Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
May 22, 2012
cat/ 00 , , Council Meeting Agenda PICKERING Tuesday, May 22, 2012 Council Chambers 7:30 pm 7:00 pm In Camera Meeting of Council I) Invocation Mayor Ryan will call the meeting to order and lead Council in the saying of the Invocation. II) Disclosure of Interest III) Adoption of Minutes Page In Camera Council Minutes, April 16, 2012 Under Separate Cover Council Minutes, April 16, 2012 1-16 Planning & Development Committee Minutes, May 7, 2012 17-23 Executive Committee Minutes, May 14, 2012 24-35 IV) Presentations 36 V) Delegations 37 VI) Correspondence 38-46 VII) Committee Reports 47-53 • a) Report EC 05-2012 of the Executive Committee VIII) Reports — New and Unfinished Business 54-96 IX) Motions and Notice of Motions X) By-laws 97-118 XI) Other Business Accessible ! For information related to accessibility requirements please contact Linda Roberts P I C K EG Phone: 905.420.4660 extension 2928 TTY: 905.420.1739 Email: Iroberts(a oickerina.ca XII) Confirmation By-law FOR INFORMATION ONLY • Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment, March 21, 2012 & April 11, 2012 • Minutes of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee, April 26, 2012 • Minutes of the Accessibility Advisory Committee, April 25, 2012 Ctrs Council Meeting Minutes =jai � .. Monday, April 16, 2012 wis1■ti et 7:30 PM Council Chambers 01 Present: Mayor David Ryan Councillors: K. Ashe D. Dickerson B. McLean J. O'Connell D. Pickles P. Rodrigues Also Present: T. Prevedel - Chief Administrative Officer G. Paterson - Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer N. Carroll - Director, Planning & Development T. Melymuk - Director, Office of Sustainability P. Bigioni - City Solicitor B. Douglas - Fire Chief R. Holborn - Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering D. Shields - City Clerk I. Janton - Planner II — Site Planning C. Hodge - Coordinator, Economic Development L. Harker - Coordinator, Records and Elections (I) Invocation Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order and led Council in the saying of the Invocation. (II) Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. (III) Adoption of Minutes Resolution # 53/12 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor McLean • 1 Cali o� = Council Meeting Minutes Monday, April 16, 2012 Ncs crier 7:30 PM 0 2 Council Chambers In Camera Council Minutes, March 26, 2012 Council Minutes, March 26, 2012 Planning & Development Committee Minutes, April 2, 2012 Executive Committee Minutes, April 10, 2012 Carried (IV) Presentations 1. Royal Canadian Legion Branch 606 and Ladies Auxiliary — Easter Parade Float Mayor Ryan provided an overview of the Easter Parade Float and specifically thanked those City employees that participated in the design and construction of the float. Councillor Dickerson presented Greg Stokman, Justin Anderson and Greg Scott with a plaque of appreciation on behalf of the Royal Canadian Legion Branch 606 and the Ladies Auxiliary. (V) Delegations Resolution # 54/12 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Ashe That the rules of procedure be suspended in order to hear the additional delegation of Cat Beattie and Andy McKinnon. Carried 1. Aiax-Pickering Board of Trade Gary Strange, President, Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade appeared before Council to provide the 2012 update on the Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade. Mr. Strange provided an overview of the critical issues that will be focused on in 2012, including transportation, the Pickering Airport Lands, economic development, emergency preparedness and business continuity, public transit links to the rest of the GTA and Durham Region. Mr. Strange thanked the City of Pickering for its continued support. 2. Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee Nesbit-Newman House, 560 Park Crescent Mike Sawchuck, Vice-Chair, Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee, provided a Power Point presentation to Council on the potential Heritage Designation of 560 Park 2 City oie = Council Meeting Minutes I- Monday, April 16, 2012 -- ii- - rte: CASE I i 7:30 PM Council Chambers 0 3 Crescent. Mr. Sawchuck and the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee are recommending the immediate designation of this property, and outlined the benefits of proceeding with a designation. Mr. Sawchuck also summarized the historical significance of the property and the designation process. Heritage Pickering formally requested the endorsement to proceed with the designation of the Nesbit-Newman House. A question and answer period ensued. Resolution # 55/12 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor McLean That the rules of procedure be suspended in order to allow Mike Sawchuck to return to answer questions, if required, immediately following the delegations for the Nesbit-Newman House, 560 Park Crescent. Carried 3. Ian Mathany, Estate Trustee, Bank of Nova Scotia Trust Company Nesbit-Newman House, 560 Park Crescent Ian Mathany, Estate Trustee for the estate of Harry Newman appeared before Council to request a deferral of the heritage designation for 560 Park Crescent. Mr. Mathany confirmed that they take no position at this point, they would simply like more time to review the material and work with staff before launching into a formal process. A question and answer period ensued. 4. Nesbit-Newman House, 560 Park Crescent a) Mary Humphrys, 926 Sunrise Avenue, appeared before Council in support of the Heritage Designation of 560 Park Crescent. Ms. Humphrys presented to the City Clerk a petition in support of the designation with over 1,100 signatures. A brief question and answer period ensued. b) Susan Slocum, 705 Sandcastle Court, appeared before Council in support of the Heritage Designation of 560 Park Crescent. Ms. Slocum was also involved in obtaining support for the petition to designate 560 Park Crescent and presented a few of the petition responses. 3 City o0 Council Meeting Minutes ate ' ' Monday, April 16, 2012 Via NI liar 7:30 PM Council Chambers 04 c) Bruce Smith, 705 Sandcastle Court, appeared before Council in support of the Heritage Designation of 560 Park Crescent and noted the potential benefits to all stakeholders involved. d) Richard Newman, 560 Park Crescent, appeared before Council in opposition to the Heritage Designation of 560 Park Crescent. Mr. Newman stated that he is the current resident of 560 Park Crescent and provided Council with an impression of what it is like to live in an old home, including details about how much work it takes to keep up such a property. Mr. Newman noted that the foundation currently required costly repairs. e) Madeline Smith, 705 Sandcastle Court, appeared before Council in support of the Heritage Designation of 560 Park Crescent. Ms. Smith described growing up in such a neighbourhood and reiterated the importance of valuing such a significant historical property. f) Patricia Newman was not in attendance for the meeting but provided her comments in writing. Her sister, Margaret Marsh read her comments and noted her support of the Heritage Designation of 560 Park Crescent but does not want the whole property designated because it would impose financial hardships in the sale of the property. Ms. Newman would support heritage designation of the house and 1/3 of the surrounding land. g) Margaret Marsh appeared before Council in support of the Heritage Designation of 560 Park Crescent. Ms. Marsh is in support of the Heritage Designation of 560 Park Crescent but does not want the whole property designated because she believes the value of the property would be negatively affected by this designation. Ms. Marsh would support heritage designation of the house and 1/3 of the surrounding land. h) Beverly Hendry, 721 Sandcastle Court, appeared before Council in support of the Heritage Designation of 560 Park Crescent. Ms. Hendry advised Council that the home is a beacon in their community and adds great value. i) Cat Beattie appeared before Council in support of the Heritage Designation of 560 Park Crescent. Ms. Beattie spoke about achieving the balance of positives and negatives of living in this neighbourhood and believes that Council should reinforce the positives, such as the protection of the significant property. j) Andy McKinnon appeared before Council in support of the Heritage Designation of 560 Park Crescent. Mr. McKinnon expressed his concern about seeing the loss of Pickering's heritage and specifically mentioned the importance of protecting the abundance of mature trees on the property. 4 • Cary �� Council Meeting Minutes Monday, April 16, 2012 1.10 ■ t4112[ 7:30 PM Council Chambers 05 Moved by Councillor Ashe Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That the rules be suspended to deal with Report PD 11-12, Item #1 from New and Unfinished Business. Carried 1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 11-12 Historical/Architectural Designation -Nesbit-Newman House, 560 Park Crescent Resolution # 56/12 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Ashe 1. That Report PD 11-12 be received; 2. That Council endorse the recommendation of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee for designation of the Nesbit-Newman House; 3. That the City Clerk be authorized to begin procedures to have the Nesbit- Newman House, municipally known as 560 Park Crescent, designated under Part IV, of the Ontario Heritage Act; 4. That any lot established through a future development process to accommodate the Nesbit-Newman House be configured so as to distinguish the home within the neighbourhood and provide a reasonable property boundary to retain the heritage context, being approximately 135 feet in frontage on Park Crescent and 140 feet in depth; 5. That the City Clerk, in consultation with Heritage Pickering, draft and forward an appropriate `Notice of Intent to Designate' to the owners of the property, the Ontario Heritage Trust, and the local newspaper; and 6. Further, that the City Clerk be directed to draft the necessary by-law together with the reasons for designation for Council approval. Carried unanimously on a Recorded Vote Council took a ten minute recess and reconvened at 10:10 pm. • 5 Cali o1 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, April 16, 2012 rdM S IOE 7:30 PM Council Chambers 06 5. Accessibility Advisory Committee 2011 Annual Report & 2012 Work Plan Keith Falconer, Chair, Pickering Accessibility Advisory Committee, provided a Power Point presentation to Council that outlined the Committee's accomplishments in 2011. Terry Arvisais, Vice-Chair, Pickering Accessibility Advisory Committee, continued with the presentation to Council, detailing the Committee's 2012 Proposed Work Plan. The work plan includes building on the Accessibility Awareness Event, Policy Review, outreach to Pickering residents and continued liaisons with City staff. (VI) Correspondence 1. Corr. 11-12 Keith Falconer, Chair Accessibility Advisory Committee Resolution # 57/12 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Pickles That Corr. 11-12 received from Keith Falconer, Chair, Accessibility Advisory Committee, submitting the 2011 Annual Report and the proposed 2012 Work Plan on behalf of the Accessibility Advisory Committee be received for information. Carried 3. Corr. 12-12 Marisa Carpino, Manager, Culture & Recreation Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Resolution # 58/12 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Pickles That Corr. 12-12 received from Marisa Carpino, Manager, Culture & Recreation, submitting the 2011 Annual Report on behalf of the Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee be received for information. Carried 6 Ciro of _ Council Meeting Minutes Monday, April 16, 2012 ��� 7:30 PM Council Chambers 07 (VII)Committee Reports a) Report PD 04-12 of the Planning & Development Committee 1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 08-12 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 16/11 Fonke Holdings Corporation 1565 Greenmount Street (Block 76, Plan 40M-1512, Part 1, 40R-15611), City of Pickering Council Decision 1. That Report PD 08-12 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 16/11 submitted by Fonke Holdings Inc. to permit residential uses on lands being Block 76, Plan 40M-1512, Part 1, 40R-15611, City of Pickering be approved; and 3. Further, that the draft zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A16/11, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 08-12, be finalized and forwarded to City Council for enactment. 2. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 09-12 Revision to Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-01 (R2) Zoning Amendment Application A 15/11 Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited Part Lots 17 & 18, Concession 3, City of Pickering Council Decision 1. That Report PD 09-12 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Revision to Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-01(R2) submitted by Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited, to permit a red-line revision to a draft approved plan of subdivision on lands being Part Lots 17 & 18, Concession 3, as shown on the Applicant's Revised Plan Attachment #3 to Report PD 09-12, be endorsed; 3. That the proposed amendments to the conditions of draft plan of subdivision approval to implement Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-01(R2) as set out in Appendix Ito Report PD 09-12 be endorsed; 4. That the Ontario Municipal Board be advised of City Councils decision on the request for red-line revision to Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-01 (R2) and 7 City 00 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, April 16, 2012 I IS 1 — �[ 7:30 PM Council Chambers 08 that the City Solicitor be authorized to attend any Ontario Municipal Board hearing on the requested red-line revision; 5. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 15/11, submitted by Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited to permit a commercial block for a variety of commercial uses, including office, retail, personal service and restaurant, and for residential use being various forms of townhouses be approved; and 6. Further, that Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 15/11 submitted by Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited, to amend the zoning of the subject property to implement Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-01(R2), as outlined in Appendix II to Report PD 09-12 be endorsed and the by-law be finalized and forward to Council for enactment following the Ontario Municipal Board approval of the revisions to the draft plan of subdivision. Resolution # 59/12 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Pickles That Report PD 04-12 of the Planning & Development Committee dated April 2, 2012, be adopted. Carried b) Report EC 05-12 of the Executive Committee • 1. Director, Office of Sustainability, Report OS 03-12 Rouge National Urban Park -Status Update and Statement of Intent Council Decision 1. That Council receive for information, Report OS 03-12 concerning a status update and Statement of Intent on the establishment of a Rouge National Urban Park; 2. That Council endorse the Statement of Intent attached to this Report as Attachment 1, confirming the City's interest in working collaboratively with Parks Canada and other stakeholders in the establishment of the Rouge National Urban Park; and 3. That a copy of this report be forwarded to Parks Canada, the Province of Ontario (Ministry of Infrastructure), the Rouge Park Alliance, the City of Toronto, the 8 Cali 4 Council Meeting Minutes ;II=,-- Monday, April .16, 2012 ==_ice �: Wei leC 7:30 PM Council Chambers 09 Town of Markham, the Region of York, the Region of Durham and the Toronto Region Conservation Authority. 2. Director, Community Services, Report CS 10-12 City of Pickering Five Year Accessibility Plan (2012-2016) -Endorsed by the City of Pickering Accessibility Advisory Committee, Council Decision 1. That Report CS 10-12 regarding the City of Pickering Five Year Accessibility Plan (2012-2016) be received; and 2. That Council endorse the City of Pickering Five Year Accessibility Plan (2012- 2016) as prepared by staff and endorsed by the City of Pickering Accessibility Advisory Committee. 3. Director, Community Services, Report CS 11-12 T-1-2012 -Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets Council Decision 1. That Report CS 11-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the tender for Asphalt Resurfacing on Various City Streets be received; 2. That Tender No.T-1-2012 submitted by Four Seasons Site Development Limited in the amount of $535,897.42 (HST included) and a net cost of$482,592.23 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 3. That the total gross project cost of$699,748 (HST included), including the tender amount and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of$630,145 (net of HST rebate) be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project by transferring the sum of $630,145 from Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund, as provided for in the 2012 approved Roads Capital Budget; and 5. Further that the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. 4. Director, Community Services, Report CS 12-12 Great Lakes Protection Act 9 Ciro 00 Council Meeting Minutes °, , —� Monday, April 16, 2012 IKSCIAV WC 7:30 PM Council Chambers � 0 Council Decision 1. That Report CS 12-12 of the Director, Community Services, regarding the Great Lakes Protection Act be received; 2. That the City Clerk forward a copy of Report CS 12-12 to the Ontario Minister of the Environment for consideration as input into the proposed Great Lakes Protection Act; 3. That the Province be requested to provide consideration for the provision of a stable infrastructure funding source for municipalities to undertake required retrofits; 4. That the Province be requested to immediately update the Stormwater Management Planning and Design Manual so that Municipalities have the tools they need to ensure their stormwater systems are resilient in light of climate change; and 5. That the City Clerk forward a copy of Report CS 12-12 to The Regional Municipality of Durham, Toronto and Region Conservation, Central Lake Ontario Conservation, and the area municipalities in Durham Region. 6. Director, Community Services, Report CS 14-12 No Parking By-Law, Amber lea Road Signage and Pavement Markings Improvements, Amberlea Road Amendment to By-law 6604/05 Council Decision 1. That Report CS 14-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the installation of No Parking zones, and improvements to signage and pavement markings on Amberlea Road be received; 2. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule "2" to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of parking on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the Corporation of the City of Pickering, specifically to address parking concerns on Amberlea Road at the curve by St. Mary Park; and 3. Further, that additional signage and pavement markings be installed for guidance on Amberlea Road at the curve by St. Mary Park, and additional speed limit signs be installed on Amberlea Road. 10 City Council Meeting Minutes Monday, April 16, 2012 7:30 PM Council Chambers e1 7. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 07-12 Commodity Price Hedging Agreements Report Council Decision That Report CST 07-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. 8. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 08-12 Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act—Adjustment to Taxes Council Decision 1. That Report CST 08-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the write-offs of taxes as provided under Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act, 2001 be approved; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. Resolution # 60/12 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Pickles That Report EC 05-12 of the Executive Committee dated April 10, 2012 save and except Item #5 be adopted. Carried 5. Director, Community Services, Report CS 13-12 Stop Signs for Safe Pedestrian Crossings on Major Oaks Road and Dellbrook Avenue, Amendment to By-law 6604/05 Resolution ## 61/12 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Pickles 11 Cali oa r Council Meeting Minutes Monday, April 16, 2012 CO-al_ t 7:30 PM Council Chambers 12 1. That Report CS 13-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the installation of stop signs for safe pedestrian crossings at two locations on Major Oaks Road and one location on Dellbrook Avenue, and a proposed amendment to the municipal traffic and parking by-law 6604/05 be received; 2. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule "7" to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulation of stop signs on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the Corporation of the City of Pickering, specifically to address the proposed addition of three additional all-way stop locations at the following intersections: • Major Oaks Road at Duberry Drive • Major Oaks Road at Greenmount Street • Dellbrook Avenue at Meriadoc Drive; and 3. That crosswalk pavement markings be painted at the new all-way stop locations, as well as all approaches at the existing all-way stop at the intersection of Major Oaks Road and Dellbrook Avenue. Carried unanimously on a Recorded Vote (VIII) New and Unfinished Business 2. Chief Administrative Officer's Report, CAO 08-12 Authority to Sign Friendship Agreements Mayor Ryan gave Council a report on his trip to China. He outlined his travels, focusing on the opportunities to utilize some benchmarking lessons on long term strategic planning.and outlined the benefits of Friendship Agreements. The full report was submitted to the City Clerk for the public record. Resolution # 62/12 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Ashe 1. That Friendship Agreements and agreements of a similar nature with national and subnational governments of the People's Republic of China, and with other foreign jurisdictions, be signed by and at the discretion of the Mayor on behalf of the City, without binding the City financially or otherwise; 12 City of Council Meeting Minutes 1-1- '-' Monday, April 16, 2012 ti_re 7:30 PM Council Chambers 13 2. That the Memorandum of Understanding between City of Taicang, Jiangsu Province of the People's Republic of China and City of Pickering of Ontario Province of Canada; the Memo of Friendship Cooperation between Yuhang . District of the People's Republic of China and City of Pickering of Canada; and the Memorandum of Understanding between Xianning City of the People's Republic of China and City of Pickering of Canada signed on behalf of The Corporation of the City of Pickering be ratified and adopted; and 3. That such agreements, once executed, be circulated to City Council and the Chief Administrative Officer and filed with the City Clerk. Carried unanimously on a Recorded Vote IX) Notice of Motion Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation (OLG) Gaming Facility Resolution # 63/12 Moved by Councillor Ashe Seconded by Councillor Pickles WHEREAS the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation (OLG) have indicated their desire to locate a casino in the GTA; and WHEREAS the introduction of gaming facilities has lead to the attraction of hotels and/or convention facilities, other entertainment complexes and, most importantly, employment opportunities; and WHEREAS the Government of Ontario has significant land holdings within the Employment Lands Corridor adjacent to the 407; and WHEREAS the host municipality receives a share of the gaming revenue (in Ajax's case over $7 million per annum); and WHEREAS a Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act request confirms that only 8.49% of the Ajax OLG facility's regular customers are Ajax residents, with almost 70% of regular patrons from outside Durham Region; and WHEREAS the experience of the Ajax OLG facility strongly suggests that locating a casino in Pickering would draw patrons from outside Pickering and thereby spur growth in Pickering's hotel/hospitality industry; and 13 Cat/ 4 it Council Meeting Minutes Monday, April 16, 2012 IS1i t � 7:30PM Council Chambers • WHEREAS the City of Pickering requires added revenue opportunities to support the renewal of infrastructure. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Pickering hereby inform the Government of Ontario and the OLG that, subject to a satisfactory Host Community Agreement and the undertaking of an appropriate public process for approval of such a facility, the City of Pickering declares itself a willing host for an OLG gaming facility; AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to Tracey MacCharles, MPP; Joe Dickson, MPP: Dalton McGuinty, Premier; Tim Hudak, Leader of the Opposition; Andrea Horwath, Leader of the NDP; Kathleen Wynne, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing; Rod Phillips, CEO of OLG; Paul Godfrey, Chairman of OLG; and all Durham municipalities. A question and answer period ensued. Motion Defeated on a Recorded Vote as follows: Yes No Councillor Ashe Councillor McLean Councillor Dickerson Councillor O'Connell Councillor Pickles Councillor Rodrigues Mayor Ryan (X) By-laws 7205/12 Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as amended by Zoning By-law 4377/94, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering District Planning Area, Region of Durham in Block 76, Plan 40M-1512, Part 1, Plan 40R-15611, in the City of Pickering (A 16/11) 7206/12 Being a by-law to amend By-law 6604/05 providing for the regulating of traffic and parking, standing and stopping on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property 7207/12 Being a by-law to amend By-law 6604/05 providing for the regulating of parking, standing and stopping on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. 14 Ca,/ 00 41 Council Meeting Minutes .0.25.-T,L: g Rip �—� Monday, April 16, 2012 VOKIN 7:30 PM Council Chambers a5 7208/12 Being a by-law to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for the purpose of enforcing parking restrictions on private property. Third Reading: Councillor Dickerson seconded by Councillor Pickles moved that By-law Numbers 7205/12 to 7208/12, be adopted, and the said by-laws be now read a third time and passed and that the Mayor and Clerk sign the same and the seal of the Corporation be affixed thereto. (XI) Confidential Matters In accordance with Procedural By-law 6746/07 and the provisions of the Municipal Act, an In Camera meeting of Council was held prior to the regularly scheduled meeting. Resolution # 64/12 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That Council move In Camera in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act and Procedural By-law 6746/07, in that the matters to be discussed relate to solicitor- client privilege and the proposed or pending acquisition or disposition of land. Carried a) Confidential Memorandum from Veridian Corporation Refer to the In Camera minutes for further information. [City Clerk has custody and control of the In Camera minutes.] b) Report CAO 07-12 City Owned Lands Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Refer to the In Camera minutes for further information. [City Clerk has custody and control of the In Camera minutes.] (XII) Confirmation By-law By-law Number#7209/12 15 City o 1 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, April 16, 2012 tS�,poi 7:30 PM Council Chambers Councillor Dickerson, seconded by Councillor Pickles moved for leave to introduce a By-law of the City of Pickering to confirm those proceedings of the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering at its Regular Meeting of April 16, 2012. (XIII) Adjournment Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Pickles That the meeting be adjourned at 11:15 pm. Carried Dated this 16th day of April, 2012. Mayor David Ryan Debbie Shields City Clerk • 16 Cary o? Planning & Development = Committee Meeting Minutes 1012[ Monday, May 7, 2012 . 7:30 pm — Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickersoni 7 Present: Mayor Ryan - arrived at 8:00 pm Councillors: K. Ashe • D. Dickerson B. McLean J. O'Connell D. Pickles P. Rodrigues Also Present: T. Prevedel - Chief Administrative Officer N. Carroll - Director, Planning & Development P. Bigioni - City Solicitor D. Shields - City Clerk R. Pym - Principal-Planner— Development Review A. Yearwood - Planner II L. Roberts - Committee Coordinator • (I) Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. (II) Delegations • Destination Imagination Brie Davis appeared before the Committee on behalf of the Destination Imagination team. She introduced the team members present and provided a brief overview of their Outreach project regarding mental health. She noted that this week is "Mental Health Awareness Week". She informed the Committee that their team had held a fundraising event comprised of a raffle and bake sale which raised over $1,000.00 which was donated to the Ontario Shores Centre for Mental Health Sciences. 1 Cat otl Planning & Development • Committee Meeting Minutes 110111M1 1 Monday, May 7, 2012 7:30 pm — Council Chambers • 1 8 Chair: Councillor Dickerson (III) Part `A' Information Reports Ross Pym, Principal Planner— Development Review gave an outline of the requirements for a Statutory Meeting under the Planning Act. He outlined the notification process procedures and 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 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. 1. Zoning Amendment Application A 02/12 Triple Properties III Inc. 1879 Whites Road (Part of Lot 28, Concession 1), 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. Ashley Yearwood, Planner II provided an overview of zoning amendment application A 02/12. He indicated since the preparation of the information report, four concerns had been received, noting building heights, traffic, character of the area and the negative impact on property values. . Steve Apostolopoulos and Angella Blanas, the applicants, appeared before the Committee to provide an overview of their proposal. Ms. Blan.as noted the plans will be consistent with the existing neighbourhood and also noted they had been in the neighbourhood speaking to residents to make them aware of the development and what they hoped to accomplish. She provided the City Clerk with a document and stated that the signatures on the document were the residents she spoke to regarding the application. She noted that the document was circulated for support of the development. Steve Apostolopoulos noted that they wanted to build five units for family members to live in and were basically seeking side yard variances. He stated that all design details would be consistent with the neighbourhood and stated that the application was for less than the maximum allowable under the Official Plan. A question and answer period ensued with questions raised regarding submission of the conceptual plans and how these plans would blend into the area. Len Rideout appeared before the Committee noting concerns with the design and height of the buildings as well as 3rd floor balconies. He felt the height of the buildings would dwarf the existing homes and impact the property.values. He also • 2 • City o1 = Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes 11100-8-1W Monday, May 7, 2012 7:30 pm — Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickerson 1 9 stated that he felt the lot was too narrow for five homes and noted his main concern was that the development complements the existing neighbourhood. Dale Pearson, 750 Stonepath Circle appeared before the Committee in opposition to the development. He stated he was not opposed to development on this lot, but felt five units was too much and that it should be limited to three homes. He asked for confirmation on the size and square footage of the buildings and noted three storeys is not in keeping with the neighbourhood. He also questioned whether the frontage would be minimized and if there would be sufficient parking for homes of this size, expressing concerns for street safety. He stated his concerns with water drainage due to the slope in back as well as the height and size of the buildings reducing the privacy and sunlight for his back yard. He requested that when issuing building permits, the City of Pickering be sensitive to the needs of the residents and approvals be in keeping with the existing neighbourhood. Lloyd Lumby, 754 Stonepath Circle appeared before the Committee in opposition to the development, stating it was not in keeping with the neighbourhood. He stated he was in agreement with the development of the property, but noted that there was servicing for 3 buildings and the number of buildings should be in keeping with what they had anticipated. He also noted concerns with the distance between houses. Mr. Lumby questioned the validity of the list of signatures on the document the applicant submitted and noted there may have been some misunderstanding in what was being signed. He noted that the residents that signed the document were not in support of the application but thought they were signing as acknowledgement that the applicant had spoken to them. Carol Scrymegour, 758 Stonepath Circle appeared before the Committee, noting the list of signatures was believed to be only an acknowledgement of development, which questions the integrity of the applicants. Donna Markou, 756 Stonepath Circle appeared before the Committee and stated she also believed that she was signing a document of acknowledgement of the development and noted that the residents signing this list were misinformed. Doug Sellars, 761 Stonepath Circle appeared before the Committee in opposition to the development. He noted that while he agrees with development here, he felt there needs to be additional information provided. He also questioned the elevation and the selling price of these homes. Gary Temple, 762 Stonepath Circle appeared before the Committee, stating he was in agreement with the delegations prior to him and noted the lack of information provided when asked to sign the document. 3 Ca Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes relt ��t Monday, May 7, 2012 7:30 pm — Council Chambers L 0 Chair: Councillor Dickerson Donna Bell, 1879 Hensall Court appeared before the Committee in opposition to the proposed development. Further to a comment the applicant made regarding working from the homes, she questioned what type of work would be done from the homes. Ms. Bell also noted that the applicants stated family members would be living in the homes but questioned how long they actually intended on staying. She requested that Council consider the existing residents when reviewing this application. Philip Haydicky, 752 Stonepath Circle appeared before the Committee in opposition to the proposed development. He noted there is a water drainage issue in the area, particularly during rain storms. He stated the look and feel of the neighbourhood is important, indicating the proposed homes are massive and do not fit in the area. He noted it seemed logical that only three units would be built since servicing and addressing was already there. He agreed that development here would benefit the neighbourhood, but also noted it must be in keeping with the area. John Baigrie, 716 Stonepath Circle appeared before the Committee and stated that no one had come to his door regarding the proposed development. He also stated • there is no guarantee on how long the applicant or their family members would live in the five homes. The applicants returned to address some of the resident's concerns. Ms. Blanas stated she had gone around to the homes in the area to inform the residents of the application and collected signatures of the people she spoke to and noted she should have been clearer in what she was doing. She also stated there were no plans for a 3rd floor balcony and noted the square footage of the buildings was unknown at this point and noted they had not submitted any design plans yet. A question and answer period ensued. Discussion took place with respect to the intent and purpose of canvassing the neighbourhood obtaining signatures and whether this was a legal binding document. Staff noted that the document did not carry any weight in the decision process. It was suggested that residents who signed the document could write into the City of Pickering to clarify their position if they wanted to. Also questions were raised on the design and square footage of the proposed dwellings and whether the applicants would incorporate the concerns of the residents into their plans. Other concerns noted were the ongoing maintenance of the property, building heights, parking, as well as the distance between homes. Staff provided clarification with respect to the existing services on the lot and drainage plans. It was also requested that staff hold a community meeting once the designs are available to work out the issues prior to a report coming forward. 4 Cars o Planning & Development l �'— Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, May 7, 2012 7:30 pm — Council Chambers • Chair: Councillor Dickerson21 (IV) Planning & Development Reports 1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 10-12 Revised Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP-2011-01 Draft Plan of Condominium Application CP-2011-01 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 3/11 Emery Homes Glendale Ltd. 1880, 1876, 1872 Liverpool Road and 1863, 1865, 1871, 1875, 1877 & 1881 Glendale Drive (Lot 19, 20, 21, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 & 38, Plan 492), City of Pickering Scott Waterhouse, Sernas & Associates appeared before the Committee on behalf of the applicant in support of the proposed application and to answer any questions. He provided a brief outline on the history of this application and noted the key revisions which were made to the application in order to address the concerns of the residents. Discussion ensued with respect to visitor and resident parking, tree preservation and the garages fronting onto Glendale Drive. Chris Gertzos, 1972 Glendale Drive appeared before the Committee in opposition to the proposed application. He stated the area currently consists of cozy bungalows with large lots and ample parking. He noted concerns with the high volume of traffic which exists now and would increase with this development. He questioned whether the two storey height of the buildings start above a garage or include the garage. He felt this was out of character with the existing neighbourhood and was opposed to cutting down all of the trees in order to build the development. Becky Arseneau, 1945 Glendale Drive appeared before the Committee in opposition to the proposed application. She noted that she could be in favour of a development with a reduced number of townhomes. She noted her main concern related to traffic and questioned whether there would be a dedicated left turn lane onto Glendale and stated this was currently very dangerous. A question and answer period ensued with respect to traffic concerns. Donna Markou, 756 Stonepath Circle appeared before the Committee in opposition to the development, noting her concerns with parking and traffic on the west side of Glenanna. She stated her opposition to three storey units. Jackie Gentle, 1859 Malden Crescent appeared before the Committee in opposition to the application. She stated she had numerous concerns and asked that the best plan for the area be considered and noted that while bungalows may not be 5 City 04 {y Planning & Development muw-giN_ - '= = Committee Meeting Minutes 1S3 1 0t Monday, May 7, 2012 2 7:30 pm — Council Chambers 2 Chair: Councillor Dickerson economically feasible for developers, it may be the best plan for the area. She also stated concerns with parking, traffic and tree preservation. Doug Martin, 1857 Glendale Drive appeared before the Committee noting that while he does recognize the revisions which were made to the application, he felt they were not significant enough. He noted it does not address the parking or traffic concerns. He stated the only way to significantly address the concerns would be to reduce the number of units to alleviate some of the traffic issues. He also noted bungalows should be considered. Jeremy Crawford, 1840 Glendale Drive appeared before the Committee in opposition to the application. He stated traffic is already terrible in the area and noted the backup at Glendale and Glenanna. He asked that safety be considered, noting there were already too many vehicles travelling at excessive speeds and also stated that the density of the plan was too high for this corner. Sandy Stephens, 1874 Glendale Drive appeared before the Committee in opposition to the development, stating that traffic in the area was getting worse. She also questioned the process for notification of the public workshops, as she had not been advised of them. Bill Waugh, 1816 Bronte Square appeared before the Committee in opposition to the development. He noted houses on 24 foot lots were ridiculous in comparison to the other side of the street. He questioned why the City of Pickering would approve such high density on one side of the street and not the other. He also questioned parking spaces and who would be paying for the road widening. Alice Rooney, 1900 Liverpool Road appeared before the Committee stating her opposition to 67 units. She noted two storeys were bad enough and did not want three. She stated it was ridiculous to think 12 parking spaces would be sufficient for 67 units and also questioned the preservation of trees. Peter Salby, 1926 Liverpool Road appeared before the Committee in opposition to the development. He stated this is an old established neighbourhood and this development would be an eyesore. He felt there should be some form of development that would appeal to the residents in the area and also noted his concerns with traffic speed. A brief discussion.period ensued with respect to transit buses and the speed of the buses in this area. Fred Drummond, 1820 Glendale Drive appeared before the Committee and stated his concerns regarding the volume of traffic in the area now and noted this 6 Citq 00 it Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes iile2111C Monday, May 7, 2012 7:30 pm — Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickerson 2 3 development would only increase traffic. He asked that the numbers be reduced in keeping with what currently exists. The Committee took a 10 minute recess and reconvened at 10:50 pm. A discussion period took place with staff providing clarification on the process involved with respect to notification for working groups. A question and answer period ensued with staff responding to questions raised regarding the road widening along Glenanna, protection for pedestrian traffic on the corner of Liverpool and Glenanna, parking on Glendale, traffic studies and densities. Recommendation Moved by Councillor Ashe Seconded by Councillor Pickles 1. That Report PD 10-12 Revised of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP-2011-01 submitted by Emery Homes Glendale Ltd. to establish 6 Development Blocks on lands being Lot 19, 20, 21, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 & 38, Plan 492, City of Pickering, be endorsed; 3. That the Proposed Conditions of Approval to implement Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2011-01 as set out in Appendix Ito Report PD 10-12 Revised be endorsed; 4. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 3/11 submitted by Emery Homes Glendale Ltd., to amend the zoning of the subject property to permit a 62 unit (maximum) townhouse dwelling development, 45 units (maximum) of which are by a common element condominium be approved; and 5. Further, that the draft zoning by-law to implement Zoning Amendment Application A 3/11, as set out in Appendix II to Report PD 10-12 Revised, be finalized and forwarded to City Council for enactment. Motion Lost (V) Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 11:40 pm. 7 cit,l co Executive Committee ' Meeting Minutes ti• �I S 1I t `I� Monday, May 14, 2012 • 2 4 7:50 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean Present: . Mayor Ryan - Councillors: K. Ashe D. Dickerson B. McLean J. O'Connell D. Pickles P. Rodrigues Also Present: T. Prevedel - Chief Administrative Officer E. Buntsma - Director, Community Services G. Paterson - Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer B. Douglas - Fire Chief • P. Bigioni - City Solicitor D. Shields - City Clerk K. Thompson - Manager, By-law Enforcement Services L. Harker - Coordinator, Records & Elections (I) Disclosure of Interest No disclosures of interest were noted. (II) Matters for Consideration 1. Chief Administrative Officer's Report, CAO 06-12 By-law to Govern the Proceedings of Council, any of its Committees, the Conduct of its Members and the Calling of Meetings Cat Beattie appeared before the Committee and expressed some concerns with the by-law. She noted her concern with section 8.6, regarding emblems not being allowed in the Council Chambers and felt the word was vague and wondered where you draw the line. Ms. Beattie also expressed concerns with section 13.1(c) regarding petitions and noted that she felt an online petition was valid and should be acceptable. Ms. Beattie thanked the Committee for keeping the delegation time at 10 minutes. 1 City co A Executive Committee _., :, ..._ Meeting Minutes 021. �� 1 Monday, May 14, 2012 7:50 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean 5 Recommendation Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson 1. That Report CAO 06-12 respecting a by-law to govern the proceedings of Council be received; and 2. That the attached draft Council Rules of Procedure By-law be enacted by Council. Carried Later in the Meeting • (Refer to following motions) Moved by Councillor Rodrigues Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That Report CAO 06-12 be referred back to staff and that MASS LBP be engaged to provide public input to the by-law and the Report be brought back to the Executive Committee meeting on September 10th Motion Defeated Moved by Councillor Rodrigues Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That Section 8.6 a) be amended as follows: 8.6 a) Signs, banners, emblems, flags are prohibited in the Council Chambers except by permission of the Chair and that cameras and video recorders will be allowed provided they do not disrupt the decorum of Council. Motion Defeated A question and answer period ensued regarding Section 12.1 Delegations. Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That Section 12.1 Delegations, be referred back to staff for further review. Carried 2 city 00 Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, May 14, 2012 2 r 7:50 pm - Council. Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Rodrigues That Section 8.15 c) Motions to continue past 12:00 am are not debatable, be deleted. Motion Defeated Moved by Councillor Ashe Seconded by Councillor Rodrigues That Section 8.5 a) A recorded vote shall not be taken on a question before a Committee, be deleted. Carried Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That Section 4.7 be amended to add the following: c) Members of Council that serve on Advisory Committees may move, second and vote on items. Carried Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Rodrigues That Section 12.2 b) be amended as follows: 12.2 b) A delegation will not be permitted to take any unused time allocated to another delegation. Carried The main motion was then Carried. The Committee took a five minute recess at 10:20 pm and resumed at 10:25 pm. 2. Chief Administrative Officer's Report, CAO 10-12 Park Vendor Permits A question and answer period ensued. 3 Cc/r o0 A Executive Committee Meeting Minutes ON N_ Monday, May 14, 2012 7:50 pm = Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean 2 7 Recommendation Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson 1. That Report CAO 10-12 of the City Solicitor regarding the issuance of Park Vendor Permits be received; 2. That a Park Vendor Permit be issued to Donkey Kone Inc. for Kinsmen Park, in accordance with RFP 2-2012; 3. That the attached draft by-law setting out the procedures for the issuance of Park Vendor Permits, be enacted; and 4. That the City Clerk be authorized to issue Park Vendor Permits to future applicants on a "first applied, first issued" basis. Carried • 3. Chief Administrative Officer's Report, CAO 11-12 Licensing Private Property Parking Enforcement Officers A question and answer period ensued. Recommendation Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson 1. That Report CAO 11-12 respecting the licensing of private property parking enforcement sites, contractors and officers be received; 2. That the attached draft by-law amending Traffic and Parking By-law 6604/05 to provide regulations for the licensing and appointment of officers to enforce the Traffic and Parking By-law on private property be adopted; and; 3. That the City Clerk be authorized to: (i) appoint licensed private property parking enforcement officers for private property parking enforcement, (ii) implement conditions for licensing and associated fees and (iii) implement private property parking enforcement policies and procedures. Carried 4 • • ca oil A Executive Committee `' - � � Meeting Minutes �ONSOVIVE Monday, May 14, 2012 7:50 pm - Council Chambers 2 8 Chair: Councillor McLean. 4. Director, Community Services, Report CS 18-12 Tender T-3-2012 —Tender for Dehumidification Upgrade at Pickering Recreation Complex Arena Recommendation Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson 1. That Report CS 18-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the Dehumidification Upgrade at the Pickering Recreation Complex Arena be received; 2. That Tender No. T-3-2012 submitted by Climate Control Division of Toromont Industries Ltd. in the amount of$281,370.00 (HST included) and a net cost of $253,382.40 be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of$315,270 (HST included), including the tender amount and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $283,910 (net of HST rebate), be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project by transferring $283,910 from the Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. Carried 5. Director, Community Services, Report CS 19-12 Tender No. T-4-2012 -Tender for the Esplanade Park Walkway and Lighting Replacement Recommendation Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson 1. That Report CS 19-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding Tender No. T-4-2012 for the Esplanade Park Walkway and Lighting Replacement be received; 5 City o0 Executive Committee 1.1 1 7=-"'7. Meeting Minutes '- ' ti'11 Monday, May 14, 2012 • 7:50 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean 2 9 2. That Tender No. T-4-2012 submitted by TBG Landscape Inc., in the total tendered amount of $239,955.90 as the Base Bid for the Esplanade Park Walkway and Lighting Replacement, and $32,594.40 as the Separate Price Schedule for the Valley Farm Road Sidewalk, for a total of$272,550.30 (HST included) and a net cost of $245,439.99 be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of$385,176 (HST included) and a net project cost of$346,863 (net of HST rebate) including the total tendered amount and other associated costs be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to fund the project as follows: a) the sum of$300,000 as provided for in the 2012 Capital Budget be increased to $314,967 and to be funded from the Parkland Reserve Fund and ; b) the additional sum of$31,896 for the reconstruction of the sidewalk on Valley Farm Road to be funded from Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund; and 5. Further that the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. Carried 6. Director, Community Services, Report CS 25-12 Tender No. T-11-2012 -Tender for Roof Replacements at Don Beer Arena — Rink 1 and Greenwood Community Centre Recommendation Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson 1. That Report CS 25-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the Roof Replacements at the Don Beer Arena — Rink 1 and Greenwood Community Centre be received; • 2. That Tender No. T-11-2012 submitted by T. Hamilton & Son Roofing Inc. in the amount of$507,709.00 (HST included) and a net cost of$457,207.68 be accepted; • 6 calico Executive Committee TO =i Meeting Minutes ����� �►�121 Monday, May 14, 2012 3 7:50 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean 3. That the total gross project cost of $559,689 (HST included) and a net project cost of $504,017 (net of HST rebate), including the tender amount and other associated costs, be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the projects as follows: a) the sum of$420,000, as provided for in the 2012 Don Beer Arena Capital Budget to be financed by the issue of debentures by the Regional Municipality of Durham over a period not to exceed ten years at a rate to be determined; b) the balance amount of$4,950 to be funded from property tax; c) the sum of$79,067, as provided for in the 2012 Community Centres Capital Budget be funded from Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund; d) the annual repayment charges in the amount of approximately $48,600 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing 2013, continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid, and any financing cost to be paid out of the Current Budget; e) the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary in order to give effect to the foregoing; and 5. That the draft by-law attached to this report be enacted; and 6. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect hereto. Carried 7. Director, Community Services, Report CS 26-12 Supply & Delivery of One Telescopic Boom Excavator -2012 Gradall XL4100-IV 6 X 4 Hydraulic Excavator Recommendation Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson 7 C u1 o0 Executive Committee --71MY Meeting Minutes Vii I 12I Monday, May 14, 2012 7:50 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean 3 1. That Report CS 26-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the supply and delivery of One Telescopic Boom Excavator be received; 2. That Quotation No. GR12-0031 dated April 12, 2012, as submitted by Amaco Equipment for the supply and delivery of One Telescopic Boom Excavator in the amount of$340,560.00 (HST extra) be accepted; 3. That the total gross cost of$384,832 (HST included) and a net cost of $346,554 be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows as provided for in the 2012 Capital Budget; a) that the sum of $345,000 be financed by the issue of debentures through the Regional Municipality of Durham for a period not exceeding five years, at a rate to be determined; b) that the balance of$1,554 plus issuing costs be funded from property taxes or other revenues available to the Treasurer; c) that the financing and repayment charges in the amount of approximately $74,260 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2013 and continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid and any financing cost be paid out of the current budget; d) that the Treasurer be authorized to make any changes, adjustments, and revisions to amounts, terms, conditions or take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; 5. That the draft by-law attached to this report be enacted; and 6. Further that the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect hereto. Carried 8. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 09-12 Cash Position Report as at December 31, 2011 A question and answer period ensued. Recommendation 8 Cad all Executive Committee Meeting Minutes vor• er Monday, May 14, 2012 7:50 pm - Council Chambers 3 2 Chair: Councillor McLean Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson It is recommended that report CST 09-12 regarding the 2011 year end cash position from the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. Carried 9. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 10-12 2012 Annual Repayment Limit for Debt and Financial Obligations A question and answer period ensued. Recommendation Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That Report CST 10-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding the 2012 Annual Repayment Limit for Debt and Financial Obligations be received for information. Carried 10. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 11-12 Development Charges Reserve Fund — Statement of the Treasurer for the Year Ended December, 2011 Recommendation Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That Report CST 11-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer respecting the Development Charges Reserve Fund be received for information. Carried 11. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 12-12 2011 Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund Recommendation 9 • Ca v1 _ Executive Committee Ali -= .v�ejE� ��= � = Meeting Minutes Eitaei Monday, May 14, 2012 7:50 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean 3 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That Report CST 12-12 from the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding the 2011 Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund be received for information. Carried 12. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 13-12 2012 Tax Rates and Final Tax Due Dates for All Realty Tax Classes Except for Commercial, Industrial & Multi-Residential Realty Classes • Recommendation Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson 1. That Report CST 13-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding the 2012 tax rates be received; 2. That the 2012 tax rates for the City of Pickering be approved as contained in Schedule A of the By-law attached hereto; 3. That the tax levy due dates for the Final Billing be June 27, 2012 and September 27, 2012 excluding the industrial, multi-residential and commercial realty tax classes; 4. That the attached By-law providing for the imposition of the tax rates approved under Recommendation 2 and 3 above, be read three times and approved; 5. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to make any changes or undertake any actions necessary to comply with Provincial regulations including altering due dates or final tax rates to ensure that the property tax billing process is completed; and, 6. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. Carried 10 City o Executive Committee ' Meeting Minutes liCSITO IOC Monday, May 14, 2012 7:50 pm - Council Chambers 3 4 Chair: Councillor McLean • 13. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 14-12 2011 Pre-Audit Balances of Reserves and Reserve Funds • Recommendation Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That Report CST 14-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding the 2011 pre-audit balances of reserves and reserve funds be received for information. Carried 14. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 15-12 Investment Portfolio Activity for the Year Ended December 31, 2011 Ontario Regulation 292/09 under the Municipal Act, 2001 Recommendation Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That Report CST 15-12 of the•Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding Investment Portfolio Activity for the Year Ended December 31, 2011 be received for information. Carried 15. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 16-12 Purchasing Policy - Revision Recommendation Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson 1. That Report CST 16-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding revision to the Purchasing Policy be received; and, 2. That Council approve the revised wording to the Purchasing Policy, Section 17, as presented in Attachment 1 to this report. Carried • 11 • c� vq A Executive Committee 4tt l �=f Meeting Minutes iii IKON MIK Monday, May 14, 2012 7:50 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean 7, r (III) Other Business 1) The Chief Administrative Officer was requested to action the following; a) Councillor McLean advised the Committee that the Police Services Board has been discussing the next generation of communication technology. As buildings go up, this could affect the communications of this equipment. Councillor McLean questioned what the Police Services Board would have to do to be added to the circulation list for agency commenting. 2) Councillor McLean requested that staff keep Council up to date with the federal government appeal of the Ontario court ruling to decriminalize bawdy houses. 3) Councillor Dickerson requested an update on the report of the election of Regional Councillors at large for the 2014 Election. (IV) Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 10:50 pm. 12 Clujoq 36 PICKERING Ma y 22, 2012 Presentations 1. Mayor Ryan Cheque Presentation —Tracy Paterson Rouge Valley Health System Foundation Image is Everything MRI Campaign 2. Presentation to Brianna MacEachern St. Isaac Jogues Catholic School Contest Winner, Local Look Back Program �C o PICKERING May 22, 2012 Delegations 1. Glenn Brown• Re: Election of Regional Chair JRefer to Corr. 13-121 2. Representative from Emery Homes Re: 1880, 1876, 1872 Liverpool Road and 1863, 1865, 1871, 1875, 1877 & 1881 Glendale Drive • • Cliq 1t1 38 May 22, 2012 PI KERING Correspondence • Pages 1. Corr. 13-12 Motion for Direction P.M. Madill, Regional Clerk 39-44 Region of Durham Re: Proposed By-law to Change the Method of Selecting the Regional Chair Letter received from P.M. Madill, Regional Clerk, Region of Durham for Council consideration of a by-law to authorize the Direct Election of the Regional Chair, which was passed by Regional Council on April 4th, 2012. The Region of Durham is forwarding the by-law to the Councils of the lower-tier municipalities requesting they pass resolutions consenting to the by-law on or before September 1, 2012. 2. Corr. 14-12 Receive for Information Tate Besso, Chair 45-46 Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee Correspondence received from Tate Besso, Chair, Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee, submitting the 2011 Annual Report and the proposed 2012 Work Plan on behalf of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee. • THIS LETTER HAS BEEN FORWARDED TO THE EIGHT AREA CLERKS 39 C�r r, April 11,2012 COPY rte: DURHAM , REGION Ms. D. Shields, Clerk f(AR. FILE City of Pickering AnoNi 1 The Esplanade ((Y1p ;o,� b� O�i-ems-Rio►^) . The Regional Pickering ON Municipality L1 V 6K7 of Durham Clerk's Department RE: PROPOSED BY-LAW TO CHANGE THE METHOD OF 605 ROSSLAND RD. E. SELECTING THE REGIONAL CHAIR (2012-A-11) PO BOX 623 (OUR FILE: COO) WHITBY ON L1 N 6A3 CANADA 905-668-7711 Ms. Shields, please be advised that Regional Council considered the 1-800-372-1102 above matter and at a meeting held on April 4, 2012, Council adopted the Fax:905-668-9963 E-mail:clerks@durham.ca following recommendations of the Committee: www.durham.ca Pat M. Madill,A.M.C.T.,CMM "ia) THAT the Regional Chair Election By-law, to change the method of II Regional Clerk selecting the Regional Chair to election by general vote, in accordance with the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, be presented for consideration; • b) THAT subject to passage by Regional Council, the Regional Chair Election By-law be forwarded to the Councils of the lower-tier • municipalities requesting they pass resolutions consenting to the by-law on or before September 1, 2012; and c) THAT the area municipalities be forwarded a copy of Report#2012- A-11 of the Regional Clerk and be advised of Regional Council's decision." Also, attached is a copy of the Election By-law (By-law#19-2012) passed by Regional Council on April 4,2012. Please place this matter before your Council for consideration and subsequently advise of Council's decision. l ( • P.M. Madill, A.M.C.T., CMM III Regional Clerk PMM/np Encl. . "Servrce Exce lence i A wc� for,ourCom munities" . $ 100%Post Consumer • 40 The Regional Municipality of Durham To: Regional Council From: P. a Report No.: 2012 M-dil A-11 Regional Clerk DURHAM REGION Date: April 4, 2012 SUBJECT PROPOSED BY-LAW TO CHANGE THE METHOD OF SELECTING THE REGIONAL CHAIR RECOMMENDATIONS a) THAT the Regional Chair Election By-law, to change the method of selecting the Regional Chair to election by general vote, in accordance with the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, be presented for consideration; b) THAT subject to passage by Regional Council, the Regional Chair Election By- law be forwarded to the Councils of the lower-tier municipalities requesting they pass resolutions consenting to the by-law on or before September 1, 2012; and c) THAT the area municipalities be forwarded a copy of this report and be advised of Regional Council's decision. 1.0 PURPOSE 1.1 The purpose of this report is to present the draft Regional Chair Election By-law for consideration by Council. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 On March 7, 2012 Council passed a resolution authorizing a public meeting to be held on April 4, 2012 at the beginning of the regular Regional Council meeting, to consider a by-law to change the method of selecting the Regional Chair to election by general vote, in accordance with the Municipal Elections Act, 1996. 2.2 The Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing enacted Ontario Regulation 3/12 on January 10, 2012, pursuant to the Municipal Act, 2001 authorizing the Council of The Regional Municipality of Durham to exercise its power under Section 218 of the Municipal Act, 2001 to change the method of selecting the head of Council. 2.3 The Regional Solicitor has prepared a draft by-law pursuant to the provisions of the Regulation and the rules set out in subsection 218(1) of the Municipal Act, 5 0 8 Report No.:2012-A-11 Page No.: 2 4i 2001, in order to change the method of selecting the Regional Chair to election • by general vote. 3.0 CHANGING THE METHOD OF SELECTING THE REGIONAL CHAIR 3.1 In order to change the method of selecting the Regional Chair, the following process is required to be followed: i) The Regional Clerk gives notice of Council's intention to pass a by-law under Section 218 and holds at least one public meeting to consider the matter. ii) The by-law must pass a "triple majority". A "triple majority" is achieved when: a. the by-law receives the support of a majority of all votes of Regional Council; b. a majority of the councils of all lower-tier municipalities pass resolutions consenting to the by-law; and c. the total number of electors in the lower-tier municipalities that have passed resolutions consenting to the by-law form a majority of all the electors in the Region. • iii) The by-law would then come into force on the day the new council is organized following the first regular election after the passing of the by-law. iv) The first regular election after the passing of the by-law will be conducted as if the by-law was already in force. 3.2 Upon enactment of a by-law to change the method of selecting the Regional Chair to election by general vote, the Council Rules of Procedure By-law will need to be amended accordingly. 4.0 NEXT STEPS 4.1 Once the by-law has been passed by Regional Council, the Regional Chair Election By-law will be forwarded to the Councils of the lower-tier municipalities requesting they pass resolutions consenting to the by-law on or before September 1, 2012. 4.2 In order for the Regional Chair Election By-law to come into force, support must be received from at least five Councils of the lower-tier municipalities and the total number of electors in the lower-tier municipalities must form a majority of all the electors in the Region. The total number of electors Region-wide is 432,256. 09 Report No.:2012-A-11 Page No.: 3 42 4.3 The Regional Chair Election By-law would take effect for the 2014 municipal elections, subject to passing a triple majority on or before December 31, 2013. 5.0 CONCLUSION V 5.1 It is recommended that the Regional Chair Election By-Law, changing the method of selecting the Regional Chair to election by general vote, in accordance with the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, be presented for consideration. 5.2 It is also recommended that subject to passage by Regional Council, the Regional Chair Election By-law be forwarded to the Councils of the lower-tier municipalities requesting they pass resolutions consenting to the by-law on or before September 1, 2012. 5.3 Notice of Council's intention to pass the by-law was published in local newspapers in March 2012 and posted on the Regional website. 5.4 This report has been reviewed by the Regional Solicitor. Respectfully submitted, ti P.M. Madi , A.M.C.T., CMM III Regional Clerk RECOMMENDED FOR PRESENTATION TO COMMITTEE Girry H'`Cu ib tt, M.S.W. • Chief Administrative Officer Attachment: #1 Proposed By-law • ~� 0 BY-LAW NUMBER_-2012 4 3 OF THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM BEING a By-law to authorize the direct election of the Regional Chair pursuant to section 218 of the Municipal Act, 2001 and Ontario Regulation 3/12, filed January 10, 2012. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED AND IT IS HEREBY ENACTED as a By-law of The Regional Municipality of Durham through its Council as follows: 1. The composition of Regional Council shall include a Regional Chair who shall be elected by general vote of all the electors of all of the lower-tier municipalities. 2. The election of the Regional Chair shall be conducted in accordance with the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 and shall be held concurrently with the regular election in the lower-tier municipalities. 3. The composition, election, term and/or appointment of Regional Council shall remain in all respects as it was the day before the coming into force of this By-law, except as specifically provided for in Paragraphs 1 and 2 of this By-law. 4. This By-law shall come into force on the day the new Council is organized following the first regular election following the passing of this By-law. 5. Notwithstanding Paragraph 4 of this By-law, the regular election held immediately before the coming into force of this By-law shall be conducted as if this By-law were already in force. 6. The short title of this By-law is the "Regional Chair Election By-law". By-law read and passed this day of , 2012. 511 4 4 BY-LAW NUMBER 19-2012 OF THE. REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM • BEING a By-law to authorize the direct election of the Regional Chair pursuant to section 218 of the Municipal Act, 2001 and Ontario Regulation 3/12, filed January 10, 2012. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED AND IT IS HEREBY ENACTED as a By-law of The Regional Municipality of Durham through its Council as follows: 1. The composition of Regional Council shall include a Regional Chair who shall be elected by general vote of all the electors of all of the lower-tier municipalities. 2. The election of the Regional Chair shall be conducted in accordance with the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 and shall be held concurrently with the regular election in the lower-tier municipalities. 3. The composition, election, term and/or appointment of Regional Council shall remain in all respects as it was the day before the coming into force of this By-law, except as specifically provided for in Paragraphs 1 and 2 of this By-law. 4. This By-law shall come into force on the day the new Council is organized following the first regular election following the passing of this By-law. 5. Notwithstanding Paragraph 4 of this By-law, the regular election held immediately before the coming into force of this By-law shall be conducted as if this By-law were already in force. 6. The short title of this By-law is the "Regional Chair Election By-law". By-law read and passed this 4th day of April 2012. --4111,' R. Anderson, Regional.Chair and CEO P.M. Madill, Regional Clerk rr, r DICKERING Memo 1811 BICENTENNIAL 2011 r To: Mayor and April 16, 201 Members of Council From: Tate Besso, Chair • Heritage Pickering Committee Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Directors Subject: 2011 Year End Report 2012 Workplan for Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee File: A -1410-001-12 The Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee is pleased to present its 2011 Accomplishments and proposed 2012 Workplan as outlined below. 2011 Accomplishments The Heritage Pickering Committee held twelve meetings in 2011. The following tasks were completed: 1) Committee was trained and educated on heritage matters. 2) Started review of potential property listings to include on Pickering Heritage Register for Council's consideration. 3) Started process of investigating three properties for potential heritage designation. 4) Assisted at first annual 2011 Doors Open Pickering. 5) Improved Heritage Register on City of Pickering website. 2012 Workplan 1) Continue to identify and pursue training opportunities to educate committee members. 2) Heritage Register 3) Conduct the required research required to submit to Council a heritage designation on two properties 4) Be actively involved in 2013 Doors Open preparation 5) Continue to create improved heritage content for City of Pickering website 46 Submitted on behalf of The Heritage Pickering Committee • Current Member ship: Dale Quaife Mike Sawchuck Tate Besso Wickham Jamadar Ellen Mason Janet Mehak Elke Pryswitt Denise Rundle S Sally Sheehan Charles Sopher Jutta Van Huss Councillor Peter Rodrigues IJ:xx I:WeritageWentage Pickering\2011 Workplan.doc • March 30, 2011 Page 2 2010 Year End Report and 2011 Workplan for Heritage Pickering Cat' o� 4 7 May 22, 2012 PICKERING Committee Reports a) Report EC 05-2012 of the Executive Committee Executive Pages 1. Chief Administrative Officer's Report, CAO 06-12 1-65 By-law to Govern the Proceedings of Council, any of its Committees, the Conduct of its Members and the Calling of Meetings Recommendation 1. That Report CAO 06-12 respecting a by-law to govern the proceedings of Council be received; and 2. That the attached draft Council Rules of Procedure By-law be enacted by Council. 2. Chief Administrative Officer's Report, CAO 10-12 66-73 Park Vendor Permits Recommendation 1. That Report CAO 10-12 of the City Solicitor regarding the issuance of Park Vendor Permits be received; 2. That a Park Vendor Permit be issued to Donkey Kone Inc. for Kinsmen Park, in accordance with RFP 2-2012; 3. That the attached draft by-law setting out the procedures for the issuance of Park Vendor Permits, be enacted; and 4. That the City Clerk be authorized to issue Park Vendor Permits to future applicants on a "first applied, first issued" basis. 3. Chief Administrative Officer's Report, CAO 11-12 74-81 Licensing Private Property Parking Enforcement Officers Recommendation 1. That Report CAO 11-12 respecting the licensing of private property parking enforcement sites, contractors and officers be received; 2. That the attached draft by-law amending Traffic and Parking By-law 6604/05 to provide regulations for the licensing and appointment of officers to enforce the Traffic and Parking By-law on private property be adopted; and; 3. That the City Clerk be authorized to: (i) appoint licensed private property parking enforcement officers for private property parking enforcement, (ii) implement conditions for licensing and associated fees and (iii) implement private property parking enforcement policies and procedures. 4. Director, Community Services, Report CS 18-12 82-91 Tender T-3-2012 —Tenderfor Dehumidification Upgrade at Pickering Recreation Complex Arena Recommendation 1. That Report CS 18-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the Dehumidification Upgrade at the Pickering Recreation Complex Arena be received; 2. That Tender No. T-3-2012 submitted by Climate Control Division of Toromont Industries Ltd. in the amount of $281,370.00 (HST included)and a net cost of $253,382.40 be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $315,270 (HST included), including the tender amount and other associated costs, and the total net project cost of $283,910 (net of HST rebate), be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project by transferring $283,910 from the Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. 5. Director, Community Services, Report CS 19-12 92-103 Tender No. T-4-2012 -Tender for the Esplanade Park Walkway and Lighting Replacement Recommendation 1: That Report CS 19-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding Tender No. T-4-2012 for the Esplanade Park Walkway and Lighting Replacement be received; 2. That Tender No. T-4-2012 submitted by TBG Landscape Inc., in the total tendered amount of$239,955.90 as the Base Bid for the Esplanade Park Walkway and Lighting Replacement, and $32,594.40 as the Separate Price 49 Schedule for the Valley Farm Road Sidewalk, for a total of $272,550.30 (HST included) and a net cost of$245,439.99 be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of$385,176 (HST included) and a net project cost of $346,863 (net of HST rebate) including the total tendered amount and other associated costs be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to fund the project as follows: a) the sum of$300,000 as provided for in the 2012 Capital Budget be increased to $314,967 and to be funded from the Parkland Reserve Fund and ; b) the additional sum of$31,896 for the reconstruction of the sidewalk on Valley Farm Road to be funded from Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund; and 5. Further that the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto 6. Director, Community Services, Report CS 25-12 104-117 Tender No. T-11-2012 -Tender for Roof Replacements at Don Beer Arena — Rink 1 and Greenwood Community Centre Recommendation 1. That Report CS 25-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the Roof Replacements at the Don Beer Arena — Rink 1 and Greenwood Community Centre be received; 2. That Tender No. T-11-2012 submitted by T. Hamilton & Son Roofing Inc. in the amount of$507,709.00 (HST included) and a net cost of $457,207.68 be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $559,689 (HST included) and a net project cost of $504,017 (net of HST rebate), including the tender amount and other • associated costs, be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the projects as follows: a) the sum of $420,000, as provided for in the 2012 Don Beer Arena Capital Budget to be financed by the issue of debentures by the Regional Municipality of Durham over a period not to exceed ten years at a rate to be determined; b) the balance amount of$4,950 to be funded from property tax; 50 c) the sum of$79,067, as provided for in the 2012 Community Centres Capital Budget be funded from Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund; d) the annual repayment charges in the amount of approximately $48,600 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing 2013, continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid, and any financing cost to be paid out of the Current Budget; e) the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary in order to give effect to the foregoing; and 5. That the draft by-law attached to this report be enacted; and 6. That the appropriate,City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect hereto. 7. Director, Community Services, Report CS 26-12 118-124 Supply & Delivery of One Telescopic Boom Excavator -2012 Gradall XL4100-IV 6 X 4 Hydraulic Excavator Recommendation 1. That Report CS 26-12 of the Director, Community Services regarding the supply and delivery of One Telescopic Boom Excavator be received; 2. That Quotation No. GR12-0031 dated April 12, 2012, as submitted by Amaco Equipment for the supply and delivery of One Telescopic Boom Excavator in the amount of$340,560.00 (HST extra) be accepted; 3. That the total gross cost of$384,832 (HST included) and a net cost of $346,554 be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows as provided for in the 2012 Capital Budget; a) that the sum of $345,000 be financed by the issue of debentures through the Regional Municipality of Durham for a period not exceeding five years, at a rate to be determined; b) that the balance of$1,554 plus issuing costs be funded from property taxes or other revenues available to theTreasurer; c) that the financing and repayment charges in the amount of approximately $74,260 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2013 and continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid and any financing cost be paid out of the current budget; 51 d) that the Treasurer be authorized to make any changes, adjustments, and revisions to amounts, terms, conditions or take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; 5. That the draft by-law attached to this report be enacted; and 6. Further that the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect hereto. 8. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 09-12 125-134 Cash Position Report as at December 31, 2011 Recommendation It is recommended that report CST 09-12 regarding the 2011 year end cash position from the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. 9. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 10-12 135-140 2012 Annual Repayment Limit for Debt and Financial Obligations Recommendation That Report CST 10-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding the 2012 Annual Repayment Limit for Debt and Financial Obligations be received for information. 10. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 11-12 141-148 Development Charges Reserve Fund — Statement of the Treasurer for the Year Ended December, 2011 Recommendation That Report CST 11-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer respecting the Development Charges Reserve Fund be received for information. 11. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 12-12 149-150 2011 Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund Recommendation That Report CST 12-12 from the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding the 2011 Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund be received for information. 52 12. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 13-12 151-157 2012 Tax Rates and Final Tax Due Dates for All Realty Tax Classes Except for Commercial, Industrial & Multi-Residential Realty Classes Recommendation 1. That Report CST 13-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding the 2012 tax rates be received; 2. That the 2012 tax rates for the City of Pickering be approved as contained in Schedule A of the By-law attached hereto; 3. That the tax levy due dates for the Final Billing be June 27, 2012 and September 27, 2012 excluding the industrial, multi-residential and commercial realty tax classes; 4. That the attached By-law providing for the imposition of the tax rates approved under Recommendation 2 and 3 above, be read three times and approved; 5. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to make any changes or undertake any actions necessary to comply with Provincial regulations including altering due dates or final tax rates to ensure that the property tax billing process is completed; and, • 6. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. 13. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 14-12 158-194 2011 Pre-Audit Balances of Reserves and Reserve Funds Recommendation That Report CST 14-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding the 2011 pre-audit balances of reserves and reserve funds be received for information. 14. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 15-12 195-204 Investment Portfolio Activity for the Year Ended December 31, 2011 Ontario Regulation 292/09 under the Municipal Act, 2001 Recommendation That Report CST 15-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding Investment Portfolio Activity for the Year Ended December 31, 2011 be received for information. 53 15. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CST 16-12 205-207 Purchasing Policy - Revision Recommendation 1. That Report CST 16-12 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding revision to the Purchasing Policy be received; and, 2. That Council approve the revised wording to the Purchasing Policy, Section 17, as presented in Attachment 1 to this report. • Cali 00 54 PI KE I May 22, 2012 NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS PAGES 1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 25-11 Proposed Wireless Cell Tower Installation Summit Telecom Services on Behalf of Rogers Communications Inc. 882 Kingston Road, City of Pickering [At the September 19, 2011 meeting of Council, the matter of Report PD 25-11 was deferred until such time as the public notification comment period has been completed. Please refer to the attached memorandum for further details] Recommendation That Summit Telecom Services be advised that City Council has no objection to the proposed 30 metre high cell tower installation at 882 Kingston Road for Rogers Communications Inc., based on the stealth design and other details submitted with the request City 01 g 5 5 . WOMialatilia[ Memo • To: Debbie Shields May 11, 2012 City Clerk From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Subject: Proposed Wireless Cell Tower Installation Update to Planning & Development Report PD 25-11 Summit Telecom Services on behalf of Rogers Communications Inc. 882 Kingston Road (St. Paul's on the Hill Church) City of Pickering On September 26, 2011, City Council, by Resolution #150/11, deferred consideration of Planning & Development Report PD 25-11 to allow the proponent to address concerns of City Council regarding the public notification process undertaken by the proponent for a proposed 30 metre high cell tower on the St. Paul's on the Hill church property (882 Kingston Road). Councillors expressed concern with the use of the SNAP newspaper as the only source to publish the required notification ad and requested that the applicant expand its notification area beyond Industry Canada's minimum requirement of three times the height of the tower. In response to these concerns Summit Telecom Services placed an additional ad in the October 26, 2011 edition of the News Advertiser (see Attachment#1). Summit Telecom advised that they consulted with Industry Canada regarding City Council's request to expand the radius of notification from three times the height of the tower to a notification area that was approximately 25 times the height of the tower to the west and 15 times the height of the tower to the north. Summit Telecom has declined to increase notification to this expanded area. Summit Telecom advise that they did not receive any comments as a result of the additional newspaper ad, but were provided with two comments from the public as a result of an independent notice prepared and distributed by Councillor O'Connell. A summary of their public consultation process is attached (see Attachment #2), which includes their response to the comments received through Councillor O'Connell's notice. The Planning & Development Department has reviewed the consultation summary and continue to support the recommendations outlined in Planning & Development Report PD 25-11. Staff note that Report PD 25-11 contains a proposed elevation of the tower which incorporates a cross logo on the shroud and we confirm that this component of the tower design will require approval of a separate sign variance application. As Summit Telecom has concluded its additional notice process for this proposed installation, it is now appropriate to bring this matter back to Council for consideration at its May 22, 2012 meeting. 56 /10P / 1110 TB:NC:Id J:\STAFFSbemett\Cell Tower\Rogers Wireless-St.Pauls\St.Pawls on Hill Cell Tower memo-May 2012.doc Attachments May 11, 2012 Page 2 Proposed Wireless Cell Tower Installation Update to Planning & Development Report PD 25-11 • Excerpts from the Pickering News Advertiser Wednesday, October 26, 2011 Attachment 57 • • • PUBLIC NOTICE PROPOSED ROGERS WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS SITE. 30 METRE"STEALTH"TRI-POLE STRUCTURE SUBJECT ANY PERSON may make a written submission to the individuals listed below lay close of business Friday November 25,2011 with respect to Wireless communications this matter. shrouded tri-pole tower, 30 metres high and will PLEASE TAKE NOTICE as the approval of this site and its design is under • occupy a'ground the exclusive jurisdiction of the Government of Canada through Industry compound area of Canada,the City of Pickering has no jurisdiction in this matter other than 203sq m. ' as a.commenting body to Industry Canada and the applicant.For more information contact the local Industry Canada office at(416)973-8215 Location 882 Kingston Road City of,Pickenng PLE ASE FORWARD ALL COMMENTS AND;REQUESTS-FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUAL Legal Description Part of - Lot 27,Range 3, PROPONENT CONTACT:.Cyrus Ghassabeh,'Summit Telecom Services Inc:, Concession Broken Front ' 2645 Royal Windsor Drive,Mississauga Ontario,L5J 1K9,Tel:(905)808 Pickering as in D20998, ' 0073 Fax:(888)279-78q3,£rusisummii tel.com • - Parts 1 to 4,40R2628 Vic` Parts 1 to 3,40R15853;s/T MUNICIPAL CONTACT:Tyler Barnett,Senior Planner,City of Pickering, C0165240,D25962 • One the Esplanade,Pickering,Ontario L1V 6K7 Tel (905)420-4660,Fax Pickering (905)420 7648 tbarnett @cityofpickering com KEY No TO ScaLE facility will include(1) '! , ,PLAN--', f� j I Radio equipment cabinet and fenang around the.'. y(��-"y-T base of the tower.The structure will provide . wireless voice and data services along Kingst;on„ ---�,_„_� �& • Road and the"surrounding ;area z • '� ROOK 0R SITE LOCATION MAP SHEPPAR!} AVE SRE KING51'ON RD ;. Attachment 5 �v-t4;:g'Avti µ` T LECO RV C(S March 26, 2012 Mr.Tyler Barnett Tyler Barnett Senior Planner-Site Planning Planning& Development Department City of Pickering Re: Proposed Rogers Telecommunication Facility C3370 St. Pauls on the Hill Anglican Church—882 Kingston Rd. Dear Mr. Barnett, Please see the below documentation regarding the process followed from last March up until January 2012 regarding the proposed installation of a Rogers Communication tri- pole at 882 Kingston Road in the City of Pickering. We feel that over the course of this process we have satisfied Industry Canada's requirements for consultation and we would like to request concurrence with this process. Understandably this may be required to go before Pickering Council again prior to any approvals. Please take a moment to review what was undertaken in this process and the attached comments and responses from the additional notifications that were mailed out. If you feel there is some information missing that may be relevant to this site please let me know as soon as you get a chance. We have also included the original report, site plan/survey, mail notifications as well as a scan of the ad in the Pickering News Advertiser October 26, 2011. Again, if anything is missing please let me know. Sincerely, Sean Ogilvie Summit Telecom Services Summit Telecom Services Inc. 2645 Royal Windsor Drive,Mississauga,Ontario,L5J 1K9 Attachment , 59 Public Consultation Summary Per Industry Canada's protocol the following notification documents were mailed out to all owners of property within the notification radius. Among other requirements, all notices identified the purpose of public consultation in an effort to facilitate communications between the proponent and the local community. These documents further outlined the timelines to be observed in submitting comments. Consultation Timeline: Initial conversations with Pickering took place in March 2011, with a proposal package received March 22, 2011. Initial public consultation took place from March 22—May 6, 2011 - Original notice place in April issue of SNAP Pickering - Mailed notices to addresses provided by the City of Pickering in accordance with Industry Canada procedures Due to a reduced summer schedule this matter did not go to Pickering council until September 6, 2011 - Issues raised included the use of SNAP for the public notification - Did not agree with the amount of properties notified although it followed the conditions of.Industry Canada's CPC protocol (3x tower height) - Requested we re-do public notification in Pickering News Advertiser - Requested increased notification(25x and 15x the height of the tower west and north) Through discussions with Industry Canada we felt that this request for increase in notification distance was not reasonable and that part of the reason for 3x tower height notification is to encourage smaller and less obtrusive towers—this is noted by Industry Canada in a letter to the City of Toronto regarding their proposed notification distances. Ll late September 2011 we contacted Councilor O'Connell to explain our view that we would redo the public notice but would not redo mailed notifications at the requested distance due to the reasons mentioned in Industry Canada's letter. Our original intent was to try and work out a fair comprise for increased notifications. Due to the high volume of sites we are looking after we could not get immediately on which direction to take with notifications and the Councilor O'Connell sent out additional notifications. Our second public notice was placed in the Pickering News Advertiser October 26, 2011 with a comment expiry date of November 25,2011. We did not receive any comments referencing this notice. We followed up with the planning department and Councilor O'Connell to determine if any comments were received on their end. On November 17, 2011 we received comment from Rick Farrell and responded November 25, 2011. November 30, 2011 we were sent 6 0 Attachment comments from Angela Costar, not specifically directed to Summit however we forwarded our input related to Ms. Costars comments the same day. We did not receive any response. December 15, 2011 we received a response from. Mr. Farrell and we sent our final response to Mr. Farrell January 3, 2012. The comments and responses are attached below. Industry Canada considers the public consultation completed when all reasonable and relevant concerns have been addressed or no comments, questions and concerns are received within the minimum 30-day commenting period. We feel we have addressed all reasonable and relevant concerns by providing information on the existing Safety Code, mitigation measures taken into account for the appearance and screening of the facility and the reasons for our notifications based on the 3x tower height requirement. Comment Summary: While we did not receive any comments from our additional public notice we did respond to comments from the additional notification of Councilor O'Connell. Mr. Farrell concerns stemmed from online research regarding health issues with cell phone towers and did not think that a 30m tower was appropriate for the area. Our responses indicated that Rogers must abide by Safety Code 6, a health code developed by Health Canada and adopted by Industry Canada for the protection of the public. Concerns regarding the validity of this code are not considered relevant to consultation. We further feel that visual impacts have been mitigated by a `stealth' design with the antenna equipment shrouded at the top of the tower with a cross insignia(a similar installation to the existing tower at the Durham Regional Police Station) In addition to the shrouding we have planned for a cedar fence as opposed to chain link and planting of shrubs to help conceal the base of the tower. Mr. Farrell despite our responses did not seem satisfied with the proposal. Ms. Costar's comments were in regard to the notifications and specifically why they were not included in the mail out. Using the email address provided in comments we responded that they were not within range of the 3x tower height notification requirement and therefore would not have been part of the mailing list. There was no response from Ms. Costar. Her comments mention she or her husband wished to speak at council. The planning department of Pickering's original recommendation for this proposal was that they had no objection. We have followed Industry Canada's protocol for consultation and additionally redone the public notice at council's request. For all the additional notifications sent out by Councilor O'Connell we only received the two comments. We feel we have met the requirements of consultation as set out in CPC-2-0-03 Issue 4 and request concurrence for our completion of this process. Nil' _, G 61 Public Comment Record: From: Rick Farrell mailto:farrel @binns.net Sent: November 17, 2011 12:56 PM To: Councillor Jennifer O'Connell Cc:tbarnett @cityofpickering.com; cyrus @summit-tel.com Subject: RE: Proposed Cell Phone Tower at St. Paul's on the Hill Good afternoon Jennifer Thank you for sending a copy of the proposal of the installation of the 30m high "STEALTH" communications tower on the property of St. Pauls on the Hill. As mentioned in previous communications not only is this tower unsightly to the neighbourhood but given the studies on the effect of microwaves on humans the location is a very poor choice.The very fact that there is a nursery school on the property should be the deciding not to install the tower in this location. Take a few minuites to read the articles on this site (http://www.latitudes.org/articlesjelectrical sensitivity articles.html#Children and Mobile) The tower itself is far from being stealth as suggested. I feel Rogers in the interest of being a good neighbor should find a better suited location possibly on the hw401 property allowance and see what the provincial government has to say about the location. Best regards Richard (Rick) Farrell Designer Binns kitchen + bath design 333 Kingston Rd. Pickering . 905-509-5555 ext. 107 cell 416-998-4051 fax 905-509-2222 Email farrell @binns.net . Attachment 62 From: Sean <sean @summit-tel.com Sent: Friday, November 25, 2011 3:25 PM To:farrell @binns.net Cc: Barnett,Tyler<tbarnett @cityofpickering.com>; Councillor Jennifer O'Connell jenniferoconnel I @sym patico.ca Subject: Proposed Rogers Tower at St. Paul's on the Hill Good Afternoon Mr. Farrell, I am writing to you with regards to your concerns raised in response to Rogers Communications proposed telecommunications facility at St. Paul's on the Hill, 882 Kingston Rd. Pickering Ontario. We have noted from your communications that you object to the location of the facility on the grounds that there may be a more suitable location, the tower appearance is unsightly and concerns regarding scientific studies/health effects from these types of facilities. Appearance: As far as appearance is concerned we of course cannot define for you what is considered pleasing or conversely unsightly however, we can tell you that the tower design was chosen to blend as much as possible with the surrounding area. Typically these towers are steel lattice or monopole design with the antenna and radio equipment attached and extending from the sides with a chain link fence around the bottom. In this case it is just three poles with all equipment shrouded at the top with a cross image as it is on the church property. Further the chain link fence at the bottom has been replaced by a more decorative cedar plank fence as well as landscaping treatments where possible to improve the appearance of the base. Further,to clarify the "stealth" designation it is referring to the equipment/antennas and wiring being hidden underneath the shrouding and fence, as opposed to mounted directly on the outside surface of the structure.The "stealth" term is referring to hiding the fact that it is a telecommunications tower, not hiding the overall structure itself. We apologize for any confusion with these terms. Again, we cannot tell you what to consider sightly or unsightly, only that steps have been taken with this specific proposal to more appropriately suit the surrounding area. Location: Selecting a location for these facilities can be a difficult and time-consuming process. In every case the locations are fairly specific due to the limitations in reach and capacity of the frequencies used, further these sites must work together with existing network infrastructure to ensure contiguous and clear network coverage. ft ar;; ( he(t.Pw• ) 6 3 In selecting a location we are given a small area to find a suitable site. Within this area there are numerous factors that affect which sites work and which do not.The first thing we look for is existing towers with available space or other tall structures and buildings to locate on top of. In this specific case neither were available. When this happens a new structure is required. Within the limits of our search area alternate sites were investigated however, no agreement could be reached. Scientific Studies/Health Effects: All radio communication and broadcasting antenna systems must comply with a variety of regulations and specific to your concerns regarding the possible health effects of these installations they must comply with Safety Code 6. Safety Code 6 (SC6) was developed by the Consumer and Clinical Radiation Protection Bureau,Health Canada and implemented by Industry Canada as the exposure standard for the regulation of mobile phones, base stations, Wi-Fi technologies and other radiocommuncation transmitters. SC6 sets safety limits for human exposure to radiofrequency(RF) electromagnetic energy in the frequency range from 3kHz to 300GHz.The safety limits in the code are based on an ongoing review of published scientific studies on the health impacts of radiofrequency electromagnetic energy. From the Wireless Communication and Health handbook—The Government of Canada has determined that there is no clear evidence that the use of wireless communications devices, including cellphones and their networks, is dangerous for human health provided its RF exposure guidelines are respected. In addition to complying with these guidelines most base stations when measured are in reality hundreds or thousands of times lower than the allowable limits under Safety Code 6. As Safety Code 6 was created, reviewed and updated by medical experts, its validity is not subject to consultation under Industry Canada's antenna siting procedures. If you would like additional information on the subject please do not hesitate to contact us. We hope we have been able to satisfactorily address any outstanding concerns you may have had with respect to this proposal. As a part of the Industry Canada procedure must inform you that if you choose to respond further to this communication that it must be done within 21 days of this response. Please feel free to contact us for any further information. . Thank you for contacting us and have a great weekend! Regards, SEAN OGILVIE 64 From: Rick Farrell farrel @binns.net Sent:Thursday, December 15, 2011 10:17 PM To: sean @summit-tel.com sean @summit-tel.com Subject: Fwd: Proposed Rogers Tower at St. Paul's on the Hill Sent from my iPad Subject: Re: Proposed Rogers Tower at St. Paul's on the Hill Good evening Sean Thank you for your technical response regarding the safety of your tower and it's stealth look hiding the wires. You do not mention the one hundred foot height of your tower which would probably be understood better by the residents of the area rather than 30 meters.You also did not mention how this is going to add obviously no value to the surrounding properties; it will obviously drastically reduce property values and make selling properties in it's immediate area next to impossible. I do realize there are government standards in place to regulate the radio wave towers and frequencies as there are for hydro tower lines regarding the corona circulating the lines. Never less there is still no proven studies these frequencies do not cause cancer in children but it cannot also be explained why children who live near them have increased rates of cancer. Find an alternate location away from housing possibly the department of highways would accommodate your tower and I am sure the government would be happy to accept your monthly rental payment.The towers are extremely unsightly and not fitting for a neighborhood, they belong in open areas not populated subdivisions. Best regards Richard Farrell Sent from my iPad L'";.c.0.ti`:- `'C E er ;"+'S- (((JJJ��� ... 5 6 ti- J From:Sean <sean @summit-tel.com Sent:Tuesday,January 3, 2012 2:40 PM To: Rick Farrell <farrel @binns.net> Cc: Subject: Re: Proposed Rogers Tower at St. Paul's on the Hill Good Afternoon Mr. Farrell, Happy Holidays and a Happy New Year! I hope they were both very pleasant. Thank you for the follow up to our response of November 25, 2011. We apologize for the delay in response, things seem to get a little hectic around the holidays/year-end. Before we get into our final response we would like to inform you of the status of this proposal and procedure for going forward. We have received a couple of comments with regards to this proposal and no new comments since the comment deadline. We will offer you our final response below to which we ask that you just let us know if your position is maintained or resolved. From there we will be completing a full package of the comment record to be submitted to the City of Pickering where we will request concurrence for our completion of the Industry Canada process governing these proposals. Please keep in mind that due to the federal regulation of these types of facilities the City of Pickering is considered a commenting agency and does not have final approval authority. The City will review all comments and responses and either concur with the location/process followed or offer non-concurrence at which point we may request guidance from Industry Canada to move forward. With regards to your comments: It appears from your email that you continue to take issue with the proposal based on its appearance/location, health risks and risks associates with property values in the surrounding area. Health &Safety As with our first response these facilities must comply with Health Canada's Safety Code 6. Respecting these limits it has been determined by Health Canada that there is no scientific reason to consider base stations dangerous to the public. The validity of this Health Code (Safety Code 6) is not considered a matter for public consultation however; if you would like more resources on the subject please do not hesitate to ask. Property Values We have noted your concern regarding property values in immediate vicinity as you feel 66 it will not add any value to the surrounding properties and drastically reduce property values. Similar to concerns whether the health regulations are valid, it was decided that discussion of property value are not considered a matter for public consultation.That being said we would like to offer some information on the subject. In the National Antenna Tower Policy Review conducted by the University of New Brunswick (David A. Townsend, Faculty of Law) the issue of whether property values are impacted by the placement of antenna towers was addressed. In this review opinions and evidence submitted by all those who participated covered all three possible outcomes; No,there is no evidence that antenna tower impact upon property values, Yes, there is evidence that property values go up and Yes, there is evidence that property values go down. The recommendation in the national review was that any impact that a proposed antenna installation may have upon the property values of particular parcels of land should not be the subject of antenna consultation.This view is shared by Industry Canada as the CPC-2-0-03 Issue 4 process that we follow does not consider concerns regarding property value reasonable or relevant and therefore not a matter of public consultation. The discussion of property value should be further offset in this specific case as the actual antenna related equipment is camouflaged and the base of the tower screened. If it were not for the requirement of consultation this facility may not have been an issue of contention at all. Again you may not agree with this information however, as mentioned property values are not a matter for public consultation. Our intent was to provide a bit of background information on the issue. If you would like more information relating to this subject please let me know. Appearance/ Location As mentioned before the locations for these towers are fairly specific. Where possible, colocation and roof top deployment are the first options considered. In this case these options were not available. With the exception of the Highway corridor most of the surrounding area is residential in nature. While already limited to a specific area so as to provide appropriate coverage and increased capacity we are further restricted to willing landlords. You are correct that the Ministry of Transportation can be accepting of these facilities however it does not appear possible in this instance. 67 Directly south of the proposed location the large area next to the 401 has in place current proposals for new condos and/or apartments. Other areas in this corridor in the immediate vicinity do not appear to have enough space or appropriate access without moving farther and farther away from the intended coverage areas. It is important to note that although these sites do cover a certain amount of distance these smaller sites are more suited toward capacity issues (the amount of people using a site) and reducing the amount of dropped and interrupted calls and or wireless services such as the [pad you sent your email from. We are aware being closer to residential properties can be a more sensitive area and as such the tower was designed to hide the equipment and screen the base so as to be less visually obtrusive than other types of towers. A similar example can be seen just north of the intersection of Kingston Rd. and Brock Rd. on the east side located at the Durham Regional Police station. It has a similar shrouding and base and features the police logo; it may be worth noting that this tower is 40m in height as opposed to the 30m Rogers has proposed.This site is similarly situated close to residential dwellings. I trust this information is helpful and sincerely hope that we were able to resolve some if not all of your concerns. Again, we ask that you please let us know at your earliest convenience if these concerns are still considered unresolved. All your comments and our responses will be compiled into a record and submitted to the City of Pickering for their final comment. If you would like any more resources on any of the subjects discussed above please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you again for your participation in this process and we wish you all the best in 2012. Regards, SEAN OGILVIE 6 8 From:Angela Costar [mailto:angela.costar @sympatico.ca] Sent: October 14, 2011 1:53 PM To: Roberts, Linda Cc: Ashe, Kevin, Councillor; O'Connell,Jennifer, Councillor Subject: Cell Tower 882 Kingston Road Pickering Importance: High Dear Miss Roberts: At around 8:30pm last evening, a resident of Sheppard Avenue delivered a letter from Jennifer O'Connell regarding the cell tower that is proposed for the church property. At no time have we been informed of this, we are the property next to the church. It was too late to contact you and ask to be put on the Agenda to speak to Council on this matter. My husband Mr.Timothy Costar would very much appreciate being given the opportunity to voice his concerns on this matter. Also we would like to know why we were given no notice of this upcoming item on the Agenda for Monday October 17th 2011. Please let me know if Tim will be added to the Agenda. Many thanks Angela Costar 69 From: Sean sean @summit-tel.com Sent: Wednesday, November 30, 2011 1:10 PM To: angela.costar @sympatico.ca Cc: Barnett, Tyler tbarnett @cityofpickering.com Subject: Proposed Rogers Communications Tower St. Paul's on the Hill, Pickering Ontario Hello Ms. Costar, We are representing Rogers Communications in the siting and municipal process for the above mentioned location and proposed facility. Your email/comments of October 14 were forwarded to us today through the City of Pickering planning department. We hope it is Ok to contact you. This matter went to council back in September where it was decided we must redo some of the notifications due to some issues, most notably a newspaper ad in the Pickering News Advertiser. Because of the additional notifications this was deferred from the follow up council meetings. From your email it seems that although you are next to the church you did not receive any notification of the proposal? Our notifications were mailed out to property owners within 90m of the proposed location and corresponded to addresses provided by the City, if you were on this list the notifications would have actually been received back in early April 2011 when the original notifications were taking place. In any case if this did somehow not make it to you we apologize. You mention that you and/or your husband wish to comment on this proposal. While this will be going back to council at some point we ask that you send any comments, questions or concerns to myself so that we may address them prior to the council meeting. You will of course have a chance to respond to any further information from us. All comments will be included in our final report to council. I hope this information is helpful to you. If you have any comments, questions or concerns regarding the proposed telecommunication facility or the process we follow please do not hesitate to contact me. Email is the typically the preferred method due to its speed and also a written account of any correspondence. Thank you for your consideration of this information. Regards, SEAN OGILVIE 7 rj dlt �� - . - - Report To Planning & Development Committee PICKERING Report Number: PD 25-11 Date: September 6, 2011 - From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Proposed Wireless Cell Tower Installation Summit Telecom Services on behalf of Rogers Communications Inc. 882 Kingston Road City of Pickering Recommendation: 1. That Summit Telecom Services be advised that City Council has no objection to the proposed 30 metre high cell tower installation at 882 Kingston Road for Rogers Communications Inc., based on the stealth design and other details submitted with the request. Executive Summary: Summit Telecom Services, on behalf of Rogers Communications Inc., submitted a proposal to construct a 30 metre high "stealth" type cell tower at 882 Kingston Road, which is the St. Paul's on the Hill church property. Since the submission of the initial proposal, Rogers Wireless has completed its public consultation process in accordance with Industry Canada requirements. The applicant has advised that no public comments were received and are requesting that City Council provide a statement of concurrence in support of the installation. City staff are supportive of the proposed installation. There do not appear to be acceptable opportunities to co-locate this installation with an existing cell tower in the immediate area . The proposed tower and equipment compound have been sited at the southeast corner of the upper parking lot where visual impacts are minimized. In view of the public consultation and Council engagement associated with this proposal, the processing of this application through this report is not considered contrary to Council's recent resolutions respecting cell towers. It is recommended that the applicant be advised that City Council has no objection to the proposed cell tower at 882 Kingston Road, based on the stealth design and other details submitted with the request. Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the proposed development. Sustainability Implications: Enhancement to the wireless coverage at this location will improve business and community communication capability. Report PD 25-11 September 6, 2011 71 Subject: Proposed Wireless Cell Tower Installation Page 2 1.0 Background: Rogers Wireless is proposing to install a 30 metre high cell tower on the St. Paul's on the Hill church property at 882 Kingston Road (see Location Map — Attachment #1). 1.1 The Proposal The proposed installation is a 30 metre high "stealth" type tri-pole communication tower and related ground cabinet. A current example of a "stealth" design tri-pole cell tower exists at the Durham Regional Police station located at Brock Road and Finch Avenue (although that installation is 40 metres in height). The tower is proposed to be located in the southeast corner of the upper parking lot of the church property, adjacent to Kingston Road. The base of the proposed tower is approximately 2.4 metres wide. The ground cabinet, which houses the radio equipment, occupies an area of 1.6 metres by 2.4 metres and is located at the base of the tower. The tower and ground cabinets will be located in a fenced compound measuring approximately 4.6 metres by 6.1 metres. The compound and tower are proposed to be set back approximately 26 metres from Sheppard Avenue and 27 metres from Kingston Road. The antenna equipment at the top of the tower will be hidden by a shroud bearing a cross insignia to reflect the adjacent church land use. Access to the tower and compound for maintenance will be from Sheppard Avenue, through the upper parking lot (see Applicant's Submitted Plan —Attachments #2 & #3). Photo simulations of the proposed installation have been provided to illustrate the design of the tower and its visual impact on the area (see Applicant's Site Selection and Public Consultation Report—Attachment #4). 1.2 Property Description The lands known as 882 Kingston Road are designated Urban Residential Area - Low Density Area in the Official Plan and zoned `R4(DN)' — Detached Dwelling\Day Nursery Zone in By-law 3036 as amended by By-law 1398/81. Surrounding land use include residential uses to the north and west, an automobile service station to the east and Kingston Road to the south. The closest residential property, located on the north side of Sheppard Avenue, is approximately 50 metres from the proposed tower. 2.0 Discussion: 2.1 Required Public Notification has been completed Planning & Development staff are currently in the process of developing a protocol respecting the installation of cell towers for City Council's consideration. In the absence of a City protocol, applicants must follow Industry Canada's requirements as outlined in the Client Procedures Circular (CPC) 2-0-03 Issue 4, entitled "Radiocommunication and Broadcasting Antenna Systems". R port PD 25-11 September 6, 2011 Subject: Proposed Wireless Cell Tower Installation Page 3 The Industry Canada requirements for public consultation require the proponent to consult with the land use authority, and the public within a radius of three times the tower height, measured from the tower base or the outside perimeter of the supporting structure. For structures 30 metres or more in height, proponents are required to place a notice in a local community newspaper circulating in the area. Based on the proposed 30 metre tower height, the proposed installation required notification to eight property owners within a 90 metre radius of the base of the tower. The applicant has indicated that they have provided written notification to the eight adjoining property owners and placed a notice of the proposed installation in the April 2011 edition of SNAP Pickering. The applicant has also confirmed that no public comments were received as a result of the public notification process (see Applicant's Site Selection and Public Consultation Report—Attachment #4). 2.2 Co-location opportunities have been examined The installation and creation of separate, stand alone, radio communication towers and broadcasting facilities is discouraged unless all other co-location options have been explored and are considered unfeasible. The applicant has advised that the closest existing cell tower, located at the base of Dixie Road adjacent to Highway 401, is outside of their search area and does not provide available space to properly serve their coverage objectives. The applicant has indicated that the proposed tower will have space reserved for future antennas, and that all Rogers telecommunications structures are considered for sharing with other carriers. 2.3 Council Resolutions In May 2011, City Council passed resolution 102/11 requesting Industry Canada to cease consideration of communication towers in any residential area of Pickering in order to establish criteria for all matters pertaining to land use for the installation of these towers (see Council Resolutions —Attachment #5). This resolution was a response to a number of cell tower installations that were erected without municipal and\or public consultation, specifically a proposed tower installation under 15 metres at 1820 Whites Road. The Whites Road proposal precipitated an earlier Council resolution in April 2011 requesting that Industry Canada reverse approval of the tower and amend its policies to require municipal consultation on all installations, regardless of height (see Resolution 87/11 in Attachment #5). Currently, municipal and public notification of towers under 15 metres is not required. The applicant has provided confirmation that this proposed installation has been publicly circulated in accordance with Industry Canada requirements and the proposal is now before Committee and Council for consideration. In view of the public consultation and Council engagement associated with this proposal, the processing of this application through this report is not considered contrary to Council's Resolutions. Report PD 25-11 September 6, 2011 73 Subject: Proposed Wireless Cell Tower Installation Page 4 2.4 Proposed Tower Location is acceptable Staff support the proposed location of this cell tower facility. The proposed tower and equipment compound are to be located at the southeast corner of the upper parking lot, maximizing the distance from the low density residential neighbourhood north of Sheppard Avenue. The equipment compound will be screened with wood privacy fencing and the applicant has agreed to augment the existing landscaping by introducing additional shrub plantings on the south side. The shroud design will minimize the visual impact of the tower equipment. Staff recommend that City Council approve the recommendation in this report as the proposed installation has minimal visual impact on the neighbourhood, provides appropriate setbacks from Sheppard Avenue and Kingston Road, and will be appropriately screened at ground level from Kingston Road. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Applicant's Submitted Plan — Site Layout 3. Ap'plicant's Submitted Plan —Tower Elevation 4. Applicant's Site Selection and Public Consultation Report 5. Council Resolutions • • Repo PD 25-11 September 6, 2011 Subject: Proposed Wireless Cell Tower Installation Page 5 Prepared B : Approved/Endorsed By: i A/4 0* // Tyler Barnett Neil Carr' P, RPP Senior Planner— Site Planning Director, P anning & Development Vk Marg Wouters, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design TB:Id Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council / ' . �8, 2A// Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT# / TO r7 b REPORT# PD 25-Il- r, u -1TE — ■1 ■ ■Nom Mill BOURG'WYS MN 11111111 ARATE •HOOL o _ .Y� —a __ _.I �— 11 Illik=LIE 4•� „""'. ,,- �0E-”„T GOLDENRIDGE I =■ JACQUELINE PSI , AIIIIIIII. "'11"1 a .' "11"„`, o WELRUS STREET _moo�� � li mum EWOOD oI'` 11111.11M o=�MR i 4 <Z- m.,0111 En . ujZi_ DMo. a 111111111 ma k `N o��a�'""'N SPRUCE RUSHTON ROAD rv% Ai �■��� MN .1. , —r eallre _ 0I -_MO / 0c*ITE'S LANE o _��- 1a 'moo �� -m1-a, u_ 0111 Nu I ' IIDUNBARTO! IIIIIIIIHHII Iii1III PD ER SHEPPARD AVENUE • UBJECT M II •---w • -OPERTY • 3.•.......sit,,,,,,,„,....,.4,, ...........„... . . . , 01100,40 A BAYFA/R BAPT/ST I CHURCH IBIDI mall511 gyp^` W BAY�� \G‘ liM 4I I City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION B.F.C. Range 3, Pt Lt 27&40R-2628 Pt 1-4,&40R-15853 Pt 1,2,3 OWNER St. Pauls on the Hill DATE July 26,2011 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. Installation#38-Rogers Wireless SCALE 1:5,000 CHECKED BY TB N ata source.• T,ranat Enbrprl.„ Inc. and Its ,u plIe R� Lh. Not.a�Pa1 n of Surwyn of 'in"' PN-7 2005 MPAC and Its suPPllar.. All Ay • 4TTACtii';ENT# 2 TO DEPORT # PD_2°1I INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANT'S SUBMITTED PLAN ROGERS MOBILE INSTALLATION . • (882 KINGSTON ROAD) • • • I • PROPOSED COMPOUND •ERI CONCRETE CURB GUTTER/ CONCRETE CURB+GUS SHEPPARD AVENUE °.9• RO.4/7 ALLOWANCE BETWEEAI CONCESSION I AND RANGE 3 ARCF. -''CONCRETE CURB+ GUTTER PIN 26353-0396(Ln ASPHALT CURB CUT CONCRETE UEWALJC I / __OH-,_ ._ ._.OPLD / ae ____llL_ IIII llI___Ill__-_111___J1L____.Ill f�L o} . `01. --ILL_____ __ y�N CON*' CURB ) I' 90.87 Y- _ N71'34'40�_T__ (a! `o BOARD.�ENGE x116.42(P78MEAS)`'�1.'1`°-_�L____ul----� 1005 TIM M' 1p11, -r0>>, i MLS- `0> i - ��!SIB _ BASE 7�*":—.ate. .,oyy I I I I`O}.1 I�a� N71'34'401 01 1 71 I 1 1 1 1 1 I` 1• St.Paal'S $ 0 1 I I I I I I I 1 1 I °'i,F o S On The Hill I I I I I I I 1 I 1 Anglican Church b ••••) -1. AB • 0'� 03� ASPHALT i Z # ■.- oyti . d • .• fi 0 •FF-104.42 .. - S1 p^. CONCRETE 164; I 1 1 1 I )b COMPOUND I I 4 I /tai N L I ,..5. •.NC'ETE UR: `o�� °:..a 1 0 oy Iqe U z. ' •MLS ..�j.. IIIF�s�. • X01�- ---- X01 alpy° ,11 ..,f-- .r pAYC1RE _. _ 90 I 101 ,°1ig 16 '-11I�L-Q4ti5 0U1 - /' WOODEN CURBS TO BE / 1pA- I IAi�. • REPLACED MTH CONCRETE CURBING i .5k FLAN .B - --R__� 51 7ART 1-_ L / A01/ /�'/—7/ j%j L// / / / // //".....✓/ / / / / j// �L .N / 9e __I�. J / / / / / /' 25961•o91b // •q0 BHT 2 / 0 ' 4 ••09. —v:574-00 p51N PART�// '/ D a f>�C • _�_— P:',R 5 glEGi LO AN �>T�I- _ .\ •\ •\ `\-\Z--6 ,`, \\ f —C 9s��Ncl\2 CU'\\ °'' 9� 4•FIRE 7i.A∎� HYDRANT .4.1 P1 �� SIGN T0.BE 9115 II 99oS I 98' 94 RELOCATED 95p1 _/467' C i E.LINE OF ITCH 66'5 �-�y''°, = i i\V�V ----- 111.E p699 40' EDGE OF ASPHALT • • ell THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING& • DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,PLANNING INFORMATION SERVICES DIVISION MAPPING AND DESIGN,JULY26,2011. ATTACHMENT#w 3 TO • R NUR I ft PD 25—1 7 - INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANT'S SUBMITTED PLAN ROGERS MOBILE INSTALLATION (882 KINGSTON ROAD) • • PROPOSED COMPOUND LAYOUT PLAN 6.10 ELEVATION PLAN 4.18 NOT TO SCALE 1.62 a • NS N3 N8 t N8 j a \ v N N7 C N1 I/ Q I CO . \ ^ / NS . \\ 0 ` (A) SEE ELEVATION PLAN 0 E _ — — N @T3j� si _ _ Q M 3).„ NBT372o PART 2 A 2n 8 ITS ri ad >n N71'510E z P(WIT) SSIB• 3.00 -i9 4 (WIT) Z I 1 PART 1 g, E s 8.10 ID N71'55'101 •IB V L • THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING& DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,PLANNING INFORMATION SERVICES DIVISION MAPPING AND DESIGN,JULY 26,2011. • ATTACHMENT# TO 7 8 ..■ REPORT # ... SUMMLT III TELECOM SERVICES May 6, 2011 VIA EMAIL Mr.Tyler Barnett Senior Planner—Site Planning Planning and Development Department City of Pickering Dear Mr. Barnett, Re: Rogers Site C3370 Proposed Wireless Communications Structure—Kingston Road& Fairport Part of Lot 27 Range 3, Broken Front Concession—882 Kingston Rd. Pickering, ON Summit Telecom Services Inc., on behalf of Rogers Communications Inc., would like to submit the.following site information package along with the accompanying site plans for a proposed telecommunications structure located at the above noted location and in accordance with Industry Canada and the City of Pickering procedures. All information included in this package should help to provide the necessary details regarding this proposal and explain the background on the reasons for this proposal and the process involved. Included herein: • Background information on the proposal • Location and site selection process • Tower type and installation • Public Notification documents in accordance with CPC-2-0-03 Appendix 2 • Site plan detailing the proposed installation • Site plan application form and.fee ($2500.00) • Title Report . I trust the information included in this package will be helpful for the City's consideration of this proposal. Sincerely, Sean Ogilvie Summit Telecom Services Inc. Summit Telecom Services Inc. 2645 Royal Windsor Drive,Mississauga,Ontario,L5J 1 K9 ATTACHMENT# TO REPORT # PD 2 -1 7 Q RJCLWLO1 oo DOD TELECOM SERVICES Introduction: This proposal is being submitted on behalf of Rogers Communications Inc., ("Rogers") in an effort to facilitate improved wireless services within the City of Pickering in an area where coverage has been calculated to be inadequate by Rogers radio frequency engineers and network planners. Telecommunication companies such as Rogers make large investments every year on improving wireless networks both in the "reach" of these networks and their capabilities to handle increased traffic. The need to improve these networks arises from the increases in demand for wireless services such as voice and data, with advancements in technology and an increasing number of wireless technology users. Coverage deficiencies such as this area in Pickering can result in a lack of service or dropped and interrupted calls. Wireless services may not be top priority for every Canadian however; many rely on wireless networks for emergency services such as police,firefighters and other first responders. For this specific site in Pickering, Ontario located at 882 Kingston Road, a new telecommunications structure or "tower"was determined necessary as there was a lack of other options including sharing opportunities or locating on top of an existing tall structure. Many people do not realize the limitations in the reach of radio waves while still remaining reliable inside and out of buildings; as such the location for a new site is very specific. Please keep in mind that a new structure or tower is not built out of convenience for a communications company. A new structure is built at a very large cost and is only considered necessary after an extensive search for alternate options. The purpose of the following document is to provide information about the procedure, selection and proposed structure in order to facilitate the federally regulated Industry Canada process. Procedure: In lieu of a municipal protocol governing radio communications and broadcasting antennas, Summit Telecom Services will be following Industry Canada's default process as set out in their Spectrum Management and Telecommunications document CPC-2-0- 03 (Issue 4). As these installations are regulated under federal policy, provincial legislation, municipal by-laws and site plan control do not apply to these facilities.The Industry Canada procedure provides the requirements outlining land use and public consultation and the 00000000 Summit Telecom Services Inc. 2645 Royal Windsor Drive,Mississauga,Ontario,L5J 1 K9 O ATTACHMENT#__V TO 8 0 REPORT # PD__2$—I 1 " ...' summiT MEIN TELECOM SERVICES general requirements to be satisfied, including but not limited to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, Health Canada's Safety Code 6 and Transport and NAV Canada regulations. While final approval of these proposals falls under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Government of Canada through Industry Canada, local concerns related to land-use are important elements to consider in the siting of these facilities. We will work together with the land-use authority and accommodate all reasonable concerns as best possible where they do not unduly impede the process of siting new facilities. Proposed Location: In the initial stages of Rogers network development, an area centering roughly on the . intersection of Kingston Road and Fairport Road calculated as the best possible location to address any coverage deficiencies. A new telecommunications facility in this area will decrease deficiency while extending the reach and capacity of the existing network. Site acquisition and network implementation specialists investigated this search area for any infrastructure that would allow for the deployment of a new telecommunications facility without the construction of a new tower. Our search in this area revealed that the closest existing telecommunications tower is approximately 900m east along Highway 401. This existing site is outside the required search area and further, at only 30m in height with multiple levels of antennae already in operation on this tower, we would not be able to efficiently service this market. The surrounding search area does not feature any other existing structures with the appropriate height to achieve the necessary coverage objectives. With alternate options exhausted it was determined that a new structure was necessary to efficiently reach and maintain the coverage objectives. d e 0 -1 Espy f ,.-J~ Proposed Tower s ac �z9, a + , (882 Kingston Road) �,c�`� �" .' DLNBAR ON , ' zz tvSH S1 SP f `'•cp -' sap LAS EK g COU.ECTOP$ / Model 1401 Park aC 135 (�,�. ✓ �b i r .4 w 4. =d, Radom t k .-1'ter , ,' i` Park �. 9.499 roe : s/ sr��e BAY RID( WOODLANDS Handxomb 3 IIf�1G`� g,�y' M�rral Q s, ,�,` ' Z2 Park FAIRPORT °` f 1. Bran Rob•"`� °m Q Corte o- •CS, / FRENCHMANS BAY P.miler Tr, ,k _,.de Sandbar Rd p Q�. 4 COLLECTORS' O •.o,� WE 1 T SHORE 4 v 2000 feat A 1 1liCi-ii•f1Er,IT ,C: RcNURT PD -1..L....____. ,y ... SUMMIT . ... TELECOM SERVICES I • it t p':II:.-*11 . •." . . • • 1 1 ti I I I . - -r--.44..4i A r i_r_ir.......,r,:,.,..:,., /.! . _(../ ... SUMMIT ,, .,_, ■■■ TELECOM SERVICES I I 4. , Alicivirtin . �, Al..,, ..,:11 4. 1.....3... .riii, '''::. 1 1 4. ,t. .. ,,c4,,.... ..; ,... ...•_-!,....r" 1 ATTACHMENT# TO ■■■ REPORT # PD O �)J 8 5 U.. SUMMIT ■MI TELECOM SERVICES • PUBLIC NOTIFICATION PACKAGE In accordance with Industry Canada's CPC-2-0-03 (Issue 4) —Appendix 2 • §UFHl ht T @I @Ssm§@Pfis @§IRS: ?@4§F4@y I WIn s @F MI§§I§§@ug @t®R€@Fl @i L§4 I § • O 6 ATTACHMENT# TO ::; SUMM!T REPOR 7 NEE TELECOM SERVICES 90M NOTIFICATION RING SUBJECT PROPERTY PLAN i500 Y O 900It ARM IERE CCMCD rittes RAYS eY E ^ l r— 04 4, cum Amst 24, sego —t54 N k / � A CAST a-4-Li i(&4 LOl t# I RA*. 3 21,,,E I \ f 90 m. NORFICATXV4 RAD US FRIam MOPOsED 101vER MucnURE POI t E E E E E E ® O '3U fl�i1 feleeefil§@FUI€e§IAA: ?@4§Reyel Winfl§eF®flue,Mieei§§edge,®Alegie;I_§d 1I0 • ATTACHMENT# TO S SUMMIT REPORT # Po- ... , ... TELECOM SERVICES Public Consultation Summary: Per Industry Canada's protocol the following notification documents were mailed out to all owners of property within the notification radius.Among other requirements, all notices identified the purpose of public consultation in an effort to facilitate communications between the proponent and the local community. These documents further outlined the timelines to be observed in submitting comments. Industry Canada considers the public consultation completed when all reasonable and relevant • concerns have been addressed or no comments, questions and concerns are received within the minimum 30-day commenting period. We are pleased to report that during our public consultation period dated March 22, 2011 and concluding May 6, 2011 we received no written or verbal questions or comments. In this regard we would like to note the conclusion of and successful participation in the public consultation process. We feel this site keeps within the spirit of the CPC guidelines and the tower type successfully blends in with the surrounding area. We have not encountered any opposition to this proposed installation. §wnmiI ff31 @t;eR1§@FVI€@§IRE: 26$§liey @I WIRd§eF®Fiv81 Mi§§i§§@d1@;®Rt @flee L§J I I�� o 8 ATTACHMENT# TO ::: s u m m I T REPORT FD 25-1 L ■EI TELECOM SERVICES March 22,2011 Current Resident/Owner, Summit Telecom Services is sending out this package on behalf of Rogers Communications Inc.to notify you of the proposed installation of a Rogers Communications Inc.wireless telecommunications tower. Through the federally regulated Industry Canada process for radio communication and broadcasting antenna systems we are required to notify any owners of property within a 90m radius of the proposed tower location. The documents included in this package are intended to provide you with information on the proposed location of the tower,tower type,tower description and the attestation to abide by or exceed all standards as set forth by Industry Canada. Included in this package is the letter of notification explaining the basics of the tower(location, purpose,regulations)and a copy of the public notice to appear in the local publication SNAP Pickering. The purpose of this package is to allow for comments by the local community and for Summit Telecom and Industry Canada to address all.questions and concerns before moving ahead with the project. The appropriate contact information can be found at the end of the Letter of Notification and/or Public Notice and comments may be submitted until the closing date of Friday May 6,2011. Sincerely, Sean Ogilvie Summit Telecom Services Inc. Summit Telecom Services Inc. 2645 Royal Windsor Drive,Mississauga,Ontario,L5J 1 K9 • ❑❑❑ 'nI InI I�+�51�� ATTACHMENT#,9 TO 8 9 ❑❑ 5 lJ t1UL RE LJ U 7 REPORT # I'D 25--1/ ODD TELECOM SERVICES • Letter of Notification:Site C3370 As a part of the federally regulated process for telecommunication installations Summit Telecom Services is inviting public comment on a proposed Rogers Communications Inc.tower installation within the City of Pickering,Ontario.Any clarification,questions or concerns please submit comments to Summit Telecom Services via mail,Email,phone or fax to the address listed below.For more information on the Industry Canada process regarding these installations please visit www.ic.gc.ca/antenna or contact the presiding Industry Canada office below.The final submission date for comments is close of business May 6,2011. Purpose: • Summit Telecom Services Inc.on behalf of Rogers Communications Inc.is proposing a telecommunications antenna installation to improve wireless and data coverage for the City of Pickering and specifically in the area of Kingston Road and Sheppard Avenue. Existing towers in the area have been determined unsuitable to achieve the desired coverage for the Rogers wireless network.The new tower will be considered for sharing with future applicants. Proposed Location: • The tower is to be located on a section of private property located at 882 Kingston Road corresponding to the GPS co-ordinates: Latitude:43 49 25.9,Longitude:-74 06 28.1. • Legal Description: Part of Lot 27, Range 3,Concession Broken Front Pickering as in D20998,Parts 1 to 4,40R2628&Parts 1 to 3,40R15853;S/T C0165240,025962 Pickering--4,.., ,t6p--:,? 4,----•, .. ,.. , .. ,-. ,e.5--- 1, ,,-,,plit. ,., . \ `ice t,, a'v. 3: -: r r it ,r A `, ` %. off,` '4.*.'-• h. Tr ��. ,p�.t _ $�;.J _ .yam'' '` ."—.7.---i":- � ��[r , ,•1 .-- � a y e9p�r 'c ` tor: .+� *. , r r;o.ol, +L ♦ irz ''.,t y '. "k s' ./�, '!''' ' - �1 t1,•- r+, ¢`Dic,t Hobe /-'' Y .'1 3. , , ', :+ C sy `„vim 0,, oil ,o. le - ." ' , , II ICi fC ji), s. Li>re3°G ,urV"0, •a al 484 m `' • . .. . . . . . . Summit Telecom Services Inc. 2645 Royal Windsor Drive,Mississauga,Ontario,L5J 1K9 n A TTACHMENT# 7 TO PD ❑E❑ TELECOM SERVICES Health Canada: • Rogers Communications Inc.attest that the radio installation described in this notification package will be installed and operated on an ongoing basis so as to comply with Health Canada's Safety Code 6,as may be amended from time to time,for the protection of the general public including any combined effects of nearby installations within the local radio environment. Public Access: • Areas where public access is prohibited will have access controls and be clearly marked. Fencing will be installed around the base of the tower and shelter. Environmental Assessment: • Rogers Communication Inc.attest that the radio antenna system described in this notification package is excluded from environmental assessment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. Transport/NAV Canada: • The structure will meet Transport Canada's aeronautical obstruction marking requirements (painting and/or lighting)as set out in Canadian Aviation Regulations Standard 621.19,Standards Obstruction Markings. Engineering Principles: • Rogers Communications Inc.attests that all aspects of the proposed wireless installation will follow sound engineering principles including construction and structural adequacy Installation Description: • • The compound will feature a 30m tall tri-pole tower with a ground shelter for equipment.The • antennas will be hidden behind a decorative shroud and a wooden fence and landscaping will help screen the equipment and compound.The area including access will occupy approximately 203sq.m.The site will feature three initial antennas(850&1900 MHz UMTS/HSPA)with space reserved for futures. ti I I ` fl; I -0" t . • EXAMPLE OF 30M STEALTH TOWER ELEVATION DRAWING AND APPLICATION 0C11:100 0 0 0 Summit Telecom Services Inc. 2645 Royal Windsor Drive,Mississauga,Ontario,L5J 1 K9 ATTACHfv■ENT#_ TO 9 ::: SUMMIT RE.t'OR I # PD_25-11 MM. TELECOM SERVICES Land-use Requirement: • In lieu of a municipal protocol governing radio-communications and broadcasting antennas Summit Telecom Services will be following Industry Canada's default process as set out in their Spectrum Management and Telecommunications CPC-2-0-03(Issue 4) Industry Canada: • General information relating to antenna systems is available through Industry Canada's Spectrum Management and Telecommunications website (http://www.ic.gc.ca/antenna) Closing date for submission of public comments is Friday May 6,2011. Contact: Summit Telecom Services Industry Canada City of Pickering Cyrus Ghassabeh Room 909,9th Floor Tyler Barnett—Senior Planner 25645 Royal Windsor Drive 55 St.Claire Av.East One the Esplanade Mississauga,Ontario L5J 1K9 Toronto,Ontario M4T 1M2 Pickering,ON L1V 6K7 Tel:905.808.0073 Tel:(416)973-8215 Tel:(905)420-4660 Fax:888.279.7863 Fax: (416)954-3553 Fax:(905)420-7648 Email:cyrus @summit-tel.com spectrum.toronto @ic.gc.ca tbarnett4i cityofpickering.com Summit Telecom Services Inc. 2645 Royal Windsor Drive,Mississauga,Ontario,L5J 1 K9 9 2 ATTF1CHidiENT#_!1 TO REPORT # PD 25— _.. • PUBLIC NOTICE PROPOSED ROGERS WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS SITE 30 METRE"STEALTH"TRI-POLE STRUCTURE SUBJECT: ANY PERSON may make a written submission to the individuals listed below by close of business May 6,2011 with respect to this matter. • Wireless communications shrouded tri-pole tower, PLEASE TAKE NOTICE as the approval of this site and its design is under 30 metres high and will the exclusive jurisdiction of the Government of Canada through Industry occupy a ground Canada,the City of.Pickering has no jurisdiction in this matter other than compound area of as a commenting body to Industry Canada and the applicant. For more 203sq.m. information contact the local Industry Canada office at(416)973-8215 • Location:882 Kingston PLEASE FORWARD ALL COMMENTS AND REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL Road,City of Pickering INFORMATION TO THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUAL: • Legal Description: Part of PROPONENT CONTACT:Cyrus Ghassabeh,Summit Telecom Services Inc., Lot 27,Range 3, 2645 Royal Windsor Drive,Mississauga,Ontario, L5J 1K9,Tel:(905)808- Concession Broken Front 0073,Fax:(888)279-7863,cyrus @summit-tel.com Pickering as in D20998, Parts 1 to 4,40R2628& MUNICIPAL CONTACT:Tyler Barnett,'Senior Planner,City of Pickering, Parts 1 to 3,40R15853;S/T One the Esplanade,Pickering,Ontario L1V 61(7,Tel:(905)420-4660, Fax: C0165240, D25962 (905)420-7648 tbarnett @cityofpickering.com Pickering KEY PLAN (NOT TO SCALE) • The facility will include(1) Radio equipment cabinet 1iior-i S and fencing around the base of the tower.The structure will provide wireless voice and data services along Kingston Road and the surrounding X area. SM YERx)K DR SITE LOCATION MAP La- Sal • -D AVE SITE • KINGSTON RD ` - =1 E Y _ TA�NiV1tUT�o._TO i 10 11 _. �' cI REPORT Wg D, a E III a W ea $b ' s 3Y q hR� 9 F, V 6q tl g v.'! g�g'"'"L.�pp'I' Lghg'yky gkg gdg kg�g'[p'' kl 5a pp rr Vy yZ C7 i n2 a� q0q` SppFg3g3� kkb $88 b$ E II b8 29d Z 1-pp66 F OZ— [p 56®. 6p 46 88�#3;✓rab 81— o _ e W Xi 8 a,_l� g i b �w g 1-1 �� n�W d i@ sG @ N Z Y— gEgg p 1 o 2,cra-3 . 4 $$s !B o %° gill € ig F @ MI : . " °a !9 1 dim poi.." 1 -4 6 !fill 45 p$ 9 1 /n'Li'iii Id p$p$'yb c �o z Sv >!b s 4 .lia 3 gi i -1 kg O . ,JLI E. ak'oi—bl ZO eB i1e"" id t?ggOgLC"rO@P OOP .4- `I egg ,ry �<6az�� Hi L_ L c=lam lPia l mtl.tRm.abn', gale a a 'ggke d @ Ag 3 i Fl a a I w A O a r! 11 I \\ a II §1 :=11111.11.1.1111111.11111M: `�S\d0, id 0 I= g \ K\\ I\, 6 1'\�1\° a si 01 LLNd�5 \ { _ • \ r • a tg� I a _ - Aa-' I 1 :\ '4.. f Pi g e Q I --- I "``s °,� '� s `, ? I 2 1 i i i ill ! g I W IS - Pwik i.,\ . ";11- a I ee age Z ` ii! '" g —Lus { 2 I a \ \ ° \ I ® ® ® O O® ©®® fn� -9i • , . -2,1 \t a ` \2 w a _ ® ® r i -=. IJ ri-_ \ CD'. \ _I I wcro.ix . i , ;al,' g j rte:i °� \ to• - ® I f I! .wa„x ;i ``, -: ,°�k 2e . _ 1l -1 \ 1\\ gi Y $ ®0n* Q o a k 1 \ \\ a p \ 1 \i g, .—,+— ---,„may 4.".____w_. `` !® \ \ \ \� E� . , 1 1 \. II 4 IE \ \\ I \\ j -$ II \\ I. \ \I \ al 6 I\I \I\ I,\ \ _" 111i11 fpn --T \ \ \ 4 ■-\ eIa' _ — -- 11 \\ tom© ,, 10. k \ X11 \ 1 IN i \\ .6 ! a g II m 1 \\\1 d ^I° • I I aW 3 12 1 \\ x p Rf E E E E E f E I S g 4 @i i I !1'! i R ;^,. R ; I I g i \\'' r l 1 a trig I 1 <`p gggi do$a a P 0116 1 6 S i n g: €g ATTACHMENT#e TO 9 4 REPORT # PD TITLE REPORT TO: LORI ELDERSHAW FROM: ZADIHA IQBAL SUBJECT: C3370 1. Registered Owner: THE INCUMBENT AND CHURCHWARDENS OF ST.PAUL'S ON THE HILL,DUNBARTON 2. Registry System FEE SIMPLE-LT CONVERSION QUALIFIED 3. Legal Description: PT LT 27,RANGE 3,CON BROKEN FRONT PICKERING AS IN D20998, PTS 1 TO 4.40R2628 &PTS 1 TO 3,40R15853;S/T C0165240,D25962 PICKERING 4. Property Identifier: 26317-0035 (LT) 5. Encumbrances: 6. Easements THE BELL TELEPHONE CO.OF CANADA • 0 6TTACHF ENT#_ 5 TO RG PUR i pp CC,, _Z - I� 7 5 Excerpt from April 18, 2011 Council Minutes Resolution #87/11 • Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Ashe WHEREAS the City of Pickering was recently informed that Industry Canada has approved a cell phone tower at 1820 Whites Road, Amberlea Presbyterian Church without any consultation with the City of Pickering; and WHEREAS the Federal Government through Industry Canada, refuses to recognize the important role that municipalities play in regards to local land use matters and specifically where cell phone towers may be situated; and WHEREAS local residents residing in the Amberlea/Foxhollow Neighbourhood are outraged, having become aware through 3rd party information that such an intrusion can be erected in a residential community; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Federal Government through Industry Canada be advised that the City of Pickering objects to the installation of a cell phone tower at 1820 Whites Road and that they reverse its approval and enter into discussions with the City of Pickering in order to find a more appropriate location; AND FURTHER that the Federal Government be required to amend their policies and procedures for the approval of cell phone and radio towers to allow for local municipalities consultation on all applications and to not approve applications • objected to by the local municipality; AND FURTHER that consultation takes place through the Federation of Municipalities on establishing guidelines to assist Industry Canada in setting • criteria that can be used by municipalities to assess each application submitted for towers; AND that a copy of this motion be forwarded to FCM to be included for endorsement at its annual meeting AND that copies of this resolution be sent to Dan McTeague, MP for Pickering/Scarborough East, the Honourable Tony Clement, Minister of Industry. and the Honourable Gary Goodyear, Minister of State(Science and Technology). Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote 4T TACK''IEi1T#__ 5 TO 9 6 REPORT # PD.a5-1 1 Excerpt from May 16th, 2011 Council Meeting Minutes Resolution #102/11 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Ashe WHEREAS On April 18, 2011 the Council for the Corporation of the City of Pickering formally opposed the installation of a communications tower at 1820 Whites Road in the City of Pickering; and WHEREAS hundreds of area residents have signed a petition objecting to the installation of a communications tower at 1820 Whites Road and other City locations; WHEREAS the City of Pickering received a response from Industry Canada in regards to our request to relocate the proposed communications tower at 1820 Whites Road and have ordered all communication tower installations cease on this site until Industry Canada can review this matter; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the Council for the Corporation of the City of Pickering requests the Government of Canada cease further consideration of communication towers in any residential area of Pickering in order to commence discussions with the City of Pickering to establish criteria based on mutual respect for all matters pertaining to land use in the City of Pickering for the installation of communication towers throughout our community. AND THAT a copy of this resolution be sent to Durham Regional Council, Corneliu Chisu, MP Elect for Pickering/Scarborough East, Chris Alexander, MP Elect Ajax Pickering, the Honourable Tony Clement, Minister of Industry and the Honourable Gary Goodyear, Minister of State (Science and Technology). Carried Unanimously on a Recorded Vote c� e4 Fll PICKERING Ma y 22, 2012 By-laws 7210/12 Being a by-law to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for the purpose of enforcing parking restrictions on private property. (By- law attached) 7211/12 Being a by-law to create and regulate Park Vendor Permits within City parks. [Refer to Executive Pages 70 to 73] 7212/12 Being a by-law to govern the proceedings of Council, any of its committees, the conduct of its Members, and the calling of meetings. [Refer to Executive Pages 4 to 31] 7213/12 Being a by-law to amend By-law No. 6604/05 [Refer to Executive Pages 78 to 81] 7214/12 Being a by-law to authorize the Don Beer Arena — Rink 1 Roof Replacement project in the City of Pickering and the issuance of debentures in the amount of $420,000. [Refer to Executive Pages 116 to 117] 7215/12 Being a by-law to authorize the supply and delivery of One Telescopic Boom Excavator in the City of Pickering and the issuance of debentures in the amount of$345,000. [Refer to Executive Pages 123 to 124] 7216/12 Being a by-law to adopt the estimates of all sums required to be raised by taxation for the year 2012 and to establish the Tax Rates necessary to raise such sums and establish the final due dates for the residential, pipeline, farm and managed forest realty tax classes. [Refer to Executive Pages 155 to 157] 7217/12 Being a by-law to dedicate Block 114, Plan M-1189, Blocks 8, 9 and 10, Plan 40M-1696, part of Block L, Plan 418, designated as Part 1, Plan 40R-27315 and Blocks 37 and 38, Plan 40M-2469, Pickering, as public highways. (By-law attached) 7218/12 Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3037, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham Part of Lt 17, Concession 3, City of Pickering AA15/11. SP-2008-01(R2)) (By-law attached) 9 8 The Corporation of the City of Pickering 7210/12 Being a by-law to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for the Purpose of Enforcing Parking Restrictions on Private Property WHEREAS pursuant to section 15(1) of the Police Services Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.15, as amended, a municipal council may appoint persons to enforce the by-laws of the municipality; and WHEREAS pursuant to section 15(2) of the said Act, municipal by-law enforcement officers are peace officers for the purpose of enforcing municipal by-laws; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the following people be hereby appointed as municipal law enforcement officers in and for the City of Pickering in order to ascertain whether the provisions of By-law 2359/87 are obeyed and to enforce or carry into effect the said By-law and are hereby authorized to enter at all reasonable times upon lands municipally known as: a) 1203 St. Martin's Drive Stuart Suckling 2. The authority granted in section 1 hereto is specifically limited to that set out in section 1, and shall not be deemed, at any time, to exceed the authority set out in section 1. 3. This appointment shall expire upon the persons listed in section la) ceasing to be an employee of St. Martin's Anglican Church or upon St. Martin's Anglican Church ceasing to be agents for 1203 St. Martin's Drive, whichever shall occur first. 4. The provisions of this by-law shall come into force and take effect on the day of the final passing thereof. By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 22nd day of May, 2012. David Ryan, Mayor Debbie Shields, City Clerk Lary Memo 99 To: Debbie Shields May 2, 2012 City Clerk From: Denise Bye Supervisor, Property & Development Services Copy: Director, Planning & Development Division Head, Engineering Services Manager, Development Control Manager, Development Review & Urban Design Subject: Road Dedication By-law Reserves: Blocks 8, 9 and 10, 40M-1696; Block 114, M-1189; Part Block L, Plan 418 (now Part 1, 40R-27315) Turning Circle: Blocks 37 and 38, 40M-2469 - File: Roadded.535 When Plans 418, M-1189 and 40M-1696 were registered, the above-mentioned reserve blocks were conveyed to the City and were intended to be dedicated as public highways upon the development of adjacent lands and the extensions of Cowan Circle and Gillmoss Road. As Cowan Circle and Gillmoss Road have now been constructed to support the adjacent development within Plan 40M-2469 to standards satisfactory to permit public access, the required road dedication by-law should be enacted. Further, the Subdivision Agreement relating to Plan 40M-2469 requires that Blocks 37 and 38 be conveyed to the City for temporary turning circle purposes until such time as Gillmoss Road is extended westerly, connecting it with the existing section of Gillmoss Road, east of Rosebank Road. As the Owner has now conveyed these blocks for turning circle purposes, they should also be dedicated as public highway. Attached are a location map and a draft of the required road dedication by-law for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for May 22, 2012. • DB:bg J:\Prop&Dev1ROADDED\SEC\535 Cowan_Gilmoss\memos\Memo to Debbie 2012 ciao Attachments 100 in I 1111 0 , G O4P� . Q , O :Y 0 o CO RT 11 12 v tIll• ` MAITLAND DRIVE ° z I FI STI ID , Li] Q 0 w C/) CL w _ O CC — 0 0 Z z = • RT if 0 CC • ( 1411914 F 41 1111.COWAN CIRCLE 7... , BLOCKS 8, 9 & / 40M 1696 O PART LOCK L, �� PLAN 418 t (PART 1 — 4 R-z 27315) GILLMOSS /CILLMOSS ROAD - +URNING CIRCLE -LOCKS 37& 38 401W-2469 PETTICOAT CREEK CONSERVATION AREA ROUGEMOUNT W °Q / //1 7-0 °ft . a 0 'R City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Block 8-10,40M-1696, Block 114, M-1189, PART 1,40R-27315& Blocks 37&38, Plan 40M-2469 OWNER City of Pickering DATE Apr.26,2012 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. Roadded. 535 • SCALE 1:3,000 CHECKED BY DB Loto bourn..: 3 T.rcn.t Enterprl... Inc. and It. supplier.. All right. R...rv.d. Not a plan of eurv.y. PN-1 .2012 MPAC and it. .uppller.. All right. R...rv.d. Not c plan of Survey. 101 The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. Being a by-law to dedicate Block 114, Plan M-1189, Blocks 8, 9 and 10, Plan 40M-1696, part of Block L, Plan 418, designated as Part 1, Plan 40R-27315 and Blocks 37 and 38, Plan 40M-2469, Pickering, as public highways. Whereas The Corporation of the City of Pickering is the owner of certain lands lying within Pickering and wishes to dedicate them as public highways. Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Block 114, Plan M-1189, Blocks 8, 9 and 10, Plan 40M-1696 and part of Block L, Plan 418, designated as Part 1, Plan 40R-27315, are hereby dedicated as public highway. (Cowan Circle) 2. Blocks 37 and 38, Plan 40M-2469, are hereby dedicated as public highway. (Gillmoss Road) By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 22nd day of May, 2012. GM David Ryan, Mayor Debbie Shields, City Clerk Roadded.535 V ci c PICKERING - Memo To: Debbie Shields May 17, 2012 City Clerk From: Ross Pym Principal Planner— Development Review Copy: Director, Planning & Development Subject: Amending By-law for Zoning Amendment Application A 15/11 Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited Part Lots 17 & 18, Concession 3 City of Pickering Amending By-law 7218/12 Statutory Public Meeting Date December 5, 2011 Planning & Development Committee Date April 2, 2012 Purpose and Effect of By-law To amend the zoning by-law to permit a commercial block for a variety of commercial uses, including office, retail, personal service and restaurant, and for 104 residential dwelling units in various forms of townhouses. Council Meeting Date April 16, 2012 Please note that part of the Council's decision was that the by-law be finalized and forward to Council for enactment following the Ontario Municipal Board approval of the revisions to the draft plan of subdivision. On April 23, 2012, the Ontario Municipal Board issued Order PL090664 that approved the revisions to the draft approved plan of subdivision in accordance with Council's endorsed revisions to the conditions of draft plan approval. RP:jf rp/plan files/mattamy.DH/MUB/memo to clerk draft by-law chart Attachments By-law Text By-law Schedule The Corporation of the City of Pickering 1 0 3 By-law No. 7218/12 Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3037, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, Part of Lot 17, Concession 3, City of Pickering (A15/11, SP-2008-01(R2)) Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to permit a mixed use development for commercial retail and office uses and residential uses on lands, being Part of Lot 17, Concession 3, in the City of Pickering; And whereas an amendment to By-law 3037, as amended, is therefore deemed necessary; Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Schedules I and II Schedules I and II attached hereto with notations and references shown thereon and hereby declared to be part of this By-law: 2. Area Restricted The provisions of this By-law shall only apply to those lands being Part Lot 17, Concession 3, City of Pickering, designated "MU-24" "MU-MD" and "SA-13" on Schedule I attached hereto. 3. General Provisions No building, structure, land or part thereof shall hereafter be used, occupied, erected, moved or structurally altered except in conformity with the provisions of this By-law. 4. Definitions In this By-law, (1) "Adult Entertainment Parlour" shall mean a building or part of a building in which is provided, in pursuance of a trade, calling, business or occupation, services appealing to or designed to appeal to erotic or sexual appetites or inclinations; (2) "Bay, Bow, Box Window" shall mean a window that protrudes from the main wall, usually bowed, canted, polygonal, segmental, semicircular or square sided with window on front face in plan; one or more storeys in height, which may or may not include a foundation, may or may not include a window seat; and may include a door; By-law 7218/12 Page 2 1 0 (3) "Body Rub Parlour" includes any premises or part thereof where a body rub is performed, offered or solicited in pursuance of a trade, calling, business or occupation, but does not include any premises or part thereof where the body rubs performed are for the purpose of medical or therapeutic treatment and are performed or offered by persons otherwise duly qualified, licensed or registered so to do under the laws of the Province of Ontario; (4) "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; (5) "Business Office" shall mean a building or part of a building in which the management or direction of a business, a public or private agency, a brokerage or a labour or fraternal organization is carried on and which may include a telegraph office, a data processing establishment, a newspaper publishing office, the premises of a real estate or insurance agent, or a radio or television broadcasting station and related studios or theatres, but shall not include a retail store; (6) "Commercial Club" shall mean an athletic or recreational club operated for gain or profit and having public or private membership, but shall not include an adult entertainment parlour; (7) "Commercial Music School" shall mean a school which is operated for. gain or profit and contains the studio of a music teacher; (8) "Commercial School" shall mean a school which is operated for gain or profit and may include the studio of a dancing teacher, or an art school, a golf school or any other such school operated for gain or profit, but shall not include any other school defined herein; (9) "Convenience Store" shall mean a retail store in which food, drugs, periodicals or similar items of day-to-day household necessities are kept for retail sale primarily to residents of, or persons employed in, the immediate neighbourhood; (10) "Corner Rounding" shall mean a lot line of a corner lot at the intersection of two street lines in the form of an arc, that joins the front lot line to the flankage lot line; (11) "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; (12) "Drug Store" shall mean a building or part of a building in which pharmaceutical prescriptions are compounded and dispensed to the public, and where medicine, medical supplies and associated merchandise, confectionary items, cosmetics, toiletries, periodicals, or similar items of day-to-day household necessities are stored, displayed and offered for retail sale; By-law 7218/12 Page 3 • (13) "Dry Cleaning Depot" shall mean a building or part of a building used for 105 the purpose of receiving articles, goods, or fabrics to be subjected to dry cleaning and related processes elsewhere, and of distributing articles, goods or fabrics which have been subjected to any such processes, (14) (a) "Dwelling" shall mean a building or part of a building containing one or more dwelling units, but does not include a mobile home or trailer; (b) "Dwelling Unit" shall mean one or more habitable rooms occupied or capable of being occupied as a single, independent and separate housekeeping unit containing a separate kitchen and sanitary facilities; (c) "Dwelling, Single Attached or Single Attached Dwelling" shall mean one of a group of not less than 3 adjacent dwelling units attached together horizontally by an above ground common wall; (d) "Dwelling, Back to Back Attached or Back to Back Attached Dwelling" shall mean a group of not less than 6 and no more than 16 adjacent dwelling units attached by common masonry walls, including a common rear wall without a rear yard and whereby each dwelling has an independent entrance to the dwelling from the outside accessed through the front yard or flankage side yard. (e) "Dwelling, Stacked Townhouses or Stacked Townhouse Dwelling" shall mean a building or structure divided into a minimum of six dwelling units each dwelling unit being separated from the other vertically and/or horizontally where each dwelling unit has an independent entrance at the ground level or through a common entrance at the ground level or at the first storey above ground and may have a shared exit facilities above the first storey. (15) "Financial Institution" shall mean a building or part of a building in which money is deposited, kept lent or exchanged; (16) Food Store" shall mean a building or part of a building in which food, produce, and other items or merchandise of day-to-day household necessity are stored, offered or kept for retail sale to the public; (17) "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; (18) "Laundromat" shall mean a self-serve clothes washing establishment containing washing, drying, ironing, finishing or other incidental equipment; By-law 7218/12 Page 4 106 (19) (a) "Lot" shall mean an area of land fronting on a street which is used or intended to be used as the site of a building, or a group of buildings, as the case may be, together with any accessory buildings or structures, or a public park or open space area regardless of whether or not such lot constitutes the whole of a lot or block on a registered plan of subdivision; (b) "Lot Frontage" shall mean the width of a lot between the side lot lines measured along a line parallel to and 7.5 metres distance from the front lot line; (20) "Multiple Dwelling-Vertical" shall mean a building containing three or more dwelling units attached horizontally and vertically by an above-grade wall or walls, or an above-grade floor or floors, or both; (21) "Personal Service Shop" shall mean an establishment in which a personal service is performed and which may include a barber shop, a beauty salon, a shoe repair shop, a tailor or dressmaking shop or a photographic studio, but shall not include a body-rub parlour as defined in the Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1980, Chapter 302, as amended from time-to-time, or any successor thereto; (22) "Private Garage" shall mean an enclosed or partially enclosed structure for the storage of one or more vehicles, in which structure no business or service is conducted for profit or otherwise; (23) "Professional Office" shall mean a building or part of a building in which medical, legal or other professional service is performed or consultation given, and which may include a clinic, the offices of an architect, a chartered accountant, an engineer, a lawyer or a physician, but shall not include a body-rub parlour as defined in the Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1980, Chapter 302, as amended from time-to-time, or any successor thereto; (24) "Restaurant—Type A" shall mean a building or part of a building where food is prepared and offered or kept for retail sale to the public for immediate consumption on the premises or off the premises, or both, but shall not include an adult entertainment parlour as defined herein; (25) "Retail Store" shall mean a building or part of a building in which goods; wares, merchandise, substances, articles or things are stored, kept and offered for retail sale to the public; (26) "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; (27) "Street" shall mean a street as defined in the Highway Traffic Act, as amended from time to time, which may provide vehicular access to a lot. By-law 7218/12 Page 5 107 (28) (a) "Yard" shall mean an area of land which is appurtenant to and located on the same lot as a building or structure and is open, uncovered and unoccupied above ground except for such accessory buildings, structures, or other uses as a_re specifically permitted thereon; (b) "Front Yard" shall mean a yard extending across the full width of a lot between the front lot line of the lot and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (c) "Front Yard Depth" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a front yard of a lot between the front lot line and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (d) "Rear Yard" shall mean a yard extending across the full width of a lot between the rear lot line of the lot, or where there is no rear lot line, the junction point of the side lot lines, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (e) "Rear Yard Depth" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a rear yard of a lot between the rear lot line, or where there is no rear lot line the junction point of the side lot lines, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (f) "Side Yard" shall mean a yard of a lot extending from the front yard to the rear yard and from the side line to the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (g) "Side Yard Width" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a side yard of a lot between the side lot line and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (h) "Flankage Side Yard" shall mean a side yard immediately adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a • street; (i) "Flankage Side Yard Width" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a flankage side yard of a lot between the lot line adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a street and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (j) "Interior Side Yard" shall mean a side yard other than a flankage side yard. • By-law 7218/12 Page 6 10S 5. Provisions ("MU-24"Zone) (1) Uses Permitted ("MU-24" Zone) (a) No person shall within the lands designated "MU-24" on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (i) Business office; (ii) Convenience store; (iii) Commercial club; (iv) Commercial music school; (v) Commercial school; (vi) Day nursery; (vii) Drug store; (viii) Dry cleaning depot; (ix) Financial institution; (x) Food store; • (xi) Laundromat; (xii) Multiple Dwelling-Vertical (xiii) Personal service shop; (xiv) Professional office; (xv) Restaurant-Type A (xvi) Retail store (2) Zone Requirements ("MU-24" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "MU-24" on Schedule attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building except in accordance with the following provisions: (a) Building Location and Setbacks: (i) Buildings and structures shall be located entirely within the building envelope shown on Schedule II attached hereto; (ii) No building, part of a building, or structure shall be erected unless a minimum of 60% of the length of the build-to-zone along the Brock Road frontage, and a minimum of 60% of the length of the build-to-zone along William Jackson Drive as illustrated on Schedule II attached hereto, contains a building or part of a building; (iii) Notwithstanding Section 4(2)(a)(i) above, below grade parking structures shall be permitted beyond the limits of the building envelope identified on Schedule II attached hereto, but no closer than 0.5 metres from the limits of the lands; • By-law 7218/12 Page 7 109 (b) Building Height and Functional Floors: Minimum 3 storeys and 14.0 metres Maximum 6 storeys and 20.0 metres (c) Floor Space Areas: (i) The maximum gross leasable floor area for all non residential uses shall be 10,000 square metres; (ii) The aggregate of the gross leasable floor area of medical professional offices shall not exceed 25% of the maximum permitted gross leasable floor area; (d) Parking Requirements: (i) There shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 4.0 parking spaces per 100 square metres of gross leasable floor area for all permitted uses listed in Section 5(1) of this by-law; (ii) For multiple dwelling-vertical uses, there shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 1.0 parking space per dwelling unit for residents, and 0.25 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors. Parking spaces for residents shall be provided in a below grade structure, at grade or both. Visitor parking shall be provided at grade; • (iii) Notwithstanding Section 5(2)(d)(i) above, there shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 10 parking spaces per 100 square metres of gross leasable floor area for any restaurant floor area that exceeds total aggregate gross leasable area of 500 square metres in the building; (iv) Parking shall be provided at grade, in a below grade structure, in an above grade structure or any combination thereof; (v) All entrances and exits to parking areas and all parking areas shall be surfaced with brick, asphalt or concrete, or any combination thereof; (vi) At grade parking lots and driving aisles shall be permitted no closer than 3.0 metres from any road or property line; (vii) Clauses 5.21.2(a), 5.21.2(b), 5.21.2(e), 5.21.2(f), 5.21.2(g), and 5.21.2(k) of By-law 3037, as amended, shall not apply to lands designed "MU-24", on Schedule I attached hereto; By-law 7218/12 Page 8 1 10 (e) Special Regulations: (i) Drive-through facilities are not permitted on lands designated "MU-24"; (ii) Residential dwelling units shall be prohibited from the first two storeys of a building; (iii). Despite Section 5(2)(a)(i) of this By-law, outdoor patios associated with a restaurant-type A are permitted to encroach beyond the building envelope identified on Schedule II of this By-law; (iv) Despite Section 5(2)(a)(i) of this By-law, covered walkways with supporting structures, are permitted to encroach beyond the building envelope as identified on Schedule II of this By-law; (v) Despite Section 5(2)(f)(iii) outdoor patios associated with a restaurant -type A are not considered to be gross leasable floor area; (vi) Despite Section 5(2)(c)(ii) gross leasable floor area excludes parking structures; (vii) Despite Section 5(2)(b), the minimum building height requirement does not apply to parking structures. : 6. Provisions ("MU-MD" Zone) (1). Uses Permitted ("MU-MD" Zone) No person shall, within the lands designated "MU-MD" on Schedule attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (a) Stacked Townhouse Dwelling; (b) Single Attached Dwelling; (2) Zone Requirements ("MU-MD") No person shall, within the lands designated "MU-MD" on Schedule I • attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter or use any building or structure except in accordance with the provisions set out below. (a) Lot Frontage (minimum) 75.0 metres (b) Lot Area (minimum) 0.5 hectares By-law 7218/12 Page 9 1 1 1 (c) Lot Depth (minimum) 50:0 metres (d) Building Location and Setbacks (i) Setback of buildings from Brock Road (minimum) 6.0 metres (ii) Setback of buildings from all other streets (minimum) 3.0 metres (iii) Setback of buildings from all other lot lines (minimum)2.0 metres (e) Despite Section 6(2)(d)(iii) of this By-law where an interior side abuts a public walkway the minimum side yard width shall be 1.6 metres. (f) Building Height(maximum) 13.0 The following special provisions shall be applicable to all lands designated ("MU-MD") (g) Parking Requirements (minimum) Two private parking spaces per dwelling unit which can be provided either within an attached garage or with one parking space in an attached garage and one parking space in a driveway immediately in front of the parking garage for that dwelling unit. In addition, 0.25 parking spaces for each stacked townhouse dwelling shall be set aside and clearly identified for visitor parking. (h) Garage Parking Size— Stacked Townhouse Dwelling (minimum) Each parking space within a private garage for stacked townhouse dwelling unit shall have a minimum width of 2.7 metres and a minimum depth of 6.0 metres provided, however, that the depth may include two interior steps. (i) Garage Parking Size— Single Attached Dwellings (minimum) Each parking space within a private garage for a single attached dwelling unit shall have a minimum width of 2.9 metres and a' minimum depth of 6.0 metres provided, however, that the width may include one interior step and the depth may include two interior steps. (j) Setback Encroachments In addition to the provisions of Section 5.7 of By-law 3037, the following shall also apply: • (i) A covered or uncovered porch, veranda or balcony, with or without a foundation may have the following encroachments: A to Brock Road 2.0 metres B to any other street 1.5 metres By-law 7218/12 • Page 10 (ii) Uncovered steps maximum encroachment: A to Brock Road 3.0 metres B to any other streetline 1.5 metres 7. Provisions ("SA-13"Zone) (1) Uses Permitted ("SA-13" Zone) No person shall, within the lands designated "SA-13" on Schedule attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (a) Single attached dwelling; (b) Back to back attached dwelling; • (2) Zone Requirements ("SA-13") No person shall, within the lands designed "SA-13" on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter or use any building or structure except in accordance with the provisions as set out in the following table. Street.Single Lane Single Back to Back Attached Attached Attached Dwelling Dwelling Dwelling (a) Lot Frontage 6.0 metres 6.0 metres 6.0 metres (Minimum) (b) Lot Area 130 m2 110 m2 80 m2 (Minimum) (c) Lot Depth 22.0 metres 19.0 metres 14.0 metres (Minimum) (d) Front Yard Depth 3.0 metres 3.0 metres 3.0 metres (Minimum) (e) 1.2 metres 1.2 metres 1.2 metres except where except where except where dwellings on dwellings on dwellings on abutting lots abutting lots abutting lots Interior Side _ share a share a share a Yard Width common wall, common wall, common wall, (Minimum) no interior side no interior side no interior side yard shall be yard shall be yard shall be required required required adjacent to that adjacent to that adjacent to that wall on either lot wall on either lot wall on either lot (0 Flanking Side 2.4 metres 2.4 metres 2.4 metres Yard Width (Minimum) By-law 7218/12 Page 11 113 Street Single Lane Single Back to Back Attached Attached Attached Dwelling _ Dwelling Dwelling (g) Rear Yard Depth 7.0 metres 0.5 metres N/A (Minimum) except where the rear lot line abuts a hydro easement, the minimum rear yard depth shall be 6.0 metres (h) Building Height 13.0 metres 13.0 metres 13.0 metres (Maximum) (i) Driveway Width 50 percent 100 percent 50 percent (Maximum) of lot frontage of lot frontage of lot frontage (j) Lot Coverage of 15 m2 10 m2 N/A all Accessory Buildings (Maximum) The following special provisions shall be applicable to all lands designated ("SA-13") (k) Corner Rounding Despite any front yard depth, rear yard depth or Setback (Minimum) flankage side yard width requirement; on a corner lot, the setback to a corner rounding at the front of a lot shall be 1.75 metres; (I) Parking Two private parking spaces per dwelling unit Requirement which can be provided either within an attached (Minimum) garage or with one parking space in an attached garage and one parking space in a driveway immediately in front of the parking garage for that dwelling unit or for single attached dwelling that has its vehicular access from a lane the required parking may be provided in a garage, either attached or detached and/or ones parking space in a garage and one parking space on a parking pad located beside a garage; (m) Garage One private garage per lot. Where the vehicular Requirements entrance of such garage is from the front yard it (Minimum) shall be located not less than 6.0 metres from the front lot line. Where the vehicular entrance of such garage is from the rear yard it shall be located not less than 0.5 metres from the rear lot line; By-law 7218/12 Page 12 114 (n) Garage Parking Each parking space within a private garage shall Size have a minimum width of 2.9 metres and a (Minimum) minimum depth of 6.0 metres provided, however, that the width may include one interior step and the depth may include two interior steps; Detached Garage Requirements: Where the rear lot line abuts a street and vehicular access is provided from that street the following shall apply: (i) minimum side yard width of 0.0 metres; (ii) minimum flanking side yard width of 2.4 metres; (iii) minimum rear yard depth of 0.6 metres; (iv) a detached garage is not considered.a main building for the purpose of the by-law. Detached Garages for Lane Based Dwelling Units: A detached garage is not considered an accessory building for the purpose of lot coverage; (o) Yard Encroachments In addition to the provisions of Section 5.7 of By-law 3037, the following shall also apply: (i) A covered or uncovered porch, veranda or balcony and with or without a foundation, may have the following maximum encroachments: A to front lot line: 2.0 metres B to flankage lot line: 1.5 metres C to interior side lot line: - 0.6 metres D to rear lot line: - 2.0 metres E to a corner rounding: 1.0 metres F eaves above these features may - A further 0.6 metres project: into the required front, flankage or rear yard or corner rounding setback (ii) Uncovered decks of any height are permitted in the rear yard provided maximum encroachments as follows: A to interior side lot line: - 0.6 metres B to flankage lot line: 1.0 metres C to rear lot line: - 2.5 metres D steps from a deck: - May encroach an additional 1.2 metres onto the rear yard (iii) Bay, bow or box windows may encroach a maximum into required yards as follows: By-law 7218/12 Page 13 115 A front yard - 0.6 metres B flankage yard - 0.6 metres C rear yard - 1.0 metres ' D eaves above these features - May project to a further 0.6 metres into the required front, flankage or rear yard 8. Model Homes (1) Notwithstanding any provisions in By-law 3037 to the contrary, a maximum of 6 Model Homes, together with not fewer than two parking spaces per Model Home, may be constructed on the lands set out in Schedule I attached to this By-law prior to the division for these lands by registration of a plan of subdivision; (2) For the purposes of this By-law, "Model Home" shall mean a dwelling unit which is not used for residential purposes, but which is used exclusively for sales, display and marketing purposes pursuant to an agreement with the City of Pickering. 9. Provisions("(H) MU-24" Zone) (1) Uses Permitted ("(H) MU-23" Zone) Until such time as the "(H)" Holding Provision is lifted, the lands shall not be used for any purpose other than any use as permitted by the Section 6 of amending Zoning By-law 7020/10 of Zoning By-law 3037. • (2) Removal of the "(H)" Holding Symbol The "(H)" Holding Symbol shall not be removed from the "MU-24" zone until the completion of the following: (a) Execution of a Development Agreement with the City of Pickering including provisions that all the requirements for the development of . the lands have been complied with, including but not limited to, environmental and engineering requirements, signalization of the Brock Road/Dersan Street intersection if required, site access, off- site works, vehicle parking, lighting, landscaping, stormwater management, phasing of construction, easements and all financial matters including the requirements of the Duffin Heights Landowners Group Cost Sharing Agreement; and (b) Appropriate arrangements have been made to the satisfaction of the Region of Durham for the provision of environmental and engineering requirements. By-law 7218/12 Page 14 116 10. By-law 3037 By-law 3037 is hereby amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as it appears to the area set out in Schedule I attached hereto. Definitions and subject matter not specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by relevant provisions of By-law 3037,as amended. 11. Effective Date This By-law shall come into force in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 22nd day of May, 2012. David Ryan, Mayor Debbie Shields,City Clerk • O 117 STREET 'A' ir 3.Om 0 --4.- 7'2.0m CC / 3.0m v -•-4.0m 0 (I; 4.0m 1 .5m \//// yy/ 2Om t 1 60.Om WILLIAM JACKSON DRIVE • //// BUILD—TO—ZONE BUILDING ENVELOPE 'A' N SCHEDULE II TO BY-LAW 7218/12 PASSED THIS 22nd DAY OF May 2012 MAYOR CLERK • 1 1 8 LIATRIS n Q 0 o� \'� li_l ( ' G KALMAR � a O 5 z m ic"\ STREET 'A' -- ,11: U SA-13 � SA-13 Q HAYDEN N.N STREET' 'B' E < MU-MD - • °' 60.Om STREET 'A' LIATRIS 68.1m f c E E 6 (H)MU-24 cn N \461m 32.2m 45.Om, _______________/ DERSAN STREET 1' • SCHEDULE I TO BY-LAW 7218/12 PASSED THIS 22nd DAY OF May 2012 MAYOR CLERK Cult 0y4 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes m°i = Wednesday, March 21, 2012 1.21111VE 7:03 pm Main Committee Room Present: Tom Copeland David Johnson — Chair Eric Newton —Vice-Chair Bill Utton Shirley Van Steen Also Present: Mila Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer David Johnson, Committee Chair acknowledged the presence of Bill McLean, Regional Councillor Ward 2 (arrived at 7:55 pm and was present until the meeting adjourned) (I) Adoption of Agenda Moved by Bill Utton Seconded by Eric Newton That the agenda for the Wednesday, March 21, 2012 meeting be adopted. Carried Unanimously (II) Adoption of Minutes Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Shirley Van Steen That the minutes of the 2nd meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, February 29, 2012 be adopted. Carried Unanimously 1 • Ca o z. • Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 21, 2012 rillliftrAlT414411- 7:03 pm Main Committee Room (Ill) Reports 1. (Deferred from February 29, 2012 meeting) P/CA 06/12 —T. Fielder/V. Marshall —Amended 1892 Liverpool Road (Lot 16, Plan 492) City of Pickering The applicant has amended the application and submitted a revised site plan that requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036 to permit the parking of 3 trailers and 2 personal vehicles (5 vehicles) on a lot, a building setback of 0.3 metres to an existing accessory building in the rear yard and an accessory building lot coverage of 6 percent, whereas the by-law allows a maximum parking of 4 vehicles, a minimum building setback of 1.0 metre to accessory structures that are greater than 10 square metres and maximum lot coverage of 5 percent for all accessory buildings. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to establish zoning compliance. M. Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending refusal. Form letters were submitted from eight surrounding neighbours indicting no concerns with the application. A petition was also received with 68 signatures from residents who benefit or have benefitted from the non-profit scout group and fully supports the storage of the Scout equipment trailer and canoe trailer parking on the subject property. Terry Fielder, owner, was present to represent the application. Diana Gould, Darren Romani, Brent McLaren, Erin Anderson, Peter Tome and Cameron Linton were present in favour of the application. Terry Fielder submitted a map that shows 23 surrounding neighbours indicating no concerns, 1 neighbour indicating a concern and 1 indicating no opinion on the application, and provided pictures of improvements made to the driveway and the location of two trailers. Terry Fielder also submitted additional form letters from surrounding neighbours indicating no concerns with the application. Diana Gould explained the importance of the camping equipment and canoes for Scouts Canada. Diana Gould also explained it is a non-profit organization and the benefits it has on the youth and community. 2 Cali o Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, March 21, 2012 • � -ire-=::: 7:03 pm Main Committee Room Darren Romani explained the previous location the trailers were stored has since closed down and other locations could cost anywhere from fifty to hundred dollars per month. Brent McLaren explained his involvement with the program and that the equipment being stored is required for Scouts Canada and provides a camping experience that some youth are not able to experience. Erin Anderson indicated that her two boys have been involved with Scouts Canada for about 10 years and they have fully benefitted from the program and fully supports the application. Peter Tome explained that he is the neighbour directly to the north and is in full support the application. Peter Tome also indicated that the proposed evergreen hedge would add character to the surrounding neighbourhood and better screen the parking of the two trailers from being visible on Liverpool Road. Cameron Linton feels the canoes should always be stored on the property because the property adds a heritage aspect to the City. Moved by Bill Utton Seconded by Eric Newton That amended application P/CA 06/12 by T. FielderN. Marshall, be Deferred until the next meeting to provide an opportunity for the applicant to meet with City Staff to discuss possible amendments to the application. Carried Unanimously 2. P/CA 09/12 — R. Koeder—Amended 661 Pleasant Street (Part Lot 1, Block D, Plan 65) City of Pickering The applicant has amended the application and submitted a revised site plan that requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511 to permit an existing lot frontage of 12.1 metres, an existing lot area of 370 square metres, an existing north side 'yard width of 0.6 metres and a flankage side yard width of 3.6 metres to a proposed dwelling addition and an accessory building setback of 0.6 metres to a proposed detached garage, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres, lot area of 460 square metres, side yard width of 1.5 metres and a flankage side yard width of 4.5 metres and accessory building setback of 1.0 metres. 3 Committee of Adjustment °0 Meeting Minutes °''=— Wednesday, March 21, 2012 tSI4t4I [ 7:03 pm Main Committee Room The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain zoning compliance and a building permit for the proposed detached garage and dwelling addition. M. Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. George Avramopoulos, agent, was present to represent the application. John Milroy of 616 Annland Street, and Gordon Haggerty of 360 Blake Street were present in objection to the application. George Avramopoulos provided a history of the 2009 Committee of Adjustment application and building permit from the previous owner. George Avramopoulos also indicated that he has taken into consideration of his neighbour's concerns when he amended the application and redesigned the proposed dwelling addition. John Milroy expressed concern that the view of Frenchman's Bay will be obstructed by the proposed construction. Gordon Haggerty expressed concern that John Milroy's view of Frenchman's Bay will still be obstructed by the amended proposed site plan. Moved by Shirley Van Steen Seconded by Bill Utton That amended application P/CA 09/12.by R. Koeder, be Approved on the grounds that the existing lot frontage of 12.1 metres, existing lot area of • 370 square metres, existing side yard width of 0.6 metres, proposed flankage side yard width of 3.6 metres to a proposed dwelling addition and a proposed accessory building setback of 0.6 metres are minor variances that are desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed dwelling addition and detached garage, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 4 Ca 00 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes I MT I - Wednesday, March 21, 2012 7:03 pm Main Committee Room, 2. That the applicant satisfy the Region of Durham financially and otherwise for the relocation of the fire hydrant, if required for the enlargement of the existing driveway. 3. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by March 21, 2014, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously 3. P/CA 10/12 — Royal Admiral (Canada) Inc. 726 Kingston Road (Part Lot 28, Broken Frontage Concession Range 3, Part 25 to 29 & 43, 40R-15653) • City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 3768/91 to permit a 100 square metre restaurant for take-out service only, whereas the by-law permits a "Restaurant—Type D" use that permits an accessory take-out component to a dine-in restaurant but not a standalone take-out use. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit: M. Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were also received from the City's Development Control Manager expressing no concerns. John Huang, owner, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 10/12 by Royal Admiral (Canada) Inc., be Approved on the grounds that the 100 square metre restaurant for take-out service only is a minor variance that is desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official.Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 5 • Committee of Adjustment C` 00 Meeting Minutes =w ?+i - -° Wednesday, March 21, 2012 1St 7:03 pm Main Committee Room 1. That this variance apply only to the 100 square metre restaurant for take-out . service only as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by March 21, 2014, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously 4. P/CA 11/12 — J. & I. Sonnylal 1884 Liverpool Road (Lot 18, Plan 492) • City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036 to permit the parking of one vehicle with a height of 3.9 metres and a length of 10.5 metres in the rear yard of the detached dwelling, whereas the by-law permits a maximum permissible vehicle height of 3.5 metres and a length of 8.0 metres to be parked on any lot. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain zoning compliance. M. Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending refusal. Written comments were also received from the City's Development Control Manager expressing no concerns. Kevin Sonnylal, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Kevin Sonnylal explained that he originally had three trucks for his business and he has already removed/sold two of the trucks to reduce negative impact on community. He indicated that in the last location the three trucks were parked, they were getting broken into and he decided to purchase this property in January 2012, under the impression from the previous owner that the property allows for the parking of large vehicles. 6 Committee of Adjustment C` CO Meeting Minutes 1 =♦ Wednesday, March 21, 2012 -pr:E2ii: 140 1 7:03 pm Main Committee Room Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Bill Utton That application P/CA 11/12 by J. & I. Sonnylal, be Refused on the grounds that the parking of one vehicle with a height•of 3.9 metres and a length of 10.5 metres in the rear yard of the detached dwelling are major variances that are not desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. Carried Vote Tom Copeland in favour David Johnson in favour Eric Newton in favour Bill Utton in favour Shirley Van Steen opposed (IV) Adjournment Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Bill Utton That the 3rd meeting of the 2012 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 7:59 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, April 11, 2012. Carried Unanimously -4- c , 20IZ Date _ Chair , /AV +r Assistant Secretary-Treasurer 7 �� CO Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 11, 2012 1 7:00 pm . Main Committee Room Present: - Tom Copeland David Johnson — Chair Eric Newton —Vice-Chair Bill Utton Shirley Van Steen Also Present: Mila Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer (I) Adoption of Agenda Moved by Bill Utton • Seconded by Eric Newton That the agenda for the Wednesday, April 11, 2012 meeting be adopted. Carried Unanimously (II) Adoption of Minutes Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Bill Utton That the minutes of the 3rd meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held • Wednesday, March 21, 2012 be adopted. Carried Unanimously • 1 Committee of Adjustment C` en, Meeting Minutes Wednesday, April 11, 2012 7:00 pm Main Committee Room (III) Reports 1. (Deferred from March 21, 2012 meeting) P/CA 06/12 — T. Fielder/V. Marshall —Amended 1892 Liverpool Road (Lot 16, Plan 492) City of Pickering The applicant has amended the application and submitted a revised site plan that requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036 to permit the parking of 3 trailers and 2 personal vehicles on a lot (2 trailers and 2 personal vehicles to be parked in the front yard and 1 trailer to be parked in the rear yard), a rear yard depth of 0.3 metres to an existing accessory building in the rear yard and an accessory building lot coverage of 6 percent, whereas the by-law allows a maximum parking of 4 vehicles, a minimum accessory building rear yard depth of 1.0 metre to accessory structures that are greater than 10 square metres and maximum lot coverage of 5 percent for all accessory buildings. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to establish zoning compliance. M. Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending refusal. Terry Fielder, owner, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Terry Fielder explained that in his interpretation of"majority of the front yard being surfaced" would be 50 percent or more in area and he has calculated the current gravel surface in the front yard is approximately 31 percent (about 4 vehicles wide). Therefore, the statement of"the majority of the front yard has been surfaced for vehicle parking in a negative streetscape appearance" in the Planning & Development department's recommendation report should be denied. Terry Fielder also indicated that the property is well under the maximum building lot coverage requirement of the by-law. The total building lot coverage including the house and accessory structures is only 12 1/2 percent whereas the by-law permits a maximum building lot coverage of 33 percent. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Terry Fielder indicated there is a possibility for the trailers to be relocated but it would only be a temporary situation but he needs a permanent solution. 2 Committee of Adjustment C` o Meeting Minutes .any 10 1. Wednesday, April 11, 2012 ::................. 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Moved by Shirley Van Steen Seconded by Bill Utton That amended application P/CA 06/12 by T. Fielder/V. Marshall, be Refused on the grounds that the parking of 3 trailers and 2 personal vehicles on a lot is a major variance that is undesirable for the appropriate development of the land, and not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. And That amended application P/CA 06/12 by T. FielderN. Marshall, be Approved on the grounds that an existing accessory building rear yard depth of 0.3 metres and an existing accessory building lot coverage of 6 percent are minor variances that are desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. . Carried Unanimously 2. P/CA 12/12 — C. Lazar 932 Vistula Drive (Lot 376, Plan M17) City of Pickering • The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2520 to permit a front yard depth of 6.0 metres and a side yard width of 0.6 metres to a proposed garage addition to the existing dwelling, whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres and a side yard width of 1.5 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for the proposed garage addition. M. Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending refusal for a side yard width of the 0.6 metres and approval for a front yard depth of 6.0 metres subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Development Control Manager expressing downspouts should be directed so that drainage does not discharge onto the neighbouring property. Written comments were also received from Claude Flint and Sylvia Nikodem of 934 Vistula Drive in objection to the application. 3 city 00 Committee of Adjustment 4111... 1411 Meeting Minutes .;� -� Wednesday, April 11, 2012 110-1111tIVE 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Correspondence received from Claude Flint and Sylvia Nikodem, indicated concerns the construction will negatively impact the streetscape, the proposed garage may cause a significant run-off of rainwater onto their property and will negatively impact the amount of natural sunlight that is allowed onto their home. Claude Flint and Sylvia Nikodem also noted that it is unnecessary and unacceptable to grant a variance for the purpose of making it easier to park a large vehicle within the existing garage. Catinca Lazar, owner, Raul Apablaza were present to represent the application. Claude Flint of 934 Vistula Drive was present in objection to the application. further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Catinca Lazar and Raul Apablaza explained the application and indicated the water runoff will drain to the front of the property and will not impact the overall development of the property. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Catinca Lazar explained the roof is the same height as the existing garage and indicated that only the width and length is being extended and feels the addition would unlikely affect the natural light to the next door neighbour. Claude Flint presented pictures for the Committee Members to review and expressed concerns that the proposed garage addition would block the natural light coming into their kitchen and the potential root damage to the existing old pine tree during construction. Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Bill Utton That application P/CA 12/12 by C. Lazar, be Deferred until the next meeting in order to give the Committee Members an opportunity to visit the site. Carried Vote Tom Copeland in favour David Johnson in favour Eric Newton in favour Bill Utton in favour Shirley Van Steen opposed 4 Committee of Adjustment City °0 Meeting Minutes i -1 Wednesday, April 11, 2012 VNINIONTO.0 7:00 pm Main Committee Room 3. P/CA 13/12 — J. Pitino & D. Mullin 547 Rodd Avenue (Block A, Plan 233, Part 1, 40R-19204) City of Pickering • The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511 to permit a front yard depth of 3.3 metres to a proposed staircase leading to a raised porch and front entrance and a flankage side yard width of 1.5 metres to a proposed detached dwelling, whereas the by-law requires a front yard depth of 7.5 metres and a flankage side yard of 4.5 metres. • The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for the proposed detached dwelling. • M. Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Development Control Manager expressing no concerns and the City's Engineering Services indicating there are no current plans to open and maintain the road allowance that abuts the subject property. Written comments were received from Councillor Kevin Ashe in support of the staff recommendation. Form letters were also submitted from 15 neighbours indicating they have reviewed the application and are in full support and it will enhance the neighbourhood. Joe Pitino, owner, and Jermaine Lawrence, agent, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Shirley Van Steen Seconded by Bill Utton That application P/CA 13/12 by J. Pitino & D. Mullin, be Approved on the grounds that the front yard depth of 3.3 metres to a proposed staircase leading to a raised porch and front entrance and the flankage side yard width of 1.5 metres to a proposed detached dwelling are minor variances that are desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed detached dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. 5 �� 00 _ Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes _ ' = l Wednesday, April 11, 2012 7:00 pm Main Committee Room 2. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by April 11, 2014, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously 4. P/CA 14/12 —V. & L Klukiewicz 865 Darwin Drive (Lot 25, Plan 40M-1628) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 2918/88 to permit a rear yard depth of 2.5 metres to a proposed deck, whereas the by-law requires a rear yard depth of 7.5 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for the proposed deck. M. Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending refusal to the rear yard depth of 2.5 metres and recommending approval to the rear yard depth of 5.7 metres to a proposed raised deck with guardrails, subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Development Control Manager expressing no concerns. Written comments were received from Councillor Kevin Ashe in support of the staff recommendation. Written comments were also received from Edward Bennett of 856 Darwin Drive in support of the application. Vic Klukiewicz, owner, Adam Malley, agent, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Tom Copeland Seconded by Bill Utton That application P/CA 14/12 by V. & L. Klukiewicz, be.Refused on the grounds that the rear yard depth of 2.5 metres is a major variance that is not desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and not in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law. And That application P/CA 14/12 by V. & L. Klukiewicz be Approved on the grounds that the rear yard depth of 5.7 metres to a proposed raised deck with guardrails is a minor variance that is desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 6 Ca o0 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes 14111 ■ Wednesday, April 11, 2012 ate= 4016 1 , �:;�;;;,_—.., �3;14 7:00 pm Main Committee Room 1. That this variance apply only to the proposed raised deck and guardrail, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans. • 2. That the applicant revise the proposed development to exclude guardrails in the design of the deck where the deck is under 0.6 metres in height. 3. That the applicant obtain a building permit for the proposed construction by April 11, 2014, or this decision shall become null and void. Carried Unanimously 5. P/CA 15/12 — B. Gamble & J. Wilcox 484 Oakwood Drive (Part Lot 97, Plan 350, Part 1, 40R-2552) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511 to permit a new detached 3 car garage having a height of 5.6 metres and a flankage side yard width of 4.5 metres to the proposed garage, whereas the by-law permits a maximum accessory building height of 3.5 metres and requires a minimum flankage side yard width of 7.5 metres to an accessory structure. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for the proposed detached 3 car garage and obtain zoning compliance for the existing flankage side yard width. M. Yeung, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer stated she received correspondence from B. Gamble notifying he is withdrawing the application. Written comments were received from Dan Drummond and Sherry Hoerster of 482 Oakwood Drive in objection to the application. A petition was also received with 10 signatures from surrounding neighbours opposed to the new detached 3 car garage. Written comments were also received from the City's Development Control Manager indicating they can support a 6.0 metres flankage side yard width to allow for future access from Milton Road, should it ever be extended, if a 4.5 metres flankage side yard is permitted a 0.3 metres reserve will be required to restrict future access to Milton Road and a grading permit will be required if the application is approved. 7 Cli o0 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes et I 1 Wednesday, April 11, 2012 V_I*3111. 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Correspondence received from Dan Drummond and Sherry Hoerster, indicated several concerns with the proposed detached garage, will it be used for fixing/repairing cars, rear yard access for emergency responders, snow removal, potential root damage during excavation and grading and an increase in water runoff into their rear yard and inground pool. Dan Drummond and Sherry Hoerster also noted that this is a major variance and is unacceptable as it would create safety concerns, reduce quality of life and decrease property values. The applicant was not present to represent the application. Steve Hann of 479 Rougemount Drive and Dan Drummondof 482 Oakwood were present in • objection to the application. Moved by Bill Utton Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 15/12 by B. Gamble & J. Wilcox, be Closed as the applicant has withdrawn the application. • Carried Unanimously (IV) Adjournment Moved by Shirley Van Steen Seconded by Bill Utton That the 4th meeting of the 2012 Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 7:35 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, May 2, 2012. Carried Unanimously • Date - i Chair Assistant Secretary-Treasurer 8 City Minutes Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee kpILLILILL -71 April 26, 2012 PICKERING 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Attendees: Councillor Rodrigues Tate Besso, Chair Mike Sawchuck, Vice-Chair Wickham Jamadar Ellen Mason Janet Mehak Elke Pryswitt Denise Rundle Sally Sheehan Charles Sopher Jutta Van Huss Isabelle Janton, Planner II — Site Planning Linda Roberts, Recording Secretary Absent: Dale Quaife Item / ° Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items/ Status Ref# (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) 1.0 Welcome T. Besso welcomed everyone to the meeting. 2.0 Approval of Minutes � ...; ' Moved by D. Rundle Seconded by J. Van Huss That the minutes of the March 22, 2012 meeting of Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee be approved. Carried 3.0 ; Business Arising from Minutes 3.1) 560 Park Crescent M. Sawchuck provided a brief overview of the status regarding 560 Park Crescent. He noted at the Council meeting held April 16th, Council endorsed the recommendation of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee for the designation of the Nesbit- Newman House, located at 560 Park Crescent. Page 1 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref# (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) I. Janton informed the Committee that the letters had been sent out and the Notice of Intent to Designate will appear in the May 2"d issue of the News Advertiser. She also noted the Trust Company should be contacted to inquire about their position on this matter. 3.2) 1130 Taunton Road T. Besso informed the Committee that a letter had been received from Lebovic Enterprises confirming approval of the Committee's request for a six month extension as well as access to the house. Discussion ensued with respect to assessing the options for the house. It was noted that garbage is accumulating on the property. The following comments were noted; • arrange a site visit • assess the value of the house • cataloging of salvageable items • lack of storage for salvage items • take photos and present to Museum, parks and operations deptartments to see if they could be utilized • determine use for salvaged items Questions arose with respect to how other area municipalities catalogue and store salvaged items. It was questioned whose responsibility the process for this would fall under. E. Mason offered to facilitate, provided it falls under the jurisdiction of the Heritage Pickering Committee. It was suggested that this be I. Janton/L. Roberts to added as an item to the work plan. action It was decided the condition of the house needs to be determined. L. Roberts will email the details of the property to L. Roberts to action members to review prior to attending a site visit. I. Janton will contact the property manager of the site to arrange a tour for Committee members and advise of the times I. Janton to action and date for those interested in attending. 3.3) Heritage Homes Relocation Initiative I. Janton noted the City of Pickering has advertised 4 heritage buildings located on Federally owned lands for relocation. She provided an update on the tours, explaining the timelines and the need to register. Page 2 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref# (summary of discussion) (include deadline as „x' • appropriate) Discussion ensued with respect to the creation of a village for the relocation of heritage homes, similar to what was done in the Town of Markham. Questions arose regarding costs as well as maintenance and amenities for such a project. The Committee expressed an interest in pursuing this idea. I. Janton noted the Town of Markham has the Markham Heritage Estate Administrative Guidelines on their website which can be downloaded for information. Councillor Rodrigues It was also questioned whether the City of Pickering Official to action Plan has heritage policies included. C. Rodrigues to investigate. • It was questioned whether the Heritage Advisory Committee would be involved in the process of awarding the homes to the best candidate in the event multiple offers are received on the same property. It was noted that decisions need to be made by mid May as relocations must be completed by June 30, 2012. It was also questioned whether the City of Pickering had any set criteria for receiving proposals on the properties in order to maintain consistency in the applications. M. Sawchuck suggested the possibility of the Committee preparing this. Discussion ensued with respect to keeping the criteria minimal, otherwise it could deter potential owners. J. Van Huss volunteered to take the lead on this. 3.4) 2012 Workplan M. Sawchuck noted this should be included at each meeting with participants providing updates on their assignments. He also noted priorities need to be set and to look at properties missed for the register. Copies were handed out to members. M. Sawchuck noted he would update the workplan with member's names and email out. 4.0 New Business 4.1) Heritage Permit Application I. Janton provided an overview with respect to an application received from Stephen Lock at 3232 Gladstone Street requesting approval for a second storey bedroom addition and interior alterations to the kitchen. She provided members with details as well as photos of the house. She noted the proposed alterations were in keeping with the heritage of the • Page 3 wItem ! Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items l Status Ref# (summary of discussion) ' f (include deadline as appropriate) house. She stated the applicant appears to be intent on maintaining the heritage character of the building and has in the past, following a fire that damaged the front portion of the house, completed quality restoration work. Discussion ensued with the following comments being noted; • the detailing of the west elevation of proposed addition not in keeping with the rest of the building • window configuration should match • request details on the material type for windows • request details on the profile and material type of siding Committee members questioned the approval process for heritage permit applications. I. Janton noted she would follow up on the process in order to provide clarity for future I. Janton to action applications. It was also questioned what the policy or guidelines would be for new construction. M. Sawchuck noted that most communities adopt the "Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places in Canada" as a reference manual. Moved by M. Sawchuk Seconded by W. Jamadar That the heritage permit application for 3232 Gladstone Street be approved with the following conditions; 1)the applicant provide clarification on the profile and materials to be used for the siding and windows; and, 2) the applicant maintain a window configuration consistent with the heritage value of the home. Carried 4.2) William Dunbar Home T. Besso noted that at the Council meeting held on April 16th questions arose regarding the William Dunbar Home located at 1050 Dunbarton Road. M. Sawchuck noted that while there is significant value of the home in terms of history, it may not merit designation over other properties in terms of the building itself. M. Sawchuck noted the need to pull together the register first, then decide which properties to add to the list. Page 4 Item I Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items I Status Refwi# (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) It was the consensus of the Committee to include this property in the previously agreed upon list of three potential properties • for designation. 4.3) Doors Open Sub-committee M. Sawchuck provided an overview of the 2011 program. He noted the Committee's decision to hold this event every two years. He outlined the timeframe for planning for 2013, noting the first step would be to form a sub-committee. He noted this committee would start up by the end of this summer and would meet approximately once a month until closer to the date of the event. L. Roberts to action It was questioned whether residents outside of the Committee could volunteer on the sub-committee. L. Roberts will confirm. 5.0 Other Business 5.1) C. Sopher noted the farm house on the southwest corner of Sideline 24 has been demolished. 5.2) E. Mason questioned whether the schoolhouse in Whitevale has been designated. M. Sawchuck noted it is protected through the Heritage Conservation District. 5.3) T. Besso indicated an email had just been received from Robert Mitchell seeking correspondence from the Committee to Winston Wong, MTO for approval of his previous request for salvage items. T. Besso indicated he would follow up with Mr. Wong regarding T. Besso to action the issue of salvage items and respond to Mr. Mitchell accordingly. 6.0 Next Meeting/Adjournment Next Meeting: June 28, 2012 The meeting adjourned at 9:25 pm. Copy: City Clerk Page 5 C1 00 A Minutes/Meeting Summary Accessibility Advisory Committee Meeting Wednesday, April 25, 2012 PI KERI G 7:00 pm Civic Complex - Main Committee Room Attendees:' K. Falconer Chair T. Arvisais, Vice Chair Councillor O'Connell M. Brenner A. Heywood-Delpeache T. Logan D. Manning D. Sharma D. Tierney S. Wilkinson J. Yacoumidis P. Noronha-Waldriff L. Harker, Recording Secretary Absent: I. Fogo S. Little Item/ Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items/Status Ref# (summary of`discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) 1. Welcome K. Falconer K. Falconer welcomed members and guests to the meeting. 2. Deohaeko Support Network - Presentation E. Rosemond and J. Klees Erin Rosemond and Janet Klees from the Deohaeko Support . Network provided a presentation to the Committee of the Deohaeko Support Network. J. Klees provided an overview of the program, detailing their approach to customized job development to ensure that the workforce represents the community. Customized job development was described as a way to help people with disabilities make a contribution and get paying jobs in their community. This organization provides support and teaches learning strategies to people with disabilities with the goal of helping these people achieve paid employment. E. Rosemond then shared some success stories, thereby giving a human face to the philosophy. Page 1 CORP0228-2/02 P. Noronha-Waldriff invited the Deohaeko Support Network to set P. Noronha-Waldriff to up a booth at the 2012 Accessibility Awareness Event. action A question and answer period ensued. 3. Adoption of Minutes March 28, 2012 K. Falconer Moved by M. Brenner Seconded by T. Arvisais That the minutes of the March 28, 2012 meeting of the Accessibility Advisory Committee be approved. Carried 4. Accessibility Survey (Draft Review) S. Wilkinson and D. Tierney S. Wilkinson and D. Tierney provided a brief overview of the draft Accessibility Survey and requested final comments and changes from members. • D. Tierney suggested adding "e.g." to question #6. • M. Brenner suggested adding "episodic" for question #4, including a definition "periodically occurs". • K. Falconer suggesting having this survey available on the City's website and having City staff collect responses and report back to the Committee quarterly. • M. Brenner suggested placing the survey on the City's Intranet to obtain responses from City staff for comparison. • Councillor O'Connell suggested placing a notice about this survey in tax bills. • S. Wilkinson suggested placing a notice in the News Advertiser and sharing with other Accessibility Committees. • J. Yacoumidis proposed to the Committee that they begin thinking about the next steps, including what the Committee will do with the information that is obtained from this survey and how this information will be reported back to the City. 5. 2012 Committee Work Plan K. Falconer K. Falconer provided an overview of the presentation to Council and the good feedback that was received. It was proposed that roles and'tasks were assigned based on the work plan that was presented to Council. Page 2 CORP0228.-2/02 Accessibility Awareness Event— M. Brenner (Lead)/A. Natifa Heywood-Delpeache, K. Falconer, D. Sharma all Committee members to assist Review of Accessibility Parking By-law— S. Wilkinson (Lead) and D. Sharma Review Standards for Curb Cuts for Sidewalks — D. Sharma (Lead) Review of Pedestrian Crossing Times at Signalized Intersections —T. Arvisais (Lead) • Policy Review for Full Services Gas Stations — Councillor O'Connell (Lead) and A. Natifa Heywood-Delpeache Building on the 2011 Accessibility Survey — J. Yacoumidis (Lead), M. Brenner, D. Tierney and S. Wilkinson Design Student Engagement Program —A. Natifa Heywood- Delpeache (Lead) / D. Sharma / M. Brenner Conduct an Accessibility Audit of Public Facilities — D. Tierney (Lead), S. Wilkinson and T. Logan Conduct an Accessibility Audit of Businesses and Facilities — M. Brenner (Lead) and D. Sharma Implement Forums for Discussion with Pickering Senior Management Team —T. Arvisais (Lead) and M. Brenner It's up to the lead in each initiative to design the initiative and outline deliverables. Members are to organize themselves and meet outside of the committee meetings. P. Noronha-Waldriff to M. Brenner suggested the development of a spreadsheet to action view deliverables and set timelines for these to be achieved. 6. 2012 Accessibility Awareness Event K. Falconer P. Noronha-Waldriff provided an overview of the planning for this event to date and advised the Committee that the next step would be to select a date to book the Pickering Town Centre. The Committee selected Saturday, November 3`d as their first selection and Saturday, October 27th as their second selection. Councillor O'Connell suggested also booking the 2013 Accessibility Awareness Event at this time to obtain the preferred date of June 1, 2013 and to book speakers for the event. Page 3 CORP0228-2/02 Discussion ensued with respect to speakers at this event. P. Noronha-Waldriff suggested putting in a Community Page Advertisement to attract speakers. 7. Site Plan Review- 502/12 Dominos Pizza All Members reviewed this site plan and determined that it was completely inaccessible as it is on a floodplain. The Committee did not recommend approval of this site plan and will be submitting their comments to the Planning & Development Department, noting that it should be resubmitted to the Committee when accessible during all seasons. 8. Other Business All 8.1) S. Wilkinson enquired why one of the accessible parking spots at the Loblaws plaza was replaced with an expectant K. Falconer to action mother parking spot? K. Falconer to follow up with T. Barnett from the Planning & Development Department fora response. 8.2) P. Noronha-Waldriff read an email from T. Barnett from the Planning & Development Department regarding the parking by- laws and the Committee's interest in increasing the number of handicap spaces allotted for each plaza. It was suggested that the Committee review the municipal by-laws and send a report to Council based on their recommendations. 8.3) Councillor O'Connell advised the Committee that she received a phone call from a concerned resident. This resident • expressed their concern that there is no full day camp available at the Recreation Complex for children ages 12+ with disabilities. Councillor O'Connell advised the Committee that it may be appropriate to start the conversation about opportunities available for residents with disabilities and transit availability to these programs. P. Noronha-Waldriff advised that the City offers programs for 13 — 18 yrs, however they are drop in programs. The resident in questions would be looking for full day programming which is not something offered. 8.4) T. Arvisais enquired about the handicap parking spot and Councillor O'Connell to location of curb cuts at the Sears entrance of the Pickering action Town Centre. Durham Transit was to move the curb cut but it has not been moved as of yet. 8.5) S. Wilkinson shared an article from the Star newspaper about the obstacles that businesses face in making their business accessible. 8.6) P. Noronha-Waldriff invited the Committee to attend the Community Engagement Workshop held by the City of Page 4 CORP0228-2/02 Pickering, Tuesday May 15th8.7) P. Noronha-Waldriff advised the Committee that she would be attending the Regional Accessibility meeting on May 22nd and invited Committee members to attend. 8.8) P. Noronha-Waldriff advised the committee that she would be attending a workshop on the Integrated Accessibility Standard Regulation: Interpretation and Application, in Vaughan on April 30th and would provide an overview at the next meeting. 8.9) K. Falconer reminded Committee members about the Day of Mourning on Saturday, April 28th 8.10) K. Falconer advised the Committee that the Waterfront Open House was held at an inaccessible location and that future events would not be held at this location. 9. Next Meeting/Adjournment All Moved by J. Yacoumidis Seconded by T. Logan That the meeting be adjourned. Carried Next Meeting: May 23, 2012 Meeting Adjourned: 8:50 pm Copy: City Clerk Page 5 CORP0228-2/02