Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Information Report 03-21
Information Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: 03-21 Date: January 4, 2021 From: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Subject: Draft Plan of Subdivision Application SP-2020-02 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10/20 Medallion Developments (Pickering Finch) Ltd. Part of Lot 31, Concession 2 (450 Finch Avenue) 1. Purpose of this Report The purpose of this report is to provide preliminary information regarding applications for Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment, submitted by Medallion Developments (Pickering Finch) Ltd., to facilitate a residential development. This report contains general information on the applicable Official Plan and other related policies, and identifies matters raised to date. This report is intended to assist members of the public and other interested stakeholde rs to understand the proposal. Planning & Development Committee will hear public delegations on the applications, ask questions of clarification, and identify any planning issues. This report is for information and no decision on these applications are being made at this time. Staff will bring forward a recommendation report for consideration by the Planning & Development Committee upon completion of a comprehensive evaluation of the proposal. 2. Property Location and Description The subject property is located on the north side of Finch Avenue, west of Rosebank Road, and south of the Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) corridor within the Rouge Park Neighbourhood (see Location Map, Attachment #1). The property has an area of approximately 2.03 hectares with frontages along Finch Avenue, Rougewalk Drive, and Mahogany Court. The site contains a 2-storey stone dwelling (identified as a potentially significant heritage resource), a shed and a barn at the southeast corner of the property, which are proposed to be demolished. The abutting property to the east (441 Mahogany Court) is subject to an easement that provides access to the subject property onto Finch Avenue. The remaining lands are vacant with clusters of trees scattered throughout the site (see Air Photo Map, Attachment #2). Information Report No. 03-21 Page 2 Surrounding land uses include: North: East: South: West: To the north is the York/Durham truck sanitary sewer, the CPR corridor and the Enbridge Pipeline. Immediately to the east is an established residential subdivision consisting of single and semi-detached dwellings fronting onto Rougewalk Drive and Mahogany Court. Across Finch Avenue is a Hydro Corridor. Immediately to the west are vacant lands, owned by Marshall Homes. In June 2020, Council approved applications for Zoning By-law Amendment, Draft Plan of Subdivision and Draft Plan of Condominium for these lands to permit a residential common element condominium development consisting of 42 lots for detached dwellings. The City is currently reviewing an application for Site Plan Approval for the lands. 3.Applicant’s Proposal The applicant has submitted applications for Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning By-law Amendment to permit a residential development consisting of 31 lots for detached dwellings fronting onto the extensions of Rougewalk Drive and Mahogany Court (see Submitted Draft Plan of Subdivision, Attachment #3). Lot/Block Number Land Area Proposed Use Lots 1 to 31 1.44 hectares 31 lots for detached dwellings fronting onto the extensions of Rougewalk Drive and Mahogany Court having lot frontages ranging between 11.0 metres and 15.1 metres. Part Blocks 32, 33 and 34 0.07 hectares Proposed part blocks to be consolidated with part blocks within the adjacent Registered Plan of Subdivision to the east, to form 3 new lots for detached dwellings. Block 35 0.001 hectares Environmental lands to be conveyed to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA). Block 36 0.08 hectares Conveyance of a road widening along the entire frontage of Finch Avenue and daylight triangles to the Region of Durham. Roads 0.44 hectares Conveyance of municipal roads (extension of Rougewalk Drive and Mahogany Court) to the City. Total 2.03 hectares As part of the proposal, the applicant is proposing to extend Rougewalk Drive further west intersecting with Finch Avenue, and extending Mahogany Court to connect to the extension of Rougewalk Drive. Information Report No. 03-21 Page 3 4. Policy Framework 4.1 Durham Regional Official Plan The Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as “Living Areas”. The “Living Areas” designation shall be used predominately for housing purposes. The Plan also states that lands within the Living Areas designation must be developed in compact urban form through higher densities and by intensifying and redeveloping existing areas, particularly along an arterial road. Finch Avenue is designated as a Type ‘B’ Arterial Road. Type ‘B’ Arterial Roads are designed to carry large volumes of traffic at moderate to high speeds, have some access restrictions and generally have a right-of-way width ranging from 30 to 36 metres. Type ‘B’ Arterial Roads generally promote higher density land uses with shared or combined access. The proposal generally conforms to the Durham Regional Official Plan. 4.2 Pickering Official Plan The subject lands are located within the Rouge Park Ne ighbourhood and are designated “Urban Residential Areas – Low Density Area”. This designation primarily provides for residential or related uses at a maximum net residential density of up to and including 30 units per net hectare. The proposal will result in a residential density of approximately 21.2 units per net hectare, which falls within the permitted density range. A portion of the subject site along the north property line is designated “Open Space System – Natural Areas”. The Natural Areas land use designation is further identified as “Significant Woodlands” and “Rouge-Duffins Wildlife Corridor”. An Environmental Impact Study is required for any proposed development within 120 metres of a key natural heritage or key hydrologic feature. The purpose of the study is to identify and evaluate the natural heritage features and hydrologic features, determine the minimum required vegetation protection zones, and determine the site’s development limits to prevent potential negative impacts from the proposed development on the natural heritage features. The Official Plan states that in establishing performance standards, regard shall be had to protecting and enhancing the character of established neighbourhoods by considering matters such as building height, yard setbacks, lot coverage, access to sunlight, parking provisions and traffic implications. The Official Plan also states that where new development is proposed within an existing neighbourhood or established area, City Council shall encourage building design that reinforces and complements existing built patterns such as form, massing, height proportion, position relative to the street, and building area to site ratio. The Rouge Park Neighbourhood Policies discourage designs that require the use of reverse frontages, berms, and significant noise attenu ation fencing adjacent to Finch Avenue. The policies also require new developments to have regard for the Rouge Park Management Plan and encourage the retention of environmentally sensitive lands. Information Report No. 03-21 Page 4 The applicant’s proposal will be assessed against the policies and provisions of the Official Plan and the Rouge Park Neighbourhood Policies during further processing of the applications. 4.3 Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines The Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines are intended to ensure lands within the neighbourhood are developed in a cohesive, well-designed neighbourhood. In the review of development proposals, the following broad goals are to be considered: develop a strong visual and physical relationship with Finch Avenue through enhanced flankage elevations featuring ample glazing, entrances and architectural detailing ; maintain a connection with surrounding natural areas and the existing neighbourhood, which can be accomplished through careful design and placement of internal road s, walkways and siting of buildings; and residential areas to feature a variety of housing types of high-quality design arranged on efficient street patterns. The Rouge Park Neighbourhood Map and Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines – Tertiary Plan proposes a future westerly extension of Rougewalk Drive connecting to Finch Avenue. The proposed extension is shown extending west through the subject property and continuing through the lands further to the west. The applicant is proposing the westerly extension of Rougewalk Drive intersecting with Finch Avenue through the subject property only, and extending Mahogany Court to connect to the extension of Rougewalk Drive. For ground-oriented dwellings (detached, semi-detached, townhomes, etc.), attention to a dwelling’s relationship with the street is important. Accordingly, the design should consider the following principals: homes should feature prominent main entrances that are easily identifiable and visible from the street; homes should provide windows and doorways at the front face of the house to provide “eyes on the street”; homes should offer an amenity area that accommodates opportunity for street-side interaction; and garages should be scaled and integrated with the design of a house such that it is not the dominant aspect of the home. The proposed development will be reviewed in detail to ensure the requirements of the Rouge Park Neighbourhood policies and the applicable Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines have been maintained. 4.4 Potential Heritage Home The Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines – Tertiary Plan identifies a potential heritage home located on the subject property. To facilitate the proposed development, the applicant is proposing to demolish the building. Information Report No. 03-21 Page 5 A Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report (CHER), prepared by Parslow Heritage Consultancy Inc., was submitted in support of the applications. The report identifies the potential heritage home as a stone cottage designed with Neoclassical detailing, a style that is common in Ontario and indicative of 1800 to 1860 architectural styling. The home has a ground floor area of 88 square metres, with a building height of 7.0 metres. The home is considered to be in fair condition. The exterior and interior of the home have been subject to vandalism, and interior renovations have been made to the first and second floors. The exterior stonework of the home shows signs of past repair. Overall, the report concludes that the modifications made to the interior of the home do not appear to have significantly impacted the structural integrity of the building. The report states that though the use of stone as a primary building material was common in the mid-ninetieth century. This stone cottage is one of a few examples remaining in the City of Pickering. The property meets the criteria under Ontario Regulation 9/06 of the Ontario Heritage Act to be classified as a heritage resource of value or interest, as the structure is important in defining, maintaining or supporting the character of the Hamlet of Cherrywood. The CHER concludes that the cultural landscape surrounding the stone cottage has been compromised and that the rural landscape no longer contains the historic road grid or lot survey of the historic township. As such, to facilitate the proposed development, the CHER recommends the stone cottage be demolished and a commemoration strategy be developed to be incorporated into the entrance of the proposed development. This option will conserve the heritage value of the neighbourhood while not restricting new development. The CHER also recommends that professional documentation of the stone cottage be archived before demolishing the building. This would include a complete set of as found drawings, and a full photographic record of the exterior and interior of the building. South Façade East Façade North Façade West Façade Information Report No. 03-21 Page 6 4.5 Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 6578/05 The subject lands are currently zoned “A” – Rural Agricultural Zone within Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 6578/05, which permits a detached dwelling, home occupation, agricultural and related uses, recreational and limited institutional uses. The southeast corner of the property is zoned “O” – Public and Private Open Space Zone within Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 6578/05, which permits various recreational uses (see Zoning Map, Attachment #4). The properties immediately to the east fronting Rougewalk Drive and Mahogany Court are zoned “S5-2” and “SD-7”, permitting detached and semi-detached dwellings respectively. The applicant is requesting to rezone the subject property to allow for zoning standards that are currently established within the abutting subdivision to the east (see Zoning Provisions Comparison Chart, Attachment #5). 5. Comments Received 5.1 Public Comments Comments were received from an adjacent property owner, Louisville Homes Limited, in regards to a holding provision on a vacant lot immediately to the east of the subject property (441 Mahogany Court). The holding provision requires the removal of an easement by the applicant in order for the property owner to construct a detached dwelling. Louisville Homes Limited is requesting that the easement be removed through these applications. 5.2 Agency Comments 5.2.1 Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) the development proposal is in close proximity to the Belleville Subdivision, which is classified as a mainline; and CPR requests that the development comply with the recommended guidelines developed for the Railway Association of Canada and the Federatio n of Canadian Municipalities. 5.2.2 Durham District School Board no objections to the applications; and students generated from this development will attend existing neighbourhood schools. 5.2.3 Other Agencies As of writing this report, no comments have been received from the Region of Durham, Toronto and Regional Conservation Authority, or Durham Catholic District School Board. Information Report No. 03-21 Page 7 5.3 City Department Comments As of writing this report, no comments have been received from Engineering Services. 5.3.1 Fire Services Department no objections to the proposal. 5.3.2 Peer Review Comments from the City’s Heritage Consultant The City has retained Branch Architecture, Heritage Consultants, to review the Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report (CHER) submitted by the applicant. The following is a summary of the comments received: The submitted CHER be revised as a Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) to bring it in alignment with current heritage practise, in accordance with the 2006 Ontario Heritage Tool Kit. The scope of the HIA aligns with much of that provided in the CHER and it would satisfy the requirements set out in the 2003 Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines. The Tool Kit advises that a heritage professional, architectural and landscape consultants, “with knowledge of accepted standards of historical research, identification, evaluation, and methods of conservation and m itigation” should undertake the HIA. A heritage architect (a member of the Canadian Association of Heritage Professionals, or CAHP) should be engaged to confirm the findings of the conditions assessment and comment on building conservation options. Based on the findings of the CHER as well as further research and analysis, the City should pursue designating this cultural heritage resource under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act. The subdivision design should give further consideration to views of the building from Finch Avenue. A heritage architect should complete a review of the later additions and alterations to determine if other elements merit inclusion as heritage attributes. A heritage architect should be engaged to advise on site plan options that would allow for the conservation of the property’s cultural heritage value and heritage attributes as part of the residential development. The heritage architect should be a CAHP member with experience collaborating on the redevelopment of heritage properties. 5.3.3 Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee At the November 25, 2020, Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee Meeting, the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee provided the following comments, which are anticipated to be approved at their next scheduled meeting in January 2021: The subject property is not listed or designated on the City of Pickering Municipal Heritage Register under the Ontario Heritage Act. The property is noted on the City’s Inventory of Historic Places. Recommends that Council list 450 Finch Avenue on The Municipal Heritage Register under Section 27 of the Ontario Heritage Act. Information Report No. 03-21 Page 8 Recommends that the Heritage Impact Assessment be revised as per the recommendations of Branch Architecture. Recommends that once the revised Heritage Impact Assessment resubmission is received by the City of Pickering, that it is circulated to Heritage Pickering to consider future designation and conservation of the property. 6. Planning & Design Section Comments The following is a summary of key concerns/issues or matters of importance raised to date. These matters, and others identified through the circulation and detailed review of the proposal, are required to be addressed by the applicant before a final recommendation report to Planning & Development Committee: ensure conformity with the City’s Official Plan and neighbourhood policies and applicable development guidelines; require the applicant to explore opportunities to retain and restore the heritage home within the proposed development, and ensure the heritage building maintains a prominent view from Finch Avenue; ensure the subject property is listed on The Municipal Heritage Register under Section 27 of the Ontario Heritage Act; require the applicant to provide parkland dedication instead of a cash-in-lieu contribution to establish a public park to serve the residents of this neighbourhood; ensure the applicant’s requested zoning performance standards, particularly building height, yard setbacks and lot coverage, are generally consistent with the existing built form within the adjacent residential subdivision to the east; ensure a tree compensation plan and/or financial contribution is provided to address the loss of existing mature trees and other significant vegetation ; ensure Part Blocks 32, 33 and 34 are merged with the adjacent landowners to the east and; ensure the landowner pays its proportionate share of the cost of the Rouge Park Neighbourhood Study and the cost of the stormwater management pond . Further issues may be identified following receipt and review of comments from the circulated departments, agencies and public. The City Development Department will conclude its position on the application after it has received and assessed comments from the circulated departments, agencies and public. 7. Information Received Copies of the plans and studies listed below are available for viewing on the City’s website at pickering.ca/devapp or in person by appointment at the office of the City of Pickering, City Development Department: Draft Plan of Subdivision, prepared by Candevcon East Limited, dated May 2020; Cultural Heritage Evaluation Report, prepared by Parslow Heritage Consultancy Inc., dated May 26, 2020; Environmental Impact Study, prepared by Savanta Inc., dated June 2020; Information Report No. 03-21 Page 9 Environmental Noise Assessment, Prepared by YCA Engineering Limited, dated May 2020; Functional Servicing and SWM Report with Preliminary Grading Plans, prepared by Candevcon East Limited, dated July 2020; Geotechnical Report, prepared by Alston Associates, dated April 7, 2017; Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by WSP Canada Inc., dated March 2016; Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by WSP Canada Inc., date June 2, 2016; Planning Rationale Report, prepared by Candevcon East Limited, dated July 2020; Stage 1 and 2 Archaeological Assessment, prepared by Parslow Heritage Consultancy Inc., dated June 25, 2020; Traffic Brief, prepared by Trans-Plan Transportation Inc., dated June 2020; and Tree Inventory and Preservation Plan, prepared by Savanta Inc., dated June 2020. 8. Procedural Information 8.1 General written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the City Development Department; oral comments may be made at the Electronic Statutory Public Meeting; all comments received will be noted and used as input to a Recommendation Report prepared by the City Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council; any member of the public who wishes to reserve the option to appeal Council’s decision must provide comments to the City before Council adopts any by-law for this proposal; and any member of the public who wishes to be notified of Council’s decision regarding this proposal must request such in writing to the City Clerk. 9. Owner/Applicant Information The owner of this property is Medallion Developments (Pickering Finch) Ltd. and is represented by GHD Limited. Attachments 1. Location Map 2. Air Photo Map 3. Submitted Draft Plan of Subdivision 4. Zoning Map 5. Zoning Provisions Comparison Chart Information Report No. 03-21 Page 10 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Isabel Lima Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Planner I Chief Planner Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design IL:ld Date of Report: December 18, 2020 Original Signed By Original Signed By Original Signed By Finch Avenue Saugeen DriveAmberlea RoadRosebankRoad Wildflower DriveSeguin SquareSequinPark 1:5,000 SCALE: © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City DevelopmentDepartment Location MapFile:Applicant:Property Description: SP-2020-02 & A 10/20 THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Date: Dec. 10, 2020 ¯EMedallion Developments (Pickering Finch) Ltd.Part of Lot 31, Concession 2(450 Finch Avenue) SubjectLands L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\SP\2020\SP-2020-02_A 10-20 Medallion Homes\SP-2020-20_A 10-20_LocationMap.mxd Attachment #1 to Information Report 03-21 Finch Avenue R oug e w a lk D r i ve Saugeen DriveAmberlea RoadMapleview CourtRosebankRoadM ahoganyCourtWildflower DriveSeguin Square1:5,000 SCALE: © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City DevelopmentDepartment Air Photo MapFile:Applicant:Property Description: SP-2020-02 & A 10/20Medallion Developments (Pickering Finch) Ltd.Part of Lot 31, Concession 2 THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Date: Dec. 10, 2020E(450 Finch Avenue) L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\SP\2020\SP-2020-02_A 10-20 Medallion Homes\SP-2020-20_A 10-20_AirPhoto.mxd ¯ SubjectLands Attachment #2 to Information Report 03-21 Submitted Draft Plan of Subdivision City Development Department Dec. 10, 2020FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. SP-2020-02 & A 10/20 Medallion Developments (Pickering Finch) Ltd.Applicant: Property Description: DATE: File No: Part of Lot 31, Concession 2 (450 Finch Avenue) L:\Planning\01-MapFiles\SP\2020 Finch Avenue Existing Location of Potential Heritage Home Attachment #3 to Information Report 03-21 R oug e w a lk D r i v e RosebankRoadFinch Avenue Amberlea RoadWildflower Drive Mahogany Court O2 S1 S5-2 S4 O2 S3 OS-HL O2(H)S5-2 A S5-7 O2 S3 A S1-E S5-7 A S1S3 S1-E A NP S5-2 S5-2 SD-7 A O2 C-18 A 1:4,000 SCALE: © The Corporation of the City of Pickering Produced (in part) under license from: © Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; © Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved.; © Municipal Property Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; City DevelopmentDepartment Zoning MapFile:Applicant:Property Description: THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY. Date: Dec. 17, 2020 SubjectLands SP-2020-02 & A 10/20Medallion Developments (Pickering Finch) Ltd.Part of Lot 31, Concession 2 (450 Finch Avenue)The above map is a digital extraction of the zoning schedule. The zoning schedulesin Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, are the official schedules. L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\SP\2020\SP-2020-02_A 10-20 Medallion Homes\SP-2020-20 A10-19_Zoning.mxd EAttachment #4 to Information Report 03-21 Zoning Provisions Comparison Chart The table below summarizes the requested zoning performance standards for the proposed lots, and the existing zoning standards for the detached and semi-detached dwellings to the east. Provision Proposed Zoning Standard (SP-2020-02, A 10/20) Existing “S5-2” Zone Standards Existing “SD-7” Zone Standards Permitted Uses Detached dwelling Detached Dwelling Semi-detached Dwellings Lot Area (min) 300 square metres 250 square metres 205 square metres Lot Frontage (min) 11.0 metres 9.0 metres 7.0 metres Lot Depth (min) 28.5 metres - - Front yard (min) 4.5 metres 4.5 metres 4.5 metres Interior Side Yard (min) 1.2 metres on one side, 0.6 metres on the other side 1.2 metres on one side, 0.6 metres on the other side 1.2 metres Flankage Yard (min) 2.5 metres 2.7 metres 2.7 metres Rear Yard (min) 7.5 metres 7.5 metres 7.0 metres Lot Coverage (max) 50 percent 48 percent 50 percent Building Height (max) 12.0 metres 12.0 metres 12.0 metres Attachment #5 to Information Report 03-21