HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD 04-10
23f3
cif o~ Report to
Planning & -Development
PICKERIN Committee
Report Number: PD 04-10
Date: January 4, 2010
From: Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 18/09
2121401 Ontario Limited (V!VA Retirement Living Corp.)
1884 Glengrove Road
(Lots 42, 43, 44 and Part of Service Road, Plan 509)
City of Pickering
Recommendation:
1. That Report PD 04-10 of the Director, Planning & Development be received;
2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 18/09 be approved to permit a
retirement home and day care centre on lands being Lots 42, 43, 44 and Part of
Service Road, Plan 509; and
3. Further, that the zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application
A 18/09, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 04-10, be forwarded to City Council
for enactment.
Executive Summary: The applicant requests an amendment to the zoning by-law
to permit a 135 unit rental retirement residence on the subject lands (see Applicant's
Submitted Plan - Attachment #2). An associated day care centre for approximately
25 to 30 children is also requested. The site is comprised of three residential lots and
an untraveled portion of City-owned Glenview Road: the northerly lot fronts onto
Glengrove Road and the two southerly lots front onto the untraveled portion of Glenview
Road which lies adjacent and parallel to Kingston Road on the west side of Glengrove
Road (see Attachment #1 - Location Map).
The proposal is compatible with the surrounding land uses and is considered an
appropriate design that conforms to the Downtown Core and Kingston Road Corridor
Urban Design Development Guidelines. Introduction of the proposed retirement home
will increase the number of people in the downtown core, thus providing greater support
to existing businesses and transit. The intensification of land use will also result in an
improvement to the economic sustainability of the area.
The recommended draft zoning provisions address minimum and maximum permitted
building height and building footprint restrictions. This will ensure balancing the need
for appropriate physical transition to residential neighbours with the requirement to
.provide a pedestrian supportive streetscape and transit supportive intensification for this
site located next to a regional transit spine within the Downtown Core.
2 3 9
Report PD 04-10 January 4, 2010
Subject: 2121401 Ontario Limited (V!VA Retirement Living Corp.) (A 18/09) Page 2
The application is recommended for approval. The implementing by-law is appropriate
as it implements the Official Plan, is in accordance with Provincial policy and constitutes
appropriate land use planning.
The conveyance of portions of untraveled Glenview Road to the applicant will be
required to implement the proposed development. In May 2009, Council passed
Resolution #133/09 authorizing staff to commence the process of stopping-up, closing
and declaring surplus the City-owned lands to prepare them for possible conveyance to
VIVA Retirement Living Corporation. Staff has initiated this process and will provide a
formal report to Council to implement the disposal of the City-owned lands following
Council's consideration of this Zoning By-law Amendment Application.
Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the
proposed development.
Sustainability Implications: The applicant's proposal is aligned with the site
planning level of sustainability principles of the Draft City of Pickering Sustainable
Development Guidelines. It achieves the Level 1 requirements for Guideline #2 (Plan
of Subdivision, Site Plan, Rezoning and Building Permit Guidelines). It is an infill
project that provides the opportunity to redevelop lands in a form that represents an
appropriate intensification of the site and takes advantage of existing infrastructure
within the City's urban area.
Specific sustainability features include:
• provision of a community use - housing type to provide diversity;
• adjacent to a Regional Transportation Spine;
• providing an integrated day care centre to serve the neighbourhood;
• intensification/compact urban form;
• reduction of reliance on the automobile;
• enhanced pedestrian environment;
• employment opportunities;
• recycling encouraged;
• energy and resource efficiency; and
• Victory Garden - supply of local food for facility and potential food bank use.
The applicant's current site plan incorporates these elements. In addition, there will be
an opportunity to improve this rating still further as additional sustainability factors
become available through site plan review and detailed building design.
Report PD 04-10 January 4, 2010
~Apct: 2121401 Ontario Limited (V!VA Retirement Living Corp.) (A 18/09) Page 3
Background:
1.0 Introduction
The owner of the properties, 2121401 Ontario Limited (V!VA Retirement Living
Corp.), proposes a retirement home and day care centre uses on the subject
lands, located at the northwest corner of Kingston Road and Glengrove Road
(see Attachment #1 - Location Map). The site currently supports two detached
residential dwelling units, one vacant and one occupied. The houses will be
removed should the development proceed.
The applicant has submitted a conceptual site plan proposing a flat-roofed, six
storey building, stepping to four storeys on the north and southwest sides and
containing 135 units comprised of 31 assisted daily living (ADL) units and 104
independent living (IL) dwelling units. A daycare centre for 25 to 30 children is
proposed for the ground floor of the building. The building is to be located in
close proximity to the street rights-of-way in order to create a street edge for
Kingston Road in accordance with the Kingston Road Corridor Urban Design and
Downtown Core Development Guidelines. The applicant's submitted concept
plan and elevations are provided for reference (see Attachments #2 & #3).
An Outline of Sustainable Initiatives, Planning Analysis Report, Phase I
Environmental Site Assessment, Limited-scope Phase II Environmental Site
Investigation, Parking and Traffic Study, Functional Servicing and Stormwater
Management Report, Environmental Noise Analysis, Shadow Studies
A901 - A904 (see Attachment #4), in addition to plan and elevation drawings
have been submitted in support of the application and are available for viewing at
the Planning & Development Department.
2.0 Comments Received
2.1 At the November 2, 2009 Public Information Meeting
(see text of Information Report & Meeting Minutes, Attachments #6 & #7)
A number of residents attended the public meeting. Two residents spoke about
the proposed development voicing the following questions and concerns:
• the amount and duration of shadowing by the new building of the
residential properties;
• whether sufficient parking was being accommodated;
• traffic congestion and parking impacts on neighbouring properties;
• where the boundary to commercial development in the.existing residential
neighbourhood would be established;
• whether Glengrove Road would need to be upgraded to accommodate
commercial weight vehicles;
• whether the existing sewer system could handle the increased commercial
use;
Report PD 04-10 January 4, 2010
Subject: 2121401 Ontario Limited (V!VA Retirement Living Corp.) (A 18/09) Page 4
241
• whether excavation for the development would affect existing water levels;
• who would be responsible for any damage done to homes in the area by
construction activities to homes in the area;
• that six storeys was too high considering the closeness of the
development to existing homes affecting rear yard privacy; and
• whether the same number of trees would be planted on the site as would
be removed by development;
Dr. Donald Roden, owner of Sheridan Veterinary Services, located directly to the
west of the subject property, addressed the Committee and voiced the following
concerns:
• that the proposal lacked vision and was insufficiently unique as a
precedent setting development;
• that there may be problems with parking and traffic congestion;
• that the building was too close to Kingston Road;
• that the building was too tall and dense;
• that the tree buffer between his property and the development would be
lost;
• that there had been no public transparency regarding the sale of the
untraveled portion of Glenview Road (noting that he had submitted a letter
regarding the purchase of the land); and
• that the loss of visual prominence of his property would have a negative
effect on his business.
2.2 Written Public Submissions on the application
Residents residing at 1892 Glengrove Road submitted written comments
summarizing their oral presentation subsequent to the public meeting (see
Attachment #8).
Residents residing at 1896 Glengrove Road submitted a letter and an email
outlining their concerns and spoke with staff in regard to their concerns (see
Attachments #9 & #10). Beyond concerns that were voiced at the public meeting,
they also noted the following development related issues:
• potential interference with radio and satellite signals;
• potential impedance to the sound of the City's clock chime;
• potential impedance to the sound of the Pickering nuclear warning system;
• light intrusion from the parking lot;
• increased congestion during a potential nuclear evacuation event.
Dr. Donald Roden submitted a letter prior and two letters subsequent to the
public meeting summarizing his comments made at the public meeting (see
Attachment #11).
Report PD 04-10 January 4, 2010
' a6-eEt: 2121401 Ontario Limited (V!VA Retirement Living Corp.) (A 18/09) Page 5
2.3 City Department and Agency Comments
Region of Durham - the proposed amendment is consistent with the
Planning Department Region's policies to develop higher density
development (see Attachment #12);
Region of Durham - municipal water supply and sanitary sewer
Works Department service is available to the subject property;
- the proposal does not present any significant
Durham Region Transit or transportation impacts
(see Attachment #12);
Municipal Property & - the project has no significant impact on
Engineering Division . transportation or traffic;
- stormwater management concerns will be dealt
with at the Site Plan Approval Stage (see text of
information report, Attachment #13);
- cash-in-lieu of 5% of the area of the subject land
(less the untraveled portion of Glenview Road);
will be required at the Site Plan Approval Stage;
Development Control - comments will be dealt with through the site plan
control process (see Attachment #14);
Veridian Connections - no comment on this application.
No other agency that provided comment has any objection to the subject
applications.
3.0 Discussion
3.1 The Proposed Uses and Built Form Massing is Supportable and Complies
with the Official Plan
Most of the subject lands are designated Mixed-Use Area - Downtown Core
(Town Centre Neighbourhood) while the lot located at the northern part of the
site is designated as Urban Residential Area - Low Density (Liverpool
Neighbourhood). The proposed retirement home and day care centre are
permitted in both designations. Situated within the Downtown Core, adjacent to
a regional transit corridor, the subject land is considered an appropriate location
for a retirement home of this size and the proposal is further supported by the
Provincial Growth Plan.
Report PD 04-10 January 4, 2010
Subject: 2121401 Ontario Limited (V!VA Retirement Living Corp.) (A 18/09) Page 6
43
The Official Plan permits a floor space index (total building floor space divided by
the total lot area) of up to and including 3.0 FSI for the Downtown Core. The
proposal has an FSI of 1.56. The proposal provides for a set-back of almost 30
metres from the residential property to the north. The building itself is also
located well outside of the residential designation.
3.2 The Boundary of the Downtown Core is not being Expanded into the
Liverpool Neighbourhood to Accommodate this Development
The Official Plan recommends that restrictions on size, height and/or floor space
of non-residential developments be considered within Urban Residential Areas
where neighbourhood character warrants. The proposal considers
neighbourhood character by restricting the building location to the area of the site
that is designated Mixed Use Area- Downtown Core. The portion of the subject
property designated as Urban Residential Area - Low Density contains no
buildings and allows for a landscape buffer that is 50% wider than is usually
required by the City.
3.3 The Proposed Development is Considered Compatible with the Existing
Neighbourhood
I
Both the Kingston Road Corridor Urban Design and Pickering Downtown Core
Development Guidelines envisage redevelopment of the subject lands toward
creating a "mainstreet" character for the community. The guidelines recommend
that (due to the very wide right-of-way proposed for Kingston Road) base buildings
be a maximum of six to seven storeys. The proposed development locates such a
six storey base building in close proximity to Kingston Road in order to create a
sense of containment for the road, to help make the streetscape pedestrian
friendly, and to provide a noise buffer to the, residential lands to the north. The
zoning by-law will establish a build-to-zone to ensure adherence to these
principles.
The applicant acquired the residential property to the north of the main property in
order to better integrate the project with the adjacent neighbourhood. This
additional lot was incorporated into the development site to allow for "transition" in
the form of increased separation distance and increased landscape buffer adjacent
to the low density residential area to the north. The provision of additional
transition distance is considered to be an acceptable alternative to providing a
lower base building in this location.
The shadowing effect of the proposed building is minimal on neighbouring
properties (see Attachment #4, Shadow Studies).
Report PD 04-10 January 4, 2010
Subject: 2121401 Ontario Limited (V!VA Retirement Living Corp.) (A 18/09) . Page 7
i 4
In fact the proposed retirement residence's shadow falls within the existing Tridel
condominium's shadow for the morning hours on the shortest days of the year (see
Attachment #5, Addendum to Shadow Study for.Tridel Building). As the VIVA
shadow shifts eastward through the day, it would graze one residential property on
the east side of Glengrove Road just before sunset. No summer shadowing effect
and very little shadowing effect in spring and fall would be caused by the proposed
building.
Staff have met with residents residing at 1892 Glengrove Road, the second lot
north of the subject property, to discuss potential shadowing impacts and other
concerns regarding the proposal. These residents are generally satisfied that their
concerns have been or will be addressed-through the site plan review process.
3.4 Applicant has satisfied Dr. Roden's Concerns with Regard to Tree
Preservation and Potential Loss of Visibility
Dr. Roden has met with the applicants to discuss his concerns regarding the
development. Dr. Roden has communicated to staff that the applicants have
agreed to modifications to the proposal which satisfy his concerns. Modifications
to the building footprint may occur through the site plan review process.
3.5 Traffic Impacts Resulting from the Proposed Development are Considered
to be Minimal and no Upgrading of the Glengrove Road Surface is Required
The Region's .Transportation Department and the City's Transportation Engineer
have accepted the findings of the Parking and Traffic Study submitted in support
of the application. The study determined that the on-site parking (based on
study review of retirement homes and day care centres) is over-supplied by 38
spaces. Further, the study concluded that traffic generated by the new
retirement home and day care centre would not have any significant effect on
traffic operations at intersections or on roadways in the area except that the
southbound movement in the pm peak will operate with an acceptable (D), but
not good (A, B, or C) level of service. Any required improvements to the
intersection at Kingston Road and Glengrove Road will be further reviewed and
addressed through the site plan review process.
Vehicular access to the site is from Glengrove Road at a sufficient distance from
the Kingston road intersection. This access location addresses the Region's
requirement to avoid vehicular conflict with Kingston Road traffic.
On-street parking is not anticipated as a result of this development, as the entry
doors on the Kingston Road/Glengrove Road sides of the building will not
provide general access to the building. On-site parking requirements will be
included in the zoning by-law.
Report PD 04-10 January 4, 2010
Subject: 2121401 Ontario Limited (V!VA Retirement Living Corp.) (A 18/09) Page 8
245
3.6 Existing Sewer Mains Can Accommodate the Waste expected from the
Proposed Retirement Home and Day Care Centre
The Regional Works Department has indicated that existing services (water and
sanitary sewer) are available for the proposed uses on the subject lands.
3.7 No Changes to Ground Water Levels are Expected
Neither the Regional Works nor the City Municipal Property &Engineering
Departments have any concerns respecting the impact of this development on
ground water levels in the area. Detailed engineering drawings will be reviewed
through the Site Plan Review Process.
3.8 Assurances are to be Provided to Adjacent Neighbours Respecting
Potential Damage from VIVA Construction
VIVA and their geotechnical consultants have agreed to meet with adjacent
neighbours to discuss concerns about potential damage from construction and to
provide the required assurances that the construction of the VIVA project will not
result in structural damage to their homes (see letter from applicant, Attachment
#15)
I
3.9 Cash-in-Lieu of Parkland Will be Required at the Rate of 5% of the land
appraisal as valued on the day before issuance of building permit
The City's Parkland-Dedication By-law prescribes the rate of parkland dedication
for non-commercial and non-industrial development to be-5%. Municipal
Property & Engineering has advised that additional parkland is not required for
this neighbourhood at this location. Therefore cash-in-lieu of parkland dedication
will be required and secured through the site plan agreement.
3.10 The highest and best use of the untraveled portion of Glenview Road is to
support appropriate development on adjacent lands that achieve desired
downtown intensification.
The integration of the untraveled portion of Glenview Road with the abutting
lands to the north allows for the creation of a development site of sufficient size
to accommodate desired downtown-scale development. The inclusion of this
right-of-way also enables the proposed retirement facility to be located closer to
Kingston Road and at a greater distance from the low density residential
neighbourhood to the north.
In May of 2009, Council passed Resolution #133/09 authorizing staff to
commence the process of stopping-up, closing and declaring surplus the
City-owned lands to prepare them for possible conveyance to VIVA Retirement
Living Corporation.
Report PD 04-10 January 4, 2010
Subject: 2121401 Ontario Limited (V!VA Retirement Living Corp.) (A 18/09) Page 9
" 24
Staff has initiated this process and will provide a formal report to Council to
implement the disposal of the City-owned lands following Council's consideration
of this associated Zoning By-law Amendment Application. A required two metre
road widening from the City-owned lands will be conveyed to the Region of
Durham to accommodate the future road cross-section and public transit
infrastructure planned for Kingston Road.
3.11 Site Plan Matters Will be Addressed
The proposal takes the applicable Development Guidelines into consideration.
All site development matters concerning the City will be more thoroughly
addressed through the Site Plan Approval process, which will review items such
as, but not limited to, zoning compliance, building massing, fagade
improvements, outdoor lighting and light intrusion, accessibility, parking location,
site access, and landscaping including identification of specific trees to be
retained and the number and spacing of trees to be planted.
3.12 A Site Specific Amendment to Zoning By-law 3036 should be enacted
Appendix I to Report PD 04-10 contains the recommended amendments to the
zoning by-law. The provisions included in the draft Zoning By-law relate to
proposed uses that are supported by the Official Plan, and applicable
Development Guidelines and have been tested in similar situations within the
Downtown Core and the South Pickering Urban Area (Chartwell, Parkway
Retirement Home).
The By-law includes:
a) restrictions on the permitted uses; ,
b) a minimum building height requirement of 12 metres;
c) a maximum building height requirement of six storeys and 21 metres;
c) zoning requirements respecting building location;
d) appropriate parking requirements for retirement home and day care uses;
e) Maximum Floor Space Index; and
f) maximum.gross floor area for the day care use.
4.0 Applicant's Comments
The applicant is aware of the content of this report and concurs with the
recommendations of the report.
APPENDIX:
Appendix I: Draft Zoning By-law
Report PD 04-10 January 4, 2010
Subject: 2121401 Ontario Limited (V!VA Retirement Living Corp.) (A 18/09) Page 10
~247
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Applicant's Submitted Plan
3. Building Elevations
4. Shadow studies
5. Tridel Building Addendum to Shadow Studies
6. Text of Information Report
7. Minutes from November 2, 2009 Statutory Public Meeting
8. Resident Comments (Attachments #8 - #10)
11. Comments from Sheridan Veterinary Services (Dr. Roden)
12. Comments from Durham Region Planning Department, dated October 22, 2009
13. Comments from Stormwater & Environmental Engineer, dated October 7, 2009
14. Comments from Manager, Development Control, dated November 16, 2009
15. Letter from Rob Freeman (Applicant) dated November 26, 2009
Prepared By: Approved/ Endorsed By:
Isa Ja , MCIP, RPP Ne4CarCIP, RPP
Plann II Director, Planning & Development
Lynda aylor, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Development Review
IJ:jf
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
(Acting) Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering City Council
10
Thomas J. uin , RD R., CMM41f
Chief Administrative Officer
I
APPENDIX I TO
2 4 8 REPORT PD 04-10
DRAFT ZONING BY-LAW
AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 18/09
~I
49
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING 2
BY-LAW NO. AS 7W
Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as
amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering District
Planning Area, Region of Durham on Lots 42, 43, 44 and part of Service
Road, Plan 509, in the City of Pickering.
(A 18/09)
WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to
permit the development of retirement facility;
AND WHEREAS an amendment to By-law 3036, as amended, is therefore deemed
necessary;
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS, AS FOLLOWS:
1. SCHEDULEI
Schedule I attached hereto with notations and references shown thereon is
hereby declared to be part of this By-law.
2. AREA RESTRICTED
The provisions of this By-law shall apply to those lands in Part of Lot 21,
Concession 1, in the City of Pickering, designated "MU-(IN)" on Schedule-I
attached hereto.
3. GENERAL PROVISIONS
No building, land or part thereof shall hereafter be used, occupied, erected,
moved, or structurally altered except in conformity with the provisions of this
By-law.
4. DEFINITIONS
In this By-law,
(1) "Build-to-zone" shall mean an area of land in which all or part of a building
elevation of one or more buildings is to be located;
By-law No.~ Page 2
~7 '
2 5) "Day Nursery" shall mean lands and premises duly licensed pursuant to
the provisions of The Day Nurseries Act, or any successor thereto, and for
the use as a facility for the daytime care of children;
(3) "Floor Space Index" shall mean the ratio of the aggregate of the floor
areas of the specified use or uses established or to be established in a
zone (excluding any building or part of a building below grade), to the area
of that zone;
(4) "Gross Leasable Floor Area" shall mean the aggregate. of the floor areas
of all storeys above or below established grade, designed for owner or
tenant occupancy or exclusive use only, but excluding storage areas
below established grade;
(5) "Retirement Home" shall mean a building or part of a building providing
accommodation primarily for retired persons where each private bedroom
or living unit does not include a stove top and oven, does have a separate
entrance from a common hall, and where common facilities and services
maybe provided for the residents including personal services, the
preparation and consumption. of food, nursing services, common lounges,
recreation rooms and ancillary support. offices;
(6) "Storey„ shall mean that portion of a building other than a basement, cellar
or attic, included between the surface of any floor and the surface of the
floor, roof deck or ridge next above it;
(7) "Yard" shall mean an area of land which is appurtenant to and located on
the same lot as a building or structure and is open, uncovered, and
unoccupied above ground except for such accessory buildings, structures,
or other uses as are specifically permitted thereon.
5. PROVISIONS
(1) Uses Permitted ("MU-(IN)"Zone)
No person shall within the lands designated "MU-(IN)" on Schedule I
attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or
structure for any purpose except the following:
By-law No. Page 3
51
(i) day nursery;
(ii) retirement home;
(2) Zone Requirements ("MU-(IN)" Zone)
No person shall within the lands designated " MU-(IN)" on Schedule I
attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building except
in accordance with the following provisions:
(i) FLOOR SPACE INDEX:
Maximum 1.7;
(ii) BUILDING HEIGHT:
Minimum 12 metres;
Maximum 6 storeys and 21 metres;
(iii) BUILDING LOCATION AND SETBACKS:
A Buildings and structures shall be located entirely within
the building envelope shown on Schedule I attached
hereto;
B No building, part of a building, or structure shall be
erected unless 100% of the length of the build-to-zone,
as illustrated on Schedule I attached hereto, contains a
building or part of a building;
C Despite clause A above, minor landscape elements such
as raised planting beds, screening walls, gazebos and
patios, shall be permitted beyond the limits of the building
envelope identified on Schedule I attached hereto, but no
closer than 0.5 metres from the limits of the lands on the
south, east and west sides and 4.5 metres from the north
property limit;
(iv) PARKING REQUIREMENTS:
A There shall be provided and maintained a minimum of
4.5 parking spaces per 100 square metres of gross floor
area for day nursery uses;
B For retirement home uses, there shall be provided and
maintained a minimum of 0.2 parking spaces per living
unit for residents, and 0.05 parking. spaces per living unit
for visitors;
I
By-law No. Page 4
2152
C All entrances, and exits to parking areas and all parking
areas shall be surfaced with brick, asphalt or concrete, or
any combination thereof;
D At grade parking spaces and aisles shall be located a
minimum of 3.0 metres from the west lot line and 4.5
metres from all other lot lines;
(v) SPECIAL REGULATIONS:
A The maximum gross leasable floor area for day nursery
use shall be 150 square metres;
B Clauses 5.9, 5.18, 5.21.1, 5.21.2(a), 5.21.2(b), 5.21.2(d),
5.21.2(e), 5.21.2(f), 5.21.2(g), and 5.21.2(k) of By-law
3036, as amended, shall not apply to lands designated
"MU-(IN)" on Schedule I attached hereto.
C Despite clause 2.8 of By-law 3036, as amended, parapet
walls shall not be included in the calculation of "building
height".
6. BY-LAW 3036
(1) By-law 3036, as amended, is hereby further amended only to the extent
necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as it applies to the
area set out in Schedule I attached hereto. Definitions and subject
matters not specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by
relevant provisions of By-law 3036, as amended.
7. EFFECTIVE DATE
This By-law shall take effect from the day of passing hereof subject to the
approval of the Ontario Municipal Board, if required.
BY-LAW read a first, second, and third time and finally passed this
day of 12010.
David Ryan, Mayor
Debbie Shields,`(Acting) City Clerk
253
o '
75.8m Q .
~ O
00
00
(V I
W
r
2.5m'i 0
MU- (IN) z
CV' - 4.5m W .
N I PLAN 509 LOTS. 42-44' '
r- O ( n
p
I M
i
o-=3.0m
4.5m ~p~
r
O
4CONCESSION . 1
NORTH PART OF QO~
LOT 22 \ 2.5m \
\
Vol
2 5
\v
r _ BUILDING ENVELOPE
® BUILD-TO ZONE
N
SCHEDULE I TO BYeLA'1N
PASSED THIS
DAY OF 2010
ATTACHMENT#1-TO
254 REPORT# PD. - v
o ~
EVERTON STREET o 0
D
w
z
Q ~
0 LANE
w w
w }
N d
o a
SQUARE > ~
o~y BOULEVARD
FIELDLIGHT
o ~
CRESCENT ~O
,P
~J ROSEFIELD ROAD
TTT7
r
w
GLENGROVE
GLENGROVE PUBLIC
SCHOOL
v
PARK ROAD
Li
z
w
X1(0
BRANDS COURT >
0 0
c(Y-a PENN ,
1896 w
1892
SUB T P~Q~'M°R~
AD O R
SOV PRE
Go o
T
U TRA LLE P T1
FR F PICKERING
N40 RECREA RON
SP`PNPpE '5-w COMPLEX
~ptJ p E ESPLANAD Q
S c( SN
~~~G F~ PICKERING
9~2 CIVIC COMPLEX
AND PARK p~EFENBAKER COU
y
ENTRAL LIBRARY SOV(N W
pO0 ~sq\_ pE J
jHE >
City of Pickering Planning & Development Department
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION LOTS 42, 43, 44 AND PART OF SERVICE ROAD PLAN 509 07\
OWNER 2121401 ONTARIO LTD. (VIVA RE=TIREMENT RESIDENCE) DATE NOV. 26, 2009 DRAWN BY JB
FILE No. A 18/09 SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY IJ H
c a:
aTeronetr Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights Reservetl. Not o plan of earve,,. PN_8
2009 MPAC and its suppliers. All rights Reservetl. Not a plan of Survey.
ATTACHMENT#..~.-.~.TO n r, r
REPORT# PD_ o
INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANTS
SUBMITTED PLAN
A 18/09
2121401 ONTARIO LTD.(VIVA RETIREMENT RESIDENCE)
N72'47'55"E 75.83
9 <..~all~ R~ Y
-
T-I ['-7777
2i 'V
ryY
_ r
i
LLJ
N o 0
S7
a ROTOREY4ROSapREY : Z
` g4aM'~1a`~' J
K C~
`0
ti us 6 STOREY ROOF
a
1 STOREY ROOF
y . (STAIR O F) .
"a
PENTHOUSE J y
y ~ MECAHNICA /
RETIREMENT ~OMMUNIITY,
rl*
ROOF HATCH
FROM STNR .
4 STOREY ROOF
o / - PO
o O
THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERINC,
- PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
INFORMATION & SUPPORT SEROCES
OCT 6, 2009
ATTACHMENTA. ! -TO
REPORT# PD 1
25!
Fi,~
axs a~ ~~E G ~ ~ ~ =yr g
€Z
j II I j li `~I o al i pl , o, „~I ~ I
~ ~ i ~ j I g~ ° of ~i of 9 0~ gogf
g'
X7100- 2950 vl 2950 ` 2950 2950! 5fi60
! ! i I $ S9 si H. S9Bi c~
i I I
i t ~ ! i ~ I ~ I~ I! I i I I
i ! i I I
I I I I I i ~~I ~ I I j I !
! I i ~ I i li I i I I i I
I I j I I i r II I I I I
I I i ~ I' I ! ! i
I i I i i I i i I
I I I I 1 i I ; i
! I II i I ~ I
I. _ i I _ I i i I I
I i
I ~ I i I ii ~ ~ ~ I j I i I
i I i I j! i I I i
Ij I I it ! I I I I I I
! ~ i I I
I i I_ i 1 i ~I I I
I
' I I I I i
i ~ I j ~ I ~I I I I II
I !
j I I I: i
! j J
W
" I i' I I i I I I I
j I Ln
r
I I I I I i ~ i
I li -.1 ~ I I~ I I ~ I 1 =
I I I I I i i ! i i --i ~
I I , ! I I I i i I
! ~ I I I ~ i j
i
! i i I ! i I I w
' ~ r 3a
I
i
ry
I
a
I > !
I w -
I
I
I
I r
LEI
a .I .
BL61 i j
Ot. OS6Z ~ 0462 I OS6Z , 0462 S9tf 49BC 099C I I i ~ I
2 I I ~I I : I ~ i i
of a of z =I ~i of 1 i pBL61 it
ui Fi ~ of ° 0011 OS6Z I OS62 0562 OS6Z 49eC L9B[ O:BC
~~aa~d ~ d d addddd ~ ~ ~
ATTACHMENT#.I TO
REPORT# PD d. !V.-/
M
~ t_ _ya Sgse t6( s 8 g j a p g Q Y
1 - bei eye ~f s g V 2 ~ ~ „ , ~ ~ ~ a " o
III I I \ _ i_
I I ~ I I i I i I I i '
I ' I I In. 9w I,. I I I
i i I ! I j I i i
! I X01 I
I, j ! I I II ~ I ~ i i - I
i ' i i I , I I- ! I i
I i i I I I
I I I I ~ ~ I ~ i - i + I
I i I ~ i ~ i ! ( ' ' i I I
I
' i
i I I
I ! I ~II~I11I
I
I I I ~I I + , ; I
i. P:1
i
I
1. i j ~f a I.
l
I
I -
i
~z ~ _ I I z
LE
0 0
Al
I
l a
w L_LI,~ L.W LLI L_JJ~LJFI w
II _ w w
r Ln
Lu
I ~ t Ll1 ~
I I I j I I ' I `~r~-~-+~ I I I
I I I
I I i I i
j Y I I I I i I I i I i I I I s g 17 [T
i
II
~ I I I I I I rIy ~I~ ~ I
UIEJ
A-El
,I I I I I ` ~ I,
I I I i a i~
I I I i ! I I ! I
I j i I I
I
I-
i I b9z6: ~ .
i
6Z6:
} I
O:I OSbZ OS6z I 0562 0;6Z 99of S98C 099{ Olli OS62 0562 OS6Z OS6Z 59.f S?Bf G39t
I I ~ I I I ~ `I ~ I ~ •I I~ I
~ a ~I i g! ~ gl o rc
of ~ =1 j of ail of § i gl w =~~1 of w gl I
°I
t4l
dd d d a d d d d dd ~ d CI ~ C d d
I
ATTACHMENT#--TO
258 REPORT# PD O'`f'-l Q
1 I ~ ~ ~tl S.6 o N.
a i &s€ i11 W v O
t sy~ ^-ad s _ _ _ ~ Q
'7111 4 o ~ s See IiF a ow ~ I 4
r# Y g°e _rv i y- N
_ g~ ~~,ly a 414- V € 's Sa qty _wx 4
I I
j NMI
[
Q !
i
i
F-fll Fi1
I I I wa I
j i ~I
I I I I ~ f ~ ! I
I
j~ I i j ~ ~ X1.1 II ' _
I
I
! !
FTFT
j i j i j ~ m III 1 ~ W
I I 7
r~
- o
i
I I I
I - i
I I $
A I~ 0,~ r L~LL~ j p3 I 3
mI Ell III III
ifl
W -
YI I
z
1-4 W
j u JE
Mill
w i 1 3r / ~I I
I I I_ a s~ i ~ I_
~6
! ~ I li
g`
u
. I I i " I I s~ i i I.
I
I I I I f I
0l:, pS6L I OS6Z I OSfii I0e p562 59.{ S9HC 099f 6plli OS6Z 0562 0562 OS6Z 59e[ Spp{ p9g[
21
,i LII
$ I al sl
21
I
ATTACHMENT# 3 TO
REPORT# PD 0"o 259
tit ''Y 5:66 s - e - ~~ga
' W a
r y !'t !5{i `s x- ~ w
cz-
I I I ' g vz-rsz~
I I I I ~ I i I i t I ! I I
I I
I I I I _ i I I I I ~ I .
I i ~i ~ I i I I I rn t I i I
! I ~ I I I i III!
I I i I !
I II III i I I I ~ ' L__1J ~ i ~ II
i I I
! j
JT6
,_JJ ~1U ~:1 III 7
FT I- I
- I
'I
1 I I I I I~ i I
I ( S ~ I I I
I Z
t
! ~
~ I I I I I , a
I I, >
i I I_ I 8
ETF I ! I W
V=
El LE =:~Lj
I w:
,er.
~I - I I•-fl a i I ~ I i
I I > I i I ~ i ; ~
w
LJ Ali W j ! ! I'I
~1I I - 1 0~ I i ! i I I I
' i I 7 'I N r I I 1 !
• lna eo 9 1 ( I I i I I
! ~ ~=I ar I i I I . I I
I I I
i i I i i I j !I
I i ~ ~ I I ! I I
I i I ~ ~ ~ I j I
I I I I I ~
I I 'I I I I i
II i i I i ~ I ! ~ I
~ ~ I I b9Z61 I I
i I i i _ I r I i
Ig9Lfit
I J
vol'! 0562 095Z OS6Z 0562 s- S9pf 099f - I~ OSbZ OS6Z OS6Z OS5Z
I S9+f 9- 099f
gl sl ¢I all g,l ¢I I. sl pl `s)
l8i
a of °I S of °a Lf
d~da~d d d d ~~d~da a d a
B~ TO
TTACHMENT# j 26.
REPORT# PD 02L d
0
2- 1
jg~
t " i #
44
y,
-
t
• j' ~ V S cz 1; 1
1 . • s1 h 1 W
~ d 7 F
W U
U W
h
a>.
.
r
o a.
t
1 7 iy
O \
1'. '9G \ ~Ap !xF
ATTACHMENT# TO
REPORT# PD 26
i
^ gi
y y
z
om~
mIG
rj
Wp N-.
Od,~ y o
v~ Y f .
N~ r
. R,
I zz-,
f'" e
~,Z_ ~y \ N=o=
w=~o
F. w
,v
ATTACHMENT ~
2 6 2 REPORT# PD--.O//- /0
cay o~
ICI
I I
PICKERING
INFORMATION REPORT NO. 09-09
FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF
November 2, 2009
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS
OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter PA3
SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment -A 18/09
2121401 Ontario Limited (V!VA Retirement Living Corp.)
1884 Glengrove Road
(Lots 42, 43, 44 and Part of Service Road, Plan 509)
City of Pickering
1.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
- the subject property is located at the northwest corner of Kingston Road
and Glengrove Road and is approximately 0.77 hectares in area (see
Attachment #1);
- one vacant, detached, 1 Y2-storey brick dwelling, one vacant, detached
bungalow, a single detached garage and several small storage sheds
currently occupy the site. The structures are proposed to be.demolished in
the course of the development of the site;
- the surrounding land uses are:
north - one and two storey residential dwellings;
south - Kingston Road and a 16-storey apartment building;
west - a veterinary clinic and 4-storey stacked townhouses;
east - a medical building housing a chiropractic centre and spa.
2.0 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL
the applicant has requested to amend the zoning by-law to permit a 135 unit
rental retirement residence on the subject lands (see Applicant's Submitted
Plan - Attachment #2);
ATTACHMENT# TO 2 6 3
Information Report No. 09-09 REPORT# PD o Page
- the proposed flat-roofed, 6-storey building, stepping to 4-storeys on the north
and southwest sides, will consist of 31 assisted daily living (ADL) units and
104 independent living (IL) dwelling units;
- the proposed building is to be located at the south and southeast section of
the subject property in close proximity to Kingston Road;
- living units will be located on the second through sixth floors;
- the ADL units will provide a higher level of supervised support and care;
- the ADL units will be approximately 31.5 square metres to 50 square metres
while the IL units will be approximately 42.7 square metres to 81.7 square
metres in size;
- communal eating facilities will be provided and none of the living units will be
outfitted with cook-tops or ovens;
- first floor facilities include: day care for 25 to 30 children, administrative
offices, and a variety of amenities, restricted to residents only, including cafe
and lounge areas activity lounges, library and gym, craft room, hair salon/spa
treatment room, heated salt-water swimming pool;
- a theatre will be located in the basement;
- outdoor facilities will include play facilities for the day care, walking paths and
a garden area;
- surface parking for 69 cars.
3.0 OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING
3.1 Provincial Growth Plan
- Places to Grow, the Provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Golden
Horseshoe, identifies the Pickering Town Centre Neighbourhood as an Urban
Growth Centre;
- Urban Growth Centres are to be planned as focal areas for investment in
institutional and region-wide public services, as well as commercial,
recreational, cultural and entertainment uses to accommodate a significant
share of population and employment growth;
- the required review of the Pickering Official Plan (to bring it into conformity
with Places to Grow) may result in changes to the boundaries, designations,
prescribed densities, and other policies pertaining to the subject and other
properties along Kingston Road;
3.2 Durham Regional Official Plan
the Regional Plan designates the subject property Urban System - Regional
Centre;
Urban System - Regional Centres are to be planned and developed as the
main concentrations of urban activities within area municipalities, providing a
full array of community, office service and shopping, recreational and
residential uses;
the proposal complies with the Durham Regional Official Plan;
ATTACHMENT "1Z -TO
Information Report No. 09-09 REPORT# PO Page 3
3.3 Pickering Official Plan
- the City of Pickering Official Plan designates most of the subject property
Mixed-Use Area - Downtown Core (Town Centre Neighbourhood) and the
northern portion of the property as Urban Residential Area - Low,Density
(Liverpool Neighbourhood);
- the Downtown Core/Town Centre Neighbourhood is intended primarily for
.residential, retail, community, cultural and recreational uses at the greatest
scale and intensity in the City, serving City-wide and regional levels;
- Urban Residential Area - Low Density (Liverpool Neighbourhood) areas are
intended for residential uses, home occupations, limited offices serving the
area, and limited retailing of goods and services serving the area; community,
cultural and recreational uses; compatible employment uses, and compatible
special purpose commercial uses serving the area;
- the Liverpool Neighbourhood policies require that Council recognize the
proximity of its low intensity development relative to the Town Centre
Neighbourhood and accordingly, consider the concerns of the nearby
residents in the Liverpool Neighbourhood when considering development
proposals, for lands in the Town Centre;
- the facility is considered to be a Community Use, as the residents will be
relying on a central-kitchen facility for their meals. This use is permitted in
both land use designations;
- no density provisions apply to community facilities; however, the permitted
floor space index (FSI) (total building floor space divided by the total lot area)
for properties within the Downtown Core is up to and including 3.0 FSI. The
proposal has an FSI of 1.56. Restrictions on size, height and/or floorspace of
non-residential developments should be considered within Urban Residential
Areas where neighbourhood character and/or environmental constraints
warrant;
- the Compendium Document to the Pickering Official Plan contains
development guidelines affecting the lands. Through the rezoning and site
plan approval process the proposal will be reviewed to ensure overall
conformity with the principles contained within the Kingston Road Corridor
Urban Design Development Guidelines and the Pickering Downtown Core
Development Guidelines;
- the proposal complies with the Pickering Official Plan;
3.4 Zoning By-law 3036
- the subject property is currently zoned "R3" - Detached Dwelling, Third
Density Zone;
- the existing zoning permits single detached dwellings;
- an amendment to the zoning by-law is required to allow the development of
the proposed retirement home;
- the applicant has requested an appropriate zone that would permit the
proposed development.
ATTACHMENT#-L-TO
Information Report No. 09-09 REPORT# PD Page 4
4.0 PRE-SUBMISSION COMMENTS AND CORRESPONDENCE 265
4.1 Resident Comments
a neighbourhood open house was hosted by the owners and applicant on
June 17, 2009;
25 neighbourhood residents and property owners attended;
concerns were raised in regard to traffic, school busses, property values,
fencing, adequacy of proposed number of parking spaces, services and site
grading, possible future expansion, the provision of day care, availability of
medical consultation, the Kingston Road sidewalk location, issues with snow
ploughing on Kingston Road and Glengrove Road;
- subsequent to the meeting, the Planning & Development Department
received a written submission from Dr. Donald E. Roden, owner of Sheridan
Veterinary Services, abutting the subject property on the west, outlining
concerns regarding traffic congestion and an opportunity for shared access,
parking adequacy, building height, building location, loss of existing
vegetation, the density of the proposal and loss of visual exposure of his clinic
building (see letter Attachment #3).
5.0 RESULTS OF CIRCULATION
5.1 Resident Comments
none received in response to the circulation to date;
5.2 Agency Comments
- none received to date;
5.3 City Department Comments
in. reviewing the application to date, the following matters have been
identified by the City's Stormwater & Environmental Engineer:
• no objection to the rezoning; however, detailed review of and adjustment
to stormwater management design factors will be required prior to site plan
approval.(see memo, Attachment #4)
5.4 Staff Comments
in reviewing the application to date, the following matters have been
identified by staff for further review and consideration:
• reviewing the studies, reports and plans submitted in support of the
application;
• 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;
ATTACHIVIENT# TO
Information Report No. 09-09 REPORT# PD off- ~O Page 5
266
• resident and neighbouring owner concerns;
• 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;
• finalizing the conveyance of the portion of the service road right-of-way
north of Kingston Road to the applicant for development in conjunction
with the subject property.
6.0 PROCEDURAL INFORMATION
- written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the Planning
& Development Department;
- oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting;
- all comments received will be noted and used as input in a Planning Report
prepared by the Planning & Development Department for a subsequent
meeting of Council or a Committee of Council;
if you wish to 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 Appendix No.
list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City
Departments that have comments on the applications at the time of writing
report;
7.2 Information Received
- copies of the plans and studies listed below are available for viewing at the
offices of the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department:
Conclusions summarized here are for information purposes only. Further
review and staff/agency comments are still required.
- outline of Sustainable Initiatives (comments required from City and Region
Engineering)
• outlines the provision of a variety of small-scale initiatives; staff may
recommend additional initiatives through the course of more detailed
review;
ATTACHMENT#__ TO
Information Report No. 09-09 REPORT# PID 960 Page 6
Planning Analysis Report (comments required from City and Region' ' 267
Engineering)
• concludes that the proposal is appropriate, desirable and represents good
planning;
- Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (comments required from City and
Region Engineering)
• indicates no evidence of past, potentially harmful activities nor any
subsoil/groundwater contamination and no further environmental
investigation is warranted at this time;
- Limited-scope Phase II Environmental Site Investigation (comments required
from City and Region Engineering)
• confirms suitability of the subject property for human habitation. No
further environmental study is warranted at this time;
- Parking and Traffic Study (comments required from City and Region
Engineering)
• estimates maximum peak parking demand to be 31 spaces. The study
concludes that the increase in site traffic will not have any significant effect
on traffic operations at intersections or on roadways in the area except
that the southbound movement during the afternoon rush-hour will operate
with an acceptable, rather than good, level of service. Improvements to
the intersections of Glengrove Road, Glenview Road and Kingston Road,
including possible right turn lane, the provision of stop lines and centre-
line tail pavement markings, would improve operations;
- Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report (comments
required from City and Region Engineering)
• finds that all utilities are available to service the site, an on-site
stormceptor and rooftop and parking lot detention will provide quality and
quantity control of the site-related stormwater;
- Environmental Noise Analysis (comments required from City and Region
Engineering)
• determines that maximum permitted indoor noise levels can be achieved
by using appropriate construction materials and methods and by providing
air conditioning to the suites. The areas of the outdoor amenity'spaces
(including the area of the outdoor day care play area) will experience
sound exposures below the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) criterion
limit. With proper engineering design, all requirements for mechanical
equipment interfacing to the outdoors can be designed to comply with the
MOE noise guideline limits. Additional road traffic generated by the
proposal will be insignificant relative to existing traffic volumes in the
general area, and is not expected to create adverse noise impact;
ATTACHMENT- 0TO
Information Report No. 09-09 REPORT# PD ~`~~~0 Page 7
268 -Shadow Studies A901 - A904 (comments required from City and Region
Engineering)
• concludes that some overshadowing of residential properties lying to the
north and northeast will only occur between 9:00 AM and 12:00 PM in
early winter. No overshadowing of residential properties will occur
between 9:00 am and sunset throughout spring, summer and early fall
seasons;
Site Plan; (comments required from City and Region Engineering);
- Elevations A-301 - A-304; (comments required from City and Region
Engineering);
- Site Grading and Servicing Concept; (comments required from'City and
Region Engineering);
- Plan of Survey (comments required from City and Region Engineering);
- Landscape Plan (comments required from City and Region Engineering);
7.3 Company Principal
- the owner of the subject property is 2121401 Ontario Inc. (V!VA Retirement
Living Corp.);
- Freeman Planning Solutions Inc. (Rob Freeman) is the applicant.
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
Isa James Lynda Taylor
Planner II Manager, Development Review
IJ:jf
Attachments
Copy: Director, Planning & Development
ATTACHMM & TO
RIPOKU PD O f io 269
APPENDIX NO. I TO
INFORMATION REPORT NO. 09-09
COMMENTING RESIDENTS AND LANDOWNERS
(1) Dr. Roden, Sheridan Veterinary Services - 1398 Kingston Road
COMMENTING AGENCIES
(1) none received to date
COMMENTING CITY DEPARTMENTS
(1) Planning & Development Department - Development Control
270 ATTACHMENT# 7 TO
REPORT# PD d / o
C-ry o~ Planning & Development
Committee Meeting Minutes
Monday, November 2, 2009
32 7:30 pm - Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor McLean
PRESENT:
Mayor Ryan
COUNCILLORS:
D, Dickerson
R. Johnson
B. Littley
B. McLean
D. Pickles
ABSENT:
J. O'Connell
ALSO PRESENT:
T. Melymuk - (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer
N. Carroll Director, Planning & Development
1. James - Planner II
D.. Shields Deputy Clerk
(1) DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST
No disclosures of interest were noted.
(11) PART `A' INFORMATION REPORTS
1. Zoning By-law Amendment -A 18/09
2121401 Ontario Limited (VIVA Retirement Living Corp.)
1884 Glengrove Road
(Lots 42, 43, 44 and Part of Service Road, Plan 509)
City of. Pickering
A public information meeting was held under the Planning Act, for the purpose of
informing the public with respect to the above noted application.
Isa James, Planner II, 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 the.by-law is
passed, that person or public body are not entitled to appeal the decision of City
1
2 -
REPORT# PO 0_ -/a 271
I
Crry o¢ Planning & Development
Committee .Meeting Minutes
Monday, November 2, 2009
7:30 pm - Council Chambers 33
Chair: Councillor McLean
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.
Isa James, Planner II, gave an overview of zoning amendment application A 8/09
with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation.
Jordan Bernamoff, President of VIVA Retirement Living Corp. appeared before
the Committee and with.the aid of a PowerPoint presentation outlined the
Pickering VIVA Retirement Community. application.. He noted that the Pickering
VIVA Retirement Community was a $30 million dollar privately financed
infrastructure project which would benefit Pickering seniors. He also noted that
the project would generate 40 60 full and part-time jobs for Pickering residents.
He stated-that the on site daycare facility was a great opportunity for inter-
generational programming and also provided daycare opportunities for staff
working at the retirement facility. He also noted that when developing projects
they are-committed to building and operating environmentally sustainable
communities.
Peter Smith, 1896 Glenview Road, appeared before the. Committee in opposition
to the application and noted the following concerns. He questioned whether the
shadowing study stated how many houses would be affected by shadowing and
for how long. He noted his concerns regarding whether there was enough
parking for the development and felt this would increase on street parking and
cause additional traffic congestion in the area. Mr. Smith wanted to know when
the rezoning from residential to commercial would stop in this area and stated
this was originally a residential area which is slowly being changed to
commercial which continually affects the residential component of the area.
Doreen Adair, 1892 Glengrove Road, appeared before the Committee in
opposition to the application. She questioned whether the City had looked into
whether Glengrove Road would need to be upgraded to accommodate
commercial weight vehicles. She questioned whether the existing sewer system
could handle the increased commercial use. She asked if assessments had
been done'to determine whether excavation -for the development would affect the
water levels. Ms. Adair also noted that when environmental drill testing had
been done the equipment had caused vibrations in the area and questioned who
would be responsible for any damage done to homes in the area. Ms. Adair also
noted that she felt the development of 6 stories is too high considering its
closeness to the existing residential homes. She stated her concerns with the
loss of existing trees and green space and questioned whether they would be
replaced with the same amount of trees as taken out. Ms. Adair also.noted that
2
2 2 ATTACHMENT#
REPORT# PQ
C-ry Planning & Development
Committee Meeting Minutes
PLUKERESIG Monday, November 2, 2009
3 4 .7:30 pm - Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor McLean
she felt the development uses would create additional traffic and on street
parking problems.
Don Roden, Sheridan Veterinary Services, 1398 Kingston Road, appeared before
the Committee in opposition to the conceptual plan being proposed. Mr. Roden
noted that he was not opposed to the development just the proposal that was
before them. - He felt that the proposal before them had no vision, could have
been more creative and felt it could be precedent setting, he felt it was not
unique. He noted his concerns regarding traffic and parking congestion, the
placement of the building so close to Kingston. Road and the height and density
of the building. He also noted his concerns with losing the tree buffer between
his property and the development. Mr. Roden felt that there had been no public
transparency to the sale of the service road and noted that he had submitted an
additional letter regarding the purchase of that land. He felt that no one had
approached him to discuss how this would affect his business and whether they
could work together. He noted that the restrictive access to his property would
be disastrous for his business. Mr. Roden stated'that he would like to work with
the developers so that they could cooperate and maybe compromise on some of
his issues.
Rob Freeman, a representative for VIVA Retirement Living Corp. appeared
before the Committee to answer questions of the residents and. go over what had
happened at the Open House VIVA held for area residents earlier. He noted that
the traffic report that had been done notes that the road network is adequate for
this development. He stated that a traffic congestion issue is prominent in the
am peak period but is caused due to back up from left hand turning. He noted
that if the road was widened to create an additional lane for turning right the
problem would probably be alleviated. He noted that if you were to compare
their site with the Chartwell site regarding parking, they would have more spaces
on their property. He noted that he felt the height was good, there was a large
amount of open space within the development and that commercial vehicles
visiting the site would not be an issue because it would only be a couple of times
per week. Mr. Freeman noted that the excess service road property was in front
of their property and he noted that it made sense for VIVA to purchase it. He
also noted that he would be happy to sit down with residents regarding concerns
about damage to homes during the construction of the development but did not
anticipate this to be an issue. He also noted that he would continue to meet with
Sheridan Veterinary Services and was hoping to save trees so the Veterinary
Clinic had some view blockage and also would be happy to provide additional
signage for the area. Mr. Freeman stated that VIVA Retirement Living Corp. was
more than happy to work with residents, Council and staff as they go forward.
with the development.
3
- - -
►Y • '3
. 2_10c( 09 -O a s-ro l
U Zoning Change 18-09 Glengrove Rd . Nov.02/09 E' V c
ATTACHMENT#_Z Q TO As a resident of Glengrove Rd I have some concerns I would like to know have beeNO V Q 3 2009
REPORT# PD looked into by the City before approving this development as proposed. CITY OF PICKERIMG
PLANNING & DEVELOPMiWr
Will the road surface of Glengrove Rd need to be upgraded to accommodate commeP&DRTMENT.
7 weight vehicles. Currently the allowable weight load is reduced in the spring. .
273
Are the current sewer pipes designed to handle the increased volume of commercial
7 waste that will be generated without causing sewage backup. It is my understanding that
Viva will be equipped with both a salt water pool and a spa and as other commercial
developments follow, the waste volume in the pipes will be even greater.
Have assessments been done to determine whether excavation for this proposed
7 development will have any effect on the water level, Glengrove Rd is part of a glen area
that already has a high water level.
When environmental drill testing was done on the soil on this property the equipment
> used caused earth vibrations that were felt in the nearby residences. My concern is what '
type of heavy equipment will be used in the excavation and building process and what
kind of damage can happen to our homes.
Who would be responsible if damage is incurred to our home due to any of the above
scenarios?
In regard to the drawings for the new retirement housing I feel 6 stories is too high
considering there closeness to the existing residential homes. According to the
Pickering Official Plan for the downtown core Kingston Rd East, the`NORTH side
of Kingston Rd between Liverpool and Valley Farm is to be lower base buildings to
form a transition between the downtown and existing lower density residential areas
to the north. It also recommends lower base buildings to prevent overshadowing of
the current adjacent residences and to protect their privacy. As we are only 75' from
their property we would be effected by privacy invasion and overshadowing. I feel the
current building proposal is too large for their lot acreage site and it should be scaled
down to amicably co-habit and compliment the long established residential community
of low density housing that has been. on Glengrove Rd since 1954.
A lot of grassland and trees will be lost to this development. Will any of the existing
trees be saved and how much green space will be replaced as compared to the amount
lost.
The number of parking spaces proposed for this development of both a retirement
housing and a daycare does not seem to be adequate for the. amount of traffic that both
facilities would likely incur. It seems that this is something that should.be calculated well
as there is no public parking lots in the area.
Doreen Adair
1892 Glengrove Rd
Pickering ON L1V 1X2
2 7 4 ATTACHMENT# 9 TO
'REPORT# PD `f- /O
December 8, 2009
Lynda D. Taylor
Manager, Development Review
Planning and Development Department
City of Pickering
One The Esplanade
Pickering, ON L1V 6K7
Dear Ms. Taylor
Reference: Zoning Amendment Application - A 18/09 (Viva Retirement Residences)
We attended both the Open House on June 17, 2009 and the Planning Application meeting on
November 2, 2009 regarding the above application. At the June 17th meeting we expressed our
concerns over the planned application and would like to re-state those concerns. Most of our
neighbours have identified similar concerns however; we want our concerns on record as well.
Height and Design
A six storey structure on the north side of Kingston Road is not in line with any other properties
in the vicinity. There are number high rise buildings on the south side which already create a
shadow over Kingston Road and by building a high rise on the north side will create a tunnel
vision. We feel that this will not create an inviting entrance to our community nor the Pickering
Town Centre. As far as the design, we would like to see a more detailed layout of the
application that will show that the playground facilities will incorporate the requirements of the
Day Nurseries Act.
Parking
We need to see evidence that ample parking will be made available for both the tenants, the
staff and the parents utilizing the daycare facility. The idea that most residents will not be
driving and that most staff would either walk or take public transit is ludicrous. We trust that
the applicant will ensure that the parking allocations will meet any requirements set out by the
Day Nurseries Act. Parking on the street should be totally prohibited since this is a school route
and at times can become congested with school buses and parents dropping the children at the
school which is at the top of the short street.
L
ATTACHMENT# q TO
REPORT# PD 275
Sidewalk
We already have witnessed the effects of the snow ploughing along the north side of Kingston
Road. At times this sidewalk is not passable due to the ploughs shoving the snow over the
sidewalk. On the south side of Kingston Road the boulevard is much wider and doesn't create
the same problem. We want to know who will be maintaining the sidewalk and where will the
snow be moved to?
Traffic
We are concerned about the congestion at the corner of Glengrove Road and Kingston Road.
This corner is already a problem with drivers not stopping at the stop sign on Glenview and
pulling out onto Glengrove. The distance between the stop sign and Kingston Road is less than
three care lengths. By permitting a driveway on Glengrove Road just north of the intersection of
Glengrove and Glenview will add to the congestion and will be an accident ready to happen. .
Planning Amendments
How far into the residential neighbourhood will the Planning Department approve non-
residential use? If this application is approved, as is, this will allow the first house on Glengrove
(1884) to be torn down. We also know that 1888/1890 has been sold with the intention of not
remaining a single family dwelling. We are concerned about the effect on the property value of
our home.
We trust that these concerns will be considered prior to making a final decision on this
application.
Yours truly
R.E. Smiles Sandra R. Smiles
Richard E. Smiles Sandra R. Smiles
7 6 ATTACHMENT# TO
REPORT# PD
James, Isa
From: smiles richard [smilesri2001@yahoo.ca]
Sent: December 14, 2009 9:25 AM
To: James, Isa; Taylor, Lynda
Cc: Pickles, David, Councillor; Pickles, David, Councillor; Johnson, Rick, Councillor; Wayne
Arthurs
Subject: Additional Items of Concern > VIVA retrirement proposal
Ms. James:
Thank you for the opportunity to discuss our concerns with regards to above mentioned proposal.
In follow-up to our telephone conversation here are the additional concerns, but not limited to.
1; As a amateur radio operator for the past 40+ years the introduction of another building such.VIVA
structure further limits the use of my amateur radio station and radio communication contacts with a
view to the south as the Tridel Complex has. This becomes another factor in the reduced/limited use
of my hobby of radio communications for pleasure and enjoyment.
2: 1 have subscriptions to satellite services which require a clear view of the southern sky to receive a
signal, the VIVA structure again has the potential to impede these signals, again this becomes a
factor in the reduction of pleasure and enjoyment to watch satellite tv and listen to satellite music of
choice for my family and myself.
3: This will obstruct the view to southern sky along with impeding the sound of the City's Clock
Chime. Please note that I do not agree with the construction of this building will limit noise from
Highway 2. it may have impact on sound immediately to the south such as the Clock and Music that's
often a part of special events in the "Town Square". (Pictures of the view to south as it is "today"
from the backyard area have been provided to Councillor's Pickles and Johnson on this matter)
4: Invasion of visual privacy in my backyard as the frontal facing portion of this building is to the North
West
5; Invasion of privacy due the lights that will be placed in the NW parking area of this facility that
will affect the window area on the south and west side of my residence.
6: Please note that advance warning devices have been installed relating to the nuclear
power situation, has this been taken into account that this building may reduce the effect of hearing
these devices in the event of nuclear concern at the OPG Power Generation facility.
7. Has there been the appropriate study of the movement of residents from this
proposed retirement/daycare facility in the event of a nuclear situation. This could have an impact of
.the movement of the existing residents in the immediate area to the north due to traffic congestion.
I strongly recommend the building structure height be limited to 3 stories or less. This would be in
line with all other structures on the north side of Kingston Road (Hwy 2) between Dixie Road to the
west and Brock Road to the east.
Please consider the above along with our and other concerned residents submissions in your
decision in the approval of this proposal.
i
ATTACHMENT#_Z2____TO
REPORT# PD 4_ZLO 277
An e-mail confirmation of receipt of this e-mail by all parties listed would be apprecaited.
Regards, Mr. & Mrs. R.E. Smiles
Yahoo! Canada Toolbar: Search from anywhere on the web, and bookmark your favourite sites.
Download it now http://ca.toolbar.yahoo.com.
z
TTACHMENT#-L-TO
A.. HERIDAiv PORT# PO-,Q
S
LJ
VETERINARY
SERVICES
1398 Kingston Road, Pickering, ON L1V 1139
Tel: (905) 839-7061 (905) 831-1131
27 July 2009
278
Lynda D. Taylor
Manager, Development Review
Planning and Development Department
City Of Pickering
One The Esplanade
Pickering, Ontario
L1V 6K7
Re: VIVA Development Proposal
Dear Ms. Taylor:
Thank you for extending to me the opportunity to meet with you on the 26th of June. I found the
discussion with you and staff members Mila and Isa productive and want to express my appreciation to
you for addressing my questions and concerns pertaining to the proposed VIVA retirement development
in the Kingston Road and Glengrove Road area in Pickering.
The concerns expressed at the public meeting were primarily as follows:
• TRAFFIC CONGESTION at Kingston Road and Glengrove Road;
• PARKING and the questions concerning adequacy for staff, residents, guests and delivery
vehicles;
• HEIGHT and its effect on neighbouring homes and businesses;
LOCATION of the building on the property and its proximity to property lines; and the resulting
impact on neighbouring homes, businesses and roadways;'
• FOLIAGE as it relates to protection of existing trees, particularly where they help separate
boundaries and thus lessen the impact on neighbouring properties and roadways.
As requested, I am putting my questions and concerns in writing. I trust that you will appreciate in
reading this overview that the depth of my concern is significant.
APPOINTMENT P::
Opp-
on., Wed., Fri. 7:30 am - 6:00 prn
-
ues., Thurs. 7:30 am 8:00 Pm
Sat. 9: - pm
PREVItII .T.IV.E CAkt CE4TRE``& H.0SPITAL''-SE-F0(UCES
Sat
i After Hours: 416-920-2002 / 905-576-3031
ATTACHMENT#_L- TO
REPORT# PD 279
In preparation for this letter, I visited and studied the following:
• The site itself and the surrounding properties;
• The nature, impact and style of all present buildings along Kingston Road;
• The ambitious future model of the Pickering downtown core, which the Province of Ontario has
recognized as an Urban Growth Centre in the greater golden horseshoe; an area where high
density, mixed use development and infrastructure investment is highlighted. The model did
reveal new structures located close to roadways and further that buildings greater than two
stories high should be tiered or set back to lessen he overcrowding impact along the major
roadways, thereby enhancing the visual impact for the entire Pickering community;
• Hollandview Trail (photographs enclosed) for comparative information and additional
retirement facilities to help me assess how, in my view, this type of proposed structure would
impact the neighbouring properties.
In an objective manner, I would like to comment on the questions and concerns expressed. I will do so
in the order set out earlier:
• TRAFFIC CONGESTION: In 1984, when the gully or Swale was created along the north side of
Kingston Road between Glengrove Road and Glenanna Road, discussions were held about
access to my property at 1398 Kingston Road, the VIVA project property, then owned by
McLeod, and the City of Pickering property (adjacent to and fronting on Kingston Road). It was
concluded then that traffic matters would best be addressed when redevelopment was being
planned and in particular, that a mutually shared access or entrance should be considered at
that time. As I stated during our session, I am willing to consider a mutual entrance to the two
properties from Kingston Road, on a realistic dollar basis. This new entrance could perhaps be
located at a greater distance from Glenanna Road which would in turn improve traffic flow and
enhance pedestrian safety concerns, while at the same time addressing some concerns
expressed about traffic congestion at the intersection of Glengrove Road and Kingston Road. I
would reiterate here that any cost sharing would have to be realistic for me to consider this
option and the location would have to be positive for all of the concerned parties.
• PARKING: I do perceive from my general observations that the proposed parking area appears
adequate for most occasions, especially if all VIVA staff knew and agreed that on street parking
for staff on the secondary roads was not permitted. Still, parking represents 25% of the land
surface and if one utilized underground parking for residents and staff, this would have a
significant positive impact on the options for height issues, structure location on the property
and impact on existing foliage.
ATTACHMENT#-.Z/-TO
280 REPORT# PID4 -ten
• HEIGHT: If there were less surface parking, the building's footprint could be larger, without
lessening the green space area, so that the height of the building could be lowered without
impacting the density. Ideally, with tiered levels, the visual impact for the community would be
improved as well as the specific visual impact from both Kingston Road and Glengrove Road.
• LOCATION OF THE BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY: With less surface parking, it would allow more
flexibility in locating a more typically balanced location from the property lines, thereby
lessening the height impact and improving the visual impression from all directions.
• FOLIAGE: Less surface parking provides a greater opportunity to retain more sizeable foliage.
This would negate the necessity of replanting and taking more time for growth. This in turn
would provide the necessary foliage barrier to lessen the visual impact of the new building.
• DENSITY: One could ask whether the density would become too great if the proposed
development were to proceed. Perhaps the developer should consider purchasing additional
property, especially since the land fronting on Glengrove Road immediately to the north is
currently listed for sale. Clearly, this would permit more flexibility to properly address all of the
issues on the agenda, especially to lower the density and thereby control the negative impact.
I have set out to this point, from a layman's perspective, what I feel should be reasonable planning
concerns and I have outlined several options. Obviously though, this it is not simply an objective,
altruistic exercise for me. I have personal concerns that drive these comments.
I graduated in 1971 from the Ontario Veterinary College in Guelph. In 1977,1 began practicing at the
rear of the Hub Plaza and expanded in size at that location as additional space became available. In
1992,1 made the significant business and subsequent financial investment in relocating to 1398 Kingston
Road. This move was undertaken for a number of reasons, among which were the following:
• Greater size to assist in growth;
• Improved exposure to assist in growth;
• Better control of my financial destiny.
At the present time, those goals have been achieved.
When I started my practice in Pickering in 1977, 1 had the only veterinary practice in the east end of
Pickering. Since that time, business competition has increased dramatically and by locating to 1398
Kingston Road, I placed myself. in a favourable competitive position. It is an obvious current goal to
retain that business edge by continuing to grow the business at its current location.
ATTACHMENT#-Z-/ITO
REPORT# PD 281
My belief in the value of my building is captured clearly in the yellow pages, on my business cards, my
letterhead and envelopes. I feel that it gives me a competitive advantage and therefore, any change
that negatively impacts my exposure will be financially detrimental to me and my staff. All of us are
concerned and anxious that a towering structure to be constructed so close to Kingston Road and our lot
line will have a very negative impact on the image that we have been trying to sustain and improve
upon. From my perspective, my Pickering practice and the real estate form the primary foundation of
my financial planning for retirement, which can only be negatively impacted if the draft plan is approved
as presented.
I know that no one should have the right to control forever how adjacent properties are used or
developed. I recognize the value of municipal planning that attempts to define a strategic and well
developed overall planning strategy. But the VIVA proposal that, with the city's assistance, will allow it
to virtually build to the street line has a direct impact on my business that is dramatic and harmful,
I believe that in the planning proposals, there is the opportunity to ameliorate the negative impact on
my location and my business and in closing, I would encourage the city to explore all of the alternatives.
I await with eager anticipation the discussions and ideas that evolve ahead. I feel confident the planning
process will bring with it some sound decisions that will overcome the concerns addressed in this letter.
Thank you again for allowing me the opportunity to outline my thoughts. I trust that I will be informed
of each and every step along the way and that the best interests of the Pickering community will prevail.
Yours very truly,
Donald E. Roden, DVM
Cc: Regional Councillor, Rick Johnson
CC: Councillor David Pickles
CC: Robert P. Morton, Solicitor
ATTACHMENT# L- TO
MP
l ORT# PD U to
3.
k,
T E R I N A " J1
SERVICES
1398 Kingston Road, Pickering, ON L1V 1B9
Tel: (905) 839-7061 (905) 831-1131
M~s. Lynda D. Taylor November 15, 2009
Manager, Development Review
Mr. Neil Carroll RECEIVED
Director, Planning & Development
City of Pickering NnV 1 9 2009
One the Esplanade
CITY OF PICKERINQ
Pickering, Ontario PIANNINa AND
DEVQ.CPMENT DEPARTMENT
L1v 6x~
Re: Compromise Proposal for VIVA Retirement Residence in Pickering.
Please find enclosed two letters. The first was written November 11, 2009 which was my
response to the public meeting held November 2, 2009. The second was written November 15, 2009
and is my proposal of compromise discussed at our meeting held on November 13, 2009.
As time is becoming of the essence, I would appreciate being informed at each step of the
process - to be an active, informed, and constructive participant in the eventual application which will
be prepared and presented to council for their consideration and legal acceptance.
Thank you both for your patience, your professional input, and the opportunity to have expressed
my concerns, my position, and my ideas, which have hopefully been found constructive.
Yours,
IJ
Donald E. Roden, D.V.M.
Cc: City Councillor, David Pickles
cc: Regional Councillor, Rick Johnson
cc: Robert P. Morton, Solicitor
pp-
APPOINTMENT PREFERRED
ERRED
ft r ours 1 _9 0 00
Mon., Wed., Fri. 7:30 am - 6:00 pm Tues., Thurs.
6 00 Pm
0.
j.
am - 4:00 pm
Sat. 9:00
~R i l" .Sir 'V C' 0 19 _ .3
eP`, Iz lr&E N T t,V E G ` TR 1 AR > N $ 14
After Hours: 416-920-2002 905-576-303
40
a~ r : s e k
ATTACHMENT# --.--TO 283
REPORT# PD D
P.S. November 16, 2009. T am both pleased and possibly encouraged to say that I received a call
today from Monica arranging. a meeting on November 21, 2009.
ATTACHMENT#-L-TO
ORT# PD SHERIDAN
_a
VETERINARY
r SERVICES
1398 Kingston Road, Pickering, ON L1V 1139
Tel: (905) 839-7061 (905) 831-1131
284
Ms. Lynda D. Taylor November 11, 2009
Manager, Development Review
W. Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
City of Pickering
One the Esplanade
Pickering, Ontario
L1V 6K7
In response to the public meeting held Wednesday November 2, 2009 re: submitted plan
A18/09 (VIVA Retirement Residence) I would like to state and clarify the following:
1. I am NOT against VIVA, nor am I against a retirement residence.
Rather
2. I am AGAINST the proposal as presented
3. Why?
a. Objectively- Kingston Road is the primary thoroughfare to the city core - it should
be more open, more inviting, and more welcoming - as opposed to more crowded,
more intimidating, and more utilitarian (compare University Avenue to Yonge Street)
- this precedent will set the tone and pulse for all future development (and developers
will use it as a reference).
b. Subjectively- The Downtown Urban Growth Centre as determined by the Province
of Ontario is intended to support existing and planned intensification within the
downtown core. The proposed building position will have a serious, adverse and
negative impact on my businesses' ability to serve, to grow and to compete in both
the short and long term, plus, in the short term, may have negative impact on property
value - this is totally contrary to the Provinces intent which is be supportive of the
existing while planning the intensification - my staff and I are very concerned.
APPOINTMENT PREFERR
Mon., Wed., Fri. 7:30 am - 6:00 pm
r a r 4
i .
Thurs.
Sat . Tues
Sat. ;jP9REtl7JVE CAF23Ef~iT f2 $c hiSPf'~`~AL:ra2`VE After Hours: 5
ATTACHMENT#~TO
REPORT# PD2 H u
4. I met very briefly with Monica Dashwood on October 20, and suggested that if VIVA
and I were sincere and serious in working with each other that the best approach would
be for all parties to be prepared to find common ground through communication,
discussion, and being willing to compromise. Following the public meeting I had a brief
conversation with Monica and Jordan at which we discussed and agreed to have their
surveyor plot the south west building location for discussion purposes. Although nothing
has yet to transpire - I will pursue, as I had the impression from both individuals that
their intentions were both genuine and sincere.
5. In 2009, Sheridan Veterinary Services has 10 full time/part time employees and its
payroll growth plan predicts this number to increase to 12 to 15 over the next 1-3 years.
On a per acre basis, the number is equal to VIVA's 60 75 when you consider land size.
6. This is the final opportunity to address the access to my property and its proximity to the
very busy intersection of Kingston Road and Glenanna Road for pedestrian and traffic
safety. As discussed and stated in prior written correspondence I would be prepared to
participate financially, if the compromise reached allows me to preserve and grow my
business.
7. Compromise Proposal
a. That the planning department/City of Pickering clearly states their position on the
distance the proposed building should be constructed to Kingston Road.
b. Once the distance from Kingston Road is settled - adjust the south west end of the
building to create a mutually acceptable compromise for all parties. Also to review
the fencing and landscaping of the area to see that it conforms to the goals of the
compromise with legal conditions to see these remain in fact over time!
c. If and once there is an acceptable compromise.that the City and Region make a final
evaluation of the options to both enhance safety and facilitate accessibility to 1398
Kingston Road re: its proximity to the very busy Glenanna/Kingston Road
intersection. To repeat, I am prepared to participate financially, if the compromise
reached allows me to preserve and grow my business.
ATTACHMENT# TO
86 2 REPORT# PD a Z -/n
In summation, my staff and I would like to request the following:
1. open, constructive dialogue and communication by all parties
2. compromise for the good of all
3. a positive resolution leading to constructive results for all.
With thanks,
Donald E. Roden, D.V.M.
Cc:.City Councillor, David Pickles
cc: Regional Councillor, Rick Johnson
cc: Robert P. Morton, Solicitor
ACHMENT# L/ TO
PORT# PD
;~7Y
I DAm
SHE''-'-
287
v tTE I NA17111
SERVICES
1398 Kingston Road, Pickering, ON L1V 1139
Tel: (905) 839-7061 (905) 831-1131
Ms. Lynda D. Taylor November 15, 2009
Manager, Development Review
Mr. Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
City of Pickering
One the Esplanade
Pickering, Ontario
L1V 6K7
Re: Compromise Proposal for VIVA Retirement Residence in Pickering.
Initially, I would like to thank both of you for the time, the information, and the advice
received at our meeting on November 13, 2009. It was nice to feel brought back into the circle
of what for me is a critical decision that has caused considerable anguish for my staff and I.
My compromise proposal is as follows:
1. That the set back of the building footprint from Kingston Road be as proposed.
2. That the position of the south west corner of the proposed building be modified
(see drawings provided) so as to allow me to retain appropriate street exposure.
3. That the fagade of the Kingston Road portion of the building, in particular that of
the south west and the south east corners be either tiered to lessen the visual
impact of the height and proximity to Kingston Road or be balanced and
enhanced through architectural design to lessen the impact of appearing like the
back of the building.
4. That the fencing along the property line abutting 1398 Kingston Road and the
landscaping along the same border and most importantly the south west corner of
the property conform to. the compromised goal of not sacrificing the visual
APPOINTMENT pp-
Mon., Wed., Fri 7 1am - 11 ,
Tues., 7:30 am - 8:00 pm
Thurs.
r A a :t. __4 r .wx'Ra:• Y ..2 9:00 am - 4:00 N•T'tVE CAkRE ENTR
~ E`E3c~SPI`
f4L'SETt'~S
Afte 920 11 1
t Hours: 416- 905
o
ATTACHMENT# /L TO
REPORT# PD
288
exposure of 1398 Kingston Road, and that the requirement be legally incorporated
into this application and all subsequent site plan applications.
5. That the City and Region reconsider the access to 1398 Kingston Road in its
proximity to the busy intersection of Kingston Road and Glenanna Road, not just
for current usage, but also how it will play a role in the future plans to access the
north east corner properties as they evolve within the urban city core to lessen the
additional pressure on this major intersection.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Yours,
Donald E. Roden, D.V.M.
Cc: City Councillor, David Pickles
cc: Regional Councillor, Rick Johnson
cc: Robert P. Morton, Solicitor
ATTACHMENT#~~--_--T~
a T - -
(:LE ~
F: %J T N ~,d
. - E~ LDIr1G ~ -
' ail ~TM- l
EXISTING r 1 S:,A ~I ~ ~ -
TOWNHOUSECL N.>ROVE i t~~
r' F F
~d `I F o r~
r „
~ ff ~--r r t=~9 r ~ A ri i ~t
EXISTING TOT.u.;;u AL aar~kvXi 1.. k s
OWNHOUSE
L
J / Y Imo. } I /1 I~ l1 1~ \ i
j z,"
r _I
1
I~ STOREY
>~,t FI.JtYV1~EA
' E ~ $r.14t5Pi tr
NG TC J
- ~ /p~~.4y /~LWy t(' L,yy2-_ r t.5„ IEN"frl tl t
lit
hlv rcxvEO ~ /
EXI..IING
BUILDING -
r /d
w r ~ -
_i j\
RETIREMENT DEVELOPMENT,,.
OVE R.'
KINGSTON RD. & -PICKERING, ONTARIO
y" SITE PLAN s.
- Scn~E I soo
~t
Proj-2 OB-7Z?f 4. I F~O4
J' v Oato. March fit. 2(k)9
ATTACHMENT 0
FtEPORT# PD,
INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANTS
290, SUBMITTED PLAN
A 18/09
21121401 ONTARIO LTD.(VIVA RETIREMENT RESIDENCE)
~i I t I' - I
I I i } , r I I I i I I Pl ~ I
v 3
- - t 0- i
r7i.
i ILI,
I r ~
i ri; I A
i
% PROPOSED 6
' t
STOREY
tom;// RETIREMENT
41
i •
THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING 8
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PLANNING INFORMATION SERVICE
DIVISION MAPPING AND DESIGN. SEPT. 21. 2009
ATTACHMENT
-
9EPORT# PID
INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANT' 291
.
SUBMITTED PLAN
A 18109
211:21401 ONTARIO LTD.(VIVA RETIREMENT RESIDENCE)
TT. -
I I i
I
- I
.r 7 I t 1 { ' i. I!
0 ~f ` 1 ' 1
,
U,, v
;y/ PRO
srngrv
POSED e I ~~J!-Yc:.ID,~ar _ ~d REtIREMENT ,1` ~ .
THIS MAP WA8 PRODUCED 8Y THE CITY OP PICKERlN(3 PUNNING &
DEVELOAMENTDEPARTMBNT, PLANNIN0INFORMATION9ERWCEB
OIVf9ION MAPPING AND DE8IGN, 89PT.. 21. 7000.
ATTACHMENT#-L~ TO
REPORT# PO
292 INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANTS
SUBMITTED PLAN
A 18/09
21121401 ONTARIO LTD.(VIVA RETIREMENT RESIDENCE)
,3
! L I
I 1 _ `
[i I . ~
11 wq
PROPOSED 6 STOREY '
\ RETIREMENT
195
oat,
PHIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING,
DEVELOPMENT DFPARTMENT. PLANNING
DIVISION MAPPING ANO DESIIGNT EPi. 2t1 2CO'
ATTACHMENT#-TO
REPORT# PD- Q 4/ -
293
INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANTS
SUBMITTED PLAN
A 18/09
21121401 ONTARIO LTD.(VIVA RETIREMENT RESIDENCE)
I I I I. ~ ~ ~ I
r~i
pli
I:j
N PROPOSED 6 t STOREY
~.1. RETIREMENT ' ~~~i•
I
THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. PLANNING INFORMATION SERVICE
2 DIVISION MAPPING AND DESIGN. EPi. 0t
ATTACHMENT# TO
REPORT# PD-0-
294 INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANTS
SUBMITTED PLAN
A 18109
21121401 ONTARIO LTD.(VIVA RETIREMENT RESIDENCE)
1 I i~ r 1 I, I ~i ~ I'
~
r•~ 1 I r~illil
I
l•---- ----•-ti--l ` ~ i ~ ' I .p r ~ Ali f~ 1~ ~
t ~ / PROPOSED 6 • ~i
.
RETIREMENT
_ /,G Via,./~~ ~ , • ~ j~'=
46-
I
1 THIS MP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY Of PICKERING PLANNING
OEVELCPMENT DEPARTMENT. INFORMATION
MAPPING AND DESIGN. SEPT. 000
ATTACHMEIUr#-a To 2 9 5
REPORT# PO
October 22, 2009
`1 V E
Isa James, Planner II 2009
Planning & Development Department
jA, CI y :ms's CK E_R>NG
City of Pickering PLANNING ~ DEVELOPMENT
One The Esplanade DEPARTMENT
Pickering, ON L1 V 6K7 .
Dear Ms. James:
The Regional
Municipality
of Durham Re: Zoning Amendment Application A18/09
Applicant: 2121401 Ontario Limited (VIVA Retirement Residences)
Punning Department Location: 1884 Glengrove Road
605 ROSSLAND ROAD E Lots'42, 43, 44 and Part of Service Road, Plan 509
4TM FLOOR
PO BOX 623 Municipality: City of Pickering .
WHITBY ON LiN 6A3
CANADA We have reviewed the above noted application and offer the following comments
905-668-7711 for your consideration.
Fax: 905-666-6208
E-mail: planning@
region.durnam.on.ca The purpose of this application is to amend the zoning on the subject lands to
permit the development of, a 6-storey, 135 unit Retirement Residence. The subject
www.region.durham.on.ca lands are. currently zoned R3 - Residential Zone.
A.L. Georgieff, MCIP, RPP
Commissioner of Planning Regional Official Plan
The subject lands are currently designated 'Regional Centre' in the Durham
Regional. Official Plan. Regional Centres shall be developed as the main
concentrations of urban activities, providing a fully integrated array of community,
office, service and shopping; recreational. and residential uses. Further, Downtown.
Pickering is recognized as an Urban Growth Centre in- accordance with the Growth
Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, and shall function as a dominant Centre
within the Region.
Kingston Road (Regional Road Highway 2) is designated as a Type 'B' Arterial
Road and.a- Transit Spine in the Durham Regional Official. Plan. Development
adjacent to Transit Spines shall provide for complementary higher density uses
and buildings oriented towards the street.
Amendment No. 128 to the Regional Official Plan was adopted by Regional
Council on June 3rd, 2009 and forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing for approval. This amendment includes the redesignation of Downtown
Pickering from "Regional Centre to "Urban Growth Centre". - In addition,
Amendment No. 128 includes the following revisions to policy 8A.2:2, relating to
Urban Growth Centres:
i) The Regignal ' downtown Oshawa and downtown Pickering are
recognized as Urban Growth Centres in accordance with. the Growth Plan for
the Greater Golden Horseshoe, and shall function as, the dominant. Centres
within the Region, with speGifiG emphasis on , busine66 and
"Service Excellence
fo• Communities"
100% Post Consumer
ATTACHMENT#=TD
Al 8/109 REPORT# PD 0 October 22, 2009
296
Page 2
ii) shall be planned as focal areas for institutional, regionwide public services;
major office, commercial, recreational, cultural, entertainment and residential.
uses, serving as major employment centres supporting higher order transit
services;
iii) should support an overall long-term density target of 200 persons and jobs
combined per gross hectare. and a floor space index of 3, 0. The. built form for
the Urban Growth Centres should be a mix of predominantly high-rise
development, with some mid-rise, as determined by area municipalities.
The proposed amendment is consistent with the Region's policies to develop
higher density development.
Provincial Policies & Delegated Review Responsibilities
This application has been screened in accordance with the terms of the provincial
plan review responsibilities. .
Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe
The subject lands are within an "Urban Growth Centre" of the Growth Plan (GP), as
delineated in the Size and Location of Urban Growth Centres. in the Greater
Golden Horseshoe paper issued `Fall 2008. Section 2.2.4.4 of the GP directs
Urban Growth Centres to be planned:
a) as focal areas for investment in institutional and-region-wide public` services,
as well as commercial, recreational, cultural and entertainment uses;
b) to accommodate and support major transit infrastructure;
c) to serve as high density major employment centres that will attract
provincially, nationally or internationally significant employment uses; and
d) to accommodate a significant share of population and employment growth.
Further, section 2.2.4.5 stipulates Downtown Pickering to achieve, by 2031 or
earlier, a minimum gross density target of 200 residents and jobs combined per
hectare:
Road Noise
An Environmental Noise Analysis conducted byValcoustics Canada. Ltd. dated
September 8, 2009 has been submitted and reviewed for this application.. The
study provides calculations and recommendations that ' would meet the
requirements of the Region of Durham and the Guidelines of the Ministry of the
Environment. It is recommended that the servicing agreement for this
development include the necessary provisions to ensure the implementation of
the noise attenuation measures (warning, clauses) as recommended in :this
report.
~L
ATTACHMENT#-Z2-TO
A18/09 REPORT# PD. October 22, 2009
Page 3
Site Contamination Potential 297
A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Report and a Limited-scope Phase II
Environmental Site Investigation Report, prepared by McClymont & Rak. Engineers
Inc., dated May.2009 and. July 2009 respectively,, were submitted in support of this
application. The reports conclude that there are no issues of potential; .
environmental concern on the subject lands; and that no further environmental
investigation is warranted at this time.
There are no other matters of provincial plan interest applicable to this application.
Regional Services
Municipal water supply, and sanitary sewer service is available to. the subject.
property.
The Regional Works Department; will provide detailed comments on the submitted
Site Grading and Servicing Concept Plan to the applicant under separate cover.
Additional comments and conditions will be provided through the site plan
application process.
Durham Region Transit & Transportation
The proposal does not present any significant Durham Region Transit or
transportation impacts.
Please contact me at 905.668.4113 ext. 2582 should you have any questions or
require additional information.
Yours truly,
L
Carla Pierini,.MCIP, RPP
Project Planner (Acting)
Current Planning
cc: Regional Works Department'- Pete Castellan
Durham Region Transit = Phil T. J. Meagher
Transportation Planning= Amjad Gauhar
ATTACHMENTO TO ATTACHMENT# D~
Cty REPORT# PD
I
1
DICKERING MEMO
298
To: Isa James October 7, 2009
Planner II
From: Marilee Gadzovski
Stormwater & Environmental Engineer
Copy: Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering
Manager, Development Control
Subject: Rezoning Application A18/09
Viva Retirement Living
Glengrove Drive
City of Pickering
File: 0-4100
I have reviewed the Stormwater Management Report for the above-noted rezoning application
and have no objection to the rezoning. However, as the report was quite detailed and will most
likely be proceeding to site plan stage very shortly, I.offer the following comments that need to be
addressed for the Site Plan Application.
Section 4.3 states that the allowable release rates for the site were calculated based on a pre-
development runoff coefficient of 0.45 and a 10 min. rainfall intensity: The assumption for the
runoff coefficient is not valid given the current hard surfaces of the three residential lots.
Moreover, these 3 lots are not typical residential lots as they are extremely large and do not
.exhibit an imperviousness of 36% (equivalent to C of 0.45). Measurements from the aerial
photography estimated (very generously) that the current hard surfaces are only approximately
6% of the total site area. Given this, the allowable release rates need to recalculated to accurately
reflect existing conditions. A pre-development runoff coefficient of 0.25 should be utilized, which
will result in more water quantity storage required.
In addition to the above, the time to peak of the pre-development peak flow should be estimated
from the Airport Formula or equivalent method and not assumed as 10 min. This.site is entire
undeveloped (except for two houses) and is drained by overland flow not directly connected to the
storm sewer. A quick check confirmed that a time to peak of approximately 21.82 min. was
obtained.
Given the extent of the seriousness of the downstream flooding concerns within the Krosno Creek
watershed, it is very important to accurately reflect existing conditions, which will directly impact
the amount of post-development storage that is required.
Consideration should be given to take the clean roof runoff (or at least partial) into the proposed
infiltration trench instead of directly, connecting it to the storm sewer. Please ensure that there is a
provision of an overflow from the proposed infiltration trench back to the storm sewer system.
ATTACHMEtfU --IM 2 9 9
REPOW PD
. PICKERING MEMO.
To: Isa James November 16, 2009
Planner II
From: Robert Starr
Manager, Development Control
Copy: Coordinator, Development Approvals
Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A18/09
Viva Retirement Living
Lots 42, 43, 44 and Part of Road Allowance, Plan 509
(1884 Glengrove Road)
City of Pickering
We have reviewed the documents submitted in support of the Zoning By-law Amendment
Application and provide the following comments:
1. The applicant will be required to enter into a Development Agreement with the City to
address any offsite works, road improvements, land transfer, easements, utility relocation,
etc.' A Draft 40R Plan should be submitted to the City for approval.
2. Landscaping on the boulevards of Kingston Road and Glengrove Road will. be addressed
during Site Plan review.
3. A Construction Management Plan will be required, during Site Plan review, that addresses
such items as road cleaning, mud/dust control, sedimentation and erosion control, hours of
work, vehicle parking, equipment and material storage, a spill response plan,. etc.
4. The City of Pickering's Fill & Topsoil By-law prohibits soil disturbance, removal or
importation to the site unless a permit has been issued. No on-site works prior to Site Plan
Approval is permitted without a permit. A copy of the By-law and Permit Application is
attached and should be forwarded to the applicant.
' O ATTACHMENT#~
REPORT; PD
FREEMAN PLANNING SOLUTIONS INC.
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT CONSULTANT
Rob Freeman
6424 Edenwood Drive
Mississauga, ON L5N 31-13
Telephone (905) 824-4375
Fax (905) 824-9833
Mobile (416) 301-7290
E-Mail planning>olukions:ilsvronatico.ca
By E-Mail and Regular Mail
November 26, 2009
Ms. Isa James,
Planner 11, Development Review
Planning & Development Department
City of Pickering
Pickering Civic Complex
One The Esplanade
Pickering, Ont
L1V 6K7
Dear Ms. James:
Re: Proposed Rental Retirement Home Facility
Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Application A-18/09
Northwest corner of Kingston Road and Glengrove Road
1874/1878/1884 GlengroveRoad
Lots 42, 43 and 44 Registered Plan 509 and Part of Closed Service Road
2121401 Ontario Limited (V!VA Retirement Living Corp)
As the Planning Consultant for 2121401 Ontario Limited (V!VA Retirement Living Corp),I am
sending this letter to formally respond to ,a number of matters raised at.the Formal Public Meeting
held on November 2, 2009. As you know, I answered most of the questions raised by the area
residents as part of my concluding comments at the Planning & Development Committee meeting.
In this regard, I believe there are three items raised at the Public Meeting that require a further
response. These are as follows:
Extent of Shadowing
` In accordance with the shadowing study submitted with the Zoning By-law Amendment
application, the proposed V!VA building casts shadows on three residential parcels to the north
along Glengrove Road as shown on the diagrams dated December 21 mostly during the morning
hours. This is not significant, in my opinion, since it occurs in the late fall and early winter months,
when outdoor amenity spaces are not generally used for extended periods of recreation or
Cont/Page 2
ATTACHMENT LZ . TO
REPORT# PD D ~6 301
Page 2
relaxation. It is important to note that since the Formal Public Meeting our Project Architect has
completed a shadow study for the 16 storey Tridel building situated on the south side of Kingston
Road. He has determined that the length of the Tridel building shadow on December 21, not only
shadows the proposed VIVA building but also shadows the residential parcels north of the V!VA
parcel along Glengrove Road. A copy of the Tridel Shadow Study for December 21, is attached for
your information. Based on this additional information, the shadow from the proposed V!VA
building is somewhat irrelevant where the shadow from the existing Tridel building is already
greater than the shadow cast by the proposed V!VA building.
Drilling on VIVA Parcel and Potential Impact on Adjacent Parcel
As noted at the Public Meeting,whe n the geotechnical work (drilling) was being completed on the
subject lands, one of the neighbours was concerned with the vibration that may occur during the
construction process that could potentially damage. her basement (foundation).As indicated at the
meeting, V!VA and their geotechnical consultants would be pleased to meet with any of the
adjacent concerned neighbours to further discuss this matter and to provide the required
assurances that the construction of the V!VA parcel will not result in structural damage to their.
homes.
Dr Roden's Comments
Since the Formal Public Meeting, it is my understanding that Dr. Roden has met with planning
staff to further discuss his concerns. Please note that on November 20, 2009, Monica Dashwood
from V!VA and I met with Dr. Roden on site to better understand his concerns regarding the
proposed development. Dr. Roden also respectfully requested V!VA to consider shifting a portion
of the building along Kingston Road in the vicinity of his parcel to improve the sight lines to his
property. We advised Dr. Roden that we would evaluate all of the comments that he has formally
made and would convene a further meeting with him after the internal review with the Project
Architect and sub consultants had been completed.
Summary
I trust this additional information is helpful and I would be pleased to further discuss the above
with you if so required.
Yours very truly,
f ryr2 21
Rob. Freeman, MCIP, RPP
c.c: Jordan Bernamoff, V!VA Retirement Living Corp - By E-Mail Only
Monica Dashwood, VIVA Retirement Living Corp - By E-Mail Only