Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLN 15-17©d PICKERING Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: PLN 15-17 Date: September 5, 2017 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods File: D-1100-096 Recommendation: 1: That Council authorize staff to initiate a zoning by-law amendment to the general provisions of By-law 2511 to add a maximum building height where site specific zoning amendments do not regulate maximum building height; and 2. That a line item be included for Council's consideration in the 2018 Budget to retain consulting services to complete an "Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Study", generally as outlined in Appendix I to Report PLN 15-17. Executive Summary: This report responds to Council's Resolution #236/16 respecting community character and infill. The report provides background on concerns arising from infill and replacement housing in established neighbourhoods and the resulting effect it can have on the character of these areas. Community Focus Group meetings were held. Through these meetings, participants identified: what elements of community character were important to them; and, the need to protect such character as neighbourhoods mature and grow. This report also provides an overview of practices undertaken in other municipalities, and highlights the City's current planning approaches to address this issue. As building height has been identified to be an important element in defining character and it is currently not regulated in many areas within By-law 2511, staff are recommending that Council authorize staff to initiate a zoning amendment to By-law 2511 to establish a maximum building height. Additionally, staff recommend consideration be given in the 2018 Budget to approve an. "Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Study". Notice of this meeting was provided to those that attended the Focus Group meetings. Financial Implications: A line item will be included in the City Development 2018 Current Budget submission (account 2611.2392.0000 Consultative & Professional) for an "Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Study"). Costs and funding will be identified at that time. PLN 15-17 September 5, 2017 Subject: InfiII and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Page 2 1. Background At the meeting on November 21, 2016, Council passed the following Notice of Motion as moved by Councillor Brenner and approved through Resolution #236/16: "Guidelines to Protect Community Character (Infill) Whereas the City of Pickering recognizes the importance of community character and its preservation where infill construction takes place; Whereas the Planning Act enables approvals when it involves Draft Plans of Subdivision, but provides no jurisdiction to enable municipalities to impose conditions for individual building permits not subject to Draft Plan Conditions; Now Therefore be it resolved that the City Development Department commence a community engagement process via the establishment of a focus group that will enable Pickering to establish the creation of guidelines that will encourage developers and builders to be mindful of established community character when bringing forward draft plans and/or individual building permits in communities such as Fairport Beach, South Rosebank and others within Pickering. And that City staff forward copies of this resolution to all City of Pickering community associations and ratepayer groups seeking appointments to this focus group." The purpose of this report is to present the results from hosting two Focus Group meetings, outline other municipal practices and recommend a study be initiated to address infill housing in established neighbourhoods. Notice of this meeting was provided to everyone that attended the Focus Group meetings. 2. What is Community Character? The City's Official Plan recognizes that neighbourhoods are the fundamental building blocks of the City's urban areas, and endeavours to maintain the identity and character of the City's neighbourhoods as they evolve over time. For the South Pickering Urban Area, the Plan identifies 15 neighbourhoods (see Attachment #1). While community character can vary from neighbourhood to neighbourhood as well as within a neighbourhood, it is shaped by a number of common elements. Community character is the sum of all the attributes and assets that make a neighbourhood, or part thereof, unique and establishes a sense of place for its residents. This includes an array of natural and built characteristics. The table that follows outlines a number of these elements. The table has been derived from a variety of sources including research by other municipalities, staff's research, the focus groups, and decisions of the Ontario Municipal Board. PLN 15-17 September 5, 2017 Subject: Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Page 3 Community and Other Uses • Schools • Parks and trails • Community centres • Retail opportunities Public Realm • Sidewalks • Street trees • Street lighting • Landscaping treatments and fencing • Amount and location of on street parking • Views — to lake, Hwy 401, parks/trees • Above and/or underground services (poles/wires) Building • Height of buildings — number of storeys • Number of units per building • Cladding on house — brick, siding, wood • Size of house • Architectural style of house — front door versus side door, fenestration and glazing, pitch of roof, roof material, porches, enclosed porches • Age of house • Garage versus no garage — attached, detached, style of doors (single, double, triple) • Building facade • Lighting on/around building Land • Setbacks • Lot area • Lot frontage • Lot depth • Lot coverage • Side and rear yards • Type of landscaping — front and side yards, gardens/sod, openness, views and spacing • Ratio of hard surfaces to landscaping • Shadowing/Access to sunlight • Driveways — width, length, style and number, parking on lot, parking pad, gravel versus hard surface (asphalt, brick pavers) • Type of vegetation on lot • Topography of lot • Privacy/Amenity space • Fencing Transportation • Width of street — pavement • Length of street and number of curves/bends • Volume of pedestrian and vehicular traffic on streets • Number of intersections with stop signs and traffic signals Neighbourhood • Density gradient formed by types of building, with highest density at the centre of neighbourhood and lowest density at the periphery or vice versa • Focal points — parks, fountain, skating rink • Walkways • Curb versus ditch — stormwater collection While not a natural or built element of the community, community spirit, involvement, and volunteerism are also important characteristics that need to be considered. PLN 15-17 September 5, 2017 Subject: Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Page 4 3. What is `Intensification', `Infill' and `Replacement Housing'? The current Provincial, Regional and City policy framework promotes intensification and provides a strong mandate to accommodate population growth through the efficient use of existing serviced urban lands. The term `intensification' is used in many ways and it comes in different forms. It is helpful to define this term and provide the context of what each looks like as lands are developed and in some cases, buildings are replaced. Intensification may be defined as the development of a property, site or area at a higher density than currently exists. Although there is no standard definition of infill, for the purpose of this report, infill means small scale residential development in an established neighbourhood including the development of a vacant lot, additional housing units on the same lot by dividing existing homes into multiple units or creating new lots by further subdivision or land division approval. 'Replacement housing' or rebuilding, involves a smaller house being substantially altered or demolished and replaced with a new larger dwelling. While replacement housing is not considered intensification or infill, since it does not increase the number of units which occupy a lot, it can have an impact or conflict with the established character of a community. 4. What are the concerns of the community? In response to Council's direction, City Development staff commenced a community engagement process through Focus Group meetings. An eBlast invitation to participate in the focus group meetings was sent out to over 750 people, including the subscribers to the eNewsletter Your City. Right Now., Pickering 101 Class of 2016 graduates, Celebrating Sustainable Neighbourhood Groups and Pickering Ratepayer and Neighbourhood Associations. Staff invited participants to define what community character meant to them, and to identify measures for protecting that character when infill development occurs. The Focus Group meetings were held on May 2, 2017 in the evening and on May 11, 2017 in the afternoon. The participants that attended the meetings represented a variety of neighbourhoods in the City, with the majority coming from the Fairport Beach Neighbourhood Association, in the West Shore Neighbourhood. PLN 15-17 September 5, 2017 Subject: Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Page 5 Through the focus group meetings the community expressed pride in why their neighbourhood or community was distinct or unique and their comments are summarized as follows: • many old trees and significant green/open spaces • Frenchman's Bay and waterfront trail • friendly neighbours — people talk to each other out walking, cycling • walkable • narrower streets • large lots • no sidewalks • diverse housing styles and forms • large setbacks • pitch of house roofs lower than new homes • peaceful • unique community feel • diverse population culturally • heritage conservation area and valued heritage community • Whitevale is unique community • pride in community events • originally established as cottage country for Toronto residents • garages not in front of house • homes with porches When asked what challenges the neighbourhoods are facing and what is important to them in the future, they indicated the following: • infill development is not sensitive to the existing character of the neighbourhood • too many variances approved to construct large homes • need to limit building heights • need consistency in height and architectural design of homes • loss of community input into infill development • loss of privacy when small houses in shadow of larger house • new development is vertical (tall) • do not like large homes on small lots • neighbourhood deteriorating over last 17 years —smaller homes being replaced with larger homes • maintain mix of housing types, sizes and styles • tree preservation important — protect mature trees • maintain wildlife habitat — natural areas • maintain heritage homes • importance of ratepayer/neighbourhood associations • community spirit important • porches improve streetscape • control development through site plan PLN 15-17 Subject: InfiII and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods September 5, 2017 Page 6 Attachment #2 and #3 to this report outline the detailed notes of the comments provided at the Focus Group meetings. In addition, three written submissions were received at the focus group meetings. The submissions outline key elements to preserve character and best practices applied in other municipalities. Attachment #4 provides a summary of each of the submissions. The participants in the Focus Group meetings expressed how much they value the various elements of community character and recognized the impact that infill and replacement housing can have on a neighbourhood. The participants drew attention to the information included in the submissions of other municipal experiences as potential opportunities and tools to address their comments and concerns. The neighbourhood changes identified by the Focus Groups varied depending on the scale of development occurring. The impacts from converting or replacing an existing house are different from developing a new townhouse project or small apartment development. There has been a considerable amount of infill and replacement housing built within certain neighbourhoods of the City, where vacant or new lots have been created or where older dwelling units have been replaced. Sometimes these homes are two or three times larger than existing homes in the neighbourhood. The builder or owner often maximizes the existing zoning permissions to build houses that are larger and have smaller setbacks to the property line than what primarily exists in the neighbourhood. Although a neighbourhood may appear to be in transition due to the scale of infill housing occurring, many of the older houses may exist for some time in these neighbourhoods, and the original character of the neighbourhood may become compromised. The City of Pickering is not unique in this regard. The impact of new housing on the community character of established neighbourhoods has been studied and addressed by a number of municipalities in the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). 5. How are other municipalities dealing with Infill and Community Character? A number of municipalities in the GTA have faced similar issues in their established residential areas. For this reason, City Development staff have undertaken a review of best or common practices of other municipalities that is outlined in Attachment #5. Although each municipality has its own policy framework to work within, and unique circumstances or context that have resulted in a study, there are some common approaches to addressing the compatibility of new development with the character of established neighbourhoods. Many municipalities have developed and adopted design guidelines for replacement housing and additions in the established low density residential areas. Some municipalities have also implemented policy and zoning changes, and a number of municipalities require site plan control in these specific residential areas. The municipalities have in each case, defined distinct areas or lot types where these tools would be applied. PLN 15-17 Subject: Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods September 5, 2017 Page 7 The Town of Halton Hills, the City of Vaughan and the City of Brampton each passed an Interim Control By-law to study specific geographic areas or neighbourhoods and determine the best tools to use in addressing the issues raised in their respective municipality. Most of the municipalities reviewed have developed design guidelines to assist in assessing the compatibility of new development with the existing neighbourhood character. These guidelines often include photographs and sketches to illustrate various solutions for successful infill development. The guidelines can be used to guide the decisions of Council or the Committee of Adjustment and assist homeowners and architects with design principles to ensure new development is compatible with the community character. In some cases, the municipalities studied also amended their zoning by-law by updating regulations for building height and setbacks appropriate for the respective neighbourhood. The cities of Mississauga, Brampton, Burlington and Markham and the Town of Oakville each use site plan control as another tool to regulate infill development in established neighbourhoods. 6. How has the City dealt with Infill and Community Character? 6.1 Pickering Official Plan Building on the Pickering District Plan, the City's new Official Plan approved in 1997, recognized through residential policy and development guidelines that certain facets of the built form and lot pattern contributed to neighbourhood character. To respect the character of such areas, the Official Plan contains policies within certain neighbourhoods, which require new development to be compatible with the character of existing development. Matters to be considered include building height, yard setbacks, lot frontage, lot coverage, lot area and in some instances access to sunlight and parking provisions. The detailed policies are outlined in Attachment #6. For example, in some neighbourhoods, the City Plan policies and guidelines were established to guide the redevelopment of large lots, originally developed on private services, to ensure compatible new development, as full municipal services were extended into these areas. These neighbourhood policies together with the directions established through development guidelines were then implemented through zoning changes. The zoning changes could be area wide, such as was done for the Rougemount Drive area north of Kingston Road, or on an application by application basis such as is being done for the Dunbarton Neighbourhood. The City's 1997 Official Plan indicates that Council shall maximize the efficiency of existing infrastructure and minimize the consumption of vacant land by encouraging: major intensification in designated Mixed Use Areas; infill development of vacant or underutilized blocks of land; redevelopment and conversion of non-residential uses to residential uses in Mixed Use Areas and Residential Areas; and, new methods for the provision of compact urban form. PLN 15-17 Subject: Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods September 5, 2017 Page 8 With respect to this policy provision, the Plan also notes that, "Intensification provides an opportunity to increase the housing stock in the City. Almost all intensification activity occurring in Pickering will be on those lands designated as Mixed Use Areas, not low density areas. Infilling occurs in low density areas on vacant or underutilized parcels of land. The effect of this will be to improve the level and range of services available to most residents, without changing the character of their neighbourhoods." To implement the City's approach to intensification and bring its Official Plan into conformity with the Provincial Growth Plan, staff's efforts have focused on enabling substantial intensification in Mixed Use Areas. The City recently completed a review of its City Centre, revising population, density and built form targets of the Official Plan in order to accommodate significant growth and development through intensification. Later this year, the City will embark on a study of the Kingston Road Corridor and the Specialty Retailing Node to address major intensification opportunities within this corridor. While most intensification in South Pickering will be directed to areas outside established neighbourhoods, there will always be development interests and opportunities to build on vacant lands and in some cases redevelop lands in transition. New forms of development, such as use of common element condominium roads, instead of full public roads, now allow the possible introduction of rear lot assembly and development where previously none existed. The rapidly rising land values and housing prices are also causing more interest in creating smaller lots in established neighbourhoods to improve affordability. The City is now experiencing new challenges with development pressures in established neighbourhoods that do not have special policies, guidelines or updated zoning to address character issues. The scale and nature of redevelopment has evolved. The City must respond to an updated Provincial and Regional land use policy direction which limits opportunities for greenfield development, directs significant portions of new growth to built-up areas of the community through intensification, and limits the supply of serviced land to accommodate growth, resulting in changing housing market demands. At the same time, the City must respond to the increasing concerns from residents and Members of Council on how new development will respect the character of mature neighbourhoods. 6.2 Development Guidelines The development guidelines in the Official Plan Compendium Document, adopted by Council for various parts of the City's 15 neighbourhoods, identify design precincts, guiding principles and land use objectives for redevelopment, and in some instances, specific urban design standards for neighbourhoods. They have been used to review development applications including applications for subdivision, land division, zoning and minor variances. PLN 15-17 September 5, 2017 Subject: Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Page 9 As the Official Plan policies require review to ensure they are consistent with current Provincial and Regional policy directions, the new or updated development guidelines must also be prepared to address redevelopment pressures in established neighbourhoods. Development guidelines only come into play where a Planning Act application is required. Guidelines are not reviewed when processing a building permit. 6.3 Zoning By-law Zoning By-laws implement the objectives and policies of the City's Official Plan. The zoning of the lands within the City's mature neighbourhoods largely restricts the residential uses to single and semi-detached units with a variety of provisions regulating the lot frontages, front, side and rear yard setbacks, lot coverage and building height. The general provisions of the zoning by-laws regulate other matters such as parking and driveways. Within three of the City's older neighbourhoods that have predominantly low density housing forms - Rosebank, West Shore and Bay Ridges — there are 5 to 6 primary zones regulating development. Attachment #7 specifically outlines the provisions in each zone. There is a fair amount of variation between the various zone requirements, particularly with the minimum lot frontage, minimum lot area and minimum side yard requirements. In addition, there have been a number of variances to zoning by-law provisions over the years, which impact the community character and built form. Recently developed subdivisions do not often maintain surplus development potential. As such, the new neighbourhoods are often less threatened by infill and redevelopment rebuilds and loss of character. To update and address deficienciesto the current zoning by-laws, Council approved the initiation of a comprehensive zoning by-law review as part of the 2017 Budget. The intent is to review and update zoning regulations for the City by replacing the four by-laws currently in place (By-laws 2511, 2520, 3036, and 3037) with one comprehensive by-law. This review is a significant undertaking that is expected to take three to five years to complete. Building height has been identified as a key aspect to the compatibility of new infill and replacement housing in mature neighbourhoods. However, there is currently a significant deficiency in the City's By-law 2511, with no maximum building height for parts of the established neighbourhoods of Rosebank, West Shore and the Bay Ridges (see Lands Covered by By-law 2511, Attachment #8). 6.4 Lot Creation Infill can take place through the development of underutilized parcels; through the creation of new lots or multiple ownership arrangements. On a small scale, an owner may divide up to three new lots from a larger lot through the consent process, provided that each of the lot frontages and lot areas, both retained and severed, meet the requirements of the zoning by-law. On a larger scale, an owner may decide to create greater than three lots through a plan of subdivision process, or propose multiple ownership through a plan of condominium. PLN 15-17 Subject: Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods September 5, 2017 Page 10 These larger scale developments typically require a change in zoning provisions, and often introduce a higher intensity housing form (e.g., townhouses) than exists in the community (e.g., detached dwellings) while still meeting the low density requirements. In a number of neighbourhoods within the City, there are areas of historic large lot development, where property owners and developers are interested in intensifying their properties. However such lot creation, if not properly planned, can lead to development which is fragmented, segregated, or out of character with the community. 7. What directions should the City take to address Infill and Community Character? Given the new challenges the City is facing with the update of the Provincial Growth Plan and development pressures in established neighbourhoods, the City needs to update and improve the tools to address emerging issues with residential redevelopment. Municipalities have a variety of planning tools to draw on in considering how to address the respecting community character when infill and intensification occurs. These include: • a review of Official Plan policy and amendments if necessary, to ensure it implements current Provincial and Regional policy requirements • the review of zoning and the preparation of required amendments • the preparation of new and review of existing development and design guidelines • heritage district designations, and • if desired, the use of site plan control Staff recommend two separate, but related courses of actions. Firstly, staff recommends that Council authorize staff to initiate a zoning amendment to By-law 2511 to establish a maximum building height, where it is currently not regulated, and secondly, staff recommend that a planning and design study be initiated to address infill and replacement housing in established neighbourhoods. Once the planning and design study is completed, the appropriate maximum height in all or parts of the neighbourhoods covered by By-law 2511 will be revisited. The planning and design study will focus on: • replacement housing, infill of vacant lots and the creation of lots through severance • infill and redevelopment through subdivision or condominium approval The first part of the Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Study will involve the review and development of appropriate policies, guidelines, and/or zoning to address the compatibility of replacement housing, additions, and small scale lot creation with the character of mature neighbourhoods. The results will guide the planning and design of this kind of development in established neighbourhoods to help ensure that new development fits compatibly with its surroundings. PLN 15-17 September 5, 2017 Subject: Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Page 11 The second part of the study will involve the review and development of appropriate policies, guidelines, or zoning to address infill and redevelopment proposals, which meet the Official Plan density requirements, but result in a density that is higher than the current average for the surrounding area. New and updated planning tools will help guide staff and Council in considering larger scale proposals that are subject to subdivision, condominium and/or site plan applications, including various forms of townhouses. In addition to reviewing and developing planning tools as noted above, the study will also include: defining the location of and nature of mature neighbourhoods; identifying and assessing practices of other jurisdictions; and, undertaking a comprehensive community engagement program with residents, public agencies, and the development industry. It is estimated that the study could take up to 18 months to complete. It is recommended that Council consider during the 2018 Budget process a line item to engage the services of a consultant to undertake an Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Study, in accordance with the proposed study outline in Appendix I. Appendix Appendix I: Proposed Study Outline Attachments 1. Official Plan Map 9 South Pickering Urban Area Neighbourhoods — Edition 6 2. Focus Group Meeting Notes — May 2, 2017 3. Focus Group Meeting Notes - May 11, 2017 4. Summary of Written Submissions 5. Review of Other Municipal Practices 6. Applicable Policy Excerpts from Pickering Official Plan — Edition 6 7. Sample Zoning By-law Provisions for Detached Dwellings — Rosebank, West Shore & Bay Ridges 8. Lands Covered by By-law 2511 PLN 15-17 Subject: InfiII and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods September 5, 2017 Page 12 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Kathleen Power, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner— Policy Jeff Brooks, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy & Geomatics KP:JB:Id / Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Kyle Bentley, P.Eng. Director, City Development & CBO Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer u,Lel 7 Appendix I to Report PLN 15-17 InfiII and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Proposed Study Outline Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods Proposed Study Outline Study Objective: To develop the appropriate policy framework, regulations and tools so that the City has a sensitive way to transition between existing older housing stock and new contemporary housing development in established mature neighbourhoods. Study Actions: 1. Define and establish boundaries for the City's mature neighbourhoods following a detailed review of all of the urban neighbourhoods. 2. Gather background information on lot fabric including lot frontages, type of houses (singles, semis & townhouses), age of houses, size of houses, design issues (height & setbacks) and type of physical changes occurring within these neighbourhoods; the trends and factors influencing the changes. 3. Identify and evaluate the unique qualities and characteristics of each of the City's mature neighbourhoods and key issues regarding small scale infill & replacement housing that are a concern to residents in that area. 4. Provide an opportunity for full public engagement with residents, agencies and the development industry, including focused consultation with each unique area. 5. Identify practices of other municipalities which would be appropriate for application to specific areas within the City of Pickering. 6. Review the City's Official Plan, Design Guidelines, and Zoning By-laws, for mature neighbourhoods and develop new and propose amendments as necessary, that respect community character and improve the ability to: a. manage replacement housing, infill of vacant lots and the creation of lots through severance; b. guide planning of infill and redevelopment through subdivision and condominium approval. 7. Make recommendations on the use of other controls such as site plan control, heritage conservation district designations as additional strategies to respect the distinct character of the City's mature neighbourhoods. ATTACHMENT# f TO REPORI 11 PLA MAP9 SOUTH PICKERING URBAN AREA NEIGHBOURHOODS T CIN OF PICKERING Al PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DECEMBER. 2009 9i k CONJUNCTION WITH THE OTHER SCHEDULES AND THE TEXT. 1. Rosebank 2. West Shore 3. Bay Ridges 4. Brock Industrial 5. Rougemount LEGEND 6. Woodlands 7. Dunbarton 8. Town Centre 9. Village East 10. Highbush 11. Amberlea 12. Liverpool 13. Brock Ridge 14. Rouge Park 15. Duffin Heights PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN EDITION 6: Chapter Two --The Planning Framework 51 ATTACHMENT # 0 TO RE{AOR li PLN 6-17 Community Character and Infill Focus Group Tuesday, May 2, 2017 What makes your Neighbourhood distinct or unique? 1 Amberlea • peaceful • diversified community • traffic concerns 2. Bay Ridges — Krosno Blvd. • 1960's bungalows predominate • have not experienced the same level of change/intensification • neighbourhood stability 3. Duffin Heights • culturally diverse community • higher densities • narrower streets • parking an issue — cars hanging out over the curb into the street • small lots 4. Dunbarton — Appleview Road • likes seeing change and new big homes being built • infill is refreshing the street and the neighbourhood • detached homes • ditches 5. Liverpool — Glendale Road • mixed development — singles, semis, townhouses • former communities have been lost (Dunbarton, Fairport,...) need to protect remaining neighbourhoods • infill development has pretend front doors and does not address the street 6. Liverpool — Rosefield Road • small community • people used to know one another — however, this is changing • less communication 7. West Shore - Resident 1 • originally established as cottage country for residents from Toronto • streets lined with old trees • ditches • greenspace • only two roads in and out of the neighbourhood • diversification of housing Page 1 of 3 ATTACHMENT # TO REPORT t 9LN 1611 8. West Shore — Resident 2 • distinctive • low density • long-term residents • no sidewalks • waterfront access • neighbours know one another • evolving to bedroom community • front porches important — people use the front of their houses • no need for community watch 9. West Shore — Resident 3 • beach community • walkable • people stop and chat • unique community feel 10. Whitevale • Whitevale is a personality rather than a neighbourhood • unique living space • know your neighbours — get together, do events, help them out when needed • focus around United Church • heritage conservation area • concern that sense of community will be lost with the development of Seaton • a number of young families have moved in • hard to duplicate Other matters discussed • by-laws need to be changed to address appropriate setbacks, heights, floor area • too many variances • Committee of Adjustment doesn't listen to the concerns of residents • planning by poor past precedents • put in place tools to address massing and scale that is appropriate to the context of the neighbourhood • address shadowing and privacy issues • need to address visual aesthetics (cool versus warm appearance) Page 2 of 3 urTACHlMENT # :? TO REPORT 11 PSN 15-17 What are the challenges that your neighbourhood faces with infill and what do you view as important for the future? • concern that by-laws are allowing monster homes on small lots • want to see a mix of housing but limit monster homes • proud of community spirit and community programs — neighbourhood watch, Easter egg hunt • new homes cold and sterile • loss of diversity of housing • not proud of tall stone monster homes • not against change and new homes, just want to see it done right and complement and fit in with the neighbourhood • front porches are important • do more to encourage a sense of community and community spirit • new areas are being developed in a vertical sense rather than a horizontal sense resulting in parking problems • importance of ratepayer/neighbourhood associations • some areas are changing more rapidly than others and are under greater threat • need to protect mature trees • need to limit building heights • provide clear standards for side, front and rear setbacks to address potential privacy and shadowing issues • chain link fences allow for neighbours to talk to one another from their backyards • do not like houses with garages out front • want consistency in standards for the design for infill which allow for limited variation • infill must be sensitive to the existing character of a neighbourhood • Whitevale is unique in that it is on private services which dictates the size of lots • Whitevale is a different way to live, and is a cultural investment • more attention needs to be paid to transportation Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENT # 3 TO REPORT N PGR tn--\1 Community Character and Infill Focus Group Thursday, May 11, 2017 What makes your Neighbourhood distinct or unique? 1. City Centre — Diefenbaker Court • local amenities: the rec centre, civic centre, soccer fields, parks • local shopping: Loblaw's, Walmart • walkable neighbourhood — doesn't drive • access to transit • good for seniors 2. Liverpool — Storrington Street • lots of trees, older homes, land that backs onto the greenbelt • has a "country like atmosphere" • good community 3. Bay Ridges — Bayview Street • lots of small older homes (the old cottages) • on one side of the street is the old cottages, on the other is new houses • friendly neighbourhood — the neighbours all know each other, you can just walk over and knock on people's doors to say hi 4. Brock Ridge — Major Oaks Road • primarily street townhouses • there used be trees, but they have all died or been removed (ash borer) • narrow streets with cars parked on the streets, hanging off curbs — parking issues • not accessible for walking or transit • the community has changed much over the last 17 years — not all for the better 5. Fairport Beach/West Shore — Marksbury Road, West Shore Blvd, Cliffview Road • old cottages mixed with newer homes • no sidewalks, but little traffic — sidewalks not needed • nearby lake • access to the waterfront trail and greenbelt area • new homes are just starting to be built — concern with "monster homes" • new homes are out of character and their height and large decks infringe on neighbours' privacy • the area has a lot of history 6. Duffin Heights — Brandy Court • large mix of housing types • it is a new area with a very diverse community • need for a school in the neighbourhood Page 1 of 3 ATTACHMENT # 3 TO HFPOR' # PLN r5-11 Other matters discussed • parking issues on Major Oaks Road and poor by-law enforcement • the example of Brampton's design guidelines for infill development • poor implementation of the Pickering Official Plan • the renaming of old streets in the Fairport Beach community What are you proud of in your neighbourhood and what would you like to protect in the future? 1. Fairport Beach/West Shore — Marksbury Road, West Shore Blvd, Cliffview Road • house size and distance between houses is a priority — setbacks and privacy should be maintained into the future • a variety of front yard setbacks is good for making an interesting street • porches are important to create a good streetscape • fewer fences in the front yard to encourage resident interaction • the need to limit building heights • the need for strong tree preservation policies • the dirt and dust created during construction is an issue • the need to ensure adequate services are available and that stormwater management is considered in new developments • keep the naturalized open spaces — room for wildlife — natural corridors for deer • street signage recognizing the different historical communities of Pickering would be good for the community • eliminating some sidewalks would be good idea — forces drivers to slow down and pay attention — sidewalks are not needed everywhere (especially in some new communities) 2. Brock Ridge — Major Oaks Road • no big issue with "monster homes" in the neighbourhood • a mix of uses would be nice — would like more local commercial uses that you could walk to 3. Duffin Heights — Brandy Court • parking on the street should only be allowed on one side of the street, not both • would like to see fencing put up around natural features to prevent kids getting in and causing trouble • insufficient lighting along some paths 4. Bay Ridges — Bayview Street • general agreement with the Fairport Beach folks • would like to see some of the quaint little cottages maintained, but the pressure to develop is huge • affordability concerns if only large homes are available — lack of options for the younger generation 5. Liverpool — Storrington Street • too many stacked townhouses are being approved • would like to see more notification about local events Page 2 of 3 ATTACHMENT# . TO REPORT# QLY`� 15-17 6. City Centre — Diefenbaker Court • maintain the parks and open space • would like to see more "open" trails and tracks — like in the hydro corridor— not obscured by trees Other matters discussed • Planning staff, Building staff and Engineering staff should be cross -trained to better deal with issues • concerns about the behavior of contractors — swearing, bad behavior during all hours of the day • poor by-law enforcement — cars parked illegally are rarely ticketed and there is no service on weekends • insufficient lighting and a dead lamp post have been left unaddressed for the past two years in Duffin Heights • kids using the nearby forest in Duffin Heights for drugs and alcohol • the City's website is not accessible — can't find information on development applications or construction occurring in neighbourhoods • not enough advertisement for community events • better and more signage is needed on-site for development applications • the City lacks the tools to control development — "developers calling the shots" • the City has design guidelines that are rarely followed - e.g. the townhouses on Wharf Street do not fit in with the Nautical Village • need to update the Zoning By-laws and implement Site Plan Control for residential properties Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENTS TO F:Pjp t •?LN 15"11 Summary of Written Submissions Commenter Submission Summary Llewellyn Pereira Number of studies have been conducted on the subject of preserving community character. Three municipal examples and the University of Waterloo were cited. The submission also outlines some of the common findings of the various studies and key elements to preserve character. Craig Bamford An excerpt from the Brampton website regarding Mature Neighbourhood Area standards for additions and replacement housing, including a copy of the Guide to Applications — Site Plan Mature Neighbourhood Development and the Guide for Infill Housing in Mature Neighbourhoods from Brampton. Paul White Excerpt from City of Toronto website — Improving Response to Infill Construction Sites, which outlines the Toronto strategy to improve the City's response to minimize impacts of residential infill construction activity. ATTACHMENT # 5 To RE.POP,T fl PLN 15-i7 Review of Other Municipal Practices Municipality Requirements for Infill/Replacement Housing Mississauga • Design Guidelines and Site Plan Requirements for New • • Dwellings, Replacement Housing and Additions to assist homeowners and architects with the design principles of site plan approval to ensure development is compatible with the character of existing low-rise neighbourhoods addresses the scale and character, massing, building height, materials, grades, garages, driveways and preservation and protection of the natural environment Brampton • • Guide for Infill Housing in Mature Neighbourhoods two distinct and defined geographic areas of the City • • • • Guide for homeowners and architects to inform design choices for new dwellings, replacement housing and additions (greater than 50 square metres) properties located in these areas are subject to site plan approval guide outlines the elements of neighbourhood character with examples using diagrams and pictures of what to consider and alternatively avoid, in considering design solutions includes building setbacks, height and massing, garage and driveway location, front entrance and landscaping Oakville • • • • Design Guidelines for Stable Residential Communities that set expectations for preferred design outcomes and assist in assessing whether new development is compatible with the existing neighbourhood character of stable residential communities based upon the following guiding principles: sense of identity, compatibility, connectivity, sustainability, legacy and creativity apply to new residential dwellings and significant additions, subject to site plan control stable residential communities are specifically identified as low density residential areas on an Official Plan schedule Burlington • • • Site Plan Requirements and Urban Design Guidelines for low density residential zones new detached and semi-detached dwellings and additions greater than 75 square metres to existing detached and semi-detached dwellings are subject to site plan control within specific residential zones primary objective of the design guidelines and approval process is to ensure the design and site layout of dwellings retain and complement the overall character of the community's existing housing stock and natural areas Page 1 of 3 ATTACHMENT # 5 TO 1.1 IccQ REPORT # Municipality Requirements for Infill/Replacement Housing • Guidelines deal with general design considerations such as site layout; character and context; materials; height, mass and scale; garages and driveways; site grading; and boundary vegetation and city tree preservation Vaughan • Draft Urban Design Guidelines for Infill Development in • • • • Established Low -Rise Residential Neighbourhoods that apply in the Stable Community Areas identified geographically on a map included in the guidelines is a companion document to the Vaughan Official Plan 2010 established low-rise neighbourhoods are categorized as large, medium and small lot neighbourhoods general guidelines applicable to all lots and some that are specific to the lot size infill guidelines applicable for detached and semi-detached houses and separate guidelines applicable to townhouse units within low-rise residential neighbourhoods Halton Hills • • • Mature Neighbourhoods Character Study is underway, with the release of the Options and Proposed Recommendations Report in December 2016 objective of this study is to determine how to better accommodate residential replacement housing and additions while ensuring the character of the mature neighbourhood areas intent of the study is to ensure geographically defined areas within Georgetown and Acton, are maintained • Study involves review of existing Official Plan policies and Zoning By-law provisions including, building height, side yards, lot coverage, floor space index, driveways and tools such as tree protection Newmarket • • studied the intensification of stable residential areas, that are geographically identified on a detailed study map in response to a Council direction to review the compatibility of residential infill in established residential neighbourhoods • Official Plan policies distinguish between Stable Residential • • Areas and Emerging Residential Areas policies to protect Stable Residential Areas are intended to ensure new development is compatible with existing neighbourhood character results of this study have been amendments to the Zoning By-law regulating the building height, reducing the permitted lot coverage increasing the setbacks Page 2 of 3 ATTACHMENT # �J TO REPGR.T z PiA 6- CI Municipality Requirements for Infill/Replacement Housing Ottawa • Urban Design Guidelines for Low -Rise Infill Housing help implement design strategies outlined in the Ottawa Official Plan • Guidelines include photographs and sketches to illustrate various solutions for successful infill development • Guidelines address public streetscapes, landscaping, building design, parking and garages, heritage building alterations/additions and service elements (e.g. utility meters, transformers) Kitchener • completed Study on Residential Intensification in Established Neighbourhoods • • Study reviewed the planning approval process for development in established neighbourhoods, to determine if changes were necessary & determine how to encourage compatible development number of changes to the Zoning By-law were recommended to recognize the character of development in established neighbourhoods • Zoning By-law regulations updated included: building height, garage width, projection and driveway width and front yard setback • Study suggested application of site plan control in certain designated neighbourhoods, for single detached, semi-detached and duplex dwellings, as a pilot project • City will be undertaking a comprehensive review of the Urban Design Manual in 2017 which is intended to incorporate changes to guidelines affecting infill development Page 3 of 3 ATTACHMENT IfTO REporn N .Thi -717-1-7 Applicable Policy Excerpts from Pickering Official Plan - Edition 6 The following specific Official Plan policies address the consideration of neighbourhood character: Policy 2.9, the City policy on Neighbourhoods states, City Council, (b) shall endeavour to maintain the different identities and characters of its neighbourhoods as they evolve over time. Policy 3.2, the City policy on Land Use Objectives states, City Council shall, (d) while maintaining the character of stable residential neighbourhoods, increase the variety and intensity of land uses and activities in the urban area, particularly on lands designated Mixed Use Area, Regional Nodes and Employment Areas; Policy 3.9, the City policy on Urban Residential Areas states, City Council, (c) in establishing performance standards, restrictions and provisions for Urban Residential Areas, shall have particular regard to the following, (i) Protecting and enhancing the character of established neighbourhoods, considering such matters as building height, yard setback, lot coverage, access to sunlight, parking provisions and traffic implications. Policy 9.2, the City policy on Community Design Objectives states, To achieve the community design goal, City Council shall: (e) encourage developments that are designed to fit their contexts by considering the mix of uses, and the massing, height, scale, architectural style and details of existing, adjacent buildings; Policy 11.2, the City policy on Preparation of Urban Neighbourhood Plans states, City Council shall, (e) once development guidelines for a Detailed Review Area are adopted, shall ensure that any development proposal complies with the adopted guidelines (adopted guidelines area included in the Compendium Document to this Plan); Page 1 of 3 ATTACHMENT N 6 D REPORT N PLN 15~11 Policy 11.3, the Rosebank Neighbourhood policies state, City Council shall, (a) in the established residential areas along Bella Vista Drive, Dyson Road, Pine Ridge Road, Rodd Avenue, Rosebank Road, Rougemount Drive, Toynevale Road and Woodgrange Avenue encourage and where possible require new development to be compatible with the character of existing development. Policy 11.7, the Rougemount Neighbourhood policies state, City Council shall, (a) in the established residential areas along Woodview Drive, Twyn Rivers Drive, Sheppard Avenue and Rougemount Drive, encourage and where possible require new development to be compatible with the character of existing development. Policy 11.8, the Woodlands Neighbourhood policies state, City Council shall, (a) in the established residential areas along Highbush Trail, Old Forest Road, Rosebank Road and Sheppard Avenue, encourage and where possible require new development to be compatible with the character of existing development. (e) to provide direction for land use within the lands covered by the Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines: (v) recognize the existing low density development on Sheppard Avenue, and to this end, require the design of new residential or commercial development to be compatible with existing development with respect to such matters as building heights, yard setbacks, building orientation and massing, access to sunlight and privacy; Policy 11.9, the Dunbarton Neighbourhood policies state, City Council shall, (a) in the established residential areas between Spruce Hill Road and Appleview Road, including Fairport Road and Dunbarton Road, encourage and where possible require new development to be compatible with the character of existing development. Policy 11.12, the Highbush Neighbourhood policies state, City Council shall, (a) in the established residential areas along Pine Grove Avenue and Woodview Avenue, encourage where possible require new development to be compatible with the character of existing development and preserve to the greatest extent possible significant vegetation, Page 2 of 3 (v) which character is reflected by features included but not limited to: lots with low lot coverage; the existing lot pattern; style and siting of dwellings; and the significant mature vegetation; and, (vi) to this end, City Council shall, in the introduction of new dwellings and creation of new lots, use strategies including but not limited to: lower lot coverages, wider lot frontages, deeper lot depths, wider side yards, deeper front yards, lower building heights and lower densities along the existing older roads; density and lot frontage gradients between development fronting the existing older roads and development fronting new internal streets; buffering between new development and existing older development; careful establishment of lot lines, and siting of new dwellings to reflect existing building setbacks and yard depths, to assist in protection of significant vegetation; and tree preservation plans; Policy 13.10, the City policy on Design of Buildings states, City Council shall, (c) where new development is proposed within an existing neighbour or established area, encourage building designs that reinforce and complement existing built patterns such as form, massing, height, proportion, position relative to street, and building area to site area ratios; Page 3 of 3 Maximum Building Height Between 9.0 m and 10.7 E o N r E Lo O r Maximum Lot Coverage 33% 0 co co 33% Or 40% - 35% 33% Minimum Side Yard One side 1.8 m Other side 3.0 m With attached garage: 1.8 m One side 1.5 m Other side 2.4 m With attached garage: 1.5 m E E CVi o r O CV E U) r One side 1.5 m Other side 2.4 m With attached garage: 1.5 m Minimum Rear Yard E u, r E in ti E in n E to r E in n Minimum Front Yard E to t•-: i'vi' E in h E E if)i to N O E E O i in CO O r E t0 r Minimum Lot Area 550 sq. m E ZT f/) '0 CO ‘t 460 sq. m 450 sq. m E t5 co 0 CO -4- Minimum Lot Frontage E E 0 W- r E 0 to r E E 0 0 O L V - O r 15.0m 17.0 m for corner lots E 0 6 r Uses Permitted Detached dwelling Detached dwelling Detached dwelling Detached dwelling Detached dwelling "R3" in 2511 "R4" in 2511 "R4-22" in 2511, as amended by 7312/13 "S" in 2511, as amended by 1001/79 "R4" in 2520 ATTACHMENT # i TO REPORT # E5.17 ATTACHMENT # 8 TO RE2Cg7 aV PLN 1.5— 17