Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutApril 6, 2009 Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, April 6, 2009 PI 'KERI Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor Littley PART "A" PLANNING INFORMATION MEETING PAGES INFORMATION REPORT NO. 05-09 1-23 SUBJECT: City Initiated Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan File: OPA 09-001/P Council's Recommendations of October 20, 2008 respecting the Duffins Heights Neighbourhood Environmental Servicing Plan City initiated Revisions to the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Development Guidelines Part of Lots 15 to 24, Concession 3 City of Pickering INFORMATION REPORT NO. 06-09 24-30 SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment -A 10/09 Pine Ridge Management Inc. and 1331301 Ontario Inc. 1450 and 1525 Pickering Parkway (Part of Lot 20, Concession 1) City of Pickering INFORMATION REPORT NO. 07-09 31-49 SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment - A 26/08 A. Adjedani & S. Aliyannajad 1234 Kingston Road (Lot 17, Plan 489) City of Pickering Accessible * For information related to accessibility requirements please contact P I K E N G Linda Roberts Phone: 905.420.4660 extension 2928 TTY: 905.420.1739 Email: Irobe rtse.citvofr) ickerina.corn Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, April 6, 2009 PI CKERI Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor Littley PART "B" PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORTS 1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 12-09 50-53 Silver Lane Estates Inc. Plan of Subdivison 40M-2119/Plan 40R-21358 Final Assumption of Plan of Subdivision RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 12-09 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding the Final Assumption of Plan of Subdivision 40M-2119 be received; 2. That the highways being Strouds Lane, Treetop Way, Calvington Drive and Tilson Court within Plan 40M-2119 be assumed for public use; 3. That the services required by the Subdivision Agreement relating to Plan 40M-2119, 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 35, 39, 46, Plan 40M-2119 and Parts 1 and 2, Plan 40R-21358, which lands were required to extend Calvington Drive and Treetop Way sufficient to provide frontage to Lots within Plan 40M-2339; and 4. That the Subdivision Agreement and any amendments thereto relating to Plan 40M-2119, save and except from Blocks 35, 39 and 46, be released and removed from title. 2. Director of Planning & Development, Report PD 15-09 54-60 Street Name Change of (Old) Taunton Road east of Brock Road to William Jackson Drive RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 15-09 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding the street name change of (Old) Taunton Road east of Brock Road, legally described as: Firstly: Regional Road #4, being Part Lots 17 and 18, Concession 3, as in Highway Plan 538 and Part Lot 17, Concession 3, as in C0212542 & C0213985, except Parts 1 and 2, Plan 40R-24188; Ca;_01 oPlanning & Development Committee Agenda PI Monday, April 6, 2009 Council Chambers KERI 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor Littley Secondly: Part Lot 16, Concession 3, Part Lot 16, Concession 4 and part of the Road Allowance between Concessions 3 and 4, designated as Part 1, Plan 40R-23354; and Thirdly: Part Lot 16, Concession 3, designated as Parts 1 to 5, Plan 40R- 15548, to William Jackson Drive be received; 2. That Council authorize the payment of $175.00 to each household having a municipal address on (Old) Taunton Road to help offset any inconvenience and out-of-pocket expenses they will incur as a result of this name change; and 3. That Council enact a by-law formally changing the name of the above-noted portions of (Old) Taunton Road east of Brock Road to William Jackson Drive. 3. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 16-09 61-124 Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-002/P Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan Informational Revision 14 City Initiated: Complete Applications and Pre-Submission Consultations City of Pickering Pickering Official Plan Review 1. That Report PD 16-09 of the Director, Planning & Development on Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-002/P, Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan, and Informational Revision 14 City Initiated: Complete Applications and Pre-Submission Consultations be received; 2. a) That Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-002/P, initiated by the City of Pickering, to set out the requirements for complete applications for official plan amendments, zoning amendments, approval of draft plans of subdivision and condominium, and approval of site plans, and to require pre-submission consultation by applicants with City staff as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 16-09, be approved; b) That the Draft By-law to adopt Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan, to implement the complete application and pre-submission consultation requirements, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 16-09, be forwarded to Council for enactment; 3. That Council adopt Informational Revision 14 as set out in Appendix II to Report PD 16-09 for inclusion in the Pickering Official Plan; Citq 00 Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, April 6, 2009 PICKERIN Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor Littley 4. That the Draft By-law to require that applicants consult with City staff prior to submission of applications for official plan amendments, zoning amendments, approval of draft plans of subdivision and condominium, and site plans, as set out in Appendix III to Report PD 16-09, be forwarded to Council for enactment; 5. That Council endorse the responses to comments received respecting the proposed draft official plan amendment contained in Appendix IV - Table 1 - Responses to Comments Received on the Proposed Official Plan Amendment; 6. That staff: a) revise planning application forms to include an acknowledgement by applicants of the obligation to pay for peer review of technical studies, should the City so require; and b) update the City's Tariff of Fees By-law to add peer review costs to the list of charges for planning applications; 7. That Council endorse the Procedures for Pre-Submission Consultation Meetings detailed in Appendix V of Report PD 16-09; and 8. Further, that the City Clerk forward a copy of Report PD 16-09 and Council's resolution on the matter to the Region of Durham, the Toronto Region Conservation Authority, the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, the City of Toronto, the Region of York, the Town of Markham, the Township of Uxbridge, the Town of Wh itch u rch-Stouffvi Ile, the Township of Scugog, the Town of Whitby and the Town of Ajax and to each person or public body that provided written or verbal comments at the Open House, the Public Meeting, the Planning & Development Committee or City Council Meeting. (III) OTHER BUSINESS (IV) ADJOURNMENT 01 Caq o~ PI r ERI INFORMATION REPORT NO. 05-09 FOR OPEN HOUSE ON March 30, 2009 AND PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF April 6, 2009 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 SUBJECT: City Initiated Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan File: OPA 09-001/P Council's Recommendations of October 20, 2008 respecting the Duffins Heights Neighbourhood Environmental Servicing Plan City initiated Revisions to the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Development Guidelines Part of Lots 15 to 24, Concession 3 City of Pickering 1.0 LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION - the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood, as defined by the Pickering Official Plan, is bounded by the C.P. Rail line to the north, Ontario Hydro Gatineau Corridor to the south, the Pickering-Ajax boundary to the east, and the West Duffins Creek to the west (see Location Map, Attachment #1); - the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood is approximately 516 hectares in size; - the majority of land within the Neighbourhood is publicly owned, with privately owned lands primarily concentrated along the frontage of Brock Road. 2.0 BACKGROUND - in April 2003, Pickering Council adopted revisions to the Pickering Official Plan and new Development Guidelines for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood; - these revisions "fine-tuned" the land use policies and designations for Duffin Heights and required the preparation of an Environmental Servicing Plan (ESP) prior to approving development in the neighbourhood; Information Report No. 05-09 Page 2 on June 12, 2006, Pickering Council endorsed draft Terms of Reference for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood ESP; in December 2007, Sernas Associates on behalf of the Duffin Heights Landowners Group (consisting of Mattamy Homes, Coughlan Homes, Lebovic Enterprises Limited and Ontario Realty Corporation) submitted the ESP to the City for endorsement; - on October 20, 2008, Council passed a resolution to: • endorsed the ESP for Duffin Heights; • authorized staff to initiate an amendment to the Official Plan and revisions to the Development Guidelines and advertise public meetings for the OPA; • endorsed in principle the City entering into a cost sharing agreement respecting the provision of infrastructure; • required that a sustainable report be submitted with all development applications in Duffin Heights; and • directed a special Planning & Development Committee meeting be held to discuss such matters as: building heights and mixed use form in the Mixed Corridors designation, phasing, parking and sustainable elements; on February 4, 2009, a Special Planning & Development Committee meeting was held to discuss various land use, road design and urban design matters raised previously by Council. 3.0 OFFICIAL PLANS 3.1 Durham Regional Official Plan - the western portion of the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood including the closed Brock West Landfill site is designated Major Open Space System with the remainder designated as Living Area on Schedule A'- Map A4 of the Regional Official Plan; - lands designated Major Open Space shall be used for conservation, recreation, and reforestation uses; - lands designated Living Area shall be used predominantly for housing purposes, in addition to certain home occupations, convenience stores, public and recreational uses, limited office development and limited retailing of goods and services; Brock Road and Taunton Road are each classified as a Type A Arterial Road on Schedule 'C' - Map `C1' - Road Network and each have a Regional Corridor overlay as shown on Schedule A' - Map A4 of the. Regional Official Plan; approved Amendment 124 to the Durham Regional Official Plan realigned the . future Type C Arterial Road, Valley Farm Road extension from the Third Concession Road to Brock Road; deleted the future Type C Arterial Road, Old Taunton Road, from Taunton Road to the future east/west Type C Arterial Road; and deleted the future Type C arterial road, Williamson Drive extension from Ravencroft Road in the Town of Ajax to the C.P. Rail line in the City of Pickering on Schedule 'C' - Map 'C2' - Road Network; Information Report No. 05-09 Page 3 3.2 Pickering Official Plan 03 - lands within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood are designated Urban Residential Areas - Low and Medium Density Areas, Mixed Corridor Areas, Open Space System - Natural Areas, and Major Utilities - Potential Multi-Use Areas on Schedule I - Land Use Structure; - lands designated Urban Residential Areas may be used for residential, home occupation, limited office, limited retailing, community, cultural and recreational uses, compatible employment uses and compatible special purpose commercial uses; - lands designated Mixed Corridors may be used for residential uses, retailing, offices, restaurants, community, cultural, recreational uses and special purpose commercial uses within this designation; the permissible density for residential development is a range of over 30 and up to and including 140 units per net hectare; - lands designated Open Space System - Natural Areas may be used for conservation, environmental protection, restoration, education, passive recreation and similar uses; - lands designated Freeways and Major Utilities - Potential Multi-Use Areas may be used for utility and ancillary uses, and public or private uses that are compatible with adjacent land uses; - Brock Road is designated as a Type A Arterial Road and a Transit Spine on Schedule II - Transportation System; 3.3 Duffin Heights Development Guidelines the current Development Guidelines include the following: • requires urban design elements to be considered with new development proposals; • requires appropriate edge treatments to protect the ecological features from new development in the neighbourhood; and • promotes the concentration of activities into focal points that are complemented with pedestrian connections and outdoor public spaces; 4.0 PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN - the City of Pickering proposes to amend the Pickering Official Plan to implement Council's Recommendations respecting the Duffin Heights Environmental Servicing Plan; - the proposed amendment, provided as Attachment #2, includes the following Schedule and Policy changes: • amend certain lands on Schedule I - Land Use Structure by: refining the Open Space System -Natural Areas to reflect an expanded natural heritage system; Information Report No. 05-09 Page 4 • replacing Urban Residential Areas - Low Density Areas designation with the Urban Residential Areas - Medium Density Areas designation for lands west of Tillings Road; • reducing the amount and revising the configuration of the Urban Residential Areas - Medium Density Areas designation for lands north of Old Taunton Road; • replacing the Urban Residential Areas - Low Density Areas designation with the Urban Residential Areas - Medium Density Areas designation and Open Space System - Natural Areas designation for lands south of Old Taunton Road; • replacing the Employment Areas - Prestige Employment designation with the Open Space System - Natural Areas designation for lands north of Taunton Road; • adding the Open Space System - Active Recreational Areas in recognition of the Pickering Golf Course; • amend the road system on Schedule II - Transportation System by: • deleting the future Type C Arterial Road crossings of the Ganatsekiagon Creek and Urfe Creek; • realigning the configuration of the future extension of Valley Farm Road, a Type C arterial road, easterly to connect to Brock Road; • replacing the future Type C arterial road network with a collector road network; • amend policy 11.17 - Duffin Heights Neighbourhood by: • deleting redundant policies; • adding minimum building height requirements in the focal points and mid blocks of the Mixed Corridor; • prohibiting direct driveway access from collector or local roads for grade related townhouse, semis or detached dwelling units in the Mixed Corridor, • adding monitoring, compensation/restoration, sustainability and cost sharing policies; • revising the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood population target from 9,500 to 2,500 persons for a 2016 planning horizon; and informational revisions to the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Map in the Official Plan updating road connections, school and park locations is provided as Attachment #3. 5.0 Proposed Revised Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Guidelines - the City, in consultation with the Planning Partnership, has prepared revised Development Guidelines for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood that enhance the natural environment, urban design and community planning principles for the community, and reflects the recommendations of the Final Environmental Servicing Plan; • the Revised Guidelines include the following changes: Information Report No. 05-09 Page 5 05 addition of guidelines to address the architectural aesthetics of buildings along Brock Road; • enhanced descriptions of the public and private realms within the neighbourhood; addition of new images and illustrations to complement guidelines; • revised tertiary and design plans by: • removing the term `major' and `minor' focal points to focal points; • inserting the development limit boundary for the developable areas; • reducing the number of schools from four to two (one public and one Catholic on either side of Brock Road); • reducing the number of neighbourhood parks from five to one, and adding four village greens; • recognizing the Pickering Golf Course; • reducing the number of stormwater management facilities from five to four; • adjusting the alignment of the multi-use trail; and • replacing the future road network with the recommended collector road network; • the Guidelines will assist developers in preparing their development proposals and staff in the review of submitted proposals; • a copy of the Guidelines will be available for pick-up at the open house and at the public meeting. 5.0 RESULTS OF CIRCULATION 5.1 Resident, Agency and Staff Comments - P&D staff is recommending that a new Policy be added to clarify that semi or single dwelling units are not permitted within the Mixed Use Areas - Mixed Corridor designation; - P&D staff in consultation with other City Departments is reviewing the financial implications relating to implementing a pedestrian friendly sustainable transportation network; - the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority have no objection (see Attachment #4); - no other comments have been received to date. 6.0 PROCEDURAL INFORMATION 6.1 Official Plan Approval Authority the Region of Durham is the approval authority for local official plan amendments unless the amendment is exempted from regional approval; Information Report No. 05-09 Page 6 6.2 General - 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. 7.0 OTHER INFORMATION 7.1 - a copy of the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Environmental Servicing Plan and Revised Development Guidelines are available for viewing at the office of the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department. Grant McGregor, MCIP, P Lynda T ylor, MCIP, P Principal Planner - Policy Manager, Develop ent Review 42~7~~_ U Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy GM:jf Attachments Copy: Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Director, Office of Sustainability Director, Operations & Emergency Services Director, Planning & Development ATTACHMENT #-L-TO 07 ii in w W z II J II II ~ w II II II II ~ 0 II II W V) I, „ II z 11 w W low, N X ii N II n 'I ,I II , I, n II W II II TAUNTON ~i Q J ' II ~I 1 ii O II II TAUNTON ii , ROAD ~ RD. LL I~ 11 II ii ORR\OO ~I „ II I~ II ;1 II II II 1 I, z O 'I I II I HY o I Y II U 11 O O II m II , Ii ~ l ;I ~ II II I II II II , II II II ~ II I cT, I 'I II c" i t O n II I II II II ,I I; ;I ROAD ii THIRD i~ CON. ROAD It < a, z~ L as q ; Q HYDR CORK ~ o Wo Pc~ r W o 0 0 ~ 0 D ie❑ i o00~ o ® O i City of Pickering Planning & Development Department DATE: MAR 11. 2009 DUEEIN HEIGHTS NEIGHBOURHOOD Data Sauraea: / C Teronel Enterprise. Inc. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not o plon of survey. A. ® 2005 MPAC and its suppliers. At All rights Reserved. Not a plan of S-lly- 08 ATTACHMENT# 12 M INFORMATION REPORW-L) PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN ATTACHMENT# ~ TO 9f~ 3~ 170N EPO T#r Gl PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN 09 PURPOSE: The purpose of the amendment is to implement City Council's endorsement of the recommendations of the Final Duffin Heights Environmental Servicing Plan (ESP) that include: widening and reconfiguring the natural heritage system, changing the designation from Low Density Areas to Medium Density Area for lands located west of Tillings Road, replacing the Type C arterial road network with a Collector road network, realigning the configuration of the future extension of Valley Farm Road to connect to Brock Road, replacing the designation of Prestige Employment with Natural Areas for lands north of Taunton Road, recognizing the Pickering Golf Course and incorporating sustainability and urban design objectives. LOCATION: The Duffin Heights Neighbourhood, as defined by the Pickering Official Plan, is approximately 516 hectares in size and is bordered by the Canadian Pacific Railway line to the north, Ontario Gatineau Hydro Corridor to the south, the Pickering-Ajax boundary to the east and the West Duffins Creek to the west. BASIS: On October 20, 2008, City Council endorsed the recommendations of the Final Duffin Heights ESP prepared by Sernas Associates on behalf of Mattamy Homes, Cougs (Tillings) Investments Limited and the Ontario Realty Corporation. The completion of the ESP is a necessary prerequisite to the consideration and approval of development applications in Duffin Heights. The ESP provides detailed information on the development limits, servicing requirements and recommendations to protect and enhance the natural heritage system including appropriate ecological buffers and water management. Also, City staff, in consultation with the Planning Partnership, has revised the Development Guidelines for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood. These revisions include enhanced environmental resources, urban design and community planning principles. Revision to the tertiary maps include: reducing the number of schools and neighbourhood parks, identifying the general location of stormwater management facilities, village greens and pedestrian routes. ATTACKIENT TO P Posed Amendment to Pickering Official Plan Page 2 PROPOSED AMENDMENT: The Pickering Official Plan is hereby amended by: 1. Amending Schedule I - Land Use Structure for the lands subject to the amendment by: • increasing the amount and revising the configuration of the "Open Space System - Natural Areas" designation; • replacing "Urban Residential Areas - Low Density Areas" designation with the "Urban Residential Areas - Medium Density Areas" designation for lands west of Tillings Road; • reducing the amount and revising the configuration of the "Urban Residential Areas - Medium Density Areas" designation for lands north of Old Taunton Road; • replacing the "Urban Residential Areas - Low Density Areas" designation with the "Urban Residential Areas - Medium Density Areas" designation and "Open Space System - Natural Areas" designation for lands south of Old Taunton Road; • replacing the "Employment Areas - Prestige Employment" designation with the "Open Space System - Natural Areas" designation for lands north of Taunton Road; • replacing the "Urban Residential Areas - Low Density Areas" designation and a portion of the "Open Space System - Natural Areas" designation with "Open Space System - Active Recreational Areas" designation to reflect the Pickering Golf Course; as illustrated on Schedule `A' attached to this Amendment. 2. Amending Schedule II - Transportation System for the roads subject to the proposed amendment by deleting segments of two future Type `C' arterial roads, realigning the configuration of the future extension of Valley Farm Road and adding a grid network of future collector roads as illustrated on Schedule `B' attached to this Amendment. ATTACIMIEWT To Proposed Amendment to Pickering Official Plan IP+FC 'A"flC p0K # bS_ o 9 Page 3 11 3. Amending the text of the Official Plan by: 3.1 Revising Section 2.10 by replacing "...102,400 people..." with "...100,500 people..." 3.2 Revising Table 1 by striking out the population targets for the years 2006, 2011 and 2016 for "Duffin Heights" and "Total Population Targets: South Pickering Urban Area" and replacing the targets as follows: TABLE 1 SOUTH PICKERING POPULATION TARGETS BY YEAR URBAN AREA Neighbourhood 1996 2001 2006 2011 2016 15 Duffin Heights 100 100 3400 -5-,8A 9,500 100 500 2,500 Total Population Targets: South Pickering Urban 71,350: 78,100 ` 87,900 97,200 107,500 Area € 84,900: 91,900 100,500 3.3 Revising Section 11.17 by deleting subsections (b), (c), (f), (h)(ii), (i), 0)(i) and 0)(ii); revising subsections (h)(i)and (h)(iii), and 0), adding new subsections (e)(ii)to (e)(viii), (g), (h), (i) 0), (k), and (1); and renumbering the remaining subsections such that section 11.17 now reads as follows: "11.17 City Council shall, (a) encourage the appropriate and timely disposition of Provincially-owned lands that are not environmentally sensitive; (b) support and eneourage the Region of Durham, grade sepa_rafin_.~. bevweeft Bweir, Read and the mil line; fe} require that Old Taunton Road reffiffin a through read prior to, during, and following eenstruetion of the grade separation between Breek Read and the f ATTACHMENT '9 TO Proposed Amendment to Pickering Official Plan INFO NUA O O age 4 1 -(d) (b) consider establishing, by amendment to this Plan, alternate land uses for tablelands in the vicinity of Valley Farm Road and the Third Concession Road, so long as these lands are not used for the receipt of disposal of waste, and providing an appropriate study is done to the satisfaction of the City, which shall include: 0 a planning/design review that addresses the compatibility of the proposed alternate land uses with abutting land uses, both existing and proposed; ii an environmental review that identifies significant natural features and functions, and defines developable limits; a transportation review that assesses the feasibility of a proposed northerly extension of Valley Farm Road through the lands, and if feasible, determines an appropriate corridor for this extension; (iv) an archaeological assessment that identifies whether any significant archaeological resources are present on the land, and recommends appropriate measure to protect, excavate, or otherwise deal with these resources; and (v) any other matters Council deems appropriate; {e) (c) despite section 11.2 (a) of this Plan, require the completion of development guidelines for the westerly Detailed Review Area prior to permitting new uses within the Area; supply, that signifieant water sanitary sewerage and arterial road ittfrastrueture neighbourhood. Further, sueh infrastmeture will serviee designated development are elsewhere in the Piekering ut-ban area. in eonsideration. of this, development is permitted in the Duffin Heights i(i) development in this neighbourhood shall be service s=with water, sewer and arterial ad infrastrueture `h manner; ATTACP? 11rM'T Proposed Amendment to Pickering Official Plan Page 5 1 3 be andertaken through sequential extension of water %nd sewer infrastrnetnre. Road infrast ow-re be provided i that supports the development of this neighboutho as well as the needs of the everit arterial read fietworIg (iii) prior to the approval of ene or mof-e of the feflowing developfnent (C) Consent; D) Part i of . , 1. Zoning By law arnendme", the Region will be satisfied tha an ""d fiftaneial ability of the Region to provide sueh 5 ineludifig the impaet on Development Charges, Genera Tax Levy and User Rates-, li•J the Region wiH be satisfied that the eost e the development are within the finaneieA eapability of the Region through a number of meehanisms whieh may iftelude but are not fifnited to- l"/ eenditions to be ineluded in an of the above noted developme" > where appheable, LR\ l"! agreements with the City of > landeveners, the Provineial Government or others, and (G) the implementation of the Development Charges Ae {1997}; {g~ (d) require that an appropriate right-of-way be protected to accommodate a future continuous (free-flow) east-west traffic movement for Third Concession/Rossland Extension west from Brock Road over the West Duffins Creek; Proposed Amendment to Pickering Official Plan Page 6 -(h) (e) for lands designated Mixed Use Areas - Mixed Corridor, (i) require new development to provide a strong and identifiable urban image by establishing buildings closer to the street, providing safe and convenient pedestrian access, and eneeurage requiring the construction of multi- storey buildings; (ii) require commercial development to provide a second storey functional floor space with three storey massing; (iii) require higher intensity (multi unit) housing forms on lands adjacent to Brock Road and restrict grade related residential development to lands adjacent to collector or local roads; (iv) prohibit driveway access from collector roads or local roads for grade related townhouses, semis or detached dwelling units; (v) despite (e)(iii) above, provisions for higher intensity residential development do not apply to lands adjacent to the C.P.R underpass; (vi) require applicants of new development to submit a Development Concept Report illustrating interim and final plans to accommodate intensification over time and ultimate build-out; (vii) despite sections 3.6 (a) and Table 5 of Chapter 3, not permit the establishment of drive-through facilities, either stand-alone or in combination with other uses; (viii) despite sections 3.6(b), 11.17 (e)(ii) and 15.38, and Table 5 of Chapter 3, in addition to the existing zoned vacant Petro-Canada lands, being Plan 4011-6962, Part 2, permit the establishment of only one retail gasoline outlet inclusive of gas bars and associated car washes for lands designated Mixed Used Area - Mixed Corridors; ,,Rta a . AMC Proposed Amendment to Pickering Official Plan age 7 (ii) identify 'Neighbotir-hood Foea Points' on the Tertiary Plan eontained within the Gouneil adopted Duffi Heights Neighbourhood Development Guidelines; (ift)(ix) require development within the Focal Points as identified on the Tertiarv Plan contained within the Council- adopted Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Guidelines to contribute to the prominence of the intersection; in order to achieve this, Council shall require: • initial development to occur on each broperty at the corner of the intersection: 0) shall require the irnplernen6ng zoning by laws for developments within Foes' Points to . ..ludo the inclusion of appropriate provisions in the implementing zoning bylaws to addressing such matters as the location and extent of build-to-zones, mininitint building- height, mix of permitted uses, and required building articulation; am •(B) above, in addition to seetion (A) shall utilize the use of other site development features such as building design, building material, architectural features or structures, landscaping, public art and public realm enhancements such as squares or landscaped seating areas to help achieve interseetio focal point-prominence; and; • all buildings to be a minimum of three functional storeys with four storey massing; (i) designate the tableland eoniferous and mime forest loeated between the valley eorridor o the Ganatsekaigon Greek and Breek Read as Open Systent on Sehedule 1, while Open Spaee Systent shall be established following the results of an envirenmenta aeeer-danee with seetion 14.4; and- 11 1 -.It -TO Proposed Amendment to Pickering Official Plan Page 8 16 (f) require any developer of lands adjacent to the tablelandnic reu and ed c rest loeatea between the valley eerrider of the Ganatselmigen Greek and Breelf Road Open Space System to submit an Envirenmen Reper~ Edge Management Plan, to the. satisfaction of the City, in consultation with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, that must: (i) deseribe and assess the features and funetions of the tableland eonifereus and mixed forest; (ii) define the emaet boundaries of the Open Spaee ; (iii) (i) address the protection of the natural heritage features and functions from any new development through such matters such as appropriate setbacks and/or buffers, tree management, tree preservation, invasive species management, environmental construction management, and stormwater management; and (ice (ii) identify road and engineering designs that maintain the ecological integrity of the tableland coniferous and mixed forest; in the design stormwater management facilities consider: (i walking and cycling opportunities; ii rest areas; iii wildlife passages, and iv innovative design features such as wetland forebays and outlets; 1 in the consideration of development proposals within the neighbourhood: (i require the conveyance of lands (e.g. sidewalks, walkways, bike lanes) to the City to facilitate pedestrian connectivity, where possible and shall not be considered as Oarkland dedication-, ii encourage rear lanes for residential units at appropriate locations such as major streets to provide streetscapes uninterrupted by garages; iii design rear lanes to accommodate utilities thereby allowing local street right-of-way widths to be less than 20.0 metres subject to the satisfaction of the City; Proposed Amendment to Pickering Official Plan Page 9 1? iv encourage proponents of new development to use sustainable development practices in their site development, building design and construction practices; O require the submission of a Sustainability Report that demonstrates how site development and building design /construction is consistent with the City's Sustainable Development Guidelines; vi design the local street pattern and walkway connections to enable residents to be within 400 metres walking distance of a transit stop/planned transit stop; and vii require the submission of a Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report that demonstrates how the proposal is consistent with the Duffin Heights Environmental Servicing Plan to the satisfaction of the City and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority; } require applicants to submit a Compensation Report that demonstrates how areas identified in the Duffin Heights Environmental Servicing Plan requiring compensation have been addressed and how any environmental impacts can be mitigated through the use of best management practices and other appropriate sustainable measures to the satisfaction of the City, in consultation with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority; (n) despite section 3.5 (a) and Table 3 of Chapter 3, the lands identified as Active Recreational Areas shall only be used for a golf course use or Natural Area use; require the preparation of a Golf Course Environmental Management Plan prior to changing the existing golf course holes that describes the use of best management practices and other appropriate measures to enhance the natural environment to the satisfaction of the City, in consultation with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority; 0 require, as a condition of site plan or subdivision approval, that landowners: Proposed Amendment to Pickering Official Plan Page 10 G} 0 provide contributions based on a Per hectare of developable land to a Fish Habitat Restoration Fund administered by the City for restoring fish habitats as identified in the Environmental Servicing Plan, in consultation with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority; ii enter into an agreement with the City committing to undertake a monitoring program as outlined in the Environmental Servicing Plan; and iii become a party to the cost sharing agreement for Duffin Heights or receive an acknowledgement from the Trustee of the agreement that the benefitting landowner has made satisfactory arrangements to pay its proportion of the shared development cost. " IMPLEMENTATION: The provisions set forth in the Pickering Official Plan, regarding the implementation of the Plan shall apply in regard to this Amendment. INTERPRETATION: The provisions set forth in the Pickering Official Plan regarding the interpretation of the Plan shall apply in regard to this Amendment. NOTE: For reference, the existing Schedule 1, Land Use Structure, to the Pickering Official Plan is also attached. 2 NOTE: For reference, the existing Schedule ll, Transportation System, to the Pickering Official Plan is also attached. hEast Duffins AreMamendment4inal amendmentTROPOSED AMENDMENT.doc SCEEDVLE A' EXISTING OFFICIAL PLAN 1i N , w r ■ Z ."t;S'~ I TAUNTON a V) AD TAUNTON C7fiD t O ~ FORESTR EAM TRAIL - - _ _ / ``II I / Q D31 G/ t? v -PINE Y HEIGHTS Z . TRAIL DERS m STRE . IA Y O ~ 38 / BROCK C ERRYW D WEST ND ARE LANDFILL i CONCESSION ROAD! CON. ° /r o I F) Q) P EXTRACT OF SCHEDULE I TO THE LAND USE STRUCTURE OPEN SPACE SYSTEM RURAL SETTLEMENTS OTHER BOUNDARIES PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN l ~ NATURAL AREAS ® RURAL CLUSTERS ,~DUFFIN HEIGHTS ACTIVE RECREATIONAL AREAS RURAL HAMLETS EDITIONS OTHER DESIGNATIONS AGRICULTURAL AREAS FREEWAYS AND MAJOR UTILITIES EE URBAN RESIDENTIAL AREAS CONTROLLED ACCESS AREAS ® DEFERRALS i ® POTENTIAL MULTI USE AREAS e LOW DENSITY AREAS I ® EMPLOYMENT AREAS MEDIUM DENSITY AREAS MIXED USE AREAS ® PRESTIGE EMPLOYMENT m MIXED CORRIDORS Cl- OF PICKERING PLMINING do DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT N %DES BERT2005 PROPOSED AMENDMENT- DUFFIN HEIGHTS w I ~ ■ TAUNTON tl;' - V, ROAD TAUNTON t'CJP.D I RD i O 'ORESTREAM D31 r PINE ■ HEIGHTS r~ - - TRAIL Iy'ly DE rz_E~-ENE m ~ sr ■ w G'f 38 _I T WES T C ERR 1rr D BRO D i L DARE ~J ROAD CON. ■ CONCESSION Q . Y It ■ CORRID R - ~ - - - ■ CHE~ffRYWOOD TBANSFORMER+d+ 0 ST - jrATION , / - - - - _ EXTRACT OF SCHEDULE I TO THE LAND USE STRUCTURE OPEN SPACE SYSTEM RURAL SETTLEMENTS OTHER BOUNDARIES PICKERING NATURAL AREAS ® RURAL CLUSTERS 'o DUFFIN HEIGHTS Z OFFICIAL PLAN" ACTIVE RECREATIONAL AREAS RURAL HAMLETS EDITION? AGRICULTURAL AREAS FREEWAYS AND MAJOR UTILITIES Fi URBAN RESIDENTIAL AREAS Q CONTROLLED ACCESS AREAS e ® POTENTIAL MULTI USE AREAS e E LOW DENSITY AREAS ® MEDIUM DENSITY AREAS OTHER DESIGNATIONS MIXED USE AREAS ®DEFERRALS 1 r m MIXED CORRIDORS CITY OF PICKERING PLMININO h OEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT (d FEB., 2009 N SCHEDULE A' EXISTING OFFICIAL PLAN J Q h W • l ` 4 ROAD Q FORES !REAM TRAIL O D39 ° ° IN P ~'z 01 HEIGHT WQ TRAIL • cEssl \ • m®. AND AREA x Gm0 ° D4 k~ Q; Q o O EXTRACT OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SCHEDULE I TO THE EXISTING FUTURE PICKERING EXISTING FUTURE O FREEWAY INTERCHANGES OFFICIAL PLAN FREEWAYS UNDERPASSES/OVERPASSES EDITION 5 TYPE A ARTERIAL ROADS RAILWAYS TYPE B ARTERIAL ROADS xxxxxxxx111- GO RAIL xx11t exelf e d TYPE C ARTERIAL ROADS a F GO STATIONS IMI e COLLECTOR ROADS ......o B~ = TRANSIT SPINES LOCAL ROADS TRANSIT FEEDER SERVICE crrr of PICKERwc DUFFIN HEIGHTS , PLANNING C DEVELOPMENT OEPIIRTMEM DEFERRALS N E1 N%,2008 seam JJ AN. E AND PROPOSED AMENDMENT- DUFFIN HEIGHTS . r ] l~ jjl~ ROAD °Q FORES RREAM 1 TRAIL ° g PIN z HEIGHT Q TRAI L m . W 38 ~ 1 O ,b mom'` >I CHE cESSI • AND A ®m®' x D4 Q Q - o: EXTRACT' OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM SCHEDULE I TO THE EXISTING FUTURE PICKERING EXISTING FUTURE O FREEWAY INTERCHANGES m OFFICIAL PLAN FREEWAYS .®...a. UNDERPASSES/OVERPASSES 3`r l ` EDITION? TYPE A ARTERIAL ROADS RAILWAYS Td 7 TYPE B ARTERIAL ROADS o 'oTM...s e xxxxxxxlxlF GO RAIL N•xx xlxf TYPE C ARTERIAL ROADS -~a4^-'= I E ® GO STATIONS ~1k1 V e COLLECTOR ROADS TRANSIT SPINES LOCAL ROADS CRY PICKERING TRANSIT FEEDER SERVICE EI tam®m PuNN mc B DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT r DUFFIN HEIGHTS py DEFERRALS N (d ~FE1 .1 THE aoeo.. 1 CD ATTAVH',RJE%NT# TO MAP 25 NEIGHBOURHOOD 15: DUFFIN HEIGHTS 21 i= I QI 1 / rorzMElz olzocK -ST LINO SITE X (c LOS~o> ~ Q r , V I LL g P o O 2 ..u~'f c I 5 ~ „ e M « ~ ~'`s 4 ~ 6P N LEGEND SYMBOLS NEW ROAD CONNECTIONS PROPOSED NEIGHBOURHOOD CEM ( ) BOUNDARY CEMETERY DETAILED REVIEW AREA PLACE OF WORSHIP PARK LANDS FOR WHICH COUNCIL HAS PUBLIC ELEMENTARY PROPOSED SEPARATE ADOPTED DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES (REFER TO COMPENDIUM DOCUMENT) 16 SCHOOL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SEPARATE ELEMENTARY O PROPOSED PARK SCHOOL O PROPOSED PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ~MAR, 20 09 UFFIC AL PLANO AND MUST BE READ IN CONJUNCTONNWITHOTIE NOTE: LAND USE DESIGNATIONS OTHER SCHEDULES AND THE TEIT- I APPEAR ON SCHEDULE I PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN EDITION Chapter Eleven Urban Neighbourhoods 209 TORONTO AND REGION onservat~on _ ~5 0 2 2_for The Living City March 5, 2009 CFN 38029 BY E-MAIL AND MAIL RECEIVED Grant McGregor, MCIP, RPP MAR 0 9 2009 Principal Planner, Policy Planning & Development Department CITY OF PICKERING City of Pickering INNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMT One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Dear Mr. McGregor: Re: Official Plan Amendment OPA 09-001/P Duffin Heights Community City of Pickering Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed Official Plan Amendment to implement the Duffin Heights Environmental Servicing Plan (ESP). TRCA staff appreciates the work completed to date by the City of Pickering and the Duffin Heights Landowner's Group, and the commitment to preserving and restoring the natural heritage system in the Duffin Heights neighbourhood. TRCA staff has reviewed the proposed Official Plan Amendment and have no objection to the amended land use structure, transportation system schedules, and text of the Official Plan. The amendment will result in an increased size and configuration of the Open Space System and reduced road crossings of the Urfe and Ganatsekiagon Creek. The Official Plan Amendment was based on the best available data and science and the appropriate compensation, edge management, fish habitat restoration and monitoring will be required through implementation of the Official Plan. The ESP also addressed the required road infrastructure in accordance with Phases 1 and 2 of Schedule 'C' of the Class Environmental Assessment for Municipal Roads Projects. As a result, the conceptual Valley Farm Road extension has been shifted south to an area of less sensitivity. The Valley Farm Road extension is now illustrated in the revised Schedule 1, Transportation System, as crossing the Ganatsekiagon Creek valley in this more southerly conceptual alignment. The Ganatsekiagon Creek supports both salmonids and redside dace. Redside dace have recently been uplisted from "threatened" to "endangered" by the MNR based on a review by the Committee on the Status of Species at Risk in Ontario (COSSARO). This uplisting occurred after the adoption of the ESP by Pickering City Council. The uplisting has implications on the proposed road infrastructure because of the Endangered Species Act. Habitat of Redside dace is protected under the Act, and a permit will need to be obtained from MNR where impacts to habitat may occur. As such, the tests outlined in Section 17(2) of the Act will need to be met during the remaining phases of the Class EA (e.g. no reasonable alternative exists, that the activity will not jeopardize the survival or recovery of the species, and that an overall benefit to the species will result). The recommendations in the Recovery Strategy will need to be adhered to. FAHome\PublicTevelopment ServicesTurham Rego \Pi kering,d ffin heightsi esp 1O.doc, ''ember o~ C4onservaton UWarm e~9 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca 2.3 Grant McGregor - Page 2 of 2 - March 5 2009 While we still await a final response to our comments on the ESP of September 17-, 2008, we have no objection to the approval of the Official Plan Amendment. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or if clarifications are required. Sincerely, Steven H. Heuchert, MCIP, RPP, MRTPI Manager, Development Planning and Regulation Planning and Development Extension 5311 cc: Reg Webster, Sernas (via e-mail) Lynda Taylor, City of Pickering (via e-mail) Bob Starr, City of Pickering (via e-mail) Marilee Gadzovski, City of Pickering (via e-mail) Bodan Kowalyk, MNR (via e-mail) F:\Home\Public\Development Services\Durham Region\Pickering\duffin heights esp_10.doc 24 Call o~ I I I I PI y KERI INFORMATION REPORT NO. 06-09 FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF April 6, 2009 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment - A 10/09 Pine Ridge Management Inc. and 1331301 Ontario Inc. 1450 and 1525 Pickering Parkway (Part of Lot 20, Concession 1) City of Pickering 1.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION - the subject properties are located on Pickering Parkway to the east of the Pickering Town Centre (see Attachment #1); - 1450 Pickering Parkway, including an unopened portion of Pickering Parkway Road allowance, is approximately 0.62 hectares while 1525 Pickering Parkway is approximately 0.51 hectares; - 1450 Pickering Parkway is currently vacant; - 1525 Pickering Parkway is currently occupied by a temporary Chartwell REIT Senior's Residence sales trailer and gravel parking lot; - the surrounding land uses for 1450 Pickering Parkway are: north - 5 storey apartment type residential buildings; south - Pickering Parkway and Highway 401; west - Glenanna Road and the Pickering Town Centre; east - Pickering Parkway and a 3 storey office building; - The surrounding land uses for 1525 Pickering Parkway are: north - Pickering Parkway and 3 storey condominium townhouses; south - Highway 401; west - a 4 storey office building; east - a multi-unit one and two storey self-service storage facility. Information Report No. 06-09 Page 2 n5 2.0 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL - the applicant has requested to amend the zoning by-law to add residential (multiple dwelling-horizontal and multiple dwelling-vertical) and institutional (day nursery, nursing home, and retirement home) uses and modify the mix of specific commercial uses (business office, convenience store, professional service shop and professional office) to the currently permitted commercial uses; - the proposed uses match the uses permitted on the lands located at the northeast corner of Valley Farm Road and Pickering Parkway known as the Chartwell REIT development; - a conceptual site plan does not accompany this application. - the applicant wishes to obtain flexibility to bring to market the products that achieve the Provincial, the City's and the owner's objectives. 3.0 OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING 3.1 Durham Regional Official Plan - the Regional Plan designates the subject properties Regional Centre; - Regional Centres are intended to be the main concentrations of urban activities, providing a fully integrated array of community, office, service and shopping, recreational and residential uses; - The Regional Centre in Pickering is recognized as an Urban Growth Centre and is to function as a dominant Centre within the Region, with specific emphasis on office, business and administrative services; - the proposal appears to comply with the Durham Regional Official Plan; 3.2 Pickering Official Plan - the City of Pickering Official Plan designates the subject property Mixed Use Area - Downtown Core within the Town Centre Neighbourhood; - the Mixed-Use Area policies and Town Centre Neighbourhood policies of the Plan encourage the highest mix and intensity of uses and activities in the City to be in this neighbourhood; - among other goals, the Downtown Core Urban Design Objectives for the area envision the area as supporting an increased intensity and mix of uses in the downtown. - It further promotes the creation of street-related mixed use buildings along Pickering Parkway and identifies Pickering Parkway as an important commercial and employment spine through the downtown; - the proposal complies with the Pickering Official Plan; 3.3 Zoning By-law 3036 - 1450 Pickering Parkway is currently zoned "MU-19" Mixed Use Zone; - 1525 Pickering Parkway is currently zoned "CO" Commercial Office Zone; Information Report No. 06-09 Page 3 26 both zones require amendment to permit residential, institutional and modifications to the commercial uses requested by the applicant. 4.0 RESULTS OF CIRCULATION 4.1 Resident Comments - none received to date; 4.2 Agency Comments The Toronto and Region - the subject properties are not within Conservation Authority a TRCA regulated area or area of interest (see Attachment #2); 4.3 City Department Comments - none received to date; 4.4 Staff Comments in reviewing the application to date, the following matters have been identified by staff for further review and consideration: • finalizing the conveyance of the unopened portion of the Pickering Parkway road allowance to the applicant for development in conjunction with 1450 Pickering Parkway; • reviewing the proposal to ensure no adverse impacts on the environment; • reviewing a phase 1 environmental assessment or submission of a record of site condition; • ensuring that the proposed development is compatible with and sensitive to existing surrounding development, including traffic, noise, level of activity, scale and intensity of the uses; • reviewing the application in terms of its level of sustainable development components; • reviewing the application in terms of the constraints and benefits the proposed use will have on both the subject property and on the surrounding community, given the function of the surrounding community; • reviewing that adequate information has been provided, that technical requirements are met and that the proposed development is appropriate at this location. 5.0 PROCEDURAL INFORMATION - written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the Planning & Development Department; - oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting; Information Report No. 06-09 Page 4 ? L_ - 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. 6.0 OTHER INFORMATION 6.1 Appendix No. • List of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City Departments that have comments on the applications at the time of writing report; 6.2 Information Received • A one page statement outlining the objectives of the application in pursuing this zoning by-law amendment is available for viewing at the offices of the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department; 6.2 Company Principal - the owners of the subject properties are Pine Ridge Management Inc. and 1331301 Ontario Inc.; - Robert Oldman of Pine Ridge Properties Inc. is the applicant. ja." Isa Ja VH Lynda Ta lorMCIP, PP PlannManager, Development Review IJ:jf Attachments Copy: Director, Planning & Development 28 APPENDIX NO. I TO INFORMATION REPORT NO. 06-09 COMMENTING RESIDENTS AND LANDOWNERS (1) none received to date COMMENTING AGENCIES (1) The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority COMMENTING CITY DEPARTMENTS (1) none received to date ATTACHMENT# -!TO INFORMATION REPORT# 29 0 0 pp0 PICKERING NORZN RECREATION ~NppE COMPLEX tJ ESP ESPLANAD Q \~GS~O c~F~i SNE PICKERING CIVIC COMPLEX p\Ef ENBAKER COURT y AND PARK LIBRARY SOUSH \ANppp -CNE pSP Li J J Q J oA p\CKER\NG D PPRKwP~ 1525 PICKERING \N 1450 PICKERING PARKWAY G P\CKER PARKWAY 40~ 0 N\GNWp,`l ALLIANCE v Li ART THOMPSON ARENA GO TRANSIT o STATION Q U) City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION "'1231 PT. BLK. 1 Now 40R-10298, PT. 4.9, IS & 16,401145M4, PART 1 TO 20, 25 , 26 (14W PICKE11ING PKWY.) CONCESSION i PT. LOT 20 NOW 40R-12401 PART 1 (1516 PICKE'RING PKWY.) w OWNER 1331301 ONTARIO INC. & PINE RDIGE MANAGEMENT INC. DATE MAR 5, 2009 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. A10/09 SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY IJ H Tomrwt Entomri q Ina. and Itf au P11- NI right.. R~Nr Not o Pion of survey. PN 2005 MPS and It. • Iisrs. NI hb R~prwd. Not a Ian of Surv ATTACHMENT# 3 0 INFCRMAYVI REPORT# From:'Brian Storozinski [mailto:BStorozinski@TRCA.on.ca] Sent: March 16, 2009 10:46 AM To: James, Isa Subject: 1450 + 1525 Pickering Parkway - A 10/09 Isa, Please be advised that the properties related to A10/09 (1450 & 1525 Pickering Parkway) in the City of Pickering are not within a TRCA regulated area or area of interest. TRCA has no objection to the proposed Zoning Bylaw amendment. I trust this is of assistance. Please feel free to contact me should you have any further questions. Regards, Brian Storozinski, M.E.S. Planner I Planning and Development Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 5 Shoreham Drive, Toronto, ON, WN 1S4 Tel: 416-661-6600 ext. 5744 Fax: 416-661-6898 Email: bstorozinski@trca.on.ca 31 cis o~ I KERING INFORMATION REPORT NO. 07-09 FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF April 6, 2009 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment - A 26/08 A. Adjedani & S. Aliyannajad 1234 Kingston Road (Lot 17, Plan 489) City of Pickering 1.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION - the subject property is located on the north side of Kingston Road, west of Liverpool Road (see Location Map, Attachment #1); - the subject property has a lot frontage of approximately 30 metres and a lot area of approximately 0.23 hectares (see Applicant's Submitted Plan, Attachment #2); - there is an existing building used for residential purposes with an accessory home-based business on the subject property; - Pine Creek abuts the subject property to the north, and an unopened municipal right-of-way is abutting the property to the east; - predominantly residential uses surround the subject property to the north, and commercial uses and open space blocks surround the property to the south. 2.0 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL - the applicant has requested an amendment to the existing zoning by-law to allow for a variety of commercial uses on the first floor and a residential unit on the proposed second storey addition of the building on the property (see Applicant's Conceptual Floor and Elevation Plans - Attachments #3 to #7); - the operation of the proposed uses for the site are currently under review between the applicant and Planning and Development Staff. Information Report No. 07-09 Page 2 .,32 3.0 OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING 3.1 Durham Regional Official Plan - the Regional Plan designates the subject property "Urban System - Regional Node"- and "Urban System - Regional Corridors", which among other uses shall be used for as the focal point of culture, art, entertainment, and to achieve a mix of commercial, residential, employment and institutional uses; - the subject property is classified under the plan as a Type 8 Arterial Road, with a right-of-way width ranging from 30 - 36 metres and speeds up to 70 kilometres an hour in urban areas; - Kingston Road is used and is classified as one of the most significant transit corridors within the Region; - a part of the subject property is classified as a Key Natural Heritage Feature; - the subject application will be further reviewed to determine if it complies with the intent of the Regional Plan; 3.2 Pickering Official Plan - the City Plan designates the subject property as "Mixed Use Areas - Mixed Corridors" and "Open Space System - Natural Areas" within the "Town Centre Neighbourhood" (see Attachment #8); - Mixed Use Areas - Mixed Corridors shall be used among other uses for the retailing of goods and services serving a broader area, residential, community, cultural and recreational uses, whereas Open Space System - Natural Areas shall be used among other uses for conservation, environmental protection, restoration, education, passive recreation, existing lawful residential dwellings and a new residential dwelling on a vacant lot; - it appears that the rear portion of the subject property is situated within the Open Space System and the remainder within the Mixed Use Areas; - the subject property is partially situated within a shoreline and stream corridor, which prohibits new and major development on designated areas; however minor additions, minor infilling and ancillary uses related to existing development maybe permitted in these areas; - areas designated as Mixed Use Areas - Mixed Corridors require a minimum net residential density of 30 to a maximum of 140 dwellings per hectare and/or a maximum floorspace index (total building floorspace divided by the total lot area) up to and including 2.5; - the Town Centre Neighbourhood policies encourage the highest mix and intensity of uses and activities in the City; - the neighbourhood policies also permit a maximum residential density of 55 units per net hectare for lands located on the north side of Kingston Road that abut low density development; Information Report No. 07-09 Page 3 33 - the subject property is classified under the plan as a Type B Arterial Road, which are designed to carry moderate volumes of traffic at moderate speeds with a right-of-way width ranging from 30 - 36 metres and speeds up to 70 kilometres an hour in urban areas; - the applicant's proposal appears to comply with the intent of the City's Official Plan, however it is subject to environmental restrictions; 3.3 Compendium Document to the Official Plan - the subject property is part of the eastern limits of the Walnut Lane Area Development Guidelines (an area bounded by Kingston Road to the south, a low density residential area to the north, Walnut Lane to the West and Pine Creek to the east), as well as the Kingston Road Corridor Urban Design and Development Guidelines; - 40 percent of the face of all buildings must be situated within a "build-to-zone" area along Kingston Road; - buildings should be designed in a way to prevent overshadowing and loss of privacy to abutting residences with a maximum building height of three storeys and 12.0 metres (inclusive of the roof); - no accessory structure shall be set back closer than 3.0 metres from the property line; - vehicular access shall primarily be from Kingston Road; - planting should integrate with indigenous planting along the edge of Pine Creek; 3.4 Zoning By-law 3036 - the existing zoning on the subject property is "R3" - Third Residential Density Zone, which requires a minimum lot frontage of 18 metres and a minimum lot area of 550 square metres; - the applicant intends to amend the existing zoning to allow for variety of commercial uses on the main floor with additional residential on the second floor. 4.0 RESULTS OF CIRCULATION (See Attachments #9to #12) 4.1 Resident Comments Stacey Howard - request for applicant to specify types of uses proposed for the subject property (see Attachment #9); Information Report No. 07-09 Page 4 3n `t 4.2 Agency Comments Region of Durham Health - no objections to approval of application Department provided that the subject property is serviced by municipal sanitary sewer and municipal water; - if municipal sanitary is not available, a new Class IV private sewage system will have to be installed (see Attachment #10); Veridian Connections - no objections (see Attachment #11); Toronto and Region - lands are located within the Regional Storm Conservation Authority Flood Plain associated with Pine Creek; (TRCA) - proposed uses could increase the risk to, and cost of property damage; - development shall not be permitted in lands subject to flooding during a Regional Storm event; - proposed application is not consistent with Provincial Policy Statements of 2005 and does not meet the requirements of Section 3 and Subsection 5 of the Planning Act,- - application should be refused (see Attachment #12); 4.3 Staff Comments in reviewing the application to date, the following matters have been identified by staff for further review and consideration: • the applicant must consult with the City, TRCA and the Region of Durham to resolve all environmental concerns affecting the subject property and to ensure full compliance with both the Provincial Policy Statements and the Planning Act; • an Environmental Report is required by the applicant to ensure the proposed development will not negatively impact the abutting stream corridor (Pine Creek) and the open space system to the north and east of the subject property; • the applicant must clarify all uses proposed (commercial and/or residential) on the subject property; • City Staff will determine if there are any negative impacts with the proposed new driveway entrance; • City Staff will review the proposed site plan and site-functioning as well as ensure that the proposed development meets the general intent of the Walnut Lane Area Development Guidelines and Kingston Road Corridor Urban Design and Development Guidelines ; Information Report No. 07-09 Page 5 35 5.0 PROCEDURAL INFORMATION - written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the Planning & Development Department; - oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting; - all comments received will be noted and used as input in a Planning Report prepared by the Planning & Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council; if you wish to 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. 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 Company Principal the owners of the subject property are Alireza Adjedani & Shahnaz Aliyannajad and the applicant is Grant Morris. Ashley Yea ood Lynda T(ay ar-MQ , RPP Planner I Manage; .pevelo ent Review AY:jf Attachments Copy: Director, Planning & Development 56 APPENDIX NO. I TO INFORMATION REPORT NO. 07-09 COMMENTING RESIDENTS AND LANDOWNERS (1) Stacey Howard COMMENTING AGENCIES (1) Region of Durham Health Department (2) Veridian Connections (3) Toronto and Region Conservation Authority COMMENTING CITY DEPARTMENTS (1) none to date ATTACHMENT# m c LL LX- C) Q O o Q VA UGHAN RI ~'F w WILLARD PUBLIC Q SCHOOL DAVID FARR P K G~ENANNA W J Li Li W O J a F Q O > o Of CRESCENT > J r w Elf w Q D O O ~ O N m ~ r m w J f- D Z ~ Z W w J J J O W W J U cif GRF 0 ~E Q CULROSS AVENUE o '(GRR\NG~ON o S , COURT o z g S JECT D PR PER.TY z Q J o 0 a - Of C) Z J W ~`N W G IQ CTA m City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION LOT 17, PLAN 489 07\ OWNER A. ADJEDANI & S. ALIYANNAJAD DATE JAN. 21, 2009 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. A 26/08 SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY AY H a a ources: Teranat Enterprises Ine. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not a plon of aurveY. PN-13 2005 MPAC antl its aupplicre. All ri hta Reserved. Not a pion of Surve 4TTAr VT 0-2-To t P 3 8 INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANTS SUBMITTED PLAN A 26/08 - A. ADJEDANI & S. ALIYANNAJAD a` A f tt f i PROPOSED2 f STOREY ADDITION t n; i 7 7 1 rt n trt EXISTING 1 S,'FOREYk w Ff DWELLING ; j_, { PROPOSED PARKING EXIST9NG DRIVEWAY TO E REMOVED PROPOSED DRIVEWAY r x Ott THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PLANNING INFORMATION SERVICES DIVISION MAPPING AND DESIGN, JAN. 21, 2009. ATT, CA! qty i5'~ Z .i Q F~ zz Doz ZE d o 0 ~<o It : g E g 3 tic:! > c_ J blW3 In. zap 990: I i i I I i w U2 d O N Q i 60 z u ->Z SEE Q xa- w a QY uZ C ~ , II ~S i ; v o 0 a m q Y. e L ~toa 1 ATTAC 4 lMAT "T t z Q/ a 40$~ Fm &Z w _ z QQZ zx O n ~a~ m IL E m o W- v a e i MW:) ZLL O i s Y nIj- ® i O • ~ ~ OQ~ 4Y!90 L 10- e u o 894 <I a I a n i s° I ` 99& < p m 6 p _ d: p AttlNVd p 0 u ~ i J Z W s~ r+ o v < ~ • 0 o ~ y Y V "I ? O. • O I q 4544 • ` I I oboe G a ATTACP O n = e ~t 7 o Z < • o t0 g$aE. ri ° 'a~ ZU F `e _ o119 Y j EE E ° - 3 z va a a g.~ ~0 ° On s o r C V O Q ~ O Y C 1 A 059E I I I~` ! obL b ooL o~g po oWz oobi ooB of ~ x t m~ i of t ~ i of i a i I s .t .I i x A A O t • A r" r v v 4 r t O O r BEbt ~ oSoE oo l a a ?A A o _ 42 1( Zo 00 s a g F.® 0'Z 0 Q _ QQOZ 2Q-, t> ° `e ' <`g gY b j _ Girg~_ U E i o g3 XO r x Q = Ohl { gfb2 i SoE x 0 9~~~5~5 4Lg b[5~ 19 Y. =fi'a w s Y t AI _ =iF=sue w r ~ ~ Z u ' : 0 o Q C=3 .r ~ fro obL oub ooL o,q o obE2 oob oog o59F 1 ' ~ ZZ s'Q aoZ Z~ 6ea 43 Li_ E Q~F -u a on r~ ea I ~ hLa b[S~ ~ z5q ~ 9's, S's °o Z d w a f J 8 a Z W O t~ Z Ima ATTACHMENT --'~-TO 1_v1 44 W X O _ i:. _ - I. w, W z - J W rg o 4G..;i'A City of Pickering Planning & Development Department OPEN SPACE SYSTEM MIXED USE AREAS URBAN RESIDENTIAL AREAS 17\ NATURAL AREAS DOWNTOWN CORE LOW DENSITY AREAS MIXED CORRIDORS ® MEDIUM DENSITY AREAS N A.26/08 45 From: Stacy Howard Sent: Tuesday, March 03, 2009 10:33 PM To: Yearwood, Ashley Subject: Re: Zoning Bylaw A26/08 Ashley, I received a meeting notice in the mail regarding property behind our house that is requesting zoning changes. I was wondering if you could help me understand exactly what is being requested. We live on Storrington St and back on to the property in question. It says here that they are looking to amend the zoning to permit commercial uses, including an addition new driveway. How does this differ from the current use. It is home today, however they run a small Psychic out of the place. Is it not already zoned as commercial? Do you have any indication what specific changes they want to make? I would like to understand what their place to ensure that is does not interfer with our home, noise etc......... Thanks, Stacy Howard 46 q /o - - j p ~ RECEI~~ LIAR 1 0 2009 CITY OF PIs✓KERING DEVELO MENT EPARTMENT MUM MCI o March 9, 2009 The Regional Municipality City of Pickering of Durham Planning Department/Building Development Health Department One The Esplanade ENVIRONMENTAL Pickering, ON L IV 6K7 HEALTH DIVISION 101 CONSUMERS DR. Attention: Debi Wilcox - City Clerk 2ND FLOOR WHITBY ON L1 N 1C4 CANADA Dear Madam: 905-723-3818 1-888-777-9613 Re: A/26/08 - Zoning Application Fax: 905-666-1887 Lot 17, Plan 489 (1234 Kingston Road) www.durham.ca City of Pickering Applicant: A. Adjedani and S. Aliyannajad An Accredited Public Health Agency The above noted application has been investigated by this Department and there are no objections to approval provided that the subject property is serviced by municipal sanitary sewer and municipal water. In the event that the subject property does not have access to municipal sanitary sewer, a new Class IV private sewage disposal system will have.to be installed to service the proposed development. Please feel free to contact the undersigned if more information is required. Yours t rl Kip I(C) Public Health Inspector Environmental Health Division KK/cw "Service Excellence for our Communities" 100% Post Consumer MAR-16-2009 MON 09:16 AM veridian_ FAX NO. p 02 RECEIVED o MAR 1 6 2009 47 CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT VERItDIAN DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONREVIEW PROJECT NAME_ A. Adjedani & S. Aliyannajad / Grant Morris Associates Ltd. [ADDRESS /PLAN-. 1234 Kingston Road 1 MUNICIPALITY: Pickering R> P NO.: 26/08 SUBMISSION DATE: February 26, 2009 The following is In overview of the general requirements the Applicant is likely to ine ill order. to obtain a complete electrical power supply system to this cite and within the site where subdivision in sonic foam a involved. The co=ents below are based on preliminary information only and are subject to revision. In all cases Vendian's standard. Conditions of Service document sets out the requirements, terms and conditions for the provision of electtic service. This review does not constitute an Offer to Connect. 1. Electric service is currently available on the road allowance(s) directly adjacent to this property, Servicing is currently fcd from Kingston Road and Veridian's supply voltnge will be at (44kV, 27.6kV,13.8kV, 12.47kV, 8.3kV, 4.16kV). 2. The existing service to this building may be inadequate. Details regarding n service upgrade can be obtained from Veridian. 3. Other, Please contact Veridian if a service upgrade is required. Technical Bepresentative: Denzil Samad Telephone: Fxt.3261 PP/df PAdfrizzell\Dcvelopment Application Review\Pickering\2009\A, Adjedani & S. Abyannajad - 1234• Kingston Road•doc TORONTO AND REGION"-*-- -0 onservation Il - a 4 for The Living City March 18, 2009 CFN 41890.02 VIA MAIL AND EMAIL (ayearwood citypickerinq on ca) Mr. Ashley Yearwood City of Pickering Pickering Civic Centre One The Esplanade Pickering ON L1V 6K7 Dear Mr. Yearwood: Re: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 26/08 On Lands Municipally Known As 1234 Kingston Road Lot 17, Plan 489 City of Pickering (A. Adjedani & S. Aliyannajad) We write further to the Notice of Public Meeting for the application captioned above and our letter dated August 21, 2008 and copied to you wherein we outline Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff opinion with respect to zoning changes on the subject lands. Purpose of the Application We understand that the purpose of this application is to amend the Zoning By-law in force on the subject lands in order to permit commercial uses on the first floor of an existing building and residential uses for a proposed second floor addition. Delegation of Comments Re: Provincial Interest in Natural Hazards As you aware, TRCA is responsible for providing plan review comments on behalf of the Province of Ontario with respect to Natural Hazards policies contained in the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005 (PPS 2005) pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding between Conservation Ontario and the ministries of. Natural Resources and Municipal Affairs and Housing. The following comments are provided according to TRCA's delegated responsibility in this regard. Flood Hazard Present The subject lands are located within the Regional Storm Flood Plain associated with the Pine Creek. Given this natural hazard, we have evaluated your proposal against TRCA and provincial flood plain management policies. Our analysis shows that flood depths on the site are up to 1.45 metres in depth and the velocities of flood waters would be approximately 0.15 metres per second in the event of a Regional Storm. In addition, there does not appear to be 'safe' ingress or egress from the site in the event of a Regional Storm. These conditions pose considerable threat to human safety and property pursuant to standards established by the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. FAHome\Public0evelopment ServicesOurham Region\Pickering\1234 Kingston_2.wpd Member of Conservation Ontario 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario W N 1S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 wvvw.trca.on.ca a 7 49 Mr. Ashley Yearwood -2- March 17, 2009 Increased Risk Associated With Proposal It is understood that the proposal would maintain the existing residential use while adding a commercial use. Adding uses to this site, given the flood hazard described above, would increase the risk to human safety in the event of a major flood, as more people would be expected to occupy the site at any given time. The proposed uses could increase the risk to, and cost of, property damage. Non Consistency with PPS, 2005 The proposed amendment seeks to change the permitted uses on the subject lands in order to add a commercial use. The PPS, 2005 defines development as "a change in land use." Further, Section 3.1.2 d) of the PPS, 2005 provides that development shall not be permitted in lands subject to flooding during a Regional Storm event. Accordingly, it is our opinion that the proposed amendment is not consistent with PPS, 2005 and does not meet the requirements of Subsection 3(5) of the Planning Act. We therefore request that the application be refused. Please contact me if you have any questions with respect to this matter. Yours truly, Chris Jo , MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Planning and Development Extension 5718 CJ/ cc: Grant Morris, Grant Morris Associates Ltd. (Grant. Morris@rogers.com) Steve Heuchert, TRCA R\HomeTublic0evelopment ServicesOurham RegionTickering\1234 Kingston_2.wpd City REPORT TO ' PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT PI K I COMMITTEE Report Number: PD 12-09 Date: April 6, 2009 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Silver Lane Estates Inc. Plan of Subdivision 40M-2119 / Plan 40R-21358 Final Assumption of Plan of Subdivision Recommendation: 1. That Report PD 12-09 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding the Final Assumption of Plan of Subdivision 40M-2119 be received; 2. That the highways being Strouds Lane, Treetop Way, Calvington Drive and Tilson Court within Plan 40M-2119 be assumed for public use; 3. That the services required by the Subdivision Agreement relating to Plan 40M-2119, 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 35, 39, 46, Plan 40M-2119 and Parts 1 and 2, Plan 40R-21358, which lands were required to extend Calvington Drive and Treetop Way sufficient to provide frontage to Lots within Plan 40M-2339; and 4. That the Subdivision Agreement and any amendments thereto relating to Plan 40M-2119, save and except from Blocks 35, 39 and 46, be released and removed from title. Executive Summary: The City entered into a Subdivision Agreement with the above-noted developer for the development of Plan 40M-2119. As all works and services within this plan has been completed to the satisfaction of City staff, it is appropriate to assume the roads and services within this plan under the jurisdiction of the City and release the developer from the provisions of the Subdivision Agreement. Financial Implications: There are no new financial implications to the City as a result of this recommendation. Report PD 12-09 April 6, 2009 Subject: Final Assumption of Plan of Subdivision Page 2 40M-2119 Sustainability Implications: The final assumption of this plan of subdivision is an administrative process that legally concludes the City's acquisition of necessary roads and other infrastructure. It does not directly impact the City's sustainability initiatives. Background: The City entered into a Subdivision Agreement with the above-noted developer for the development of Plan 40M-2119. As the developer has now completed all works and services to the satisfaction of City staff, it is appropriate to assume the roads and services within this Plan, save and except from Blocks 35, 39, 46, Plan 40M-2119 and Parts 1 and 2, Plan 40R-21358, which lands were required to extend Calvington Drive and Treetop Way sufficient to provide frontage to Lots within Plan 40M-2339. Further, it is also appropriate to release the developer from the provisions of the Subdivision Agreement with the City dated March 1, 2002 and registered as Instrument No. DR121855 save and except from Blocks 35, 39 and 46. Attachments: 1. Location Map - Plan 40M-2119 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: RPP Denise Bye, Supervisor Neil CarrqHM Property & Development Services Director, Planing & Development DB:bg Copy: (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council (+tn) C d Thomas J. uin , RD , CMM I I I Chief Administr tive Officer Report PD 12-09 April 6, 2009 Subject: Final Assumption of Plan of Subdivision Page 3 5 2 40M-2119 Recommendation approved: (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Director, Office of Sustainability Director, Operations & Emergency Services Director, Planning & Development City Clerk c ATTACHMENT # TO REPORT # PD_L ' 09.._..__ 53 0 WOODSMERE TRANQUIL CRT. AL TONA w UBL IC PARK w ST. ELIZABETH S SEPARATE SCH 0 Q EYVIE w STROUDS L ARK Q 0 0 ERNUT CRT. w > o STRppOs a LLJ ~PNE Li Q O a > z U U Q F Li J J Q OP ZREE~ T ST. > Z z Li ui 21 F-- GATE BJECT RIVE Q J > SUB (VISION FOXWOOD a PARTS STARVIEW CRT. Z w PINEVIEW LANE ~ n U) o w C w O AUTUMN CRESCENT TWYN RIVERS DRIVE SHEPPARD AVENUE 0 T MONICA S p 7T City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-2119, & PARTS 1 & 2, 40R-21358 00~0 OWNER VARIOUS DATE FEB, 19, 2009 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY RP At oT-r,g.troEnterprises Inc. antl its suppliers. All rights Reservetl. No[ a plan o/ n~r~ey. PN-11 2005 A. antl i[s su ppl ten. All rights Rese rvetl. Not a plan o/ Survey. 1 -1 City 00 REPORT TO A PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Pj j~COMMITTEE Report Number: PD 15-09 54 Date: April 6, 2009 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Street Name Change of (Old) Taunton Road east of Brock Road to William Jackson Drive (Old) Taunton Road legally described as: Firstly: Regional Road #4, being Part Lots 17 and 18, Concession 3, as in Highway Plan 538 and Part Lot 17, Concession 3, as in C0212542 & C0213985, except Parts 1 and 2, Plan 40R-24188; Secondly: Part Lot 16, Concession 3, Part Lot 16, Concession 4 and part of the Road Allowance between Concessions 3 and 4, designated as Part 1, Plan 40R-23354; and Thirdly: Part Lot 16, Concession 3, designated as Parts 1 to 5, Plan 40R-15548 (ORC Lands). File: L4540-007 Recommendation: 1. That Report PD 15-09 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding the street name change of (Old) Taunton Road east of Brock Road, legally described as: Firstly: Regional Road #4, being Part Lots 17 and 18, Concession 3, as in Highway Plan 538 and Part Lot 17, Concession 3, as in 00212542 & C0213985, except Parts 1 and 2, Plan 40R-24188; Secondly: Part Lot 16, Concession 3, Part Lot 16, Concession 4 and part of the Road Allowance between Concessions 3 and 4, designated as Part 1, Plan 40R-23354; and Thirdly: Part Lot 16, Concession 3, designated as Parts 1 to 5, Plan 40R-15548, to William Jackson Drive be received; 2. That Council authorize the payment of $175.00 to each household having a municipal address on (Old) Taunton Road to help offset any inconvenience and out-of-pocket expenses they will incur as a result of this name change; and Report PD 15-09 April 6, 2009 Subject: Street Name Change Page 2 (Old) Taunton Road to William Jackson Drive 55 3. That Council enact a by-law formally changing the name of the above-noted portions of (Old) Taunton Road east of Brock Road to William Jackson Drive. Executive Summary: On September 17, 2007, Council passed Resolution 17/07 authorizing staff to initiate the process of changing the name of (Old) Taunton Road east of Brock Road to William Jackson Drive. The process included contacting the owners fronting (Old) Taunton Road to advise them of the City's intent to change the street name and to seek their comments. All owners have indicated that they have no objection to the name change. The name William Jackson holds historical significance to this area of the City and has been approved by the Region and endorsed by City staff and Heritage Pickering. It is being recommended that the City proceed with the name change and that Council enact the attached draft by-law, which when registered, will formally change the name of (Old) Taunton Road to William Jackson Drive. A small section of (Old) Taunton Road remains in ORC ownership and must be transferred to the City before the street name change by-law is registered. Consequently, the official street name change will be delayed slightly. It is also recommended that the City provide financial assistance to residents impacted by this name change to offset their out-of-pocket expenses and inconvenience. Financial Implications: 1. Registration of street name change by-law (Account 1416) $100.00 2. Signage replacement (Account 2320-2409) $400.00 3. Reimbursement for out-of-pocket (Account 2610-2320) $525.00 expenses resulting from name change Sustainability Implications: Enactment of the attached draft by-law is part of the administrative process that is required to legally conclude the renaming process. It does not directly impact the City's sustainability initiatives. Background: When Taunton Road was realigned by the Region of Durham east of Brock Road in the 1990's, the original Taunton Road remained open linking the `new' Taunton Road to Brock Road. This linkage is commonly referenced as (Old) Taunton Road. This established the current situation where two roads exist in the City of Pickering bearing the same name. Report PD 15-09 April 6, 2009 Subject: Street Name Change Page 3 56 (Old) Taunton Road to William Jackson Drive To avoid confusion to the public and emergency services, and to establish a new street name for what will become a collector road within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood, it is recommended that (Old) Taunton Road be renamed to "William Jackson Drive" which name holds historical significance to this area of the City. On September 17, 2007, Council passed Resolution 17/07 authorizing staff to initiate the process of changing the name of (Old) Taunton Road east of Brock Road to William Jackson Drive. The process included contacting the owners fronting (Old) Taunton Road to advise them of the City's intent to change their street name and to seek their comments. All owners have indicated that they have no objection to the name change. As the street name William Jackson Drive has been approved by the Region and endorsed by City staff and Heritage Pickering, it is recommended that Council enact the attached draft by-law, which when registered will formally change the name of (Old) Taunton Road to William Jackson Drive. It should be noted that although staff is seeking enactment of the attached draft by-law at this time, it will not be registered until the City has acquired the portion of (Old) Taunton Road that remains in ORC's ownership (Parts 1 to 5, Plan 40R-15548). ORC maintains that the conveyance of this portion of (Old) Taunton Road to the City can only be undertaken in conjunction with,the disposition of other lands it owns in Duffin Heights following required EA works. Staff is also seeking authorization to provide each household $175.00 to offset any inconvenience and out-of-pocket expenses they will incur as a result of this name change. Attachments: 1. Location Map showing lands subject of name change 2. Location Map showing the ultimate alignment of William Jackson Drive 3. Draft Name Change By-law Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Denise By d, Supervisor, Neil Car ~IP, RPP Property & Development Services Director, Planning & Development Report PD 15-09 April 6, 2009 Subject: Street Name Change Page 4 (Old) Taunton Road to William Jackson Drive 57 DB:bg Copy: (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Chief Administrative Officer Director, Operations & Emergency Services Director, Planning & Development City Clerk Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering Fire Chief Manager, Development Control Supervisor, Customer Care (Acting) Fire Prevention Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Thomas J. Qu' n, RDMR, CMM III Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT#=_TO J H REPORT# PD I S- oc'1 0 0 U O m RDPD TAUNTON O9O c .Pig . FDReR tREEt 2 ova UNTO ROAD ( OOLDISTEAD NAME CH WILLIAM JACKSON DRIV ) 0 0 a 0 U O Owne s 1. CITY F PICKERING 2. ONT RIO REALTY CORP. 0 U Z City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION LANDS SUBJECT OF NAME CHANGE OWNER CITY OF PICKERING DATE MAR. 12, 2009 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. WILLIAM JACKSON DRIVE SCALE N.T.S. CHECKED BY DB N F12. natroEalerpriaee Inc. and ita upplier,. All right, Reserved. Not o plan of a~r~eY. PN-15 05 MPAC and Its ,u ppliera. Alla right, Re,e rvetl. No[ a plan of Survey. ATTACHMENT# `2 i _ - J REPORT# PD 0 Q 0 Y U 0 M ROPD TAUNTON O9O cp R. FDRBR OCk SREE~ ~pR I I I I TEMPORARY RE ROAD CO LD TAUNTON ROAD HANGEro LLIAM JACKSON DRIVE) ANTICI TED ULTIMATE ALIG MENT OF LIAM JACKSON DRIVE THROU THE FIN HEIGHTS NE HBOURHOOD 0 /NDU CULTURAL C T DERSAN STREET U O City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ULTIMATE ALIGNMENT OF WILLIAM JACKSON DRIVE OWNER CITY OF PICKERING DATE MAR. 12, 2009 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. WILLIAM JACKSON DRIVE SCALE N.T.S. CHECKED BY DB IV U010 Inc. ontl ila suppliers. All rights Reservetl. Not on of a,.-.y. PN-15 2005 PAL and ifs au ppliers. All ri hts Reserved. Nol a plan of ,.,,"ply ATTACHMENTO 'IEPORT# PD I 6 0 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. Being a by-law to change the name of the ~ road allowances described herein to "William Jackson Drive" in the City of Pickering. WHEREAS pursuant to section 11(3)1 of the Municipal Act, the Council of a local municipality may pass by-laws for giving names to or changing the names of highways under their jurisdiction. NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. The portions of the road allowances referred to as Old Taunton Road, being: (a) Regional Road #4, being part of Lots 17 and 18, Concession 3 as in Highway Plan 538 and part of lot 17, Concession 3 as in C0212542 and C0213985, save and except Parts 1 and 2, Plan 40R-24188; (b) Part of Lot 16, Concession 3, part of Lot 16, Concession 4 and part of the Road Allowance between Concessions 3 and 4, designated as Part 1, Plan 40R-23354; and (c) Part of Lot 16, Concession 3, designated as Parts 1 to 5, Plan 40R-15548, all being in the City of Pickering, are hereby renamed "William Jackson Drive". BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 20th day of April, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk City REPORT TO _ PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT PI KERIN COMMITTEE Report Number: PD 16-09 Date: April 6, 2009 1 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-002/P Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan Informational Revision 14 City Initiated: Complete Applications and Pre-Submission Consultations City of Pickering Pickering Official Plan Review Recommendation: 1. That Report PD 16-09 of the Director, Planning & Development on Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-002/P, Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan, and Informational Revision 14 City Initiated: Complete Applications and Pre-Submission Consultations be received; 2. (a) That Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-002/P, initiated by the City of Pickering, to set out the requirements for complete applications for official plan amendments, zoning amendments, approval of draft plans of subdivision and condominium, and approval of site plans, and to require pre-submission consultation by applicants with City staff as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 16-09, be approved; (b) That the Draft By-law to adopt Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan, to implement the complete application and pre-submission consultation requirements, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 16-09, be forwarded to Council for enactment; 3. That Council adopt Informational Revision 14 as set out in Appendix II to Report PD 16-09 for inclusion in the Pickering Official Plan; 4. That the Draft By-law to require that applicants consult with City staff prior to submission of applications for official plan amendments, zoning amendments, approval of draft plans of subdivision and condominium, and site plans, as set out in Appendix III to Report PD 16-09, be forwarded to Council for enactment; 5. That Council endorse the responses to comments received respecting the proposed draft official plan amendment contained in Appendix IV - Table 1 - Responses to Comments Received on the Proposed Official Plan Amendment; Report PD 16-09 April 6, 2009 S ct: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-002/P Page 2 D 6. That staff: (a) revise planning application forms to include an acknowledgement by applicants of the obligation to pay for peer review of technical studies, should the City so require; and (b) update the City's Tariff of Fees By-law to add peer review costs to the list of charges for planning applications; 7. That Council endorse the Procedures for Pre-Submission Consultation Meetings detailed in Appendix V of Report PD 16-09; and 8. Further, that the City Clerk forward a copy of Report PD 16-09 and Council's resolution on the matter to the Region of Durham, the Toronto Region Conservation Authority, the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, the City of Toronto, the Region of York, the Town of Markham, the Township of Uxbridge, the Town of Whitchurch-Stouffville, the Township of Scugog, the Town of Whitby and the Town of Ajax and to each person or public body that provided written or verbal comments at the Open House, the Public Meeting, the Planning & Development Committee or City Council Meeting. Executive Summary: The Province, through legislation changing the Planning Act in 2007 (Bill 51), provided municipal councils with new authority to set out requirements for complete planning applications and for mandatory consultation before submission of applications for official plan amendments, zoning by-law amendments, plans of subdivision and plans of condominium. The legislation also enabled municipalities to pass by-laws requiring the pre-submission consultations. The recommended Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan implements the new authority provided by the legislation. The main elements of the amendment are to specify information that must be included with an application to make it a complete application and to require applicants to consult with City staff prior to submission of applications. At the pre-submission consultation meetings, staff will identify the technical studies and information necessary to address the scale and scope of the proposal and require the studies to be submitted with the application in order for the application to be deemed a complete application. The City will not consider an application unless it is complete and the amendments to the Planning Act provide that appeal rights only commence after an application is deemed complete. The recommended amendment identifies a list of thirty-four. possible technical studies that may be required, depending on the scale, location and scope of a given application and provides descriptions of the circumstances and purposes of many of the studies. Report PD 16-09 April 6, 2009 Subject: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-002/P Page 3 63 This amendment is similar to amendments being undertaken by many other Ontario municipalities to implement the new authority provided by the legislative changes. The intent of the changes is to allow municipalities to mandate full information at the beginning of the processing of applications, rather than having key information submitted later in the process or after an application is appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board following completion of municipal council's consideration. Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated to adopt this amendment. Sustainability Implications: The proposed amendment requires a sustainable development report to be submitted by applicants. The proposed amendment will require that planning applicants pre-consult with City staff prior to submission of applications and submit all required studies with the initial application. This requirement will allow the City to discuss sustainability objectives with applicants early in the application process thereby improving the opportunity to integrate sustainability elements as part of the initial development design. 1.0 Background: 1.1 This Official Plan amendment is the first part of the Official Plan Review Although the `complete applications and pre-submission consultation' amendment is part of the broader Official Plan Review, it is being processed ahead of Council adoption of the final Official Plan Review workplan and consultation plan. Adoption of the amendment will permit the City to utilize the new powers authorized by Bill 51 sooner. Staff intend to forward a proposed final workplan and consultation plan for the Official Plan Review for the consideration of Council later in 2009. 1.2 Bill 51 empowers the City to specify the contents of complete planning applications and to require applicants to consult so that the City can inform the applicant what items of information must be filed to make the application complete when submitted Prior to passage of Bill 51, Pickering staff and Council had advised the Province of support for measures to require applicants to provide municipalities with more information earlier in the planning approvals process. Through adoption of Amendment 17, Pickering can now implement these new powers provided in Bill 51. Report PD 16-09 April 6, 2009 Subject: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-002/P Page 4 6 I Following passage of Bill 51 in 2006, Pickering City Council delegated the authority to deem planning applications `complete' to the Director, Planning & Development, by adoption of By-law 6763/07 in May 2007. Bill 51 permits municipalities to identify in the Official Plan, the information required in order to deem applications 'complete' and to refuse to consider applications until they are `complete'. Bill 51 also permits municipalities to require applicants to consult with municipalities prior to submission of applications, which allows municipalities to identify the particular information requirements for each individual application. While Bill 51 requires municipalities to adopt a by-law to require pre-submission consultations, related provisions may also be included in official plans. 1.3 A draft City initiated amendment addressing complete applications and pre-submission consultations was circulated in October 2008 and was explained in Information Report No. 21-08 The draft amendment proposed a number of changes to Section 15 of the Pickering Official Plan to: • require applicants to consult the City prior to submitting applications to allow City and agency staff to identify the studies needed to evaluate the technical merits of an application. Even though the proposed amendment includes a long list of possible technical studies, staff will `scope' which studies (if any) will be needed, depending on the scale and nature of each application and will `scope' the complexity of each required study to the technical issues of concern; • require applications to include not only a complete application form, information listed in the Planning Act and its regulations and application fees, but also a record of the pre-submission consultation, an agreement to pay peer review and outside legal/consulting costs, should the City require such payments, and all studies that are identified as required at the consultation meeting; • require that all required items are completed to the satisfaction of the City before the City can `deem' the application 'complete'; • provide a list of 30 possible technical studies that could be required, across the broad spectrum of possible applications, for official plan amendment, zoning amendment or draft plans of subdivision or condominium; • provide a list of 26 possible technical studies that could be required for site plan applications, depending on the complexity and scale of the individual proposal; and, • provide descriptions, criteria, purpose, and/or issues of concern for many of the listed technical studies that may be required for applications. Report PD 16-09 April 6, 2009 Subject: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-002/P Page 5 65 Notification (along with a copy of the proposed amendment) was provided for the Open House held on October 21, 2008 and the Public Meeting held on November 3, 2008. Notification was provided by newspaper advertisement and on the City website, in addition to written notification to agencies, municipalities, utilities, resident associations, development companies, First Nations' representatives and other persons and public bodies that requested notification of Official Plan Review matters. 2.0 Revisions are now proposed in response to comments received on the proposed amendment Four people attended the October 28, 2008 Open House, at least six people attended the November 3, 2008 Public Meeting at Planning & Development Committee, and six written comments were received on the proposed amendment. A summary of the written comments received and staff responses is provided in Table 1: Responses to Comments Received on the Proposed Official Plan Amendment, which is attached to Report PD 16-09, as Appendix IV. In addition, the written comments submitted are attached to Report PD 16-09 as Attachments 3 to 8 inclusive. 2.1 Staff Recommend revisions to the proposed amendment to reflect responses to the comments received • Staff agree with the recommendation of the Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD) that only those technical studies related to a proposal be required and that the scope of the required studies be limited to the scope and complexity of the application; • The Durham Region Planning Department suggested that six additional technical studies be added to the list of potentially required studies. Staff agree with five of these additions. The Region also advised that proposed Amendment 17 is exempt from Regional approval which will render Pickering Council's decision final on the proposed amendment, unless appealed; • Staff agree with the request of Runnymede Development Corporation, Tribute Communities and Mattamy Homes that the City authority to be satisfied with completed studies before an application can be deemed 'complete' be limited to the scope and not the conclusions of such studies. Staff have revised the appropriate sections of the proposed amendment to reflect the changes noted above with which staff agrees. Detailed responses to all comments received are provided in Table 1: Responses to Comments Received On The Proposed Amendment, which is included as Appendix IV to Report PD 16-09. Staff recommend that the responses in Table 1 be endorsed by Council (see Appendix IV) and that Council authorize the revisions noted above by adoption of the Draft By-law to approve Amendment 17, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 16-09. Report PD 16-09 April 6, 2009 Subject: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-002/P Page 6 66 3.0 City Staff have reconsidered two policy issues 3.1 A better way of requiring applicants to pay peer review costs is now recommended and a formal requirement to pay legal/consulting costs is no longer proposed The earlier draft proposed amendment included in Information Report No. 21-08 required that an applicant enter into a fees agreement with the City to cover: 1) peer review costs; and, 2) outside legal/consulting costs of the City, where the City appears at the Ontario Municipal Board or a Court in support of an application. Peer Review Costs While staff considers that applicants should be responsible for such costs, a requirement for an agreement for every planning application, when few applications require peer reviews, would unnecessarily burden applicants and create additional workload for City staff. Although it is anticipated that very few technical studies will need to be peer reviewed, peer reviews will be required for some technical studies, such as retail market impact analysis. Before concluding that a peer review must be done, the applicant's experts will be given the opportunity to correct obvious information gaps or missing analysis identified by staff. Peer reviews may be required when: 1) the City does not have qualified in-house expert staff; 2) the City does not have sufficient qualified in-house expert staff resources to provide timely evaluation of technical studies, or, 3) City expert staff disagree with the applicant's expert's findings and a third-party expert opinion is needed from another qualified professional before staff can prepare a recommendation to Council. Accordingly, applicants should be required to sign an acknowledgement, on the planning application forms submitted as part of a 'complete' application, of the responsibility to pay such costs, should they be required. For applications that require peer review, recommendation reports from the Planning & Development Department would be prepared only after the City selects the peer review expert, the applicant pays and the peer review is completed. Legal/Consulting Costs Currently, when a planning application that is supported by City Council is appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board or referred to a Court, the City Solicitor obtains instructions from City Council respecting the position to be taken at the Board or Court. In order to maintain Council's flexibility to tailor its instructions to the City Solicitor to the unique circumstances of individual appeals/court applications, it is now recommended that the City not introduce a new policy requiring applicants to pay the costs of obtaining outside legal or related consulting services. Report PD 16-09 April 6, 2009 Subject: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-002/P Page 7 67 This approach still retains the ability for City Council/the City Solicitor to retain outside legal or consulting services at the applicant's expense if both the City and the applicant agree. It is recommended that Council authorize staff to revise planning application forms to include an acknowledgement of the applicant's obligation to pay peer review costs of technical studies, where required. In addition, it is recommended that Council authorize an update of the City's Tarrif of Fees By-law to authorize charging applicants for required peer reviews. Appropriate policy revisions to implement an applicant responsibility for peer review and to delete references to legal/consulting costs are included in sections 15.3 and 15.4 of proposed Amendment 17 in Appendix I. It is recommended that Council adopt this policy change by enacting the Draft By-law to adopt Amendment 17, as set out in Appendix I. 3.2 Payment of required Agency Fees should also be ensured before the City deems applications `complete' Full evaluation of many applications, particularly large scale development proposals, often requires extensive technical review by key agencies such as the Conservation Authorities or the Region of Durham. In many such cases, neither the City nor the public will be able to reach meaningful conclusions on some of the fundamental issues raised by such applications until the agency input is available. These agencies charge fees to conduct their reviews. The pre- submission consultation meeting will allow identification of issues of concern and required technical studies by such agencies. In order for the City to be sure that it can fully evaluate the merits of applications, it should have assurance that proper agency input will be provided. Without payment of agency fees at the time applications are submitted, the City cannot obtain such assurance. Accordingly, the City should require proof of payment of agency fees as a material part of a 'complete' application, whenever such fees would be required. The amendments to the Planning Act now allow a municipality to require an application to include any other information or material that the council considers it may need if such information or materials are identified in official plan provisions. If required, such information and materials must also be made available to the public. Report PD 16-09 April 6, 2009 Subject: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-002/P Page 8 8 Since a main purpose of the legislative revisions is to have pertinent information available to council and such agency review is often a critical element to evaluate the merits of an application, the City should not deem an application `complete' until fees charged by agencies are paid. Staff has included revisions to section 15.3 of proposed Amendment 17 to require that agency fees for review of applications and pertinent technical studies be submitted prior to deeming an application `complete'. It is recommended that Council adopt the agency fee requirement by enacting the Draft By-law to adopt Amendment 17, as set out in Appendix I. 4.0 Consistent Procedures should be adopted for the Required Pre-Submission Consultation Meetings Section 15.2 of proposed Amendment 17 would require applicants "to pre- consult with the municipality prior to submitting "an application for planning approval. The "meeting will be held with the applicant, City staff and any other government or public authority the City determines appropriate". At the meeting, required studies would be identified and terms of reference or guidelines for the required studies would be set out. Section 15.3 requires that a record of the pre- submission consultation be provided as one part of a `complete' application. 4.1 Proposed Procedures for Pre-Submission Consultation Meetings In order to fulfill the proposed requirements and provide consistent administration of the pre-submission consultation meetings, the following procedures are proposed: • The purpose of the meetings is for staff to advise a prospective applicant what information and studies will be required at the time an application is submitted to comprise a 'complete' application; • The proponent will be advised that if confidentiality is requested, staff shall keep the proposal confidential; • Planning & Development staff will arrange the meetings at no charge to the prospective applicant; • Staff will request a preliminary summary, concept or sketch of the proposal ahead of the pre-submission consultation; • Staff may waive the requirement for a pre-submission meeting for low impact proposals; • Staff will invite appropriate City and outside agency staff, circulate preliminary proposal and invite applicant to a Civic Complex meeting; • Invited City staff may include Planning, Development Control, Building, Fire Services, Municipal Property & Engineering and Office of Sustainability staff; • Invited outside agency staff may include Conservation Authority, Region of Durham, Provincial Ministries, utilities, railways and similar agencies staff; Report PD 16-09 April 6, 2009 Subject: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-002/P Page 9 69 • The list of studies/information required and the terms of reference/guidelines of each required item will be scoped/limited to the scale and complexity of each proposal at the meeting, if possible, or subsequent to the meeting; • Where known, the applicant will be advised if studies will require peer review; • Planning & Development staff will provide a record of the conclusions of the meeting shortly after the meeting, with a copy to participants; and, • If necessary, more than one pre-submission consultation meeting may be required. 4.2 Staff Recommend that Council Endorse the Procedures for Pre-Submission Consultation Meetings It is recommended that Council endorse the proposed procedures for pre- submission consultation meetings as set out in Appendix V of Report PD 16-09. 5.0 Some staff preparation is necessary to Implement Amendment 17 Training of Planning & Development and other City staff and education of planning applicants about the new requirements will be necessary. In addition, terms of reference or guidelines will be prepared to detail the contents required for each of the required technical studies Staff will monitor the resource requirements to administer the pre-submission consultation meetings over a period of time in order to determine whether increases to planning application fees may be warranted to cover increased service levels. Appendices I Draft By-law to Adopt Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan for Complete Applications and Pre-Submission Consultations II Proposed Informational Revision 14 to the City of Pickering Official Plan for Complete Applications and Pre-Submission Consultations III Draft By-Law to Require Pre-Submission Consultation for Planning Applications IV Comments and Responses on Proposed Official Plan Amendment V Procedures for Pre-Submission Consultation Meetings Attachments: 1. Text of Information Report No. 21-08 2. Minutes from Public Meeting 3. Comment Received from David Gray Eagle Sandford 4. Comment Received from Caroline Huston 5. Comment Received from Region of Durham 6. Comment Received from Chris Barnett for Tribute & Runnymede 7. Comment Received from Chris Barnett for Mattamy 8. Comment Received from BILD Report PD 16-09 April 6, 2009 Subject: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-002/P Page 10 i i rZ n Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: r Steve Gaunt Neil Carroll Principal Planner, Policy Director, Planning & Development Catherine Rose Manager, Policy SG:ld Copy: (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council -:1~4"V/< C"Y I Thomas J. ui n, RD CMM III Chief Administrative Officer 71 APPENDIX I TO REPORT PD 16-09 DRAFT BY-LAW TO ADOPT AMENDMENT 17 TO THE PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. Being a By-law to adopt Amendment 17 to the Official Plan for the City of Pickering (OPA 08-002/P) WHEREAS pursuant to the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.p. 13, subsections 17(22) and 21(1), the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering may, by by-law, adopt amendments to the Official Plan for the City of Pickering; AND WHEREAS pursuant to Section 17(10) of the Planning Act, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing has by order authorized Regional Council to pass a by-law to exempt proposed area municipal official plan amendments from its approval; AND WHEREAS on February 23, 2000 Regional Council passed By-law 11/2000 which allows the Region to exempt proposed area municipal official plan amendments from its approval; AND WHERERAS the Region has advised that Amendment 17 to the City of Pickering Official Plan is exempt from Regional approval; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That Amendment 17 to the Official Plan for the City of Pickering, attached hereto as Exhibit "A", is hereby adopted; 2. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward to the Regional Municipality of Durham the documentation required by Procedure: Area Municipal Official Plans for Amendment 17. 3. This By-law shall come into force and take effect on the day of the final passing hereof. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this day of 2009. 10 At David Ryan, Ma Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk 7 Exhibit "A" to By-law AMENDMENT 17 TO THE PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN 4 Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan PURPOSE: The purpose of this Amendment is to change policies of the Pickering Official Plan to set out the requirements for complete applications and for mandatory consultation before submission of applications for Official Plan amendments, Zoning By-law amendments, plans of subdivision and plans of condominium, in accordance with Sections 22(5), 34(10.2), and 51(18) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c.P.13. The amendment also sets out requirements for complete applications and mandatory pre-submission consultations for site plan applications. LOCATION: This amendment applies to all lands within the City of Pickering. BASIS: On January 1, 2007, the Planning Act was amended by Bill 51, the Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006 to provide a number of additional planning and development control tools for municipalities. Among these is the ability of a municipality to require studies to be submitted at the time of application and to refuse consideration of an application if these studies are not submitted; in other words, if the application is not `complete'. However, in order to avail itself of these powers, the municipality must include provisions in the Official Plan relating to the requirements of a 'complete application'. These provisions are to document the information or material that the municipality considers it may need in order to review the full range of matters relevant to an application. This complete application provision applies to Official Plan Amendments, Zoning by-law amendments, plans of subdivision and plans of condominium. This amendment also requires a complete application provision for site plan applications. In addition, Bill 51 introduced provisions permitting a municipal council, by by-law, to require applicants to consult with the municipality prior to submission of a planning application. Concurrent with adoption of this Amendment, City Council will pass such a by-law, and this Amendment proposes to add a policy to the Official Plan to provide for mandatory pre-submission consultation for planning applications for Official Plan amendments, Zoning By-law amendments, plans of subdivision, plans of condominium and site plan approvals. 1 Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan ACTUAL AMENDMENT: The Pickering Official Plan be amended by: (NEW TEXT SHOWN AS UNDERLINED TEXT, DELETED TEXT SHOWN AS STRIKEOUT TEXT, RETAINED TEXT SHOWN AS UNCHANGED TEXT) Chapter Fifteen - Development Review 1. Amending policy section 15.2 as follows: • Deleting policy section 15.2 in its entirety "15.2 City Couneil the proponents o appropriate inventory, impaet and reports asseeiated with ene or more shadowing, -a! hazards aft-d _f • Adding the following new policy section 15.2: "15.2 City Council shall require applicants to consult with the municipality prior to submitting an application for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, draft plan of subdivision, draft plan of condominium or site plan approval. The pre-submission consultation meeting will be held with the applicant, City staff and any other government agency or public authority that the City determines appropriate. At the pre-submission consultation meeting; (a) the list of required studies set out in sections 15.5A or 15.5B will be scoped to only require studies related to the application. The City, in consultation with applicable agencies, may also prepare terms of reference /guidelines for any of the required studies which would set out the required study information, analysis and recommendations necessary to address the scope and complexity of the application; and (b) additional studies may be determined necessary for submission with the application based on the nature of the application." 2 Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan Y6 2. Amending policy section 15.3 as follows: • Deleting existing policy section 15.3: "15.3 City Cotmed the proponents o development and devel ' fteeordaftee with, one or more short or long term , p1m, environmental construction fnanagemen • Adding the following new policy section 15.3: "15.3 City Council shall not accept an application for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, draft plan of subdivision, draft plan of condominium, or site plan approval until the following has been submitted to the City: (a) a complete application form, including an acknowledgement by the applicant of the obligation to pay required peer review costs, as referred to in Section 15.4; (b) any information or materials prescribed by statute and regulation; (c) a record of pre-submission consultation; (d) the prescribed application fee(s); (e) payment, or proof of payment of application review fees charged by commenting agencies; (f) all required studies set out in Section 15.5 for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, draft plan of subdivision and draft plan of condominium application; and (g) all required studies set out in Section 15.6 for a site plan application." 3. Moving existing policy section 15.4, in its entirety, to appear as new policy section 15.5C. Adding new policy section 15.4, as follows: • Adding the following new policy section 15.4: 3 Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan 7 ,7 "15.4 City Council shall require all of the matters set out in Sections 15.3.15.5A, and/or 15.5B to be completed to the satisfaction of the Citv respecting the scope and complexity appropriate to the application prior to the City deeming the application complete. Once an application is deemed complete, the City may retain a qualified consultant to conduct a peer review of any of the studies required in sections 15.5A and/or 15.5B at the applicant's expense as acknowledged on the application form and as provided for in Section 15.3 (a); and 4. Deleting policy section 15.5, in its entirety and replacing it with a new policy section renumbered as policy section 15.5A. Introducing a new policy section 15.56. Renumbering existing policy section 15.4 as new policy section 15.5C, as follows: • Deleting existing section 15.5, as follows: "15.5 When eonsidering appheations to amend this Plan, in addition to other development review City Couneil shall consider the , shall, A-ve-va-1-1 h--P-n-efit to the eemmunity of the (a) require all appheations to be aeeompanied by a Planning Analysis evaluating the proposal against the relevant goalsi objeetives, and general purpose and intent of this Platt-, and (b) diseourage amendments that are eontra to the goals, objeetives, and genera Adding the following new policy section 15.5A: "15.5A City Council shall require the following materials and studies prepared by qualified experts, as scoped or expanded as a result of the pre-submission consultation required by section 15.2 to be submitted at the time of application for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, draft plan of subdivision, and draft plan of condominium approval: 0) a planning rationale report which considers the overall benefit to the community and evaluates the proposal against the relevant goals, objectives, 4 Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan policies and general purpose and intent of this Plan, the Regional Official Plan, the Provincial Policy Statement, the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Greenbelt Plan, where applicable; (ii) a transportation study; (iii) a shadow study; (iv) a wind study; (y) a statement of compliance with heritage conservation designation or conservation district policies- (v J) an archaeology assessment; (vii) a functional servicing study addressing municipal water and wastewater servicing. For smaller site-specific applications, a site servicing study may be required in lieu of a functional servicing study; (viii) a drainage and stormwater management study, including preliminary grading; (ix) a flood plain impact engineering study as referred to in subsection 15.31(fl; (x) an agricultural report as referred to in section 15.6; (xi) a site suitability study as referred to in section 15.7; (xii) an environmental report as referred to in section 15.8; (xiii) a natural heritage evaluation as referred to in subsection 15.9; (xiv) a hydrological evaluation as referred to in subsection 15.9; (xv) a hydrogeology and water budget study; (xvi) a watershed/subwatershed study for major development as determined on a cased case basis; (xvii) an impact study on potential aggregate extraction as referred to in subsection 10.8(b); (xviii) an aggregate extraction assessment study as referred to in subsection 10.8(b) and sections 15.33 and 15.35; (xix) an assessment of lands within 500 metres of a Known Waste Disposal Site as referred to in section 15.12A; (xx) a Phase I environmental site assessment, and a Phase II environmental site assessment and a Record of Site Condition if the Phase I environmental site assessment shows potential for contamination, as referred to in section 15.12B; 5 Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan 79 (xxi) a contamination management plan for development in high acquifer vtilnerable areas, (xxii) a containment management plan for development in proximity to a wellhead protection area; (xxiii) a waste disposal community impact study as referred to in section 15.36 (xxiv) a noise study as referred to in subsection 15.13(a); (xxv) a vibration study as referred to in subsection 15.13(c); (xxvi) a dust and/or odour study as referred to in subsection 15.13(b); (xxvii) a lighting study as referred to in section 15.13; (xxviii) a retail impact study as referred to in section 15.14; (xxix) a sustainable development report; (xxx) a rental housing conversion study for the conversion of rental units to condominium tenure; (xxxi) an urban design brief which indicates how relevant development and/or urban design guidelines and related policies of this Plan are proposed to be implemented-, (xxxii) a financial impact study; (xxxiii) an architectural design study; and (xxxiv) a railway corridor safety study." • Adding the new policy section 15.513, as follows: 1115.5B City Council shall require the following materials and studies prepared by qualified experts, as scoped or expanded as a result of the pre-submission consultation provided for by section 15.2 to be submitted at the time of application for site plan approval: (i) a transportation study; (ii) a shadow study; (iii) a wind study; (iv) a statement of compliance with heritage conservation designation or conservation district policies; (v) an archaeology assessment; (vi) a site servicing study addressing municipal water and wastewater servicipZ vii) a drainage and stormwater management study, including preliminagy grading; 6 Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan (viii) a floodplain impact engineering study as referred to in subsection 15.31(j), (ix) a grading plan; (x) a landscape plan; (xi) an agricultural report as referred to in section 15.6; (xii) a site suitability study as referred to in section 15.7: (xiii) an environmental report as referred to in Section 15.8; (xiv) a report demonstrating compliance with the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan; (xv) an assessment of lands within 500 metres of a Known Waste Disposal Site as referred to in section 15.12A• (xvi) a Phase I environmental site assessment, and a Phase 11 environmental site assessment and a Record of Site Condition if the Phase I environmental site assessment shows potential for contamination as referred to in section 15.12B• (xvii) a waste disposal community impact study as referred to in subsection 15.36; (xviii) a noise study as referred to in section 15.13(a): (xix) a vibration study as referred to in section 15.13(c): (xx) a dust and/or odour study as referred to in section 15.13(b): (xxi) a lighting study as referred to in section 15.13 (xxii) a sustainable development report; (xxiii) an urban design brief which indicates how relevant development and/or urban design guidelines and related policies of this Plan are proposed to be implemented; (xxiv) an architectural design study; (xxv) a construction management plan; and (xxvi) a railway corridor safety study." • Amending former policy section 15.4 as policy section 15.5C, as follows: 1115.5C City Council, in considering any supporting report or management plan, City Ceuneil shall consult with the relevant conservation authority, provincial ministry, regional department, and other relevant group or agency on the appropriateness and approval of the report or plan." 7 Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan 5. Deleting existing policy section 15.6, in its entirety, and replacing with the following new policy section 15.6 as follows. • Deleting existing policy section 15.6 as follows: "-15.6 in aeeerdance with sections 2.26 and 2.30 of this Plan, City Coune-.1 may permit eertain the rural area and e existing ~ealements, designate new settlements, we this M.-on, when shall require all appheations to be aeeempanied ineluding the Planning Analysis required by „seetion (a) an Agtieultural Report d --10 the City's satisfitetion that the proposed i (i) will not signifieantly adversely affeet the amount or qi (ii) is loeated and/or operated i Distanee Separation Formulae as amended from time to time; and (iii) cannot be aecommodated less signifieant agrieultural lands, in rural settlement, or in the urban and area; (b) aft Environmental Report meeting the the proposed use or settlement, (i) will net adversely affeet the quality, or funetion of natural features and eludin groundwater,-and (H) is energy efficient and envft"nme form, in terms of its water usage and sewage • Adding a new policy section 15.6, as follows: 1115.6 When considering applications for non- agricultural uses on lands designated Agricultural Areas, Open Space System or Oak Ridges Moraine Countryside Areas by this Plan, City Council shall require an Agricultural Report prepared by a qualified expert. The Agricultural Report shall demonstrate, to the City's satisfaction, that: 8 1 Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan (a) (i) the proposal complies with the minimum distance separation policy; (ii) the proposal minimizes impacts on surrounding agricultural operations and lands to the extent feasible; (iii) the proposal requires additional lands to be designated to accommodate the proposed use; (iv) the proposal is not located on lands which comprise specialty crop areas; (v) there are no reasonable alternatives to accommodate the proposal which avoid agricultural areas; and (vi) there are no reasonable alternative locations to accommodate the proposal in agricultural areas with lower priority agricultural lands; and (b) for proposal respecting livestock facilities, that the proposal complies with Minimum Distance Separation Formula as addressed in policy 15.39 of this Plan." 6. Amending policy section 15.7, as follows: "15.7 in aeeordance with seetions 2.32 and . Plan, this to the hantlets of Greenwood, Kinsale n Balsam ,:.1_out amendment t the require, Couneil shall ift addition to any othe 7 demonstrating to the satisfaetion of the City in eensultation with other rel 9, that, When considering applications for non- agricultural uses in the Rural Area, City Council shall require a site suitability stuff prepared by qualified experts. The site suitability study shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City, in consultation with other relevant agencies, that: (a) the development will have an adequate supply of potable water and soil conditions are satisfactory for the effective operation of a private waste sewage system on each proposed lot; and (b) there will not be any adverse impacts on the supply of water or the soil and groundwater conditions of adjacent properties." 7. Renumbering existing policy section 15.9 as section 15.8 (a) and amending new policy section 15.8 (a) as follows: 15.8 City Council, 9 Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan (a) using Appendix II to this Plan as a guide, City Comwil shall for major development, and may for minor development, as determined through a pre-submission consultation in Section 15.2 require the submission and approval of an Environmental Report as part of the consideration of a development application or a public infrastructure project; and," 8. Renumbering policy section 15.8 as section 15.8 (b) and amending as follows: (b) despite seetieft , City Council the Guidelines in Appendix II, may, through the pre-submission consultation in Section 15.2, require the submission and approval of an Environmental Report as part of its consideration of any other development application or public infrastructure project. 9. Adding new policy section 15.9, as follows: "15.9 City Council, for development or site alteration within 120 metres of a key hydrologic feature or within 120 metres of a key natural heritage feature located within the Natural Heritage System of the Greenbelt Plan, shall require a natural heritage evaluation and hydrological evaluation to be prepared by qualified experts. For development adjacent to a key natural heritage feature located outside of the Natural Heritage System but within the Protected Countryside of the Greenbelt Plante the policies of section 15.8 (a) shall apply." 10. Amending policy section 15.10 as follows: 15.10 Despite Section 15.9;15.8 (aagricultural uses including the construction of farm related buildings are exempted from the requirements of sections 15.8 b) and 15.9, except for uses adjacent to Known Waste Disposal Sites, and subject to the policies of sections 15.8 (Lb) and 15.12A." 11. Amending line 3 of the first paragraph of policy section 15.11 to remove reference to policy section 15.9, as follows: 15.11 City Council shall require that the Environmental Report submitted in accordance with sections 15.8 and 15.9 include at least the following, 10 Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan 84 12. Renumbering subsection (i) of policy 15.11 as new policy section 15.12A, amending policy section 15.12A, as follows: 15.12A for a Report submitted under seetion 15-.9 Qjy Council shall require, for lands on or within 500 metres of a Known Waste Disposal Site, Gity Couneil shall quire an the assessment should of risks from landfill gases and leachate, to the satisfaction of the City, that: "a) be is carried out by a qualified engineer; fii)~b) examines the potential affects of the waste disposal site on the proposed development; and fiii)~c) makes recommendations on the construction and phasing of development to ensure the implementation of the Report's recommendations including monitoring for lands on or within 500 metres of a Known Waste Disposal Site." 13. Renumbering policy section 15.12 as section 15.128, and amending as follows: 45A2 15.12B On lands suspected of being contaminated (for example: sites where filling has occurred; lands used for industrial, transportation or utility purposes; certain commercial properties such as gas stations, auto repair garages and dry cleaning plants), City Council shall, (a) require the proponents of development to complete prior to any approvals for the site ental audit a Phase I environmental site assessment, and a Phase 11 environmental site assessment and a Record of Site Condition if the Phase I environmental site assessment shows potential for contamination, in accordance with provincial guidelines and legislation as may be amended from time to time, to identify any on-site contamination, and following completion of the audit assessment, should contamination be found, require the restoration of the site to a condition suitable for the intended uses, before permitting the establishment of the uses; and 11 Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan (b) prohibit residential uses on lands previously used for automobile repairs, for service stations, for fuel storage, or for the disposal of construction waste or debris unless the site is first restored in accordance with provincial guidelines and legislation as may be amended from time to time. 14. Amending policy section 15.13 as follows: 15.13 On lands affeeted b For applications with impacts from noise, vibration, dust, light spillage at3d- or odours, or which may raise safety concerns, City Council, ~aj shall require a the proponent of sensitive land uses to complete a an Heise -ham appropriate study, prepared by a qualified expert, as specified in subsections a), b) and c) below to the satisfaction of the City in consultation with relevant agencies, i€- the proposed development is within 300 metres of railroad right of way, an as follows: " on lands affected by noise, for proposals for new sensitive land uses within 300 metres of a railway right-of-way or adjacent to an arterial road, and for proposals for new land uses (including, but not limited to, commercial and industrial uses) that may introduce new sources of noise adjacent to sensitive land uses, City Council shall require the proponent to complete a noise study, and, (i) shall require appropriate measures to mitigate any adverse effects from the noise identified by the study, and (ii) shall only permit development if attenuation measures satisfactory to the City are undertaken to prevent or mitigate adverse impacts, which measures may include, but not be limited to berming, fencing and the imposition of building setbacks to be undertaken as a condition of approval. (e) shall require the prepo"ent e development to eomplete an app dust or odottr afiftlysis > > 1 by a qualified eonsultant, to the au~-&eetion of the City in eonsultation with relevant ageneies, where, Nibratien, nor odeur levels c antieipated to be unaeeeptable. 12 8 6 Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan for proposals for new sensitive land uses in proximity to sources of dust, light spillage, and/or odours, and for proposals for new land uses that may introduce or increase existing light spillage, dust or odours, City Council shall require the proponent to complete an appropriate dust, light, and/or odour analysis, and (i) shall require appropriate measures to mitigate any adverse effects from the dust, light, and/or odours identified by the study, and (ii) shall only permit development if attenuation measures satisfactory to the City are undertaken to prevent or mitigate adverse impacts, which measures may include, but are not limited to: buffering or imposition of separation distances between the respective land uses to be undertaken as a condition of approval. (c) shall require the proponent of development to eomplete a vibration tudy, prepared to the satisfaetie Of City in consultation with relevan ) if the proposed development is for proposals that would introduce new sensitive uses on lands within 75 metres of a railway right-of-way, and City Council shall require the proponent of development to complete, (i) a vibration impact study, and shall require appropriate measures to mitigate any adverse effects from the vibration identified by the study; and (ii) a railway corridor safety study and shall require that all proposed development adjacent to railways provides appropriate health and safety measures such as setbacks, berms and security fencing to the satisfaction of the City, in consultation with the appropriate railway. 15. Revising policy section 15.14 as follows: 15.14 Outside of the Downtown Core, City Council, in the review of development proposals for new or expanded gross leasable floor space for the retailing of goods and services, Oa shall for the development of 2,500 square metres or greater of floor space, and 13 Amendment 17 to the Pickering Official Plan may for the development of less than 2,500 square metres of floor space, as determined through a pre-submission consultation in Section 15.2, (i) require a retail impact study, U to justify the proposed floor space for the retailing of goods and services, and ii to demonstrate that such additional floor space will not unduly affect the viability of any lands designated or developed for the retailing of goods and services. Chapter Ten - Resource Management 16. Amending policy section 10.22 as follows: 1110.22 City Council recognizes that people's normal use and enjoyment of property may be affected by unacceptable levels of noise, vibration, dust, and/ er lightspillage, odours or safety concerns in proximity to railway lines; accordingly, Council shall require proponents of affected developments to adequately address noise, vibration, dust, and/ er light, odours or safe concerns, and where necessary, to incorporate into such developments, appropriate mitigation measures as may be specified in a required analysis (see section 15.13)." IMPLEMENTATION: The provisions set forth in the Pickering Official Plan, as amended, regarding the implementation of the Plan, shall apply to this Amendment. Numerous section number cross references will be required with the next consolidation of the Plan. INTERPRETATION: The provisions set forth in the Pickering Official Plan, as amended, regarding the interpretation of the Plan shall apply to this Amendment. 14 APPENDIX II TO REPORT PD 16-09 PROPOSED INFORMATIONAL REVISION 14 TO THE CITY OF PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN Informational Revision 14 to the Pickering Official Plan P 9 PURPOSE: The purpose of this Informational Revision is to change CITY POLICY informational text of the Pickering Official Plan in order to clarify the requirements for complete applications and for mandatory pre-consultation before submission of applications for Official Plan amendments, Zoning By-law amendments, plans of subdivision, plans of condominium, and site plan applications. LOCATION: Applies City wide. BASIS: In reviewing the CITY POLICY informational text contained in the Official Plan, various housekeeping and technical revisions have been determined to be necessary and appropriate to complement and assist users with understanding the policy changes to the Official Plan regarding the provisions of mandatory pre-consultation for planning applications for Official Plan amendments, Zoning by-law amendments, plans of subdivision, plans of condominium and site plan approvals. ACTUAL The City of Pickering Official Plan is hereby amended by: REVISION: (NEW TEXT SHOWN AS "UNDERLINED TEXT", DELETED TEXT SHOWN AS "STRIKEOUT RETAINED TEXT SHOWN AS UNCHANGED TEXT) 1. On page 287, in the CITY POLICY informational text at the start of chapter fifteen, Development Review, amending paragraph three by deleting the period after the word "application" and adding the words "to constitute a complete application." to the end of the first sentence, deleting and replacing the remainder of the paragraph so that it reads as follows: 2 "This Chapter also outlines the various reports that are required to be submitted in conjunction with a development application. T4-te analysis; reports tnay be required to address a variety of matters depending o the type of proposal and its laeation. Some "es of reports that ma be requii-ed ifielude ft planning analysis of the benefits and impaets o study; study-, and a tree ift-ventory and preservation study to constitute a complete application. An application would be deemed to be complete when all required information as set out in this Chapter has been submitted to the City. A standard list of required studies is provided for all development applications However, during the pre-submission consultation with the applicant, staff will identify the studies from the standard list that will not be required or may be scoped in extent, or may request additional information depending on the complexity of the application." 2. On page 289, within the CITY POLICY informational text under the heading Supporting Reports, deleting the first two sentences of the first paragraph and replacing it so that it reads as follows: "Depending on the type, 1 location of a develepynent eYa*;~notts- stip e#ing r-ep efts-Fnay-b be r-equir-ed. The pekeies-in this seetien detail both general and speeifie An application is deemed complete when all of the required items and supporting reports provided in sections 15.2 to 15.14 are submitted The policies in this section detail specific requirements for the submission of various supporting reports. Other reports may be required by other sections of this Plan." 3. On page 289, revising the CITY POLICY informational side note for section 15.2 so that it reads as follows: "CITY POLICY l mspaet-Reperts Pre-submission Coiisultation " 4. On page 289, revising the CITY POLICY informational side note for section 15.3 so that it reads as follows: "CITY POLICY Complete A.PPlication" 3 9'1 5. On page 289, moving the existing CITY POLICY informational side note of section 15.4 to a new section 15.5C, and adding a new CITY POLICY informational side note for section 15.4 as follows: "CITY POLICY Peer Review at Applicants ExOense" 6. On page 290, replacing the CITY POLICY informational side note for section 15.5 that is now renumbered as section 15.5A, introducing a new CITY POLICY informational side note for new section 15.56 so that they read as follows: 15.5A "CITY POLICY Rewired Studies or an Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, Draft Plan of Subdivision, and Draft Plan of Condominium Approval" 15.56 "CITY POLICY Rewired Studies-for Site Plan Approval" 7. On page 291, revising the CITY POLICY informational side note for section 15.6 so that it reads as follows: "CITY POLICY A-gdmltural Areas: Supporting Information to Permit Non Agricultural Uses" 8. On page 291, revising the CITY POLICY informational side note for section 15.7 so that it reads as follows: "CITY POLICY cem~ m," Rural Areas: Supporting Information for ' Non Agricultural Uses" 9. On page 291 & 292, revising the CITY POLICY informational side notes for sections 15.8 and 15.9 so that they read as follows: 15.8 "CITY POLICY Environmental Environmental Reports Required" 15.9 "CITY POLICY Evaluation Reports Required within Natural Heritage System" 4 .9 10. On page 292, revising the CITY POLICY informational side note for section 15.10 so that it reads as follows: "CITY POLICY Environmental Reports: &~eeeption Exem tion for Agricultural User" 11. On page 294, revising the CITY POLICY informational side note for existing and now revised policy section 15.12 that is now renumbered as section 15.126, and adding a new CITY POLICY informational side note for section 15.12A as follows: 15.12A "CITY POLICY Supporting Information for Lands within 500 metres of a Known Waste Disposal Site" 15.126 "CITY POLICY Environmental Site Assessment" 12. On page 294, revising the CITY POLICY informational side note for section 15.13 so that it reads as follows: "CITY POLICY Noise, Vibration, Dust, Li ht Sae and Odour Studies" 13. On page 140, revising the CITY POLICY informational side note for section 10.22 so that it reads as follows: "CITY POLICY Noise, Vibration, Dust, Li ht Sa e and Odour" IMPLEMENTATION: The provisions set forth in the City of Pickering Official Plan, as amended, regarding the implementation of the Plan shall apply in regard to this Amendment. INTERPRETATION: The provisions set forth in the City of Pickering Official Plan, as amended, regarding the interpretation of the Plan shall apply in regard to this Amendment. 5 APPENDIX III TO 9 3 REPORT PD 16-09 DRAFT BY-LAW TO REQUIRE PRE-SUBMISSION CONSULTATION FOR PLANNING APPLICATIONS THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING 94 BY-LAW NO. L?,q,44,,F7 Being a by-law to require consultation with the City prior to submission of applications for official plan amendments, zoning by-law amendments, site plans, plans of subdivision and plans of condominium WHEREAS Subsections 22(3.1), 34(10.0.1), 41(3.1) and 51(16.1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c.P.13 authorize municipalities to pass by-laws to require land use planning applicants to consult with the municipality before submitting applications for official plan amendments, zoning by-law amendments, site plans, plans of subdivision and plans of condominium; WHEREAS Council wishes to have applicants discuss planning applications with City staff before the applications are submitted to the City, to ensure that the appropriate studies and other requirements are completed to the satisfaction of the City, prior to final submission; AND WHEREAS Council wishes to provide City staff with an opportunity to determine and provide advice about City submission requirements, and identify to the applicant which agencies and senior levels of government will need to be consulted before an application is deemed complete; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Applicants shall consult with the City's Planning & Development Department prior to submitting requests to amend the City's Official Plan or zoning by-laws, and prior to submitting applications for site plan, plan of subdivision or plan of condominium approval. 2. Planning applications submitted to the City prior to a required consultation meeting will not be accepted as Planning Act applications or processed by the City until after the consultation meeting. 3. If an applicant is proposing to, or is required to, submit more than one application for planning approval in support of a single development proposal, a single meeting with Planning & Development staff can satisfy the requirement to consult. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this day of , 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk APPENDIX IV TO REPORT PD 16-09 95 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED ON THE PROPOSED OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT cn cu -0 Z/~Cl) cu ° o c E ~ 7 6 0 N 7 N a A- N t~ (6 O "j c o V U _(D 0) c c Q O . a. E c ca ca O - cm 4: c N c E- a) N cn U c :3 U Q Q O Co :3 v° °-O U E ~QV v E aE cu 0 4-- a (n o a-V V co U o~~ ~75 aE Q~ ca o- QU) a~ O .o E cn a) o~ a) CU E w a) ~ c~ aai Q-~ vi o-0 a C: M 0 -0 C: cu 'Z, - CL cn r- m -0 c C. ca N cu E° o c c L~ o 2° a~~ E~ c ~'c aNi cm vi-CcncE0-0 E~w m °a~Q.--rn `O-~0 -o c00- a)oma ~cnE0-ruCL :3 inC 5C a) a) W En M c a) c ~•o o M c -0 E 0 3.~ D o a m o M CD CU m E N c -0 -r-= N E Q cc4 ~Q 0~ a) -(Dr -0 o C -.e 0 C 0 ocn(Dc>voic*>,cazca CL E~~cavi~a) a) 0) cu E c: a) (D z E 0) CL z-- c .2 ca o ° ca (1) a) (B cn ~ c U U U) -v a) N Q E ca a) EE -0 u) 0 c~oE~-0 =s .2 ~ 0 CL Cr U) c>3 U o a• o > U ~I~-Ea?Mo m°u m Q°uciQ Qa- Q~ V ^ ^ d N O CL O a) w ° L. a _ _0 o~ o cu.C: NQc° c: 0 a- Lo a) -0 E > a) LZ C: O o ~N LrQO4 ° 'a c 0 N c+ m ap ° C r a> o Q~ ~~a~ 0 v~-0 cn aD > CL c >N o LO U ° avi = O a o, c mV a m = QCU -0 c a) c ~ u Urr O q (D (D m E L) E c: cu CL (0 LO cu O a-0 o o a ULo O c U O L =C3: c cu ( r o6 U) U a) a) a) O a) -1- M a) E p) E L O> m z U L m~r >Za. (U 4.1 Lo . 0 _0 LO (D )-o c: >'O cn V.O 0 err a) c6 O oU) U U) c cn 4- U) O +O+ C p a 0 p_0 N c a) p N .r E rn. cu 0) U p U-0 c r co =3 =3 Q a. 0 U) U) c cn m can cn U) a - C. N N U) d ~ m d L W +O+ d H E i = C~ -a = c U m `0O a) - O 0~ V c O E r N O V 9 7 o ca Ft c 0.- cu C 4- f6 cn U C O O Cf) (1) L70- cn C C _r_ 4 O> N 0 0 C) -C a) C C a) i U cu cu 8 ID -0 cu (D CU q-- M -0 a) CL 75 W U (u cu . 06 a) . O C C_ O • U = N O C 0-1- C (D -0 LO c a) 0 0 cu 4) D ='ov.C ~~vioaLZ'3Va~i~~ ~cQcn O o a c c C Imo- p m M N vi c Q a) o a) C -a j a) O ~ O.- a~ c U O a) a) E a)U-) a)C: w a- a) oo~coi0~a) ~c.ML c a) a) a) -c o c 'O 5 ai C C_ cn ~n c m~e cn c a/•~ ca c O a) N CD 3: 0 p C 0 m m a) U 'Q.. J O L i L 4-- O Q) a L C_ JS -C (n o 0 Q ~ . 4 p Q p U C N. C (C6 N a) fl- CO L CL O a) O v- a) OE O OC U O N> > C a) o m m O-a a) e4`m~ a) L6 m c a) a) acca~c m4- d. tt: aj - N U ..a p > O f0 ~ O ~ U C m cu a) C C_ U) C_ N a) m c o) U C +r a) o N V C o a V a) a) U a) a) O C C Q "O a) a) a -c-0 cn 0 a) U Q(n ~H+).~33mENrcanca0-(n f--Cv 0 ~ N O O CL = _ 3 ~ a E cn a) a) CU CL 0 0 a) m ON =a o~ =a)~ 0c0 > o cn o _ cn CD O E ~ c > 0 O to O o ca) M ~_~a) w 3 U > o a -5 ig ~ a) U x" m N ~L D a) MQ 0-0 O d C a) C a) N (a O y ~'~J_ L " x a) "5 4- U) E a) Rf a) C p a) C CO :3 c0 -a _ a- Y a- -r- a) E C c in a C a) (n -C (D O ` cn C V ~ t C a) 0 0 cn .r te a O cn E c3° OWm.x C_a) C V O ca C_ ~ 3 -o a) c N c 0 q? V E~ C_ c C_ 0 ~ c- cu m 4- -F cn =3 (n ~0.. O C C V O D U cC .c E U (n Q) cn ) a :3 a) a) a`)mo ~COC .~'UL m c N _ ~ • U H M C_ M C~ U C cLf O O C_ U cl N m m d d ~ m 0) a) c F- E f- c E o c C_ J - ~ O O 0 7--a > N ev c o N am mC< c d E cri 0 0 a) U a) O) S -C N O. Rf 'p 5 N L C 3 C 3 O L- a) c6 a) vi O -v c° ate) c O ~ c3o -C `n c E~ C o o- a) 0)(0 m c O M C' m cn L O m N E cn c 0 cn co m m a) Cli U Q'• L 0 E-0 • ` 4O cn L a) +r C0 C U O a) C: ` :3 a) c N M Q d a) O O LL U O C a (0 .O Q a) Q- 0• U w C ~O U 4- CO CO Q, C O m x 0) E L- Q N C a. ' C N U O~ a) 7 V C O U U~ 3 cv d y C>._ U c C R3 V +M O O CD a) C -am (6 O Q 0 M O _C U a) M C~ 'O m a c -a a) "p O Q" m= c o Q' cn 0 Q~ . V a) O Q C E a- -C _ C E m Q N y 'r- CL N• V C LO N O- C N= O C Q a) E O Q ~ to O 0 Q O C 0 ~ N m m -EL Q N a)°0-0 o- E m a) L Q-~3 4-- LE5 Umo~oa~i~ -0 O M -a o~ ° cn c CO O c n U, c ca c C _ C EL L. U N a) c O r- ~ ai .4 CU O (n M + c a) a) a) -o a) 76 ui (Q a) CL a) E c E a)Ma)Eoo rnUa)>.~c>,>,c.~~?oc a) o'cnCV; 0 .2)= cL o n~omacc0) E cm o)wEE =Uc~~O«9cnCL ~F--D _0ma) cacaE0-Em Q Q~c~E 0 CL (n c a) i- a E3cn c U) d 2.2 c6 m O c (n 0 -0 a) CL (0 D-o -ac- o EL C :3 :3 a) a) ch -a Qa)cn a) UED- QE c d~ cn LE a) m a) O C cn > U c a) vo) ca t/ U p 0--D N O 5= C O O C O O - ,a)a 0 Q. ~°Ec`a E 75 L6 -(n 0 U - d: J cn ea C) E O ~ C N ~ O N -La V o a) -v p- cv a) a) -C C= O C C a) O V V "p v) VcA~ ca) p C ~ oV o > U a) c M U) C Q CD co r a) r L ~ d NO N E E E O ca E ~ V i c CL 3 d oCL o c d E 0 U L a) / O cu 0) -O c0 U c a) E C: U) L Y a U) > a- c N U c p O O a fB N E o_ d p y U) 0 L- p 0 C U 'a O' Fu c c °a C: N c o d y p L 3 U rn E L a) c -C L C L a=) ~°-,0-a 0,2 om E cn > y N _0 a Q p c6 c E L -a a) p a- -C FL 3`E ~a)cc E ea ~ o -6 C 4- .w X 0 a) T CD alai M L) ~ a) (D _ y O p Q :-vim cm Q 0cn aXi 0 N C Y) to C'O y O p L y w- -a -p N O a) N O cu a) M C: L. a) O y 'y V 01 U y U) 'C p O cu d o O> y m Q cn Cc r O c4 cn cu -0 3: y ? a) c 0 CU m N Q a p~_ cfl CL r- C: 0 FL a O N :3 '0 co co 0 E = N (ti U c O 4) 4" m -0 U) 0 cu E cu 'E3 0- 0 - m >a) Lm p ~CU L0 cusp- cu = L O a) U) y> v O Q /d = m p O o U) *5 R V a a) > cu a, U- u 0 U) Q O L 0.0 c a) 5sc cn° ~Q-a) -L p wEEO CO -~e O a) Ey O y x- t O cu p O (D U OU Q .O V d c6 7 > Ur-) ~ o~ y Ca m a L E :3 EEo=°E u.cE(~D:: L-c m.2 cum; coU) -0 =E X02 E CL M CL :3 a co 4w V = N _ -C a d N N ~-V c: Lo cY a) OO fl .O p" L" O > O L c c M> L c c 0 cu N c 0 O-0- Q O a) L O 0 0 O cn O d; U .00 V- u) O- c c C.) cn CD !E )~Q 0=ccn ~s -C ECU x N a _ v)Ocu v)cn:z cu u)>3 f-¢Ea) O Q N M t d r L LL O V O V 1 00 _ ~ (1) -a -a 3: 0 =.-L Cu a) (1) fu a) 0 0 0) U ~ - Cu 4- U) 0 +r O -O . N T O V f CU n O U= O- (6 -C (n O C c a Cu U N O)-a CO "O N D= U O> Q R) 30 OU U) 22 V O 0 N O 'E O.. "O U N N • D O U 0 CO N= Y 0 U O cv N U c -C -0 C (6 (D a" (6 Cu a p m O =3 - 'O C 0 L- 0 C: 0 3: C: -0 (n C-5 7o E N -O 0) ~ > -0 (n c "O 0 O N C a) ~ Cu . O N (6 N N U N c o N a ` o O E a O N c = u) aL+ E 0 O 1 E E :3 (n N N a) N N O _A L E cn c 0~ a O Q) O c O > .V O O C O ~C O Q N 0 c Q- O M~ N r U +-r Cu m N L Q O mc N0c~ C N a'' t~ (0 c a Cn E Cu " o CU 0 O Cu 0 3 m o~ a c It Cu c_a E- 0::3 L- -r- OC)) CL C: L) m E ~ c ~ oc a~0y= ca)a Qc 0 (n Cu CU FL Cn U) co t .2 o E -0 a) 24E °'aL(n0 a) a-70aa) CL a) '-o.CCc c'ia`~i4-(D Cu a) a) x 0 0-75 cu 0 QcA.. F- o 0+r 2..E ° W M 0 o M Q Qca4- U 0 O N O N CL Q) a` -0 0 -v.Na CL c E 0 2 a) ca _ O N U) o Q0 O c~ a~ o V 0 a o O 0 -C 11 0- '0 =3 -C 0 0 o :3 W CD N N E O 0~ 4 CO w a) (D "a O E- -a 2D CL -0 m Cn -0 =3 c N a) C: L a) a) Ci E a v EQ = O O O o U) U^ o cu w p) ' Q.. -41 c O c - (!1 N C a" O - O c c - o Q. C U) cv to -a O O -a > N ( N 4- } 4 E ~ ~ 0 U N U _U U) (D C cn 0) 0 E 4- CL -0 :3 a ~ (6 N w mCL :3 -0 w % N O :3 DL m O ^ ^ CL r (V U) d r L O -a C d G N c U) C O F- E E 0 - cc Q M ~ E moLa) O 7-OB E cL E .c o o c o U ~~UI-U c a~ E L6 0 0 a) 101 cu LO c a) E y U C ` O - N CU O a) E Q ~ C _N ~ a) a N ~a o a- a a) O ~ m N O C. O d ~ c ~ 0 0 c E E CD > U CD CL m CU E E m U N E a) U m c~ N ~ N E a~ C E O O p Q. U cu N m ` 0 E E~ E m U o U •L c a) U o U) C d E 6 O U APPENDIX V TO 1 0 2 REPORT PD 16-09 PROCEDURES FOR PRE-SUBMISSION CONSULTATION MEETINGS City of Pickering Procedures for Pre-Submission Consultation Meetings In order to fulfill the proposed requirements and provide consistent administration of the pre-submission consultation meetings, the following procedures are proposed: • The purpose of the meetings is for staff to advise a prospective applicant what information and studies will be required at the time an application is submitted to comprise a `complete' application; • The proponent will be advised that if confidentiality is requested, staff shall keep the proposal confidential; • Planning & Development staff will arrange the meetings at no charge to the prospective applicant; • Staff will request a preliminary summary, concept or sketch of the proposal ahead of the pre-submission consultation; • Staff may waive requirement for pre-submission meeting for low impact proposals; • Staff will invite appropriate City and outside agency staff, circulate preliminary proposal and invite applicant to a Civic Complex meeting; • Invited City staff may include Planning, Development Control, Building, Fire Services, Municipal Property & Engineering and Office of Sustainability staff; • Invited outside agency staff may include Conservation Authority, Region of Durham, Provincial Ministries, utilities, railways and similar agencies staff; • The list of studies/information required and the terms of reference/guidelines of each required item will be scoped/limited to the scale and complexity of each proposal at the meeting, if possible, or subsequent to the meeting; • Where known, the applicant will be advised if studies will require peer review; • Planning & Development staff will provide a record of the conclusions of the meeting shortly after the meeting, with a copy to participants; and, • If necessary, more than one pre-submission consultation meeting may be required. ATTACHMENT#__1__TO REPORT# PD 2 2 1 Q 4 City o~ I KERIN INFORMATION REPORT NO. 21-08 FOR OPEN HOUSE ON October 21, 2008 AND PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF November 3, 2008 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 SUBJECT: 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) 1.0 BACKGROUND • The Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006 (Bill 51) introduced a number of changes to the Planning Act including a number of additional planning and development control tools for municipalities. • One objective of the current Pickering Official Plan Review is to introduce new policies to use the additional planning and development control tools for municipalities made available by Bill 51. Complete Applications: • Among the new powers provided by Bill 51 is the ability of a municipality to require studies to be submitted at the time that applications are submitted and to refuse consideration of applications if these studies are not submitted: in other words, if applications are not `complete'. This complete application provision applies to official plan amendments, zoning by-law amendments, consents, plans of subdivision and plans of condominium. However, since the Region of Durham is responsible for consents, policies for consents will not be proposed by the City. • To avail itself of these powers, the City must include in its Official Plan the requirements for 'complete' applications. These provisions should document the information that the City will need to review an application. ATTACHMENU TO Information Report No. 21-08 REPORT# PD 16 U 2 Page 2 QJ • Although not specifically enabled by the Planning Act (Bill 51), other municipalities have extended provisions for complete applications in their official plans to include site plan applications. Pre-submission Consultations: • The Act also provides a municipality the ability to require applicants to consult with it prior to submitting applications for official plan amendments, zoning by-law amendments, site plan approval, consents, plans of subdivision and plans of condominium. • In order to require such pre-consultation, a municipality must pass a by-law to do so. The Act does not require a municipality to include such provisions in its Official Plan, nor does the Act prevent such provisions. Official Plan Review: • The Official Plan Review draft workplan sets out a three-year study process to amend the Pickering Official Plan through a series of seven amendments. The first amendment listed in that workplan will implement Bill 51 and the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS, 2005). • Staff now proposes to take earlier advantage of those Bill 51 powers for complete applications and mandatory pre-submission consultations by proceeding with an amendment for this purpose first. The amendment to implement the remainder of the new powers introduced by Bill 51 and requirements of the PPS, 2005 will be forwarded using the Council approved consultation process for the rest of the Official Plan Review once Council has approved the revised workplan and consultation program. • Staff is currently reconsidering aspects of the consultation and visioning aspects of the Official Plan Review program, prior to forwarding a revised workplan for Council approval. • Since this amendment is part of the Official Plan Review, the Planning Act requires that an Open House be held in addition to the requirement for a Public Meeting. It also requires that notification of these consultation meetings include the proposed amendment to the official plan. • Accordingly, an Open House is scheduled to be held October 21, 2008, commencing at 7:30 pm, a Public Meeting is scheduled for November 3, 2008, commencing at 7:30 pm, and a copy of the proposed draft Official Plan Amendment has been included in the notices mailed to everyone who requested to be advised of Official Plan Review meetings. Information Report No. 21-08 ATTACHMENT# TO Page 3 ii- n6 REPORT# PO ft 2.0 OFFICIAL PLANS AND ZONING BY-LAW 2.1 Durham Regional Official Plan • Although the Region of Durham adopted Amendment #114 (ROPA #114) as a major part of its recent Official Plan Review, the Regional Official Plan does not provide policy directives for lower-tier municipalities to implement complete application' requirements in their Official Plan, or require `pre-submission consultations'. • The Region has recently adopted its own official plan amendment and by-law to require planning applications submitted to the Region (i.e.: Regional official plan amendments, consents, etc.) to be complete and to require mandatory pre-submission consultations before applications for Regional approval are submitted. 2.2 Pickering Official Plan • Although the current City of Pickering Official Plan provides criteria for specific studies required to be provided during the consideration of different types of planning applications, it does not specify that such studies must be submitted at the time that the applications are submitted to the City. It also does not currently require a pre-submission consultation for planning applications. • Chapter 15 of the current Pickering Official Plan lists various studies that are required and, in many cases, the specific study requirements. • In some cases these study requirements need to be revised to conform with the Greenbelt Plan or ROPA #114. For instance, ROPA #114 applies stricter permissions regarding uses in Prime Agricultural Areas. These restrictions affect issues that should be addressed in required studies that support applications in Agricultural Areas in the City of Pickering. 2.3 Pickering Zoning By-laws • The subject Amendment will not have any implications for the Zoning By-law. 2.4 Other Pickering By-laws • The City adopted By-law No. 6763/07 in May, 2007 to delegate to the Director, Planning & Development, the authority to deem applications for approval under the Planning Act as 'complete'. • A draft by-law to require applicants to consult with the municipality prior to submission of planning applications is attached to this Information Report as Attachment #3. Staff will recommend that Pickering City Council adopt such a by-law to come into effect at the same time as the proposed official plan amendment to require complete applications and mandatory pre-consultation prior to submission of planning applications. Information Report No. 21-08 ATTACHMENTS®TO Page 4 1 REPORT# PD_ ~ ~ O ~ 3.0 DISCUSSION 3.1 Advantages of New Policy Directions Complete Application • Requiring specific studies to be submitted as part of a development application is a tool to strengthen implementation of Provincial policies and municipal priorities. • Including such provisions in the Official Plan will offer greater certainty for the applicants. • It will also allow City staff to have adequate information and time to comprehensively assess the merits of an application. • Requiring studies to be submitted early in the process also contributes to greater transparency and accessibility to information for stakeholders, as all documents submitted to the municipality will be available to the public. • It also front-loads the planning process in that necessary information is provided up-front, leading more certainty during the process. • An application would be deemed to be complete when all required information has been submitted to the City. • The time periods in which an applicant can appeal to the OMB would not begin to run until the application is deemed complete by the municipality. • However, an applicant can bring a motion to the OMB to dispute whether a notice from the municipality that an application is not complete or whether a notice has not been received within 30 days of submission of an application is reasonable. • In addition, new provisions in the Planning Act restrict evidence before the OMB to only the information and material that was previously provided to the municipality with the application. This places the onus on applicants to ensure that municipalities have all relevant material and expert reports in support of development applications when submitted. If new information is still introduced at the OMB, the Board must refer the application back to the municipal Council to reconsider the application. Pre-submission Consultation • Requiring consultation with City staff prior to submission of a planning application will require earlier engagement with City staff and with agency staff such as Conservation Authority, the Region of Durham or other interested agencies, thus allowing staff more time to understand the possible impact of a proposed development on a range of possible public policy concerns. • It offers an opportunity for City and agency staff and other stakeholders to identify concerns and issues earlier in the process. • It also provides City staff with flexibility to scope or add to the standard list of required studies for a complete application depending on the complexity of the application and to scale the extent of required studies to the anticipated impacts of each particular application. ATTACHmm TO Inform attio~n Report No. 21-08 REPORT# PD _v Page 5 3.2 Review of Approaches of Other Municipalities • As Attachment #1 (Table 1 - Complete Applications and Pre-Consultation Provisions of other municipalities) illustrates, there are a number of interesting similarities amongst the approaches of other municipalities to complete application requirements. • Most municipalities have chosen to include pre-submission meeting requirements in their official plans even though it is not required by the Planning Act. In many cases they have linked that requirement with the complete application requirements. • As well, many municipalities have used the pre-submission requirements to both scope the list of required studies as well as add to the list of studies. This approach has a great deal of merit, as the scale, impacts and complexity of each application varies and as such the number and type of studies will vary as well. • In terms of the studies required as part of a complete application, most municipalities list those studies in their Official Plan, while a few include them in separate schedules or appendices. • There are generally two different approaches to the list of studies themselves: one is to use a standard list of studies for all applications and rely on the scoping provisions to tailor the study requirements; and the other is to have separate lists for each type of application. Staff recommends the former approach for Pickering. • Not discussed in Table #1, but a requirement of many of the municipal official plan amendments is the requirement that applicants agree to pay for peer reviews of the applicant studies and legal support of an applicant's case at court or the OMB. This is becoming a standard practice throughout Ontario, and there is merit in clarifying the intent of the City of Pickering in this regard in the Official Plan. 3.3 The Proposed Pickering Official Plan Amendment • The proposed amendment is attached to the written notices of the Open House and Statutory Public Meeting sent to City Councillors and staff, agencies and utilities and anyone who requested notice of any Official Plan Review matters. The proposed amendment, including informational revisions and policy changes to the Pickering Official Plan is attached to Information Report No. 21-08 as Attachment #2. • The purpose, location and basis of the proposed Amendment and Informational Revision explain that changes are proposed in order to implement new powers provided by Bill 51 to require that planning applications be complete when submitted and include all required information and studies as determined at a mandatory pre-submission consultation meeting with City staff and interested agencies. This applies to applications to amend the official plan or zoning by-law and for plans of subdivision and condominium and site plan approval. This provides a standard list for all applications to be scoped at the pre-submission consultation meeting. ATTACHMENT 0 Information Report No. 21-08 REPORT# PD /6,-0 Page 6 109 • Items 1 and 2 of the proposed amendment include revisions to several informational paragraphs that precede the policy sections. Informational side notes are proposed to be amended for most of the policy sections. • Although the Planning Act does not require a municipality to include provisions to require a pre-submission consultation in the Official Plan, a number of municipalities have done so, largely to make it clear to applicants of the municipalities requirements. Including it in the Official Plan also gives the municipality the ability to scope the studies that are required under the complete application provision. This has been added as section 15.2 as shown in Attachment #2 (also see Attachment #3 for the draft by-law to require pre-submission consultations). • Item 3 requires that applicants pre-consult with City staff to establish which studies must be submitted with their planning applications and that additional studies may also be required later, during the processing of applications. • Item 4 lists the types of information that must be submitted with the application, including a completed application form, record of the pre-submission consultation meeting, all required fees, a peer review and legal fees agreement and all required studies. • Item 5 specifies that, applications will be deemed complete once all required items are submitted to the satisfaction of the City. • Item 6 lists up to 30 possible types of studies that may be required to accompany applications, with the studies required for each specific application determined and scoped in the mandatory pre-submission consultation meeting with staff. • Some existing policy sections that address agricultural reports and rural servicing studies refer to applications for settlement expansions (Sections 15.6 and 15.7) that are no longer permitted by the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Other sections need to be brought into conformity with the Greenbelt Plan, Provincial policy and Regional policy in terms of their wording and scope. Items 7 and 8 of the proposed amendment address these conformity issues. • Item 7 provides the criteria/objectives for required agricultural reports; while Item 8 provides the objectives required for site suitability studies required for proposals for non-agricultural uses in rural areas. • The Greenbelt Plan provides a minimum distance for development or site alteration adjacent to key hydrologic and key natural heritage features that are located within the Natural Heritage System of the Greenbelt Plan. In such instances, a natural heritage evaluation and hydrological evaluation is required. Policy change is required to add these studies in addition to an Environmental Report. Items 9 to 13 of the proposed amendment addresses these conformity issues. • Items 9, 10 and 11 explain the criteria for environmental reports while Item 12 introduces requirements for natural heritage and hydrological evaluations for features within Natural Heritage System lands designated in the Greenbelt Plan. Item 13 provides a minor exception for farm related buildings. Information Report No. 21-08 ATTACHMENT#_~_TO Pa e 7 IEPORT# PD. 9 • Item 14 continues existing required elements to be addressed in an environmental report. • Item 15 revises technical wording for studies that would assess the impact of lands close to known waste disposal sites. • Item 16 introduces minor technical revisions to current provisions for environmental site assessments of lands suspected of being contaminated. • Items 17 and 18 revise wording to add light and safety studies to current requirements for impact studies whenever noise, vibration, dust and odour are generated or new or expanded uses are proposed within the impact areas of such nuisances. Item 19 proposes the inclusion, in an earlier section of the official plan, of light, as a matter that can impact the enjoyment of people's properties. • Finally, Item 20 clarifies that the need for retail impact studies will also be determined through the pre-submission consultation meeting with City staff. 3.4 Other Implications • The City should prepare standard terms of reference for studies not currently addressed in the Official Plan. Such terms of reference lead to products that meet the requirements of City and agency staff and address an appropriate level of technical analysis. This can lead to more responsive applications and quicker application review times. • It is also recommended that the City prepare a standard fees agreement to require that the costs of any necessary peer reviews of required studies or legal and related consulting costs for City support of an application at a court or the Ontario Municipal Board are paid by the applicant. • The peer review cost agreement may be triggered for many of the studies that may be submitted since the City does not have the expertise to review studies such as environmental, hydrogeology and some other types of studies. Outside consulting assistance may be required to review such studies. The application fees however are not sufficient to cover the costs of retaining outside consulting assistance. • Requiring an applicant to enter into a fees agreement to cover peer review costs as part of the complete application requirements provides the City with resources necessary to undertake a thorough and complete review of each and ever application. • Staff will consider whether a fee should be charged for the pre-submission consultation meetings and protocol established for scheduling and other administrative aspects of such meetings. 4.0 RESULTS OF CIRCULATION 4.1 Resident Comments None received to date; Information Report No. 21-08 ATTACHMENT# _ ~ TO Page 8 REPORT# PD..~. S5 111 4.2 Agency Comments None received to date; 4.3 City Department Comments None received to date; 5.0 PROCEDURAL INFORMATION 5.1 Official Plan Amendment Approval Authority • Region of Durham approval of this City initiated amendment will be required, as this is part of an official plan review. 5.2 General • 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 the decision on this Amendment, 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 adoption of any official plan amendment, you must request such in writing to the City Clerk. 6.0 OTHER INFORMATION 6.1 Attachments 1. Table 1: Complete Applications and Pre-submission Consultation approaches of other municipalities 2. Draft Informational Revision and Official Plan Amendment 3. Draft By-law to require pre-consultation ORIGINAL SIGNED BY ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Steve Gaunt, MCIP, RPP Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner - Policy Manager, Policy SG:jf Attachments Copy: Director, Planning & Development 1 1 ATTACHMENT# TO Excerpt from L,ty o~ REPORT# PD Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, November 3, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littley (II) PART `A' - INFORMATION REPORTS 1. 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 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. 1 ATTACHMENT#. -TO Gaunt, Steve REPORT# PO 0 9 113 From: greyeagleO [greyeagleO@sympatico.ca] Sent: October 14, 2008 8:35 PM To: Gaunt, Steve Subject: Seaton Attn Steve Gaunt Steve I recently received your Notice of Open House On Tuesday October 21 regarding the Pickering Official Plan Amendment. Why would I attend the meeting as there has been no real consultation process and to be quite frank with you your City Council couldn't plan a party never mind a subdivision. All I have received from your Mayor and certain Councillors is slander and deformation of my true character when in the beginning it was myself that came to Pickering to educate the ignorant and stand up for Mother Earth and First Nations history and culture. Steve greed is a really sick disease and I will not be a part of your seriously flawed attempt at destroying Seaton forever. May the great spirit have mercy on your sad souls. David Grey Eagle Sanford greyeagle(a-sympatico.ca I am using the Free version of SPAMfighter We are a community of 5.5 million users fighting spam. SPAMfighter has removed 52 of my spam emails to date. The Professional version does not have this message 1 ATTACHMENT#TO 3EPORW PD 114 To: Steve Gaunt, Principal Planner, Planning Dept., City of Pickering Debi Wilcox, City Clerk, City of Pickering From: Carolyn Huston, 898 Antonio Street, Pickering L1 W 1T3 Email: carolyn.huston@,sMMpatico.ca Phone: 905-837-9426 Re: Draft Amendment and Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan Date: October 291h, 2008 Dear Mr. Gaunt and Ms Wilcox I wish to make the following comments and additions to the above document. 1. In. keeping with the City's policy of transparency and accountability as well as with a code of ethics, the introduction of third party, independent qualified experts should be considered. 2. The step outlined above would resolve the perception, fairly or unfairly held in some instances, that the City's Planning Department is nothing more than a `rubber stamp' mechanism for developers. 3. It would also resolve the belief held by many members of the community that the City, in allowing developers to use their own experts, has given developers an exceptional amount of power over the views and wishes of the general public. In effect, the City has allowed the fox to be in charge of the chicken coop. 4. These third party, independent qualified experts could be chosen through tender and/or lists developed by the Planning Department, in conjunction with established, professional associations for engineers, conservationists, etc. 5. To maintain integrity and fairness, parametres could be set limiting time lines and costs so developers do not feel that they are being gouged or their projects are experiencing undue delay. 6. In addition, all costs associated with these third party independent qualified experts are to be paid for by the developer. This way, the City and the taxpayer, are not responsible for these fees. If developers disagree with the independent qualified expert's opinion, then the developers can always go to the OMB. ATTACH MENT#_ 2- _.___TO 9EPORT# PD & - a 15 The following are my specific suggestions and additions (changes are in bold face): 15.2 The pre-submission consultation meeting and any other government agency or public authority or community association that the City determines appropriate. 15.4 and d) aforementioned qualified consultant, peer reviewer and appropriate professionals as outlined in a), b) and c), respectively, shall not be employed by or under contract with the applicant and shall also be independent of the City's Planning Department and all other City employees. 15.6 When considering, City Council shall require an Agricultural Report prepared by a qualified expert not employed by or under contract with the applicant and independent of the City's Planning Department. 15.7 When considering the approval of non-agricultural uses in the Rural Area, City Council shall require a site suitability study prepared by qualified experts not employed by or under contract with the applicant and independent of the City's Planning Department. 15.8 require the submission and approval of an Environmental Report prepared by qualified experts independent of both the applicant and the City's staff members, 15.9 shall require a natural heritage evaluation and hydrological evaluation to be prepared by qualified experts independent of both the applicant and the City's staff members. 15.12A (a) is carried out by a qualified engineer not employed by or under contract with the applicant and independent of the City's Planning Department and/or engineers on staff; 15.13 On lands affected by noise City Council shall require an appropriate study to be prepared by a qualified expert not employed by or under contract with the applicant and independent of the City's Planning Department and/or engineers or other experts on staff. ,ATTACHMENT# -To 1EPQRT# PO 116 15.13 © (iii) both the vibration study and the railway corridor safety study be prepared by qualified experts not employed by or under"contract with the applicant and independent of the City's Planning Department and/or engineers or other experts on staff. 15.14 Outside of the Downtown Core, City Council require a retail impact study prepared by qualified experts not employed by or under contract with the applicant and independent of the City's Planning Department and/or other experts on staff. ATTACHMENT# S TO ~tEPORT# PD ~ ;1 November 20, 2008 Steve Gaunt, MCIP, RPP Planning and Development Department City of Pickering One the Esplanade Pickering ON Mr. Gaunt: The Regional Municipality Re: City Initiated Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan - of Durham Requirements for Complete Applications and Pre-Submission Planning Department Consultations (Pickering Official Plan Review), File: OPA 08-002/P 605 ROSSLAND ROAD E The purpose of the official plan amendment application is to implement policies 4T" FLOOR for complete applications and mandatory pre-consultation in accordance with the PO BOX 623 Planning Act and Bill 51. The remainder of Bill 51 will be implemented through a WHITBY ON L1 N 6A3 CANADA future amendment as part of the Pickering Official Plan Review. 905-668-7711 Fax: 905-666-6208 The proposed requirements for complete applications applies to Official Plan E-mail: planning@ region.durham.on.ca Amendments, Zoning by-law amendments, plans of subdivision, plans of condominium and site plan applications. This amendment also proposes to add www.region.aurham.on.ca policy to the Official Plan to provide for mandatory pre-consultation for planning A.L. Georgieff, MCIP, RPP applications. Commissioner of Planning Schedule E - Table E8 of the Regional Official Plan outlines the Regional requirements for complete Regional planning applications. Additional requirements for planning applications in the Regional Official Plan that should be part of the Pickering requirements in policy section 15.5A include: 0 contamination management plan for development in high aquifer vulnerable areas; containment management plan for development in proximity to a wellhead protection area; • rental housing conversion study for development that will facilitate the .conversion of rental units to condominium tenure; and • watershed/sub-watershed study for development on a case by case basis as required. Also, proposed policy 15.5A(xix) should include a requirement for a Record of Site Condition for Official Plan Amendments, Zoning by-law amendments, plans of subdivision and plans of condominium. Proposed policy 15.5B(xvi) requires an RSC for site plan applications and similar policy wording should be specified for the other planning applications. Similarly, proposed section 15.12B should reference that a Record of Site Condition be required for development that has undertaken a Phase II environmental site assessment. Proposed policy 15.13 should include sections for a noise and vibration study for development within 1000 metres of a railway yard as required in Schedule E - Table E8 of the Regional Official Plan "Service Excellence for our Communities" 100% Post Consumer ZTACHMENT# TO 3EPORT# PD 11 The remainder of the requirements for complete applications appears appropriate. The proposed mandatory pre-consultation by-law is appropriate. In accordance with Regional By-law 11-2000 this application is exempt from Regional Approval. Please advise the Commissioner of Planning of your Council's decision. If Council adopts the amendment, please forward a record to this Department within 15 days of the date of adoption. The record should include the following: • two (2) copies of the adopted amendment; • a copy of the adopting by-law; and • a copy of the staff report and any relevant materials Please contact Dwayne Campbell, Project Planner in this Department should you have any questions or require additional information regarding this matter. v Kai Yew, MCIP, RPP Manager Current Planning Copy: Regional Works Department - Pete Castellan DEC-11-20013 14:10 DPOI S LLP 41636578E6 7 ATTACHMENT DAY IS '3EPORT# PD /3 -0 19 LEGAL 9 I RS SINCE 1892 1892 LLP FROM THE OFFICE OF Chris Burnett DIRECT LINE 416.365.3502 DIREC-FAX 416.177.7407 E-MAIL obarncttadavis.ca FILE NUMBER 690&6-00001 December 17. 2008 DELIVERED BY FAX Mr. Steve Gaunt Principal Planner - Policy City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, ON LIV 6.K7 Dear Mr. Gaunt: Re: Information Report 21-08 _ Requirements for Complete Applications - Proposed Official Plan Amendment We act on behalf of i;unnymede Development Corporation Limited and.Tribute Communities, and their related entities with respect to land they own in north-east Pickering. We have had the opportunity to review the above referenced report, and reel: one clarification we believe is important in understanding the proposed process with respect to complete applications. As we understand the proposed process, applicants seeking Planning Act approvals will be required to consult with the City prior to the submission of their applications. The pre- submissions consultation will include a review of what studies will be required in order for the City to consider the application to be complete for the purposes of the Planning Act. We believe it is the intent of the City that it be satisfied with the scope of the reports prior to the application being considered complete, and not that it be satisfied with the substantive conclusions contained within the reports. However, the proposed land age of the implementing official plan amendment is not entirely clear. Section 15.4 is proposed to read: "City Council shall require all of the matters set out in Section 15.3, 15.5A, and/or 15.5B to be completed to the satisfaction of the City prior to the City accepting the application as complete." (emphasis added). This language appears to leave open the possibility that the City must be satisfied with the substance of the reports themselves, as opposed to their scope, prior to the application being considered complete. If this is the intention, we take the position that this is contrary to the inttriL of the Bill 51 Planning Act amendments, which are not intended to give municipalities the ability _ Davis u.a, 1 First Canadian place, suite 5600, P,O. Box 367, 100 King Street West, Toronto, ON Canada N15X 1 E2 ~ww,~,davis.ca TORONTO VANCOUVER MONTREAL CALGARY EDMONTON WHITEHORSE TOKYO YELLOWKNIFE DEC-17-2008 14 11 DAVIS LLP 415365716,86 P. 0:3,0 3 A17ACHMENT# TO 12 0 DAVIS I LLP IEPORT# PD /en D Pa<oe 2 of to evaluate the substantive conclusions of reports as part of the detennination as to whether applications are complete. We ask that this point be clarified, and if necessary, the language of section 15.E be amended so there is no ambiguity in this regard. We also note that proposed policy 15.3 (e) states that an application will not be accepted until a fee agreement has been entered into with the City, to cover peer review costs and legal costs if the City appears in stpport of the application at the OMB. Such a requirement falls outside of the intent of the amendments to the Planning Act which allow municipalities to set 'complete application' requirements. These requirements are, we believe; intended to be directed towards ensuring that the municipality has the information it requires, and not to requiring fee agreements to be entered into prier to accepting applications. We therefore request that this requirement for a complete application. he deleted. We also request notice of any decision with respect to this proposed official plan amendment. Yours truly, DAVIS LLP Per: Chris Bamett CMB/cmb TOTAL P.03 JRN-23-2009 16 13 DRU 1 S LLP 416365 ees P. 92.l p3 4TTACHMENT#~TD ?EPDRT# PD ry LEGAL A DAYIC V SINCE 1892DVISORS Lt_P I FROM THE OFFICE OF Chris 3arnett DIRECT LINE 416 365,3502 DIRECT FAX 416.77 7407 6UAIL cbarnet[rdavis, u FILE NUMBER 49147-0001, January 23, 2009 DELIVERED BY FAX Mn Steve Gaunt Principal Planner - Policy City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Dear Mr. Gaunt: Re: Information Report 21-08 Requirements for Complete Applications - Proposed Official Plan Amendment We act on behalf of Mattamy (Seaton) Limited, and its related entities with respect to land it owns in Duffin Heights and Seaton. We are writing on its behalf to comment on the proposed complete application official plan amendment currently being considered by staff.. As we understand the proposed process, applicants seeking Planning Act approvals wil~ be required to consult with the City prior to the submission of their applications. The pre- submissions consultation will include a review of what studies will be required in order for the Citv to consider the application to be complete for the purposes of the Planning Act. We believe it is the intent of the City that it be satisfied with the scope of the reports prior to the application being considered complete, and not that it be satisfied with the substantive conclusions contained within the reports. However, the proposed language of the implementing official plan amendment is not entirely clear. Section 15.4 is proposed to read: "City Council shall require all of the matters set out in Section 15.3, 15.5.x, and/or 15.513 to be completed to the satisfaction of 'the City prior to the City accepting the application as complete." (emphasis added). This language appears to leave open the possibility that the City must be satisfied with the substance of the reports themselves, as opposed to their scope, prior to the application being considered complete. If this is the intention, we take the position that this is contrary to the ini'ent of the Still 51 Planning Act'amendments, which are not intended to give municipalities the ability Davis LLP, 1 First Canadian Place, Suite 6600, P.O, Box 367, 100 King Street West, Toronto, ON Canada N15X I E2 w,mv.davis.ca TORONTO VANCOUVER MONTREAL CALGARY EDMONTON WHITEHORSE YELLOWKNIFQ 7pKYO 3RN-23-2009 16:13 DW IS LLP 4163657866 P.03 03 ATTACHMENT DAYIS "F 3EPORT# Pp 1 2 2_ Page 2 of 2 to evaluate the substantive conciusions of reports as part of the detenraination as to whether applications are complete. We ask that this point be clarified, and if necessary, the language of section 15.4 be antcnd:~d o there is no ambiguity in this regard. We also note that proposed policy 15.3 (e) states that an application will not be accepted until a fce agreement has been entered into with the City, to cover peer review costs and legal costs if the City appears in support of the application at the OhfB. Such a requirement falls outside of the intent of the amendments to the Planning Act which allow municipalities to set 'complete application' requirements. These requirements are, we believe, intended to be directed towards ensuring that the municipality has the information it requires, and not to requiring fee agreements to be entered into prior to accepting applications. We dlerefore request that this requirement for a complete application be deleted. We also request notice of any decision with respect to this proposed official plan amendment. Yours truly, DAVIS P Pe Chris Barnett CIMB/cmb cc: Rodger Miller TOTAL P.03 ATTACHMENT#-L-TO 9EPORT# PD 23 November 5, 2008 r , 011 y Mr. Steve Gaunt, Principal Planner City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario L1V 6K7 RE: Proposed Official Plan Amendment OPA08-002P to Establish Complete Application Requirements & Pre-Consultation Prior to Submission of Development Applications The Building Industry and Land Development Association is in receipt of the proposed Official Plan Amendment to establish Complete Application and pre-consultation requirements as necessitated by Bill 51, the Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law Amendment Act. We anticipate that this exercise, as required by Bill 51, is essentially a codification of existing City processes. Therefore, we trust that there will be an intent to maintain a level of flexibility, and to act reasonably when dealing with development application approvals. BILD has been following similar exercises being conducted by other GTA municipalities, and is pleased to have the opportunity to comment on the proposed process for the City of Pickering. BILD recommends the following: Section 15.5A: "City Council shall require the following materials and studies The list of material that the City indicates will be required for a complete application is quite lengthy and inclusive. BILD recommends that a clause be added to this section which recognizes that there will be different requirements for different applications, and which makes reference to studies being required of the applicant if and only when they are related to the project. In keeping with the principle that one size does not fit all, BILD recommends that the wording of this section be revisited to better reflect that not ALL studies are always necessarily required, and that those requested of the applicant shall be relevant to the specific application. Wording could be included in this section so that it reads, "City Council < < delete "shall"> > < <insert > > MAY require the following materials and studies, < <insert> > which should be appropriate and in keeping with the scope and complexity of the application... prepared by...." In keeping with this same principle, BILD also recommends the same wording be included to Section 15.513. 1 2 4 ATTACHMENT# TO 3EPORT# PO I With reference to Section 15.4: "City Council... may require a peer review at the applicant's expense..." This statement that the City may require a peer review of any report or study appears to be excessive. As written, it allows the City to retain outside expertise when the same capabilities may exist in- house. BILD recommends that this clause be narrowed to provide that the City be permitted to hire a peer review limited to technical reports, and/or in circumstances where it does not have sufficient in-house expertise to review a necessary study. In addition, BILD requests that the City reconsider the requirement to have all peer reviews conducted at the applicants expense as this is an additional and unnecessary cost burden. It is hoped that the spirit and intent of Bill 51 requirements are recognized with the proposed OPA. In keeping with the principle that one size does not file all, BILD recommends that the City ensure the wording of the proposed OPA reflects the following: • that the studies requested of the applicant be relevant to the specific application • that the scale and scope of any required report/ technical study is dependent on the scale and scope of the proposal. BILD requests to be kept apprised of any changes to staff's proposed amendments to the complete application and pre-consultation requirements prior to final Council approval. We trust that you will take our comments under advisement and look forward to providing additional input as the City moves forward with the preparation of additional administrative amendments to the planning approvals process as required by Bill 51. Sincerely, Paula J. Tenuta, MCIP, RPP Director, Municipal Government Relations CC. Glen Murphy, Chair, BILD Durham Chapter o» 20