HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLN 30-24Report to
Planning & Development Committee
Report Number: PLN 30-24 Date: November 4, 2024
From: Kyle Bentley
Director, City Development & CBO
Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 01/24
City Initiated: City of Pickering Consolidated Zoning By-law
Recommendation:
1. That Report PLN 30-24 regarding the City Initiated City of Pickering Consolidated Zoning
By-law be received (see Appendix I);
2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 01/24, initiated by the City of Pickering, to prepare a Consolidated Zoning By-law, be approved; and
3. That staff be directed to bring forward the final Consolidated Zoning By-law, subject to
refinements as may be warranted following comments and submissions at, and after, the
Planning & Development Committee Meeting and staff’s further review, for enactment at the December 16, 2024 Council meeting.
Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to present a City-wide Draft Consolidated Zoning By-law (the “Draft Zoning By-law”) to Council for consideration. Upon Council approval, a final Consolidated Zoning By-law will be forwarded to the December 16, 2024 Council Meeting for enactment. This final By-law may include any refinements or amendments following staff review of comments and submissions made at or after the
Planning & Development Committee Meeting.
The Consolidated Zoning By-law Review (CZBR) was initiated in 2020, and involved extensive public consultation, including virtual and in-person open houses. Over 160 public and stakeholder comments were received during the CZBR, leading to the preparation of a City-wide Draft Consolidated Zoning By-law. The First Draft of the Consolidated Zoning By-law
(the “First Draft ZBL”) was released for comment in early 2023.
The Second Draft Zoning By-law (the “Second Draft ZBL”) was made available for comment prior to, and at, the Statutory Public Meeting, held on April 2, 2024. The third Draft Zoning By-law – September 2024, (the “Draft Zoning By-law”), discussed in this Report, incorporates revisions based on public and stakeholder feedback received at, and since, the Statutory
Public Meeting, as well as any other matters identified by staff.
The Draft Zoning By-law consolidates six existing parent zoning by-laws, introducing modernized definitions, zoning provisions, and zoning categories. Recent legislative changes aimed at increasing housing supply are also incorporated. The Draft Zoning By-law adopts the approaches to definitions, zoning provisions, and zone category structure of the two newer
PLN 30-24 November 4, 2024
Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 01/24 City Initiated: City of Pickering Consolidated Zoning By-law Page 2
existing parent zoning by-laws 7364/14 Seaton and 7553/17 City Centre. These By-laws will
be repealed and replaced by the Draft Zoning By-law. The four older existing parent zoning
by-laws 2511, 2520, 3036 and 3037 will be superseded by the Draft Zoning By-law to assist in the interpretation of site-specific exceptions carried forward to the Draft Zoning By-law.
The Draft By-law is on the City’s website, and the public can view the Draft Zoning By-law text and an interactive zoning map online. Subject to Council’s adoption of the By-law, written
notice of passing of the Draft Zoning By-law will be mailed, starting a 20-day appeal period.
Staff will advise Council on any appeals to the Ontario Land Tribunal. Following the approval of the final Zoning By-law, staff will carry out implementation tasks to ensure there is appropriate training and maintenance related to the approved Zoning By-law.
Staff is recommending that Council approve the Zoning By-law Amendment Application
A 01/24 and that the Final Draft Zoning By-law, as may be amended, be forwarded to the
December 16, 2024 Council meeting for adoption.
Relationship to the Pickering Strategic Plan: The recommendations in this report respond to the Pickering Strategic Plan Priority of Advance Innovation & Responsible Planning to Support a Connected, Well-Serviced Community.
Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the recommendations of this report.
Discussion: The purpose of this report is to present, for consideration at the November 4th Planning & Development Committee Meeting, a City-wide Draft Consolidated Zoning By-law (the “Draft Zoning By-law”). Subject to Council’s approval, a final Consolidated Zoning By-law will be forwarded to the December 16, 2024 Council Meeting, subject to any refinements or amendments following comments and submissions at, and after, the Planning & Development
Committee Meeting, and staff’s further review.
This report addresses revisions to the Draft Zoning By-law resulting from public, stakeholders', and staff comments, received on the Second Draft - February 2024 Zoning By-law (the “Second Draft ZBL”) presented at the Statutory Public Meeting held April 2, 2024 (see Information Report 01-24, Attachment 1).
The Draft Zoning By-law is a consolidation of the City’s current six parent Zoning By-laws 2511, 2520, 3036, 3037, 7364/14 and 7553/17. It is the first major modernization of definitions, general provisions, and restructuring of zoning categories. Also included for the first time is an online interactive zoning map. A copy of the Draft Zoning by-law is available for viewing on the City’s website at Let’s Talk Pickering, and at the offices of the City of Pickering, City
Development Department.
PLN 30-24 November 4, 2024
Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 01/24 City Initiated: City of Pickering Consolidated Zoning By-law Page 3
1. Background
In 2020, a multi-phase Consolidated Zoning By-law Review (CZBR) was initiated. It
started with the completion of eight discussion papers, and the initiation of public consultation. The discussion papers provided an overview of the relevant provisions in each of the existing parent zoning by-laws, and an analysis of how the existing zoning related to planning policies and legislation at the local, regional, and provincial levels.
The discussion papers identified the following:
• recent best practices in Ontario municipalities
• guiding principles for the preparation of a new consolidated zoning by-law
• an assessment of key policy gaps and issues
• recommendations for a new zoning category structure
Public consultation included: the opportunity for feedback on the Let’s Talk Pickering
website page (the central place for information about the CZBR); four virtual open
houses; two in-person open houses; and six update reports to Planning Committee and
Council. In total, over 160 people attended, or viewed, in-person and virtual open
houses. The Second Draft ZBL was presented to the Planning & Development
Committee at a Statutory Public meeting on April 2, 2024.
The First Draft ZBL and the Second Draft ZBL were released for public review and
comment in 2023 and 2024 respectively. Approximately 165 comments have been
received from the public and stakeholders on these first two Draft Zoning By-laws. Staff
reviewed the comments, met with the public and stakeholders to discuss the comments,
and revised the Draft Zoning By-law as appropriate. See Attachment 3, Responses to
Public and Agency Comments, for a listing of all comments received on the Draft Zoning
By-law and corresponding explanation on how each comment has been addressed.
2. The Draft Zoning By-law
A Statutory Public Meeting was held April 2, 2024. Attachment 1, Information Report
01-24, considered at this meeting, discusses the preparation of the Draft Zoning By-law,
its structure, provisions, and zoning categories. The following discussion addresses
additional information and matters that have emerged since the Statutory Public
Meeting. Attachment 2, New and Modified Provisions included in the Third Draft By-law,
outline how the Draft Zoning By-law presented at the Statutory Public Meeting has been
updated.
2.1 Public and Stakeholder Comments
All comments received from both the public and stakeholders on the Draft Zoning By-law are summarized in Attachment 3, Responses to Public and Agency Comments. Comments intended to streamline the Draft Zoning By-law, and improve the
administrative process for development, were also received from City staff.
PLN 30-24 November 4, 2024
Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 01/24 City Initiated: City of Pickering Consolidated Zoning By-law Page 4
Attachment 3 also includes staff responses, as well as an indication of whether, and
how, the Draft Zoning By-law has been amended.
2.2 Nightclubs
At the Statutory Public Meeting, a member of the Committee expressed concern about the calls received from the public over noise from nightclubs impacting residential neighbourhoods. Staff consulted further with Municipal By-law Enforcement and Legal
Services. Staff understand that nightclubs are a significant cause for resident
complaints about noise, and are the basis for on-going legal proceedings. Accordingly, a nightclub definition and provisions prohibiting nightclubs within 150 metres of a residential zone, and prohibiting an outdoor patio accessory to a nightclub, were added to the Second Draft ZBL. Staff will continue to review other potential additions to the
definition of a nightclub, so as to differentiate it from a restaurant operating with an
outdoor patio.
2.3 Driveway Length
At the Statutory Public Meeting, a Committee member suggested requiring builders to increase minimum required driveway lengths to accommodate larger vehicles. Existing
site-specific zoning by-laws require garage fronts to be set back a minimum of
6.0 metres, which accommodates a minimum driveway length of 6.0 metres, and typical vehicle lengths.
It is the experience of staff that developers are often requesting a reduction to driveway lengths, which is rarely supported. Longer driveway lengths are often achievable on
deeper lots. Increasing minimum driveway lengths (i.e.,i.e. the minimum setback to the
garage door) on lots with reduced minimum depths, could potentially decrease the interior length of the dwelling, and/or decrease rear yards depths. At this time, staff is not proposing to increase minimum driveway lengths but will conduct a further review of the merits of requiring greater minimum driveway lengths.
2.4 Transitions provisions
The Draft Zoning By-law contains provisions that recognize, for a five-year period, the status of existing Planning Act and Building Act applications. The following are key points of the proposed transition provisions:
• Transition provisions lapse 5 years after the adoption of the Draft Zoning By-law.
• Minor variances related to complete development applications can be processed under existing parent zoning by-laws in force at the time of submission of the complete development application.
• A revision submitted after the adoption date of the Draft By-law to a complete site
plan application (including an application for a multi-phase development site), would
not be grandfathered.
PLN 30-24 November 4, 2024
Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 01/24 City Initiated: City of Pickering Consolidated Zoning By-law Page 5
2.5 Technical Revisions
The Draft Zoning By-law contains housekeeping provisions that delegate technical
revisions to the Director, City Development & CBO without the requirement for a minor
variance or zoning by-law amendment. Technical revisions are those that are
administrative and do not change the intent and purpose of the Draft Zoning By-law.
2.6 The Draft By-law will either replace or supersede the current six parent By-laws
The Seaton Zoning By-law 7364/14 and City Centre Zoning By-law 7553/17 will be repealed and replaced by the Draft Zoning By-law, while existing Zoning By-laws 2511,
2520, 3036, 3037, will not be repealed but superseded by the Draft Zoning By-law.
Zoning By-laws 7364/14 and 7553/17 are the most recent of the City’s parent zoning by-laws reflecting modern development. The approaches to definitions, zoning provisions and zone category structure used in these newer by-laws have been updated and carried forward to the proposed Draft Zoning By-law and applied city-wide.
Some site-specific exceptions carried forward into the Draft Zoning By-law refer to
existing parent Zoning By-laws 2511, 2520, 3036, 3037. Therefore, these by-laws will not be repealed at this time and will continue to be in force as needed for the exceptions. Once the Draft Zoning By-law comes into force, staff will review the carried forward exceptions to determine whether any further exceptions can be consolidated
into the approved Zoning By-law. Staff will also review whether any of the superseded
zoning by-laws can be repealed. Parent Zoning By-law 3036 is required to continue to be in force until Official Plan Amendment 38 (OPA 38) implementing the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node and Intensification Study is approved by the Ontario Land Tribunal, and an implementing zoning by-law for the OPA 38 lands
amending the Draft Zoning By-law is prepared.
2.7 Provincial Policy Statements and Legislative Changes
The Draft Zoning By-law has been prepared to be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2020 (PPS 2020) as required by Section 3 of the Planning Act. Recently, after preparation of the Draft Zoning By-law, the Province introduced the new policy
document, the Provincial Planning Statement, 2024 (PPS 2024), replacing the PPS
2020, and incorporating the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, 2020. The PPS 2024 is expected to come into force later this year after the writing of this report. The Draft By-law has been prepared to be consistent with draft PPS 2024.
Since the initiation of the Consolidated Zoning By-law Review, the Planning Act has
been modified to introduce, among other changes, a requirement that all municipalities
permit a minimum of three dwelling units on residential lots that have full municipal services and to eliminate minimum parking requirements for Protected Major Transit Station Areas (PMTSAs). The existing parent zoning by-laws were amended in 2023 to permit up to two additional dwelling units on most residential lots in Pickering and to
introduce accompanying zoning provisions. These new zoning permissions and
PLN 30-24 November 4, 2024
Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 01/24 City Initiated: City of Pickering Consolidated Zoning By-law Page 6
provisions have been carried forward into the Draft Zoning By-law. To implement the
changes to minimum parking requirements in PMTSAs, the Draft Zoning By-law
proposes the elimination of minimum parking requirements in Pickering’s PMTSA as identified in the recently approved Durham Region Official Plan.
2.8 Durham Region and Pickering Official Plans
Envision Durham, the Region’s recently approved official plan, describes how the
Region will accommodate growth, while meeting the needs of residents and businesses
and protecting resources in Durham. Earlier in 2024, a review of the City’s Official Plan was initiated and is scheduled to be completed by 2026. A new Pickering Official Plan will conform to Envision Durham policy direction. Envision Durham and a new Pickering Official Plan will inform future updates to the Draft Zoning By-law. The Planning Act
requires municipalities to update comprehensive zoning by-laws within three years of
the adoption of a new official plan. A consolidated city-wide zoning by-law with updated provisions will greatly assist in future comprehensive zoning by-law reviews intended to bring zoning into conformity with a new official plan.
3. Next Steps
Written notice of passing of the final By-law will be mailed by the City, no later than
15 days after the day the by-law is passed, to each person and public body that filed a written request to be notified of Council’s decision, and to any prescribed person or public body. Paper copies of the Council passed Draft Zoning By-law are required to be sent to the clerk of Durham Region.
The appeal period to the Ontario Land Tribunal (OLT) is 20 days from the date of the
notice of passing of the final Zoning By-law. The following individuals may make an appeal to the OLT under the Planning Act:
• persons who made oral submissions at the April 2, 2024, statutory public meeting
• persons who provided written submission to Council
• the registered owner of any land to which the Draft Zoning By-law applies
Any appeals will be reviewed by City Development and Legal Services. Information and
next steps on appeals will be discussed in future reports to Council.
Once the Zoning By-law is approved, significant staff resources will continue to be
required for the following:
• Posting the Draft Zoning By-law and the interactive zone map to the City’s website and continuing maintenance and updating.
• Providing training to City staff users of the Draft Zoning By-law to ensure consistent zoning review.
• Updating templates used in City Development for zoning review.
PLN 30-24 November 4, 2024
Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 01/24 City Initiated: City of Pickering Consolidated Zoning By-law Page 7
•Reviewing development applications to ensure compliance with both the existing
parent zoning by-laws and the Draft Zoning By-law (where applicable zoningprovisions are appealed to the OLT) until the applicable appeals have beenwithdrawn or disposed of, and the applicable sections of the Draft Zoning By-law aredeemed to have come into force.
Appendix:
Appendix I Draft Consolidated Zoning By-law (under separate cover)
Attachments:
1.Information Report 01-24
2.New and Modified Provisions included in the Third Draft By-law3.Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By:
Original Signed By Original Signed By
Mimi Lau, MCIP, RPP Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Chief Planner
Original Signed By Original Signed By
Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Manager, Zoning & Administration Director, City Development & CBO
ML:DW:jc
Recommended for the consideration
of Pickering City Council
Marisa Carpino, M.A. Chief Administrative Officer
Original Signed By
Information Report to
Planning & Development Committee
Report Number: 01-24 Date: April 2, 2024
From: Catherine Rose Chief Planner
Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 01/24 City Initiated: City of Pickering Consolidated Zoning By-law
1.Purpose of this Report
The purpose of this report is to provide information on the second draft of the Consolidated
Zoning By-law (Draft Zoning By-law). This report contains general information on the
public engagement undertaken, how the current six parent Zoning By-laws wereconsolidated, the new structure of the zoning categories, and the new zoning provisions.
This report is intended to assist members of the public and other interested stakeholdersin understanding the proposed Draft Zoning By-law. The Planning & Development
Committee will hear public delegations on the Draft Zoning By-law, ask questions for
clarification, and identify any planning matters for further consideration. This report is forinformation purposes, and no decision is to be made at this time. Following a review ofthe public, agency and stakeholder comments, staff will bring forward a recommendationreport, and a final Draft Zoning By-law for consideration by the Planning & Development
Committee.
2.The Draft Zoning By-law
A copy of the Draft Zoning By-law is available for viewing on the City’s website at Let’sTalk Pickering, or at the offices of the City of Pickering, City Development Department.
3.Background
Report PLN 18-19 to the Planning & Development Committee outlined the need to
update and consolidate the City’s existing six parent Zoning By-laws 2511, 2520, 3036,3037, 7364/14 (Seaton) and 7553/17 (City Centre). In 2020, a multi-phase ComprehensiveZoning By-law Review (CZBR) was initiated. Phase 1 of the CZBR continued throughout2020 and 2021, during which staff, with the assistance of the consulting firm of WSP
Canada Group Ltd. (WSP) prepared a public consultation strategy, completed eight
discussion papers, and hosted an electronic open house.
The discussion papers provided an overview of the relevant provisions in each of theexisting parent zoning by-laws, and an analysis of how the existing zoning relates toplanning policies and legislation at the local, regional, and provincial levels. Also
discussed were recent best practices in Ontario municipalities that have undertaken acomprehensive zoning by-law review. Guiding principles, and an approach to structuringzoning categories, were recommended.
Attachment 1 to Report PLN 30-24
Information Report 01-24 Page 2
As Phase 2 of the CZBR commenced, the project was renamed as the “Consolidated” Zoning By-law Review, to more accurately reflect the nature of the work completed. By contrast, a “Comprehensive” Review would imply updating the zoning to implement the Official Plan designations. A Comprehensive Review of the Zoning By-law will be initiated following completion of a new Pickering Official Plan.
Phase 2 includes the preparation of the Draft of the Consolidated Zoning By-law, and public engagement. In 2022, staff released the first Draft Zoning By-law for public review and comment. Staff reports PLN 03-22 and PLN 36-22 provided information on the first Draft Zoning By-law. Following comments received from City staff, the public, agencies,
and stakeholders, a second Draft Zoning By-law was released on February 6, 2024. This
Information Report 01-24 provides general information on the second Draft Zoning By-law.
4. Community Engagement
The City’s website page, Let’s Talk Pickering, has been the central place for information
about the CZBR and the Draft Zoning By-law. The site contains the following information:
the eight discussion papers; reports to Council; open house and informational videos; the text and mapping of the Draft Zoning By-law; staff answers to submitted questions; the community consultation program; and next steps.
To date, as part of Phases 1 and 2, four virtual open houses, and two in-person open
houses have been held to address the discussion papers and the Draft Zoning By-law.
The most recent in-person open house was held on March 12, 2024, at Pickering City Hall. Another in-person open house will be held at Pickering City Hall, immediately prior to the April 2, 2024 Statutory Public Meeting. Notice for these events has included ads in the News Advertiser (when in publication), and more recently, the Toronto Star; mobile
boulevard signage; City website notices; brochure and post card drops; and emailing.
In total, over 160 people have attended, or viewed, in-person and virtual open houses. The comments received are summarized in the Comment Summary Matrix available for viewing on Let’s Talk Pickering. This matrix also includes consultant/staff responses to each comment. To date, approximately 165 comments have been received from the
public, agencies, and City staff. Comments on the Draft Zoning By-law will be accepted
until May 1, 2024, and will be reviewed to inform the preparation of the final Draft Zoning By-law. The final Draft Zoning By-law will be presented later in 2024 to Council for consideration.
The comments received to-date fall generally into one of the following themes:
• general zoning inquiries for particular properties, requests for clarification of zoning provisions, and corrections to the online zoning map
• requests from landowners/developers, some with submitted development applications, for site-specific zoning changes (staff advises that requests for
site-specific zoning changes are not being considered through the Consolidated Zoning By-law Review)
Information Report 01-24 Page 3
• requests from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to rezone certain Authority-owned lands to Environmental Protection that are currently zoned for residential uses, despite the presence of natural heritage features or hazard lands
• general comments on the structure of the Draft Zoning By-law
• comments that support more mixed-use zoning and implementation of Official Plan policies
5. Consolidating the Existing Zoning By-laws
5.1 The existing six parent Zoning By-laws are consolidated
Except for the Seaton Zoning By-law 7364/14, the zones and provisions of all the existing parent zoning by-laws have been consolidated and harmonized in the Draft Zoning By-law. This includes administrative provisions; definitions; general regulations; parking and loading standards; definitions; zone-specific provisions for permitted uses,
and lot and building standards; and provisions for enactment and transition. Seaton
Zoning By-law 7364/14 has been retained except for its administration and enactment chapters as a chapter within the Draft Zoning By-law.
In addition to the six parent zoning by-laws, the Draft Zoning By-law incorporates the following two zoning amendments recently passed by Council:
• regulations for Infill and Replacement Housing in Established Neighbourhoods, which were adopted by Council in 2021 and approved by the Ontario Land Tribunal in 2023, are applied to the certain neighbourhoods through an overlay map, and establish additional lot and building standards that supersede the provisions for a given zone
• regulations for Additional Dwelling Units, adopted by Council in 2023, bringing the Draft Zoning By-law in conformity with the changes to the Planning Act in 2022
5.2 Zoning categories are restructured
The structure of the zone categories in the six existing zoning by-laws was reviewed to
establish a single structure of new zones for the Draft Zoning By-law that would apply city-wide. The approach to consolidating the existing zone categories was to establish a clear zone structure to guide future development, simplify and consolidate the similar provisions of existing zones, reduce the number of zones, order residential zones according to density, and carry forward some site-specific zoning as exceptions. See
Attachment 1 for a table of the Proposed Zone Categories.
Consolidating residential zones from the six existing Zoning By-laws is a critical step in the new city-wide Draft Zoning By-law. The intent of this step of the process was not to result in any significant variances from the existing residential standards, but rather simplify and consolidate the similar provisions of the existing zones. The residential
zones are reorganized into the three broader zone categories of R1 – Residential First Density, R2 – Residential Second Density, and R3 – Residential Third Density, according to the density of their permitted dwelling types. Within each category, there are subzones that establish lot frontage and lot area provisions.
Information Report 01-24 Page 4
Attachment 2 of this report is a concordance table, demonstrating how the zones from the existing parent Zoning By-laws have been consolidated into the zone structure for the Draft Zoning By-law.
5.3 Site-specific Exceptions
The existing six parent Zoning By-laws contain exceptions approved through site specific
rezonings after the enactment of the original parent by-laws. All exceptions were reviewed to determine if they could be consolidated, deleted, or carried forward into the Draft Zoning By-law. This review looked at whether there were similarities among the exceptions, and whether they complied with zones and provisions of the Draft Zoning
By-law. Exceptions were deleted if they complied with the provisions of the Draft Zoning
By-law.
Exceptions were carried forward if they did not comply with the Draft Zoning By-law provisions. Carrying forward exceptions into the Draft Zoning By-law ensures that existing zoning permissions are not removed from properties. This approach has
reduced, in half, the total number from approximately 850 to 412 Exceptions.
The exceptions that are carried forward are numbered, and the numbers are displayed at a property level on the interactive zone map. The user of the By-law can then search for it numerically if their property is subject to an exception.
5.4 Transition provisions
The Draft Zoning By-law contains provisions that recognize, for a five-year period, the
status of existing Planning Act and Building Act applications. These proposed provisions allow applications submitted prior to the Draft Zoning By-law coming into effect, to continue to be processed according to the Zoning By-laws that were in effect at the time of application. A by-law comes into effect once Council passes a by-law and the appeal
period lapses without any appeals, or when a by-law is appealed, and the Ontario Land
Tribunal (OLT) issues an order dismissing the appeal, or approving, or approving with modifications.
5.5 Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retail Node Intensification Areas
Council adopted Official Plan Amendment 38 (OPA 38) for the Kingston Road Corridor
and Specialty Retail Node Intensification Areas on January 24, 2022. On November 4, 2022,
the Region of Durham issued a notice of decision to approve OPA 38. That decision was appealed to the OLT. The Draft Zoning By-law does not propose zoning for the lands subject to OPA 38. The new Zoning By-law will be amended following the decision of the Tribunal, and preparation of an implementing zoning by-law for the OPA 38 lands. Until
then, the OPA 38 lands will continue to be subject to the current Zoning By-law 3036.
5.6 Minister’s Zoning Orders
The Planning Act authorizes the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to make a Minister’s Zoning Order (MZOs) and enact an Ontario Regulation to regulate the use of land, buildings, and structures anywhere in Ontario. MZOs are a level of zoning that
Information Report 01-24 Page 5
supersedes municipal zoning wherever the municipal and provincial zoning conflict. Four provincial Minister’s Zoning Orders cover certain lands in Pickering, and often, the public are unaware that their property may be subject to an MZO. To improve the understanding of zoning in Pickering, the Draft Zoning By-law contains an informational schedule (Schedule 2) that outlines the lands that are subject to the four MZOs. Schedule 2 –
Minister’s Zoning Orders, can be viewed on Let’s Talk Pickering. In addition, Section 16, Enactment, states that the MZOs remain in effect and supersede the Draft Zoning By-law.
6. New and modified zoning provisions
In addition to consolidation, the six existing Zoning By-laws were reviewed against the
City’s Official Plan, current best practices, and emerging issues. Attachment 3 outlines
the sections of the CZBL that were updated or modified. Below is a discussion of the new zoning provisions that were added to address the various emerging issues of Council or community interest.
6.1 Short-term rentals
The existing parent Zoning By-laws do not contain provisions regulating short-term
rentals. New provisions are proposed that would permit, in all residential zones, a maximum of one short-term rental in an owner-occupied principal residence, as defined by the federal Income Tax Act.
6.2 Nightclubs
In response to public comments with concerns over noise, a new general regulation is
introduced that prohibits nightclubs within 150 metres of a Residential Zone, as well as prohibiting an outdoor patio accessory to a nightclub.
6.3 Agriculture-Related and On-Farm Diversified Uses
To conform to the City’s Official Plan and Provincial Policy, zoning regulations within the
Rural Zones in the Draft Zoning By-law are updated to permit a range of agriculture-
related uses, such as a farm winery or cidery, and on-farm diversified uses, such as an agritourism use. On-farm diversified uses are restricted to one hectare or two percent of the total lot area. These uses provide flexibility for farm-owners in diversifying their income, and boost the rural economy, while protecting primary agricultural use.
6.4 Driveway widenings and minimum interior garage size
The current Seaton and Duffin Heights By-laws restrict driveway widths. The Draft Zoning By-law proposes zoning provisions regulating a maximum driveway width, and minimum landscaped open area, to accommodate additional parking. All residential lots in the City will be subject to restrictions to accommodate additional parking while
protecting on-site drainage and streetscape concerns. These proposed provisions align
with the additional dwelling unit zoning provisions.
Information Report 01-24 Page 6
Also introduced are zoning provisions requiring a minimum interior garage size. These provisions ensure residential garages adequately accommodate the minimum required vehicle parking and storage.
6.5 Integrated Sustainable Design Standards
To support the Integrated Sustainable Design Standards (ISDS), and as directed by
Council Resolutions #914/22 and #3323/23, new definitions, and provisions that address heat island reduction, permit rooftop solar panels, specify minimum outdoor amenity areas for certain uses, and required minimum bicycle parking rates, are included in the Draft Zoning By-law.
7. Next Steps
As noted in Section 2, a copy of the Draft Zoning By-law is available for viewing on the City’s website at Let’s Talk Pickering, or at the offices of the City of Pickering, City Development Department.
Comments on the Draft Zoning By-law will be accepted up to May 1, 2024. Until this
time, staff will continue to engage the public and stakeholders through providing
information on the City’s website and meeting with stakeholders as requested. Comments received will inform staff of the preparation of a final Draft Zoning By-law. A staff recommendation report along with the final Draft Zoning By-law will be presented to Council later in 2024.
8. Procedural Information
• written comments regarding the Draft Zoning By-law should be directed to the City Development Department
• oral comments may be made at the Statutory Public Meeting
• all comments received will be noted and used as input to a Recommendation Report and a final Draft Zoning By-law prepared by the City Development Department for consideration at 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 the final Draft Zoning By-law
• 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
Attachments
1. Proposed Zone Categories
2. Concordance of Zoning Categories 3. New and Modified Provisions
Information Report 01-24 Page 7
Prepared By:
Original Signed By
Mimi Lau, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner, Zoning & Administration
Original Signed By
Deborah Wylie, MCIP, RPP Manager, Zoning & Administration
Approved/Endorsed By:
Original Signed By
Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner
ML:DW:ld
Date of Report: March 18, 2024
Proposed Zone Categories
Page 1 of 5
Attachment 1 to Information Report 01-24
Zone Name Zoning
Symbol(s)
Main Permitted Uses
Residential
Residential First Density R1A, R1B, R1C,
R1D, R1E, R1F,
R1G, R1H, R1I
Single-detached
Residential Second Density R2A, R2B R1 permitted uses plus semi-detached, duplex
Residential Third Density R3A, R3B, R3C R2 permitted uses plus townhouses, apartments
Commercial
Commercial General C1 Range of commercial uses
Commercial Automotive Service C2 Automobile Service Station, Car Wash,
Convenience Store, Restaurant, Outdoor Display
Area uses
Commercial Highway C3 Range of Retail and Automobile Service uses
Commercial Hamlet CH Range of Retail and Automobile Service uses
Mixed-Use
Local Node LN Retail, service and office uses
Community Node CN Community, cultural and limited retail uses
Mixed-Use General MU1 Residential, retail, service uses
City Centre
City Centre One CC1 Residential, commercial and community uses
City Centre Two CC2 Residential and commercial
City Centre Residential One CCR1 Townhouses, office and personal service, park
City Centre Residential Two CCR2 Similar but wider range of uses permitted in CCR1
Proposed Zone Categories
Page 2 of 5
Zone Name Zoning
Symbol(s)
Main Permitted Uses
City Centre Civic CCC Civic, community and office uses
City Centre Open Space CCOS Park and community uses
City Centre Natural Heritage System CCNHS Community garden and park
Employment
Employment General E1 Manufacturing
Employment Prestige E2 Light manufacturing, warehousing
Employment Commercial E3 Places of assembly, light manufacturing,
warehousing, limited retail
Environmental Protection and Open Space
Environmental Protection EP Agriculture, conservation, passive recreation
Open Space OS Agriculture, community centre, park, community
garden
Open Space Waterfront OSW Aquaculture, marina, community centre,
conservation
Stormwater Management Facility SWM Stormwater management pond
Golf Course GC Golf course
Rural and Oak Ridges Moraine
Agriculture A Agriculture, a detached dwelling, farm related
uses, community centre, schools
Quarry Q Agriculture, quarry, forestry
Oak Ridges Moraine – Agricultural ORMA Agriculture, a detached dwelling, conservation
Proposed Zone Categories
Page 3 of 5
Zone Name Zoning
Symbol(s)
Main Permitted Uses
Oak Ridges Moraine – Environmental
Protection
ORMEP Conservation uses
Oak Ridges Moraine – Institutional ORMI Community uses, school, recreation, place of
worship
Oak Ridges Moraine – Commercial ORMC Limited commercial uses
Oak Ridges Moraine – Residential General ORMR5,
ORMR6
Detached dwelling
Institutional and Other
Institutional General I1 Community uses
Urban Reserve UR Uses legally existing at the date of the passing of
the Draft Zoning By-law, passive recreation
Utility UT Conservation, passive recreation, parking lot,
stormwater management
Seaton Urban Area
Seaton Low Density Type 1 SLD1 Detached, semi, duplex, multi-attached, block &
back-to-back townhouses
Seaton Low Density Type 1 Heritage Lot SLD1HL Detached, semi, duplex, multi-attached, block &
back-to-back townhouses
Seaton Low Density Type 1 Townhouses SLD1T Detached, semi, duplex, multi-attached, block &
back-to-back townhouses
Seaton Low Density Type 2 SLD2 Detached, semi, duplex, multi-attached, block &
back-to-back townhouses
Seaton Low Density Type 2 Multiple SLD2M Detached, semi, duplex, multi-attached, block &
back-to-back townhouses
Proposed Zone Categories
Page 4 of 5
Zone Name Zoning
Symbol(s)
Main Permitted Uses
Seaton Medium Density Detached & Semi SMDDS Seaton Low Density uses and apartment dwelling
Seaton Medium Density Multiple SMDM Seaton Low Density uses and apartment dwelling
Seaton High Density SH Street multiple attached dwelling, apartment
dwelling, personal service uses
Seaton Mixed Corridor Type 1 SMC1 Range of residential, community, retail and
automotive uses
Seaton Mixed Corridor Type 2 SMC2 Range of residential, community, retail and
automotive uses
Seaton Mixed Corridor Type 3 SMC3 Range of residential, community, retail and
automotive uses
Seaton Minor Commercial Cluster SMCC Apartment dwelling, live work, and retail uses
Seaton Local Node SLN Block and back-to-back townhouses, live work,
and apartment dwelling, and retail, service,
entertainment uses
Seaton Community Node SCN Seaton Local Nodes uses, home improvement
centre, hotel
Seaton Community Node Pedestrian
Predominant Area
SCNPP Seaton Local Nodes uses, home improvement
centre, hotel
Seaton Prestige Employment General SPEG Light manufacturing, business services, schools,
hotel, data and communications
Seaton Prestige Employment Node SPEN Light manufacturing, business services, schools,
hotel, data and communications
Seaton Prestige Employment Heritage Lot SPEHL Light manufacturing, business services, schools,
hotel, data and communications
Proposed Zone Categories
Page 5 of 5
Zone Name Zoning
Symbol(s)
Main Permitted Uses
Seaton Employment Service SES Office, retail, business service
Seaton Community Use SCU Schools, place of worship, community
Seaton District/Community Park SDCP Community and recreational uses
Seaton Open Space SOS Limited community and recreational uses
Seaton Utility SUT Water and sewage pumping and treatment, energy
pipelines, highways
Concordance of Zoning By-law Categories
Page 1 of 4
Attachment 2 to Information Report 01-24
Parent Zoning By-law
Zone Category
Draft Zoning By-law
Zone Category
Residential
R6 First Density – R1A
V First Density – R1B
R1 First Density – R1C
R3 First Density – R1D
R4 First Density – R1E
S1 First Density – R1F
S2 First Density – R1G
S3 First Density – R1H
S4 First Density – R1I
SD Second Density – R2A
RM Second Density – R2B
RMM Second Density – R3A
n/a Third Density – R3B
n/a Third Density – R3C
Mixed Use, Commercial and Other Zones
City Centre City Centre One – CC1 City Centre One – CC1
City Centre Two – CC2 City Centre Two – CC2
City Centre Residential
One – CCR1 City Centre Residential One – CCR1
City Centre Residential
Two – CCR2 City Centre Residential Two – CCR2
City Centre Civic – CCC City Centre Civic – CCC
Open Space – OS City Centre Open Space – CCOS
Natural Heritage System
–NHS
City Centre Natural Heritage System –
CCNHS
Mixed Use LCA, C1 Local Node Zone – LN
CCA Community Node Zone – CN
MU Mixed Use Zone – MU
Commercial SC, SPC, CO, C2 Commercial General – C1
CA, CA3 Automotive Service Commercial – C2
C3 Highway Commercial – C3
Concordance of Zoning By-law Categories
Page 2 of 4
Parent Zoning By-law
Zone Category
Draft Zoning By-law
Zone Category
HM, HMC Hamlet Commercial – CH
Employment M2, M2S General Employment – E1
M1 Prestige Employment – E2
MC Employment Commercial – E3
Open Space and
Environmental Protection G Environmental Protection – EP
O1, O2, OS, CP, and NP
Exceptions Open Space – O
O3B Open Space Water – OSW
OS – SWM Storm Water Management Facility –
SWM
GC Golf Course – GC
Agriculture and Rural A Agriculture A
Q Quarry Q
ORM-A ORMA
ORM-EP ORMEP
ORM-I, ORM-R ORMI
ORM-M1 ORM-M1
Institutional and Other ES, I(C), I(R), I(PRA), CU General Institutional – I1
R(NH) Institutional/Residential – I2
UR Urban Reserve – UR
CNR Utility – U
Concordance of Zoning By-law Categories
Page 3 of 4
Parent Zoning By-law
Zone Category
Draft Zoning By-law
Zone Category
Seaton
Residential Low Density Type 1 –
LD1 Seaton Low Density Type 1 – SLD1
Low Density Type 1 –
Townhouses – LD1-T
Seaton Low Density Type 1 –
Townhouse (SLD1T)
Low Density Type 1 –
Heritage Lot – LD1-HL
Seaton Low Density Type 1 –
Heritage Lot (SLD1HL)
Low Density Type 2 –
LD2 Seaton Low Density Type 2 (SLD2)
Low Density Type 2 –
Multiple – LD2-M
Seaton Low Density Type 2 – Multiple
(SLD2M)
Medium Density –
Detached & Semi – MD-
DS
Seaton Medium Density – Detached &
Semi (SMDDS)
Medium Density –
Multiple – MD-M
Seaton Medium Density – Multiple
(SMDM)
High Density – H Seaton High Density (SHD)
Mixed Use Mixed Corridor Type 1 –
MC1
Seaton Mixed Corridor Type 1 –
SMC1
Mixed Corridor Type 2 –
MC2
Seaton Mixed Corridor Type 2 –
SMC2
Mixed Corridor Type 3 –
MC3
Seaton Mixed Corridor Type 3 –
SMC3
Minor Commercial
Cluster – MCC
Seaton Minor Commercial Cluster –
SMCC
Local Node – LN Seaton Local Node – SLN
Community Node – CN Seaton Community Node – SCN
Community Node
Pedestrian Predominant
Area – CN-PP
Seaton Community Node Pedestrian
Predominant Area – SCNPP
Employment Seaton Prestige
Employment General –
PEG
Seaton Prestige Employment General
– SPEG
Seaton Prestige
Employment Node – PEN
Seaton Prestige Employment Node –
SPEN
Concordance of Zoning By-law Categories
Page 4 of 4
Parent Zoning By-law
Zone Category
Draft Zoning By-law
Zone Category
Seaton Prestige
Employment Heritage Lot
– PE-HL
Seaton Prestige Employment Heritage
Lot – SPEHL
Seaton Employment
Service – ES Seaton Employment Service – SES
Community Use Seaton Community Use –
CU Seaton Community Use – SCU
Natural Heritage and Open
Space
Seaton
District/Community Park
– DCP
Seaton District/Community Park –
SDCP
Seaton Open Space –
OS Seaton Open Space – SOS
Seaton Stormwater
Management – SWM
Seaton Stormwater Management –
SSWM
Seaton Golf Course – GC Seaton Golf Course – SGC
Seaton Natural Heritage
System – NHS
Seaton Natural Heritage System –
SNHS
Seaton Cemetery – CE Seaton Cemetery – SCE
Seaton Hamlet Heritage
Open Space – HHOS
Seaton Hamlet Heritage Open Space
– SHHOS
Seaton Utility – Utility –
UT Seaton Utility – SUT
New and Modified Provisions
Page 1 of 3
Attachment 3 to Information Report 01-24
Draft Zoning By-law Section Added/Modified
1 Administration
1.9 Transition Clarifies how provisions apply to applications that have been
submitted and deemed complete at the time the Draft Zoning
By-law comes into effect. Transition provisions are proposed to
be repealed 5 years from the effective date of the CZBL.
3 Definitions
3.2 Defined Terms Definitions added include:
Adverse Effect; Amenity Area, Common Outdoor; Amenity
Area, Common Indoor; Ancillary Retail Sales; Aquaculture;
Common Outdoor; Dwelling Width; Electric Vehicle Supply
Equipment; Flat Roof; Front Entrance; Green Roof; Dwelling
Depth; Dwelling Width; Landscaped Open Space; Main Front
Wall; Shipping Container; Short-term Rental; Solar or Shade
Parking Structure; Stacking Lane; Vertical Farming; Veterinary
Clinic
Definitions modified include:
Amenity Area; Area of High Aquifer Vulnerability; Commercial
Vehicle; Contractor’s Yard; Drive-through Facility; Driveway;
Dwelling Unit, Additional; Grade Existing; Average Grade;
Ground Floor; Height; Landscaped Area; Lot coverage; Lot
Depth; Motor Vehicle; Nightclub; Obnoxious; Park; Person;
Retirement Home; Self-storage Facility; Setback; Theatre
4 General Regulations
4.3 Additional Dwelling Unit Zoning By-laws 8034/23, 8035/23, 8036/23, 8037/23, 8038/23,
and 8039/23 permitting additional dwelling units are
consolidated here.
4.9 CLOCA and TRCA
Regulated Areas
Recognizes Bill 23 and the evolving role of conservation
authorities in application review. Provisions maintain that
boundaries of regulated areas “shall be” determined by
CLOCA and TRCA as applicable. However, the provision
stating that “final boundaries of the regulated area shall be
determined by CLOCA or TRCA, as appropriate” is removed.
4.11 Established
Neighbourhood Precinct
Overlay Zone
Infill & Replacement Housing and Building Height Zoning
By-laws 7872/21, 7873/21, 7874/21, 7900/22, 7901/22, and
7902/22 are consolidated here.
New and Modified Provisions
Page 2 of 3
Draft Zoning By-law Section Added/Modified
4.14 Height Exceptions Responds to Integrated Sustainable Design Standards (ISDS):
a) Performance Measure ER2 to ER4 (Heat Island Reduction)
general regulation for Height Exceptions permits rooftop
solar panels and associated equipment to exceed the
maximum permitted building height by 1.5 metres.
b) Performance Measure ER1 (Emissions, Renewable
Energy, and Resilience) general regulation for Height
Exceptions permits a parapet wall that forms part of a green
room to exceed the maximum permitted building height by
1.5 metres.
4.22 Nightclubs Establishes minimum distance separation from residential
areas for night clubs.
4.23 Oak Ridges Moraine Area
Special Provisions
For clarification, Subsection 8 Areas of High Aquifer
Vulnerability added to reference to Schedule 3 and the Official
Plan, in particular section 10.13 Areas of Groundwater
Protection and 16.43 Groundwater Vulnerability – Oak Ridges
Moraine.
4.24 On-farm Diversified Uses Identifies that home industry is subject to a maximum gross
floor area and applies the provisions of Section 4.16 Home
Industries.
4.27 Outdoor Storage Permits outdoor storage as a principal use in any zone that
permits outdoor storage and requires a visible barrier to any
adjacent yard, highway, or street. Conditions remain and
permission does not apply to Open Space Waterfront zone.
4.30 Public Uses Permitted in
All Zones
Clarifies the provisions that apply to public uses.
4.33 Rooming Homes Rooming houses are required to encompass the entire
dwelling and limited to one per lot; the maximum number of
bedrooms changed from 10 to 6.
4.35 Seasonal Farm Help
Dwelling
Removes the minimum floor area of 58.0 square metres as a
requirement.
4.38 Shipping Containers Provides direction on the location of shipping containers used
for storage.
4.39 Short term rental and
definition
Responds to public concerns and supports possible future
licensing.
New and Modified Provisions
Page 3 of 3
Draft Zoning By-law Section Added/Modified
5 Parking, Stacking, and Loading Regulations
5.11 Residential Driveway and
Front Yard Landscaping
Requirements
Responds to need for additional parking on private property.
5.12 Parking and Storage of
Vehicles in Residential
and City Centre Zones
Provision implemented City-wide.
5.13 Bicycle Parking Space
Requirements
Responds to ISDS Performance Measure T3 (Bicycle Parking
and Storage Facilities) minimum short-term and long-term
bicycle parking rates applied.
6 Residential Zone Regulations
Sections 6 Residential and
Section 8 Mixed Use Zone
Regulations
Responds to ISDS Performance Measure LN7 (Common
Outdoor Amenity Space) minimum outdoor amenity areas are
specified for apartment dwellings in the City Centre zones and
the Residential Third Density zones.
8 Mixed-Use Zone Regulations
8.3 Lot and Building
Requirements
Mixed Use General (MU1) the intent of the zone provisions
changed from permitting high-rise mixed-use development to
permitting low-rise mixed-use development.
12 Rual and Oak Ridges Moraine Zone Regulations
12.3 Oak Ridges Moraine
Zones
Adds Oak Ridges Moraine Commercial (ORMC) to reflect
existing uses in the hamlet of Claremont.
13 Institutional and Other Zone Regulations
13.2 Permitted Uses UR Zone Urban Reserve Zone recognizes existing uses and permits a
new detached dwelling provided a detached dwelling was
already a permitted use
New and Modified Provisions included in the Draft Zoning By-law
By-law Section Added/Modified
Preamble Section 1. Overview of Zoning By-laws
Clarified that any development contravening the by-law is an offence.
Preamble Section 2. Overview of the Zoning By-law for the City of Pickering
Minor grammatical corrections.
Preamble Section 3. Checking the Zoning and
Applicable Provisions
Clarified the relationship between Minister’s Zoning Orders and the City’s Zoning By-law. Added reference to
new Schedule 8 showing Protected Major Transit Station
Area.
Preamble Section 5.
Relationship to Other By-laws, etc.
Clarified that other utility operators may be subject to
other regulations and setbacks, such as pipelines and rail lines, in response to comments received from utility providers.
1.6 Legal Non-Conformity Replaced these provisions with the clearer provisions used in the Seaton By-law, for consistency and clarity.
1.7 Legal Non-compliance Replaced the provision regarding land acquisition by a public authority for improved clarity and flexibility for the landowner.
Added new provisions that recognize legal non-complying
buildings, structures, parking areas and driveways as
complying so that they can further expand or be altered.
1.9 Transition Added a more fulsome list of planning applications to be
eligible for transition, including site plans, consents, subdivisions, condominium, part-lot control and minor variances.
Added a new clause that allows an existing application
that is transitioned to be varied through a minor variance,
so that some flexibility is provided to existing application processes.
Clarified transition for applications that were received and processed by the City under a previous application
process (pre-application submission).
Clarified that applications which have been transitioned will only cover buildings/structures as generally shown in the application, and that new buildings may be subject to a new application and the new zoning by-law.
Attachment 2 to Report PLN 30-24
By-law Section Added/Modified
1.10 Technical Revisions to the Zoning By-law Added a new section that allows for staff to make interpretation decisions around minor formatting and numbering issues that do not change the intent of the By-law.
Definition – Daylight Triangle Corrected wording to clarify that the dimensions of a daylighting triangle are determined through the development approvals process.
Definition – Dwelling, Live-Work Corrected wording to align with the Ontario Building Code.
Definition – Landscape Strip Clarified that the height of landscape strips is as identified in the text of the by-law.
Definition – Lot Coverage Revised definition to allow better enforcement and align with municipal best practices.
Definition – Lot Frontage Clarified the measurement of lot frontage.
Definition – Rooming
House
Clarified that rooming houses refer to a maximum of
6 bedrooms.
Definition - Reserve Added this definition to aid in ensuring consistent
interpretation wherever this term is being used.
Definition - Street Simplified this definition.
Section 4.27 (formerly Section 4.8) – Below Grade Entrances to
Dwelling Units
Added encroachment of entrances into permitted yards.
4.11 – Frontage on a
Street
Simplified provision.
4.13 – Height Exceptions Clarification that rooftop mechanical equipment is
regulated by section 4.31.
4.18 – Live Work Dwelling Clarified that the minimum floor area applies to the commercial use and not the dwelling portion.
4.22.3.7 – Non-conforming buildings in the Oak Ridges moraine Area
Provision deleted as it is difficult to implement in zoning and is better administered as a policy under the Oak Ridges Moraine Plan.
4.25 – Outdoor Patio Clarified that outdoor patios are permitted wherever restaurants are permitted, subject to meeting the
standards.
4.27 – Permitted Encroachments Updated to reflect that exterior entrances are allowed to encroach into required yards provided they are not closer
than 0.9 m to the lot line.
By-law Section Added/Modified
5.2 – Parking Space Requirements Updated in accordance with recent changes to the
Planning Act allowing no minimum parking requirement within the Protected Major Transit Station (PMTSA). Added a new schedule 8 depicting the boundaries of the Protected Major Transit Station Area.
Table 5.1 – Parking Space Requirements Updated parking requirement for hotel so that it is clearer and more in line with expected parking demand.
5.4 – Accessible Parking Spaces Updated to require accessible parking spaces to be shown on a Site Plan.
5.9 – Surface Parking Spaces in City Centre Zones
Clarified that a landscape strip with a minimum height of 1.5 metres for screening purposes is required where a parking area is provided adjacent to residential
development.
Table 5.3: Minimum
driveway width and
minimum landscaped open space in residential zones
In response to comments, the minimum required
landscaped open space for lots with 11 metres frontage
was reduced from 45 percent to 30 percent, thereby allowing 2 adjacent driveways on the lot.
Table 6.9 – Lot and building requirements in the Residential Third Density Zones
Updated to include the minimum building separation requirements for taller buildings.
Added a maximum floor plate requirement to the R3C zone.
Introduced amenity area requirements, to require the
provision of recreational space on the lot at a rate of 4 square metres per unit for developments with more than 8 units.
Table 8.3: Lot and Building Requirements for the Mixed-Use Zones
Added amenity area requirements to the Mixed Use 1 Zone.
Table 8.6: Lot and Building Requirements for the City Centre Zones
Maintained the requirement for a minimum 4 square metres of amenity area per unit, in the existing City Centre By-law, but eliminates the requirement for a minimum of 2 square metres per dwelling unit in indoor space and a
minimum of 2 square metres per dwelling unit in outdoor space, in favour of 1 contiguous common outdoor amenity area of at least 40.0 square metres.
Table 10.2: Permitted Uses in the Employment Zones Added self-storage facility as a permitted use, to acknowledge that this use exists in various zones across the City.
Table 10.3: Lot and Building Requirements in the Employment Zones
Clarified that a minimum landscape strip must have a height of 1.5 metres where abutting zones that permit sensitive uses.
By-law Section Added/Modified
Table 12.2: Uses Permitted in the Rural Zones Removed cemetery and place of worship as permitted uses in the A zones.
Table 13.2: Uses Permitted in the Institutional and Other Zones
Added additional dwelling unit, rooming house, short-term rental and home occupation as permitted uses in the Urban Reserve Zone, provided the lot had permission for a single detached dwelling on the date of passing of the By-law. These are uses typically permitted in residential
zones.
Seaton Section 14.1 –
Definitions
Removed reference to adult video and unnecessary
language from air conditioner definition.
Added definitions of ancillary retail sales; floor area, net; net density; public authority; and short-term rental
Updated definition of art gallery/studio.
Seaton 14.2 – General Regulations Added Section 14.2.22 Short Term Rental.
Seaton Section 14.2.4 – Public Uses Permitted in All Zones
Updated.
Seaton Section 14.2.5 – Permitted Encroachments Clarified encroachments of exterior steps.
Seaton Section 14.2.6 – Legal Non-Conformity and Section 14.2.7 – Legal Non-Complying Buildings
and Structures and Section
14.2.8 - Legal Non-Complying Lots
Deleted these sections, as these are covered off by the provisions under Section 1.6 and 1.7.
15 – Exception Zones Clarified the applicability of the former parent zoning
by-laws versus the new Consolidated Zoning By-law.
16 – Enactment Clarified that the new Consolidated Zoning By-law comes
into force on the day it was passed if no appeals are received. If appeals are received, the appealed portions shall come into force when all appeals of the portion of the By-law have been withdrawn or fully disposed of and the
rest of the By-law shall come into force the day the By-law
is passed.
Clarified the status of the former parent zoning by-laws, which are superseded.
Clarified the status of Minister’s Zoning Orders.
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
Trans Canada Pipeline
(TCPL)
Request that the Zoning By-law schedules
show TCPL’s pipelines and facilities, where
applicable, as UT (or as an appropriate
‘Infrastructure’ symbol). We can provide GIS
shape files to the Township; however, A data
sharing agreement is required prior to
sharing of GIS shape files.
Recommend the following changes to the
proposed draft Zoning By-law:
1.Add in Section 3.2 Defined Terms, the
Provincial Policy Statement 2020
(PPS 2020) definition of ‘Infrastructure.
2.Create a new zone symbol for
Infrastructure to distinguish these
corridors and facilities from public utilities.
3.Rename the proposed title of
Section 4.45 from ‘Utilities Permitted in All
Zones,’ to ‘Utilities and Infrastructure’.
4.Add the following new regulations
to 4.45 Utilities and Infrastructure, as
renamed: 4.45.3 In any zone where lands
abut a pipeline right-of-way, permanent
buildings and structures, as well as
retaining walls, driveways, parking spaces
and parking areas, shall be setback a
minimum of 7 metres from the edge of the
pipeline right-of-way; and, accessory
structures, including pools, decks and
sheds, shall be setback a minimum
TCPL's pipelines and facilities will be
integrated under an informational
attachment to the draft Zoning By-law once
a data-sharing agreement is entered into.
Such attachment is intended to show
facilities of infrastructure operators. The
Preamble will be updated to note that the
relevant infrastructure operator should be
consulted for any development proposed
near these areas.
With respect to the requested revisions, we
prefer not to incorporate the definition of
infrastructure from the PPS 2020, as the
definition is written in the context of
interpreting the policies of the PPS 2020.
We note the term public use is defined
which incorporates various elements of the
PPS infrastructure definition, including oil
and gas pipelines. This type of
infrastructure is permitted in all zones.
We do not agree with creating a new
infrastructure zone. The zoning by-law
already contains a utility zone. Comment
number 3 is no longer applicable as these
provisions have been merged under
Section 4.29 of the draft Zoning By-law.
With respect to the requested setbacks,
these have not been incorporated. The
Preamble will be updated to note that the
relevant infrastructure operator should be
Attachment 3 to Report PLN 30-24
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
3 metres setback from the edge of the
pipeline right-of way.
consulted for any development proposed
near these areas in which case the
infrastructure operator can apply setbacks
accordingly.
Resident/Landowner
3430 Seventh Concession
Road
The CZBL indicates this parcel of land as
Agricultural - A. However, there is an existing
golf course on the subject lands zoned A/GC
under amending By-law 5076/00, permitting
the golf course. The CZBL Agricultural zoning
does not permit a golf course.
The mapping is updated to reflect A/GC
and OS-HL zoning on the site as per site-
specific exception By-laws 5706/00 and
5720/00.
Resident/Landowner
Park Crescent
Update zoning to open space. It is in the
hazard zone and owned by the TRCA or City.
These lands are rezoned to OS as
requested by the Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority.
Resident/Landowner
509 Park Crescent
Incorrect Zoning - Should be rezoned to
OSW/OS.
These lands are rezoned to OS as
requested by the Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority.
Resident/Landowner
5375 Sideline 4
Requested clarification about whether the
draft Consolidated Zoning By-law allow
secondary dwellings in the Oak Ridges
Moraine.
The City has reviewed its policies and
zoning provisions for Additional Dwelling
Units (ADUs, i.e., secondary dwellings)
based on recent provincial policy changes
through the More Homes Built Faster Act
(Bill 13). The provisions have been
updated in both the current zoning by-laws
and in the draft Consolidated Zoning By-
law to permit ADUs on most lots.
5375 Sideline 4 is situated within the Oak
Ridges Moraine, and presently is zoned
ORM-EP – Oak Ridges Moraine -
Environmental Protection zone by Zoning
By-law 3037, as amended. The proposed
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
zoning in the draft Comprehensive Zoning
By-law for your property will remain ORM-
EP. The current and proposed ORM-EP
zoning does not permit an ADU either
within a second structure or accessory
structure or in the principal dwelling. The
intent of not permitting ADUs within a
second structure or accessory structure
within the Oak Ridges Moraine is related to
servicing, environmental protection and
engineering concerns.
Malone Given Parsons
representing North- East
Pickering Landowners
Group (NEPLOG)
Section 1.0
• The preferred approach to zoning is to
permit a range of built forms and typologies
(from single detached dwellings to higher
density townhouse units such as stacked
and back-to-back units) within the same
general residential zone.
Section 2.0
• Concerned that the parking requirements of
2 parking spaces for all residential building
types is overly restrictive and request the
City to require a lower parking rate of
1 parking space per unit.
• Request the City to use driveway and
garage standards that are inclusive for all
built forms such as a reduced parking
space dimension of 2.6 metres by
5.6 metres.
Section 1.0 Response
The Consolidated Zoning By-law is
principally a consolidation exercise, and
efforts were made to appropriately
integrate MZOs into the second draft
Consolidated Zoning By-law. Please note
the current in-effect MZOs can be found by
selecting Schedule 2 of the Layers List in
the Interactive Map.
Section 2.0 Response
The first draft of the Consolidated Zoning
By-law consolidates all existing Residential
zones, many of which, such as the
Residential- General zones, were not
organized by density (despite numbering
such as R1 to R6 which suggest
otherwise). The first draft was preliminary.
Now that the Exception Zones have been
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
• Encourage the City to consider more
modern and flexible building zone
standards for new residential communities
in the Residential Second and Third
Density zones.
• Request that the prohibition of a
temporary sales office until an applicable
plan of subdivision or condominium has
received draft plan approval or the
property is in a zone the permits the
proposed development be removed from
the draft Consolidated Zoning By-law.
Section 3.1
• Request that the City consider including
stacked and back-to-back townhouses
within the draft Consolidated Zoning By-
law.
• Clarification requested if landscaping area
in any yards can be counted towards both
amenity area and landscaping area, and
how indoor amenity areas can be
regulated for individual dwelling units
such as townhouses
Section 3.2
• Request clarification that the MU1 zone
adequately captures the range of mixed
uses and built forms intended for the
mixed-use category.
reviewed, further work was completed to
reorganize and streamline the Residential
zones in the second draft.
At the time that NEPLOG Secondary Plan
process is complete and when there is an
area specific zoning-by-law amendment,
the City will consider how best to integrate
this area-specific by-law into the
Consolidated Zoning By-law. It is not
expected that the new Zoning By-law will
include the zones which will be applied to
these lands, as the zoning and standards
should be informed by the Secondary Plan
process.
Section 3.1 Response
Further refinements to the permitted uses
and amenity area requirements have been
incorporated into the second draft.
Section 3.2 Response
The Mixed-Use Zone category was
developed to reflect the City's Official Plan
designations and provide a zone basis for
the City to use when reviewing zoning by-
law amendments for mixed-use
development applications instead of
developing new zone codes. The Mixed-
Use zones are organized by density with
Local Node (LN) zone permitting smallest
scale and uses and the Mixed-Use General
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
Section 3.3
• Concerned that the parking requirement
of 2 parking spaces for all residential
building types is overly restrictive.
(MU1) zone permitting an increased scale
and range of uses.
The MU1 zone has been revised to
address smaller-scale mixed use
development, generally up to 5 storeys. It
is intended that this zone could serve as a
starting point for future development
applications. As this project is primarily a
consolidation exercise, it is anticipated that
further effort will be conducted to
modify/simplify or add new Mixed Use
zones in a future zoning by-law.
Section 3.3 Response
Parking rates for areas outside of the City
were informed by the benchmarking
exercise discussed in Discussion Paper #7
as well as an evaluation of site-specific
exceptions for medium-density housing
forms in the City. As this project is primarily
a consolidation exercise, significant
refinements may be considered in a
subsequent Zoning By-law review stage.
Further, there are opportunities for reduced
parking rates within the Kingston Road
Corridor intensification area. This area is
excluded from the Consolidated Zoning By-
law project and will be reviewed as part of
a separate City initiated zoning by-law
amendment.
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
MHBC Planning Urban
Design & Landscape
Architecture
2055 Brock Road
Request draft Consolidated Zoning By-law be
revised to reflect an active development
application.
The draft Zoning By-law is revised to reflect
the July 8, 2024, Ontario Land Tribunal
Decision OLT 23-000498.
Resident/Landowner
3290 Greenburn Place
Will Section 14.2.9 apply in RE zones, and is
it part of the General Provisions? Other
references are Home Occupation and
Parking in Driveway.
Please note that Section 14.2.9 of the draft
Zoning By-law applies to the Seaton Urban
Area only. The subject site, 3290
Greenburn Place, is not located in this area
and subject to Site Specific By-law 2044/85
(see Exception 312). Any Residential zone
outside of the Seaton Urban Area will be
subject to Section 5.12 - Restrictions on
the Parking and Storage of Vehicles which
regulates the parking and storage of
vehicles. A Vehicle Sales or Rental
Establishment is not a permitted use in the
RE zone, nor permitted is a Home
Industries (See Section 4.15 - Home
Industries). The height of a garage is
regulated through Section 4.2.3 of the draft
By-law which limits the height to 3.5m
except for a detached private garage with a
pitched roof which permits a height of
4.5m. Please see Exception 312 for
additional provisions that are applicable to
the lands.
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
Resident/Landowner
1230 Sandbar Road
Zone in line with waterfront open space. The zoning shown in the first draft was the
existing zoning from By-law 2511 and
carried forward. In response to specific
comments from TRCA on the first draft,
some zoning updates in this area have
been made in response to TRCA's
separate comments.
Resident/Landowner
734A Krosno Boulevard
This property contains a freehold townhome
but is zoned RM4. Other RM zoning specify
interior side yard setbacks, yet RM4 wording
remains unchanged from current bylaw 2520.
RM2 and RM5 zones for street townhomes
have a 0.9m side setback for interior.
In the Final Draft Consolidated Zoning By-
law, the Residential zones have been
consolidated and streamlined to ease
readability to respond to comments from
the public and stakeholders. In the case of
this property, the new zone, R3A, contains
streamlined provisions for street
townhouses, which apply a minimum
interior side yard setback of 0.0 m where
two street townhouses share a common
wall.
Resident/Landowner
2215 Brock Road
This would be better utilized if zoned multi-
use, community use like for a library, or
community centre, or low- rise commercial /
mixed residential. The adjacent
neighbourhoods north of Finch would utilize
it.
We note that this property is currently
zoned Agriculture A and is the site of a
former commercial greenhouse. The intent
of the Consolidated Zoning By-law Review
is to consolidate the existing zoning. This
site is zoned Urban Reserve in the draft
Consolidated Zoning By-law, to indicate
that the site may be developed in the
future, subject to a development
application.
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority
Appreciate that the draft Zoning By-law
highlights TRCA’s roles and pleased to see
TRCA’s Regulated Area mapping is to be
included as a schedule.
Propose zoning for certain TRCA owned
lands, or under a management agreement
with the City, to ensure environmental
protection.
Clarification requested for zoning certain
Environmental Protection – EP and Open
Space – OS lands to Agricultural – A.
Ensure the draft Zoning By-law reflects the
requirements of source protection plans in
accordance with the Clean Water Act.
Request the following:
• carry over the definition of watercourse
to the Seaton zoning regulations;
• incorporate a setback from stable top
of bank or shoreline hazard;
• prohibit development including
accessory and additional dwelling
units; and accessory uses, building
and structures in lands identified as
hazardous lands or sites;
• amend section 4.9.1 to outline that not
all regulated areas may be captured in
the draft Zoning By-law;
• clarify rationale for a minimum 4 metre
setback from the EP zone;
• prohibit certain uses such as day care
in hazardous lands and site;
We would be pleased to obtain and review
any updated regulation area mapping to
assess its incorporation into the final zoning
by-law.
Although this Zoning By-law Review is
principally a consolidation exercise, and
site-specific zone changes are not being
addressed typically, we have reviewed
and agreed with incorporating the
requested site-specific changes. The
reason is that TRCA is requesting
modifications to an EP or OS zone over
its landholdings, which would not require
a site-specific evaluation to inform the
modification. We note that the comment
regarding the Rouge National Urban
Park zoning is subject to further review.
At this time, it is preferred that the Clean
Water Act requirements be left to
processes outside of zoning, but we
welcome further discussion on the merits
of incorporating them into zoning. Further
review of the Highly Vulnerable Aquifer
provisions will be considered in the
third/final draft CZBL. We appreciate the
suggestion to carry forward the definition of
watercourse into the Seaton definitions. As
the term is not used in the Seaton zone
provisions, we do not feel it is necessary
currently. In large part the intent of this
chapter is to consolidate the existing
Seaton zoning regulations.
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
• define Significant Valleylands,
Wetlands, Significant Woodlands, Fish
Habitat and Seepage Areas and
Springs;
• generally, prohibit new stormwater
management facilities within EP zones;
• clarify that major (or active)
recreational uses are not permitted
within the EP zone and/or highlighting
that only minor (or passive)
recreational uses will be permitted
within EP zones; and
• refine definition of structure to provide
examples such as headwall, outlet
pipes, etc, for clarity on permitted types
of structures and no confusion for
ponds, underground tanks, etc.
We would prefer not to incorporate a
setback from stable top of bank or
shoreline hazard as it would be difficult for
zoning administration to enforce this in
many circumstances. Generally, any
specifically hazardous lands identified
through a development process would be
incorporated into a protective zone such as
EP.
We have made the requested revision to
the “checking the zoning” section as
suggested. Regarding your comments on
Section 4.1, Accessory Dwelling Units, we
have added the requested provision to
accessory dwelling units.
Regarding your comments on 4.2.1,
Accessory Uses, Buildings and Structures,
it would not be appropriate to make this
change, as the location of hazardous
lands/sites will not be clear to zoning
administration and this section will be
applied very frequently to sheds and many
other types of minor structures. There may
also be exceptions to this given there is a
wide variety of accessory structures. The
Zoning By-law does not contain a fulsome
map of these areas. A prohibition on a use
in a particular area of land should be
identified on a map or relate to the entirety
of the lot.
The suggested edit in Section 4.27.5
(former Section 4.9.1) has been
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
integrated. Former Section 4.12
(Environmental Protection (EP) and City
Centre Natural Heritage System (CCNHS)
Zone Setback) has been deleted.
The general provision requiring the
minimum 4 metre setback has been
deleted. Generally, the feature plus its
required buffer/setback should be
incorporated into the EP zone mapping
through development application
processes.
The request to prohibit certain uses
where there is a threat to the safe
evacuation of vulnerable populations such
as day care use is addressed through a
proposed new provision which cross
references with section 4.9.6. This
focuses on day care uses. The medical
use would not involve overnight care and
would not be the same as the uses listed
in Section 4.9.6
The terms, Significant Valleylands,
Wetlands, Significant Woodlands, Fish
Habitat and Seepage Areas and Springs
are defined to assist in the interpretation of
the provisions of 4.22.5. As the terms are
not used in the Seaton zoning chapter,
there is not a need to define them in the
Seaton chapter.
Note that only existing stormwater
management (SWM) facilities in the EP
zoning are permitted. The City may have
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
used the prior G zoning to permit SWM
facilities, and since this G zone was
replaced by the EP zone, there is a need
to recognize these existing uses as they
will continue to function as essential
infrastructure. Moving forward, the City
will utilize the specific SWM zone for
new facilities.
It is the City’s intent not to allow for major
recreational facilities in the EP zone. The
allowance for buildings and structures
would only be related to the established
permitted uses listed in the table. As such
only accessory structures associated with
passive recreational uses would be
allowed in the EP zone (e.g., for trails).
We added the word “permitted” to clarify.
A further revision of the definition of structure
is not necessary. Structures would be
limited to the permitted uses and the
definition of accessory (i.e., related to the
use) and the definition of structure.
Resident/Landowner
570 Kingston Road
Zoning map does not indicate which zoning
establishment this address falls under.
This property is located within the
Kingston Road Corridor and Special
Retailing Node Intensification Area,
which is not subject to this proposed
draft Consolidated Zoning By-Law, and
thus it has not been assigned a proposed
new parent zone. Policy and zoning
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
updates for this area are being
undertaken through a separate process
which will be incorporated into the CZBL
at a future date.
Currently, the property is subject to a site-
specific exception zone, LCA-7, which was
established through municipal by-laws
2599/87,4121/92, and 4080/92.
Durham Live The draft Consolidated By-law proposed to
zone the Durham Live lands as C1
(General Commercial) and UR (Urban
Reserve) which does not reflect the site-
specific exceptions and MZO that exists on
the site. The following is a summary of
requests for changes:
• Area 1 (Pickering Casino Resort Lands):
Objects to the proposed C1 zoning.
Requests a C1 Exception; Objects to UR
zone for the westerly lands of Area 1,
requests for these lands to be added to
the C1 Exception; No comments on the
UR zone in northeastern corner
• Area 2 (MZO Lands): Exclude these from
the draft Consolidated Zoning By-law
• Area 3 (Lands West of Squires Beach
Road): Create a UR Exception zone
The Durham Live Lands are subject to site-
specific By-laws 7404/15, 7661/18, and
7735/20, in addition to MZO 607/20.
The Consolidated Zoning By-law Project is
a consolidation of the various By-laws,
including site-specific exceptions, into one
City-wide By- law. Therefore, most site-
specific zoning will not change, and simply
be consolidated. This will maintain aspects
of previous prevailing zoning by-laws.
As such, existing site permissions for
Durham Live Lands will be maintained
through the existing exceptions and
MZO. There is no need to create a new
C1 or UR exception zone to reflect these
existing permissions.
The MZO is reflected in Schedule 2 of the
draft Consolidated Zoning By-law. As
noted in the Preamble of the draft By-law,
in the event of a conflict between this draft
Zoning By-law and an MZO, the MZO
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
prevails.
Exception Zone 70 has since been created
for Area 1 which aligns with the MZO
wording.
Resident/Landowner
1862 Liverpool Road
What is the current zoning for this site? Has
there been any studies for the future use of
the properties abutting this site? What is the
City's vision for this site?
Any information on plans for those
properties, including any development
applications or site-specific studies, can
be obtained from the City's Development
Planning department. We note that
zoning in the second draft Consolidated
Zoning By-law is updated to the Urban
Reserve zone, to reflect the possibility
that future development may occur,
subject to an application.
Melymuk Consulting
Limited
2215 Brock Road
It is requested that the second Draft of the
City’s Consolidated Zoning By-law (and all
subsequent drafts) zone the developable
portion of the property at 2215 Brock Road
as “CN” (Community Node) with an
exception to allow residential uses such as
townhouses and apartments with heights
up to 62 metres.
Currently, 2215 Brock Road is zoned A
under Zoning By-law 3036. From our
understanding, you are seeking to rezone
your property to be consistent with the
designations that exist on the site
(Community Node and Natural Area).
Under the draft Zoning By-law, the site is
proposed to be rezoned to Urban Reserve.
The Urban Reserve zone provides for and
regulates existing uses on lands which are
primarily undeveloped for urban uses.
Generally, these uses have limited
buildings or structures. The Urban Reserve
zone is intended to protect land from
premature subdivision and development to
provide for future comprehensive
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
development on those lands.
It should be noted that the Consolidated
Zoning By-law Project is a consolidation of
our various By-laws into one City-wide By-
law. Therefore, most zoning has not
changed, and simply has been
consolidated. Some other elements of the
project include updating outdated
terminology and providing a more
accessible Zoning By-law.
Requests for pre-zoning are not being
contemplated within this process. The
current zoning reflects the existing use on
the subject site. The process for rezoning
includes an application, specific supporting
studies, and a public meeting.
Resident/Landowner
1675 Montgomery Park
Road
Please advise for this property if we should
follow the requirements of the parent by-law
2511, or the current draft by-law?
Until the new Consolidated Zoning By-law
(CZBL) is enacted by Council, the
requirements of the parent By-Laws apply
to any change you may wish to make to
your property. However, as the CZBL is
principally a consolidation exercise, the
intent is mainly to carry forward existing
zoning standards into one document.
Resident/Landowner
490 Kingston Road
Zoning info for 478-490 Kingston Road does
not appear on the map
This site is located within the Kingston
Road Corridor. This area is excluded from
the Consolidated Zoning By-law project and
will be reviewed as part of a separate City
initiated zoning by-law amendment. For
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
more information about this project, please
visit:
https://www.pickering.ca/en/city-
hall/kingston-road-corridor-
intensification.aspx
Resident/Landowner
940 Brock Road
In your zoning GIS map, this property is
classified as E3 (Employment Commercial).
In other resources (MPAC) I see it is MC-
18. My goal is to open an indoor Cricket
facility (sportsplex). Would this use be
permitted at this location?
Confirmed that a Cricket Facility is
permitted as a "Commercial-Recreational
Establishment" under By-law 6255/04.
Resident/Landowner
1289 Wharf Street
The proposed Zoning By-law will not permit
restaurant use as a principal permitted use.
Request for subject lands to be placed within
a site-specific Open Space Waterfront Zone.
This property will be rezoned OSW which
recognizes (permits) the restaurant.
Resident/Landowner
1230 Sandbar Road
Sandbar Road remains residential zoning,
when in fact the land is not to be used as
residential. A rezoning may be required.
There is no record of Sandbar Rd being
zoned OS, zoned R4 under 2511. City
confirmed this property is under TRCA
ownership and therefore rezoned as EP.
Resident/Landowner
Saxton Glen Estate
Clarification of provisions concerning
Accessory Structures; Permitted Uses and
Antenna Towers as it relates to By-law
2044/85 and the Saxton Glen community.
We note that By-law 3044/85 has been
incorporated as Exception 312, under
Section 15.312. In consideration of the
comments, we have proposed
modifications to accessory structure
requirements (see new Sections
15.312.2.b.xi.A and B).
Resident/Landowner
Park Crescent
This land is owned by the TRCA and should
be part of the open space system"
The TRCA has provided details comments
regarding zoning for their lands, and the
land has been rezoned according to
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
TRCA’s request.
Resident/Landowner
520 Marksbury Crescent
This property should be zoned as open space
as should properties to the east and west
which are owned by the TRCA and cannot be
built on due to ongoing erosion due to the
shoreline hazard. The waterfront trail goes
through this lot.
The TRCA has provided details comments
regarding zoning for their lands, and the
land has been rezoned according to
TRCA’s request.
Resident/Landowner
2550 Brock Road
The proposed Zoning is reflected as A,
whereas a site-specific zoning by-law was
passed in 2022 (7696/22) to permit the
redevelopment of the lands. The draft By-law
would appear to be reverting to the former
zoning applicable to the lands, which should
not occur.
The intent is to carry forward existing
exceptions which have now been included
in the second draft Consolidated Zoning
By-law.
Resident/Landowner
1920 Bayly Street
Discrepancy between the listed exception
and actual By-law
This site is zoned M-IC(DN) as per site-
specific exception By-law 5829/01,
amending Zoning By-law 2511. This is
reflected on the interactive zoning by-law
mapping.
Resident/Landowner
2460 Brock Road
This is not being built as mixed use. A mixed-
use area has a mix of apartments, shops, and
spaces for people to sit or hang out. This is a
strip mall full of parking and some offices.
Bring in extra legislation or design
requirements about what "mixed use" is, and
if you don't address surface parking, you're
going to end up with some very ugly and
inaccessible areas. Toss the parking
underground, make a square, make it easy to
This site is subject to site-specific exception
By-law 7642/18 from a previous zoning
by-law amendment application. This
exception permits both commercial and
residential uses, including a drive-through
facility. The draft Consolidated Zoning
By-law provides the City with modernized
standards to regulate above and below-
grade parking structures, and a new Mixed
Use Zone Chapter to use as a basis when
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
access by foot or bike (it’s for the people that
live close by, right?). This isn't working. Also
why is there a drive through here?
reviewing mixed-use development
applications. Currently, the intent is to
maintain existing zoning requirements for
lands with an exception zone and to require
the owner to submit a rezoning application
for any proposed changes.
Resident/Landowner
1650 McBrady Crescent
Request to re-evaluate uses permitted in LN
and other mixed use uses or commercial
zones adjacent to residential zones (i.e., night
clubs and loud restaurants in strip plaza
behind houses) - Ward 3.
Other comments:
• increases in water infrastructure capacity
is not keeping pace with rate of condo
development (low water pressure);
• Increased bike safety connecting Brock
Road to Kingston Road;
• concerned about small businesses as
intensification happens; and
• include in future City-wide studies.
It is noted that the City will need to review
the policies of the Official Plan for
commercial areas to fulsomely respond to
this comment. As such, this comment is
flagged for consideration in future studies.
The concerns about nightclubs are noted.
Nightclubs can be impactful in terms of
noise and there is a compatibility issue with
respect to nearby residential uses. We
have reviewed and updated the night club
provisions.
Resident/Landowner
Bay Ridges Area
If rooming houses or short-term rentals open
in Pickering there should be regulation.
The draft Zoning By-law includes rooming
houses provisions in Section 4.32 and
Short-term rental provisions in Section 4.38
to help better regulate these uses in the
City.
Miller Thomson LLP
representing GFL
Environmental Services
Inc.
GFL’s is dissatisfied by how the site was split
into different zones. GFL's view is that the
entire Site should be zoned E1 in recognition
of the existing Waste Transfer Station
To reflect the existing Waster Transfer
Station in an industrial area and avoid legal
non-conformity, 1034, 1048, 1060 and
1070 Toy Avenue will continue to be zoned
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
1034, 1048, 1060 and
1070 Toy Avenue
operations. Furthermore, the Waste Transfer
Station use should be explicitly permitted on
these lands given the long-standing use.
GFL’s intention is to continue that use in this
location and the continued need for its
services in Pickering and Durham Region.
as per the site-specific exceptions
applicable to the sites. This will maintain
aspects of previous prevailing zoning by-
laws. Please see Exceptions 21, 48 and 73
as they apply to the sites.
Resident/Landowner
General
1. How is the City of Pickering altering
restrictive residential zones such as RS1 to
address intergenerational living needs of
families? Parking needs, for example.
2. Does the city have any plans to further
design or designate how parcels in MU1 are
used? How can the City enforce the vision of
the Official Plan?
3. How can the City provide existing residents
with a more diverse offering in local nodes?
4. In the future, will the City consider zoning
industrial as more mixed use?
The CZBL is a consolidation effort to bring
existing By-laws into one By-law. Additional
Dwelling Unit (ADUs) provisions have been
incorporated in Section 4.3 of this draft.
Parking needs for ADUs are considered.
Additional driveway widening provisions are
included in Section 5.11 of the draft Zoning
By-law.
Official Plan policies are primarily enforced
through the provisions of the Zoning By-
law. One of the tasks of the new CZBL
project is to ensure that all zoning
provisions reflect Official Plan policies.
A diverse offering of neighbourhood-
appropriate services (including retail uses
such as food stores or restaurants and
community uses such as libraries or day
cares) are permitted in the Local Node (LN)
zone. There may be other avenues for the
City to support or encourage a broad mix of
uses in Local Nodes, but zoning can only
permit the uses, not facilitate the diversity
of mix.
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
The CZBL includes three employment
zones with a variety of uses, including a
range of industrial uses. The overall vision
and land use strategy for employment
areas is set out in the Official Plan.
Changes such as the suggestion of
approaching employment areas as more
mixed use in nature may be dealt with at
the time of the next Official Plan Review.
That process will provide several
opportunities for public participation.
Resident/Landowner
345 Kingston Road
There's no zoning This site is located within the Kingston
Road Corridor. This area is excluded from
the Consolidated Zoning By-law project and
will be reviewed as part of a separate City
initiated zoning by-law amendment. For
more information about this project, please
visit:
https://www.pickering.ca/en/city-
hall/kingston-road-corridor-
intensification.aspx
Resident/Landowner
5229 Brock Road
(also known as ‘Old’ Brock
Road)
The front of the property is zoned ORM-R5
and the back approximately 3 acres is zoned
ORM-A. The adjacent Ward Farm, on the
south side, has recently been approved for
housing development by the Ontario Land
Tribunal (OLT) Plan Approval 18T-90016 (R).
I would like to request that the zoning on my
back property be changed to ORM-R6
consistent with the farm.
Currently, 5229 Old Brock Road is zoned
“ORM-A” “ORM-R5” & “ORM-EP” Under
Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-
law 6640/06. A residential dwelling is a
permitted use.
From my understanding, you are seeking to
rezone your property to be consistent with
the recent OLT approved development
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
adjacent to your lot.
It should be noted that the Consolidated
Zoning By-law Project is a consolidation of
our various By-laws into one City-wide
By-law. Therefore, most zoning has not
changed, and simply has been
consolidated. Some other elements of the
project include updating outdated
terminology and providing a more
accessible Zoning By-law.
The purpose of the Consolidated Zoning
By-law Review project is not to rezone
individual properties. The process for
rezoning includes an application, specific
supporting studies, and a public meeting.
And, in the case of the adjacent neighbor,
further resolution via the OLT. Furthermore,
the lands south of your lot were formerly
zoned for Agricultural uses (ORM-A). The
applicant went through a formal process to
rezone the lands including supporting
studies and public consultation.
Resident/Landowner
General Provisions
Can there be consideration for driveway size
relative to vehicle size? To provide you with
some context, I live in zone R4 and my
driveway can accommodate 8-10 cars and
my home is 5600 square feet in size so one
vehicle that measures 1.5 car lengths should
be considered as permissible.
Oversized vehicles are regulated under
Section 5.12 (Parking and Storage of
Vehicles) of the second draft Consolidated
Zoning By-law. Please refer to this section
of the By-law which will regulate vehicles in
residential zones.
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority
(TRCA)
2001 Clements Road
Requested that a portion of this lot be zoned
Environmental Protection - EP to reflect its
natural heritage features.
The Consolidated Zoning By-law Review is
a consolidation effort to bring existing
parent Zoning By-laws into one
consolidated by-law. This site is zoned
M2S and M1 by existing parent Zoning By-
law 2511. Rezoning a portion of this
property to the appropriate environmental
protection zone will be further studied in a
future comprehensive zoning review
following the adoption of a new Official
Plan.
Resident/Landowner
5269 Brock Road
Please advise whether properties in
existence before the Consolidated Zoning By-
Law is completed and enacted, be required to
meet all Consolidated Zoning By-Law
requirements, or will the Clergy Principle
apply to those properties?
Properties and uses in existence prior to
the Consolidated Zoning By-law coming
into force that do not comply with the
Consolidated By-law may be considered
legal non-conforming and enjoy certain
permissions as long as the properties and
uses were incompliance with zoning that
existed prior to the Consolidated Zoning
By-law.
Kohn Architects
2055 Brock Road
Concerned that the following provision works
for flat grade scenarios but not for sloping
rows of townhouses: 7. Special Provisions
(“RMI-7” Zone) (1)(b) A private garage shall
have a minimum width of 3.0 metres and a
minimum depth of 6.0 metres provided,
however, the width may include one interior
step and the depth may include two interior
steps.
The subject site is zoned "RH/MU-3" and
"OS-HL" under exception By-law 7085-10.
There is no provision within this exception
for By-law 3036, which amends, which
regulates the interior space of the garage.
As part of the draft Consolidated Zoning
By-law, we have amended Section 5.6
(Size of Parking Spaces and Aisles) which
regulates the size of parking spaces within
private garages to remove discussion
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
regarding the number of steps and instead
regulate by a maximum encroachment
permitted for steps.
Resident/Landowner
375 Kingston Road
Within and around 100 buildings nearing
different stages of approval in the City of
Pickering, there should be thought on where
applications are approved for height, trying to
keep it near the Go Station and/or Kingston
Road/Liverpool area, and maybe near Brock
Road and Pickering Parkway. What doesn't
make sense is to award considerable height
in areas like Altona and Kingston Road, or
specifically what is known as Bruno’s Plaza at
Rougemount and Kingston Road. Focus on
development in and around the Pickering
Town Centre and Brock/401 corridors, where
we have the Go Station and other transit
more readily available.
This site is located within the Kingston
Road Corridor. This area is excluded from
the Consolidated Zoning By-law project and
will be reviewed as part of a separate City
initiated zoning by-law amendment. For
more information about this project, please
visit:
https://www.pickering.ca/en/city-
hall/kingston-road-corridor-
intensification.aspx
Resident/Landowner
Kingston Road Corridor
For property located inside Kingston Road
Corridor and Specialty Retail Area Study,
how will exceptions be addressed within this
area while the CZBL leaves space for a new
KRCSR by-law?
For the Kingston Road Corridor and
Specialty Retail Area Study (KRCSR) Area,
until the new study area By-law is adopted
and in force, City of Pickering parent zoning
by-laws will apply. For developments in this
area will go through the application process
as usual. The study is complete but
currently before the OLT. Existing
exceptions are being carried forward
(maintained) and will be reviewed as the
KRCSR By-law is developed.
Resident/Landowner On the project review website, it is noted that For the Kingston Road Corridor and
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
1899 Brock Road exceptions and on-going applications would
be blank, but I am still unclear as to how
these would be incorporated in the final
CZBL. Can you clarify?
Specialty Retail Area Study (KRCSR) Area,
until the new study area By-law is adopted
and in force, City of Pickering parent zoning
by-laws will apply. For developments in this
area will go through the application process
as usual. The study is complete but
currently before the OLT. Existing
exceptions are being kept and will be
reviewed as the KRCSR By-law is
developed.
Resident/Landowner
1734 Bayly Street
This zoning only applies to the lands with the
municipal address 1750 Bayly Street. The
correct amending By-law is 4989/97 and is
zoned CA(A)-1 not CA(F)-1.
By-law 4989/97 was repealed by By-law
5971/02, which has been carried forward,
and applies the CA(F)-1 zone to 1734 and
1742 Bayly. This is reflected on the
interactive mapped.
McDermott & Associates
Limited
Lots 6 And 7. Registered
Plan 424, 1930 Durham
Road No.5, Part Lot 16,
Concession 9, City of
Pickering
Request that the site-specific provisions
implemented by By-law No. 6640/06 be
brought forward under the proposed
comprehensive zoning by-law.
The Consolidated Zoning By-law Project is
a consolidation of the various By-laws,
including site-specific exceptions, into one
City-wide By- law. Therefore, most site-
specific zoning will not change, and simply
be consolidated. This will maintain aspects
of previous prevailing zoning by-laws. The
exception zones have been consolidated
and are available online.
Richard Vink, Consultant
Seaton
The issue is with lane based product and the
maximum front yard and minimum rear yard
requirements. In regards to the Zone
provision charts -Section 4, Table 4;
The chart is somewhat confusing, as it notes
the, Minimum Rear Yard as NR (no
Thank you for noting this potential conflict
between the general provisions in 14.2.18
regarding attached private garages on
lanes and the lot and building requirements
in Section 14.4. As part of the development
of the draft of the Consolidated Zoning By-
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
requirement). However, section 2.18, in
regards to ‘Standard for Attached Private
Garages on Lots Accessed by Lanes’ also
applies and sets a minimum and maximum
setback to the rear lot line. This confusion on
this has led to a number of home builders to
seek minor variances in regard to the
maximum building setback to the rear yard lot
line. Adding a note to the chart, to refer to
section 2.18, would be helpful to avoid this
confusion.
The other concern in regard to applying both
a maximum front yard setback and also a
maximum rear yard setback to a dwelling.
These maximum setbacks dictate the building
depth, which directly affects the square
footage of the dwellings and garage depths.
The townhouse blocks on a plan of
subdivision are often not the same depth and
may vary from block to block, resulting in the
dwellings being custom designed to suit the
various block depths.
law the changes were considered. The
requirement for the maximum rear yard
setback has been removed to create more
flexibility. We have not added the
requested notation, as it may take away
from the general intent that all provisions of
the By-law will always apply and there are
various aspects of Section 14.2 which will
be applicable in most circumstances.
ASE+J Inc Architect
1605 Deerbrook Drive
Please advise regarding the zoning by-law
requirement for a second dwelling unit in the
basement.
The City has reviewed its policies and
zoning provisions for Additional Dwelling
Units (which would include a basement
dwelling unit in a single-detached dwelling)
based on recent Provincial policy changes
through the More Homes Built Faster Act
(Bill 23). This has been incorporated into
the draft Consolidated Zoning By-law.
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
Resident/Landowner
1335 Kingston Road
A site-specific exception was approved for
the City Centre.
The site-specific exception and related
changes to the Schedules of By-law
7553/17 are integrated into the Draft
Consolidated Zoning By- law (Noting that
this is the Pickering City Centre site, for
which an exception by-law was enacted by
Council on January 23, 2023, for the
easterly portion of the site.).
Resident/Landowner
1355 Kingston Road
The subject lands are zoned City Centre One
Mixed Use 1 (CC1). However, the site-
specific exceptions (A 15/21) have not been
included in the text. We respectfully request
that the approved site-specific zoning
exceptions for the subject lands be included
to ensure that the future development
remains compliant when the By-law comes
into full force and effect.
The second Draft of the Consolidated
Zoning By-law has been updated to
incorporate the exceptions from the City
Centre Zoning By-law including
amendments. The intent is to fulsomely
consolidate the City Centre Zoning By-law
so that it may be repealed.
Resident/Landowner
Natural Heritage
Commented about the legislative changes in
setbacks for Provincially Significant Wetlands,
from 120 metres to 30 metres, and the
potential for irreversible loss of wetland
function within the city. Requests that a
standard 120 m setback be adopted by the
City of Pickering for all wetlands in the CZBL
review.
These setback provisions come from
amendments to the City's existing Zoning
By-laws to protect various natural heritage
features the Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan area. The AOI (or the
Minimum Area of Influence, as described in
Policies 16.42 and 16.51 of the City's
Official Plan), should not be confused with
setbacks.
The change by the Province implies that
the Minimum Area of Influence for wetlands
in urban areas would now change from 120
metres to 30 metres. The scope of the area
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
to be studied re potential impacts has been
reduced from 120 metres to 30 metres.
However, the actual setback will be
determined throught the results of an
environmental impact study.
The Official Plan contains policies
regarding distances from natural heritage
features, which trigger additional required
studies and/or protections, the outcomes of
which are implemented through the
development application process.
As the Zoning By-law Review project is a
consolidation exercise, these requirements
have not been updated. The City will
undertake a review of these provisions and
the associated policies in the future.
Resident/Landowner
1875 Clements Road
1) The E1 - Employment General Zone no
longer allows outdoor storage as a principal
use, compared to M2S zone of By-law 2511.
It is the intention of the property owner to
develop the property for open storage use.
2) Transition Provisions: in reference to staff
report PLN-09- 23, the submission notes that
there will be an extended period between the
pre-submission stage and the time an
application is formally submitted. Request for
removal of "deemed complete" in section
1.9.2 transition provisions. Request also to
add a provision to allow for the filing of an
application for a minor variance from the
Within the draft E1 zone, outdoor storage
will be permitted through the use of a
Contractor's Yard or accessory Outdoor
Storage. Outdoor storage as the principal
permitted use is not contemplated in any
new zones in the second Draft
Consolidated Zoning By-law.
It should be noted that the Consolidated
Zoning By-law Project is a consolidation of
the various By-laws, including site-specific
exceptions, into one City-wide By-law.
Therefore, most site-specific zoning will not
change, and simply be consolidated. This
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
prevailing zoning by-law. will maintain aspects of previous prevailing
zoning by-laws and any minor variances
could continue to vary provisions of the
site-specific regulations.
In addition, transition provisions proposed
are valid for 5 years from the effective date
of this By-law which in our opinion is
sufficient time to accommodate any
extended period between the pre-
submission stage and when an application
is deemed complete by the City. Minor
variances will be allowed by the City
following the passing of the new Zoning
By-law.
Resident/Landowner
Whitevale Road
Quarry land appears to be missing the Highly
Vulnerability Aquifer layer as illustrated in OP
Schedules. Please check.
The Highly Vulnerable Aquifer Areas have
been updated in the draft Consolidated
Zoning By-law, (see Schedule 8), to
incorporate only those areas which are
subject to the Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan. The mapping of these
areas and the associated provisions are
required to implement the Oak Ridges
Moraine Conservation Plan. However, it is
also noted that other source water policies
from the City's Official Plan will apply and
be considered through development review
processes.
Resident/Landowner
711 Krosno Boulevard
Are the new proposed zoning changes
affecting my property changes done in 2002
This property is zoned C2 in the draft
Consolidated Zoning By-law and permits a
range of uses related to automobile service
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
for the restaurant and severance. stations, including a restaurant.
Resident/Landowner
615 Liverpool Road
Both sides of Liverpool, south of Wharf are
Live-work freehold townhouses. It needs to
be maintained as a mixed-use area.
This property and adjacent properties on
Liverpool Road are subject to site-specific
exceptions which permit a mix of uses.
These exceptions are now included in the
draft of the Consolidated Zoning By-law.
Resident/Landowner
640 Liverpool Road
Your building housing why?, this is the
perfect sport for small park maybe even
outdoor food truck court. built out this area as
a destination.
The Consolidated Zoning By-law Project is
a consolidation of the various By-laws,
including site-specific exceptions, into one
City-wide By-law. Therefore, most site-
specific zoning will not change, and simply
be consolidated.
This property is zoned Open Space
Waterfront in the draft Consolidated Zoning
By-law, which does not permit residential
uses. Any change in these permitted uses
will be subject to a zoning by-law
amendment application.
Resident/Landowner
Staxton Glen Estate
When Draft #2 is released, it will contain
revised and updated Exceptions?
To answer your exceptions question, we
aim to post an exceptions table on Let’s
Talk Pickering so you will receive another
email when it’s posted. This will allow the
public to review the exceptions prior to their
addition to the third draft. Regarding
applications that are before a committee or
approval by Council, those are separate
processes, and they will be added to the
CZBL after approval.
Resident/Landowner Concerned that the site’s 40 percent lot The site has an exception which will be
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
1645 Pickering Pkwy coverage is not recognized. Will this be
included in the zoning by-law prior to it being
finalized by Council?
carried over into the new CZBL.
Resident/Landowner
1246 Gloucester Square
This is currently zoned S3, not SD Thank you for noting this. The correct
zoning has been applied through the
carrying forward of exception by-law
2864/88.
Resident/Landowner
485 Whitevale Road
This is currently zoned HMC8, this should
become a CH zone.
This property is subject to exception by-law
2677/88, which applies the HMC8 zone,
and will be carried forward in the draft of
the Consolidated Zoning By-law.
Resident/Landowner
2130 Dixie Road
Zoning should be residential as all other
areas surrounding the property are
residential, this could make for a great place
to add much-needed housing in the Liverpool
area.
The Consolidated Zoning By-law Project is
a consolidation of the various By-laws,
including site-specific exceptions, into one
City-wide By- law. Therefore, most
site-specific zoning will not change, and
simply be consolidated.
Resident/Landowner
2097 Liverpool Road
This should be higher density residential. The Consolidated Zoning By-law Project is
a consolidation of the various By-laws,
including site-specific exceptions, into one
City-wide By- law. Therefore, most
site-specific zoning will not change, and
simply be consolidated.
Resident/Landowner
911 Begley Street
This is currently Zoned PU - Public Utility.
Why change it to RM?
Thank you for noting this. The correct
zoning has been applied through the
carrying forward of by-law 1299/81.
Resident/Landowner
1910 Altona Road
Should be zoned residential, increase
housing in this area
The Consolidated Zoning By-law Project is
a consolidation of the various By-laws,
including site-specific exceptions, into one
City-wide By- law. Therefore, most
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
site-specific zoning will not change, and
simply be consolidated.
Resident/Landowner
1415 Major Oaks Road
These lots should be zoned S1 and not S2,
refer to By-law 4183/93 schedule.
Thank you for noting this. The correct
zoning has been applied through the
carrying forward of by-law 4183/93
Resident/Landowner
825 Jomar Avenue
Please confirm the zone and advise the
following: (1) Permitted use with conditions
(2) The maximum building height
This property was zoned R1D in this draft
of the Consolidated Zoning By-law, which
permits a single-detached dwelling, a
rooming home, and a home occupation, at
a maximum building height of 9 metres.
Resident/Landowner
501 Marksbury Road
This property is owned by the TRCA, within a
hazard zone and should be designated
parkland.
The zoning of the property has been
changed to Open Space, in accordance
with TRCA’s request.
Resident/Landowner
1855 Ninth Concession
Road
Oddly shaped sliver overlapping. Thank you for noting this. Overlaps and
other legacy instances of data inaccuracies
have been cleaned up..
Resident/Landowner
425 Whitevale Road
The Community Hamlet zone is not listed in
the draft comprehensive by-law document.
What is permitted in this zone?
This property is subject to an exception by-
law as amended, which has been carried
forward in the draft Consolidated Zoning
By-law. The exception zone applicable to
the property is HMC9, which permits the
following uses:
•bed & breakfast establishment;
•day spa;
•dwelling unit;
•professional office;
•restaurant – type A
•retail store; and
•small implement repair shop.
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
Resident/Landowner
431 Sheppard Avenue
A duplex zoning should be allowed in the
area given it's close a proximity to highway
401 and big lots.
The subject property is zoned R1E and
allows up to two additional dwelling units on
the lot, subject to zoning regulations for
Additional Dwelling Units.
Resident/Landowner
648 Foxwood Trail
I can find no reference to X225 (S SD-SA).
What is it and what are the uses permitted.
Exception 225 can be found in the By-law
3036 Part 2 Document online. The
S-SD-SA zone permits a single detached
dwelling, semi- detached dwelling, and
single attached dwelling residential uses.
Please see Exception 225 for further
details.
Resident/Landowner
5229 Brock Road
On the interactive map for my property, you
show a pond in the middle of my land. This
doesn't exist so please remove it. There is a
cluster of trees and bushes but not a pond.
Noted.
Resident/Landowner
1851 Sandstone Manor
Properties, such as this should, permit private
school use. There are limited opportunities for
private schools, and the draft uses in this
zone permit a daycare and commercial
school, however not a private school. A
location such as this should be considered,
where the provincial D series guidelines can
be met.
Noted. 1851 Sandstone Manor is subject to
Exception 71 (by By-law 789/78) and
permits the following uses: business
offices; food preparation plants; light
manufacturing plants; public uses; scientific
or medical laboratories; and warehouses.
Resident/Landowner
857 Liverpool Road
More flexibility should be provided for
commercial uses where properties abut major
streets. This comment is not necessarily
pertinent to this site, however properties
along Liverpool Road should be encouraged
to allow for future land use flexibility; no
Noted. Under Section 4.17 of the CZBL
allows for Home Occupation uses
including: Art Gallery, Personal Services
Shop, Private Home Daycare, Office,
Medical Office, and Instructional Business
uses.
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
parking should be required.
Resident/Landowner
1404 Rougemount Drive
Can the Zoning Maps include the character
overlay zones?
The Infill Precinct Layer will be available in
the Interactive Zone Mapping.
Resident/Landowner
395 Kingston Road
What are the allowable uses / zoning on the
property.
This is located within the Kingston Road
Corridor and is subject to a future By-law
amendment (Official Plan Amendment 38,
currently before the Ontario Land Tribunal).
Miller Thomson LLP
representing GFL
Environmental Services
Inc.
1070 Toy Avenue
This site and sites surrounding reference the
former zones as proposed zones. Is this not
proposed to be an Employment zone (E1 -
E3) in the future?
Please see Section 15 of the draft Zoning
By-law for how to apply exceptions. Where
the exception zone refers to the Former
Zoning By- laws (e.g., 2511), the zone
symbol shall refer to the corresponding
zone, and the associated provisions as
may be contained in the Former Zoning By-
laws (e.g., 2511). The requirements of the
exception zone, and all other applicable
zone requirements under the Former
Zoning By-law, shall apply except as may
be otherwise stated in the exception zone.
The site will remain zoned per the
Exceptions, and not rezoned to E1 to E3 in
the future.
Miller Thomson LLP
representing GFL
Environmental Services
Inc.
1034 Toy Avenue
We have an exception but how are we
supposed to know the underlying zone code?
Please see Section 15 of the draft Zoning
By-law for how to apply exceptions. Where
the exception zone refers to the Former
Zoning By- laws (e.g., 2511), the zone
symbol shall refer to the corresponding
zone, and the associated provisions as
may be contained in the Former Zoning By-
laws (e.g., 2511). The requirements of the
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
exception zone, and all other applicable
zone requirements under the Former
Zoning By-law shall apply except as may
be otherwise stated in the exception zone.
Resident/Landowner
1675 Montgomery Park
Road
1. Refer to By-law 6090/03 (Exception 6).
Not all lands to the east form part of this
Exception.
2. These lands were initially zoned O1, they
do not form part of Exception 6.
This portion has been rezoned to Open
Space (OS) and is not subject to
Exception 6.
Resident/Landowner
1899 Brock Road and
Seaton (SPEG and
SPEHL - site specific)
1. Clarification requested regarding
incorporation of 1899 Brock Rd., Kingston
Road corridor and special retail node into
CBL especially regarding OPA 20– 003/P,
ZBAA07/20, SPA 06/20 through by law
7945/22 and 0720–22.
2. Request to add additional uses to table
14.20 (SPEG Zone) for restaurant, bake
shop, Café, convenience store.
3. Request provisions of Table 14.6.2, for
ancillary retail sales, be applied to the
total area of the lot, versus the current per
building policies.
4. Request removal of retail stores from
Section 14.6.3 prohibited uses.
The Kingston Road Corridor site is out of
scope of the new ZBL as indicated in the
submission. The Kingston Road Corridor
OPA 38 is currently before the Ontario
Land Tribunal. Provisions related to the
Kingston Road Corridor will not be
integrated into the city-wide Consolidation.
With respect to the Seaton request, the
Seaton zoning is carried forward and
intended to implement the previously
approved plans. The permission of new
uses in the Prestige Employment zone
would need to be evaluated against the
policies. Generally, there is a limit to the
types of non-employment uses allowed in
employment lands. A Zoning By-law
Amendment application is required to
change the use.
Resident/Landowner
Duffins Rouge Agricultural
Regarding revoked Central Pickering
Development Plan (CPDP) and O. Reg.
According to Bill 136, the Duffins Rouge
Agricultural Preserve easements and
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
Preserve 154/03 (Agricultural Preserve MZO) - put
back the agricultural preserve MZO protective
easements.
covenants are valid and held by the
province. The City does not have the
authority to remove them, and this is not a
municipal matter. Further, a lapsing
contract on previous agreements or
removals is regarded as null and void at
this point. An administrative consideration
for Council is to direct Staff to update
AMANDA to reflect the properties where
Bill 136 continues to hold the easements.
Resident/Landowner
1470 Finch Ave
Concerns with permitted uses such as
conservation use, park, and passive
recreation use in the Urban Reserve zone.
Concerns were raised as conflicting with
identifying the land for future development.
Requests that lands be designated
‘residential’ subject to the required studies as
may be required by staff within a formal
planning application.
The Pickering Official Plan designates
1470 Finch Avenue as Urban Residential
Area – Low Density Area and the existing
parent Zoning By-law 3036 zones the
property Agriculture – A. The property is in
the urban area of the City in a mixed area
that has been developed for low density
residential uses through plans of
subdivision and larger lots having a
potential for future low density residential
redevelopment. The current A zoning is out
of date for an urban area and does not
reflect the potential for future residential
development.
The draft consolidated Zoning By-law
proposes to zone 1470 Finch Avenue as
Urban Reserve – UR recognize the
potential for future urban redevelopment,
and that agriculture zoning is no longer
appropriate. Permitted uses in the Urban
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
Reserve zone include conservation use,
park, and passive recreation use. Staff
reviewed definitions and permitted uses of
Urban Reserve and Future Development at
the municipalities of London, Guelph,
Ottawa, Vaughan, Stratford, and
Clarington. Except for Stratford and
Clarington, all municipalities included uses
such as passive recreation, conservation,
recreation, and park. Respectively, London
and Ottawa include a preamble and a
purpose for the UR zone clarifying the
intention to protect land from premature
development, and recognize the land for
future development, while recognizing the
existing uses.
Regarding the request to designate the
lands ‘residential’ subject to a formal
planning application, it is noted that the
lands are designated by the Pickering
Official Plan as Urban Residential Area –
Low Density Area. There is no intention
through the Consolidated Zoning By-law
Review to change the residential
designation of the property. This is to
confirm that the existing Urban Residential
Area – Low Density Area designation, and
both the existing Agriculture – A and
proposed Urban Reserve -UR zoning
would permit the submission of a Zoning
By-law Amendment Application for
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
Council’s consideration. The purpose of the
Consolidated Zoning By-law Review is Not
to bring properties into compliance with the
existing Official Plan designations. That will
be a subsequent exercise, following the
completion of a new Pickering Official Plan.
Resident/Landowner
2465 Sixth Concession
Road
RC5 is from the First Draft and was
consolidated for the Second Draft CZBL.
Please correct this zone category.
These lands have been rezoned to R1B.
Resident/Landowner
2505 Brock Road North
Exception to recognize the permitted uses
including the proposed funeral centre, parking
along one side of internal cemetery roads, as
accepted by the City, either as associated
uses to the operation of the cemetery or
explicitly identified as permitted uses on the
cemetery
Clarify S. 1.9.2 to specifically recognize what
has been interpreted as a permitted use - for
clear, transparent, and unambiguous
expression of the permission on the property.
3) X303 (CEM-1, 1927/84 F) amended to
permit continuous use of the funeral centre
and allowance of existing internal roads for
parking purposes (provided min. width of 6 m)
4) X303 should not preclude the expansion of
the cemetery in the future.
Permissions of X303 and Pre-Consultation
SPA S 03/92 (R22) were reviewed. The
City is satisfied that the requested funeral
home was previously permitted. SPA
S03/92 (R22) has also been circulated and
is therefore complete according to prior
requirements for circulation. X303 has been
modified to clarify that a cemetery and
funeral home are permitted uses to not
preclude expansion in the future. However,
if parking amendments are required, the
property owner can proceed with a minor
variance.
Resident/Landowner
1875 Clements Road
1) S. 1.9.2 requiring applications to be
deemed complete by the City be removed
and that this transition policy apply to any
Transition provisions (Section 1.9.2.2) are
clarified with the addition of a provision to
specify that where pre-submission
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
application for which a Pre-Consultation
meeting request has been submitted and held
with the City prior to the enactment of the
CZBL or
2) That either a site-specific exception be
implemented for the subject property in order
to maintain existing land use permissions for
outdoor storage or that the property not be
subject to the proposed By-law such that By-
law 2511 continue to apply to the subject
property;
3) that minor variances be subject to the
prevailing by-law (reference to 2511 in March
2023) to allow variances from provisions of
the previous zoning by-law in the event of a
minor variance, where the permission sought
by the minor variance is more desirable than
the condition required by the new zoning by-
law from the perspective of safety, urban
design, or efficient use of lands. - please
explain, does this mean whichever provision
best meets these criteria should prevail?
consultation was held and recorded by the
City, and meets the required revisions as
recorded, the application would be deemed
a complete application, provided it is in
accordance with all prior zoning by-laws.
Section 1.9.2 is clarified to list types of
planning applications, including minor
variances. In combination with Section
1.9.2.2. provisions are further clarified to
include minor variances related to
transitioned planning applications, to be
considered under transition provisions.
Staff reviewed the pre-consultation
minutes, met with the landowner, and
agreed that prior to the adoption of the
CZBL, the landowner would submit a
rezoning application based on the pre-
consultation minutes.
Resident/Landowner
1400 Church St (proposed
E1 and E2); 1792
Liverpool Rd (proposed
CC1 - H, X382, X404;
020017302000000); 1900
Dixie Rd (proposed LCA-
2, 3036 X223; Former by-
1. The existing site-specific exception (E1) for
1792 Liverpool Road permits Outdoor
Storage associated with a Garden Centre
Use as an additional use, and further, it is
suggested that the site-specific exception
X382 be modified to specify that Outdoor
Storage is not subject to the provisions of
With respect to Outdoor storage/display
(1792 Liverpool), it appears the Exception
contains a specific set of requirements for
the outdoor storage (seasonal garden
centre). Exception X382 has been modified
to specify that Outdoor Storage is not
subject to the provisions of S 4.26 as every
year they receive a site plan approval (see
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
laws 1494/82, 6104/03
and under first Draft "LN");
1725 Kingston Rd
(proposed LCA- 1, 3036
X275; Former by- laws
1895/84, 4468/94)
Section 4.27.
2. The site-specific exception (E1) for 1792
Liverpool Road appears to generally be
accurately carried through by site specific
exception X382, except for subsection 3d):
• Subsection 3d) states: Section 9.3.1,
related to Floor Space Index and related
to Building Height, shall not apply to any
additions or expansions to existing
buildings and structures as legally existed
on the effective date of this By-law.
• The existing site-specific provision directs
the exemption to both the parent by-law
section, and other provisions of the site-
specific exception related to height and
FSI.
• We suggest the following revision:
Sections 9.3.1 and 15.382.2a), related to
Floor Space Index and related to Building
Height, shall not apply to any additions or
expansions to existing buildings and
structures as legally existed on the
effective date of this By-law;
According to the Interactive C-ZBL Map, 1900
Dixie Road and 1725 Kingston Road are
proposed to be rezoned to LCA-2 and LCA-1
respectively, and subject to site-specific
provisions. The draft C-ZBL does not
establish the LCA zone as a zone (Section 2),
and there are no other references to the LCA
Section 15.382.3f). The Exception
addresses the use already. For clarity, in
the parent zoning by-law, the new Outdoor
Storage provisions are intended to relate to
industrial storage, and the Outdoor Display
Area/Seasonal Display Provisions are more
relevant.
Minor modification was made to Section
3d) as indicated in the letter.
With respect to 1900 Dixie and
1725 Kingston, the Exception would apply
with respect to permitted uses and
standards, in addition to the general
provisions of the parent zoning by-law. It is
correct the parent by-law does not
otherwise address LCA zones. By-law
6104/03 permits an Outdoor Garden
Centre. The LCA-1 and LCA-2 zones are
only referenced in the Exception. Some
properties in the Parent By- laws have
unique site-specific zone codes and this
may be one such case. Moving forward,
the LCA-1 and LCA-2 will be maintained
until further consolidation allows these
specific provisions to be amalgamated into
an overarching zone code.
The Second Draft by-law required a 1.5 m
minimum height for any landscape strip
requirement, but this is not always
desirable (e.g., where the landscape strip is
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
zone. It is noted that in the initial draft of the
Consolidated Zoning By-law, these sites were
proposed to be zoned Mixed Use Local Node
(LN).
We seek clarification as to the
implementation of this new zoning.
The M1 and M2S zones applicable to 1400
Church Street S under By-law 2511 are
proposed to be replaced by the E1 and E2
zones. The E1 and E2 zones contain
numerous performance standards, which are
not currently applicable to the M1 and M2S
zones, and which may create instances of
legal non-conformity. We are concerned with
the proposed new landscape strip
requirements for the E1 and E2 zones found
in Table 10.3 of the draft CZBL, which require
a minimum width to any street line and any
other lot line of 3.0 metres and 4.5 metres.
required abutting a street). In the Third
Draft, this height is removed from the
definition and moved into the general
provisions to apply to certain
circumstances. Further modifications
include Section 5.9.1 b) A minimum 3.0 m
wide landscape strip shall be required and
permanently maintained between any
street line, daylight triangle or existing
residential developme,nt and the parking
spaces or aisles. Where a landscape strip
is provided between existing residential
development and the parking spaces or
aisles, the landscape strip shall also have a
minimum height of 1.5 m to provide visual
screening. The minimum landscaped strip
abutting any other lot line is also changed
to 1.5 m from 4.5 m in Table 10.3: Lot and
Building Requirements for the Employment
Zones.
Resident/Landowner
1355 Kingston Road
Transition policies should be expanded to
include lands that are subject to a complete
application for ZBA or Draft Plan of
Subdivision applications OR subject lands be
exempt from the CZBL and existing ZBL
provisions continue to apply. Concern is
regarding a change in the amenity space
requirements for future SPA applications
despite being part of a broader master plan.
CZBL Shared Amenity Space minimum
increased rate from 4 sq m to 8 sq m for
Amenity area requirements are updated
and reverted to the prior requirements,
consistent with the Integrated Sustainable
Design Standards. If there is an application
with the City that meets the transition
requirements, the new General Provisions
will not apply to disrupt the process.
Transition provisions are clarified and
discussed in the Report to the Planning and
Development Committee.
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
developments of more than 20 units.
Questioning the minimum rate for indoor
amenities. Request to maintain existing
provisions of min 2.0 sq m per unit for indoor
and outdoor amenity areas (4 sq m
combined).
Clarification is requested on Section 15
(Exception Zones) and Section 16
(Enactment) of the Second Draft of the
Consolidated Zoning Bylaw. Our
interpretation of Section 15(c) is that for
exception zones that reference former zoning
bylaws, the requirements of the exception
zone and former zoning bylaw still apply to
those lands. However, 15(b) defines former
zoning by-laws to exclude those by-laws that
have been repealed and not superseded.
This would mean for1355 Kingston Road
(Exception zone 400) the zone exception and
the former by-law permissions may not apply,
given that zone exception amended By-law
7553/17, which is now repealed.
The provisions of the two zoning by-laws
that have been repealed (Seaton By-law
7364/14 and City Centre By-law 7553/17)
have been carried forward in the new
Consolidated Zoning By-law. Thus, any
exception zone referring to By-law 7553/17
now relates to the City Centre zoning
provisions in Chapter 9 of the new CZBL.
Section 15.c) has been revised in the Final
Draft to clarify this.
Resident/Landowner
1786-1790 Liverpool Road
(S08/23 - Makimono);
1460
& 1430 Celebration Drive
(S02/22 - UC 4-5); 1475
Celebration Drive (S06/22
- UC 7)
Clarification about scenarios where
previously approved site-specific zoning
by-laws conformed with applicable ZBL at the
time of approval and omitted development
standards in the CZBL.
Confirmation that the existing 4.0 sq m per
dwelling unit rate continues to apply.
The transition provisions have been
updated in Section 1.9 of the draft Zoning
By-law. If there is an application with the
City that meets the transition requirements,
the new General Provisions will not apply to
disrupt the process. Transition provisions
are clarified and discussed in the Report to
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
Confirmation of the proposed transition
clauses and their effect on the previously
secured rezoning approvals and that no
regulations of the CZBL will prevent the
implementation and SPA of the existing
active applications (that nothing shall prevent
the SPA or building permits of the mentioned
applications so long as they comply with the
regulations of their site-specific ZBL and CC
By-law 7553/17 in effect at the time of their
approval.)
Proposed shared amenity areas are
unreasonable. Request the requirement
remain as regulated in By-law 7553/17 2.0 sq
m per dwelling for indoor and outdoor
amenity areas (4.0 sq m combined total).
Suggest differentiating rates between
locations i.e. CC vs. areas of lower
intensity/lower land cost.
the Planning and Development Committee.
Amenity area requirements have been
updated and have reverted to the prior
requirements, consistent with the
Integrated Sustainable Design Standards.
Malone Given Parsons on
behalf of North-East
Pickering Landowners
Group (NEPLOG)
NEPLOG Area-Specific Zoning: Agree with
the proposed approach to the zoning of the
NEPLOG lands concurrent with the
secondary plan process. However, continue
to re-iterate comments that the preferred
zoning approach to creating complete
residential communities is to permit a range
of built forms and typologies (from single
detached dwellings to higher density
townhouse units such as stacked and back-
to-back units) within the same general
This CZBL initiative consolidates parent by-
laws and modernization is in the form of
language, added provisions that reflect
standard practice and adds a limited range
of updated standards such as parking.
Additional work will be considered under
the Official Plan Review that started May
27, 2024. Form-based zoning, significantly
increased permissions, and MZO requests
to the province are not within the scope of
this initiative.
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
residential zone.
Pickering Airport MZO: Urge the City to
consider applying to the Province to remove
the portion of the existing Pickering Airport
MZO (O.Reg 102/72) applicable to the
NEPLOG lands to facilitate urban
development as part of the zoning by-law
review and consolidation process.
Mixed Use Zones: Concerns that only the
MU1 zone permits residential uses out of the
3 mixed use zones. Request that the City
consider increased maximum building height
in the MU1 zone, and more flexibility with the
FSI.
Parking Space Requirements: Concerns that
the parking requirements for residential uses
are overly restrictive in the Draft ZBL at a
minimum of 2 parking spaces for all
residential building types except stacked
townhouses and apartment dwellings. These
should require a lower parking rate of 1
parking space per unit.
Parking Space and Driveway Dimensions and
Landscaped Open Space: Request that Table
5.3 be amended so that the categories are
‘Lot Frontage Less than 11.0 m’ and ‘Lot
Frontage Greater than 11.0 m’. Request
clarification if the calculation of the minimum
30/45 percent required landscaped open
space in each yard is inclusive of the
There have been no changes to the Mixed-
Use Zones. In large part zones for future
intensification should be driven by other
processes such as the Kingston Road
Corridor and will also be informed by the
OP Review. The proposed MU1 zone is
more of a stopgap until that work takes
place and is intended to function as a
starting point to introduce some
terminology and an approach to mixed- use
zones.
The CZBL maintains 2 parking spaces per
dwelling as proposed in the draft, as this is
driven by the consolidation and continues
to be a practice similar to other
municipalities for ground-related housing.
The City is supportive of using 11 m as the
threshold and has updated Table 5.3. The
new zoning by-law does not currently
restrict number of garage doors. Further,
the intent of the language, used for a
driveway or parking, is to state which yards
are subject to the requirements (i.e., since
a driveway could be located in the front or
the exterior side yard). The requirements
would not apply to any yard where there is
no part of a driveway. We do not support
reduction in the percentages as they
appear to work well. A townhouse will have
a front yard of 6x6 m in the R3A zone for
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
minimum driveway width on the lot required
by the first row of Table 5.3 or if it is
calculated separately. Clarification on
intention of provision. Concerned with new
provision introduced under Section 14.3.12
Residential Building Standards:
recommendations on more modern and
flexible building standards in the Residential
Second and Third Density zones (e.g.,
reduced minimum rear yard setback,
increased maximum.
example, and the driveway would be limited
to 50 percent of this area as it is limited to a
3 m width. If any existing lots do not
comply, they would be considered legal
non-complying.
With respect to requested revisions to the
residential zones, this may be considered
in a next phase of zoning review. The
current proposed standards represent a
consolidation at this time. It is anticipated
that any new development that deviates
from these standards apply for a zoning
by law amendment. No lands have been
pre-zoned with the proposed zones.
With respect to modifying the temporary
sales office, the City uses a Standard
Operating Procedure to exempt sales
offices from the Site Plan approval so the
process has already been expedited on
behalf of applicants.
Fairport Beach
Neighbourhood
Association
Seaton, City-wide
Request that natural heritage lands within the
Seaton Area (By-law 7364/14) be rezoned to
recognize their existing natural heritage
designation.
City Staff contacted the landowner,
Infrastructure Ontario. This review process
does not have the authority to rezone
property without landowner approval.
City-wide, TRCA regulatory lands will be
recognized in an attachment to the
consolidated Zoning By-law. These maps
are updated annually by the TRCA.
Resident/Landowner
Duffins Rouge Agricultural
Request to reinstate agricultural easements
that were removed by the Duffins Rouge
In 2023, the Duffins Rouge Agricultural
Preserve Act (Bill 136) repealed the Duffins
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
Preserve Agricultural Preserve Repeal Act of 2022. Rouge Agricultural Preserve Repeal Act of
2022, thereby reinstating the easements
and covenants. This is not a municipal
matter. Further, a lapsing contract on
previous agreements or removals are
regarded as null and void at this point.
Macaulay Shiomi Howson
Ltd representing
Seaton Landowners
Group
Identified minor administrative corrections in
the Second Draft CZBL.
The minor corrections have been made in
response to the comments.
Resident/Landowner
Taunton/Brock Road
Seaton Neighbourhood
Please review the deck/balcony zoning
restrictions for this property/SLD1. Due to the
lot sizes, these backyards are already very
small and quite close to the neighbouring
houses. Due to the grading elevation, there is
a chance that owners with a walk-out
basement will build a balcony/raised deck
from the second floor into their backyards.
This will reduce privacy for adjacent
neighbours even further.
Section 14.2.5 Yard Encroachments of
Seaton By-law integrated into the CZBL
allows a porch or deck to encroach 2.0
metres into the required rear yard. There
are no height limits.
Resident/Landowner
2080 Lynn Heights Drive
Is a public speaking and a tutoring service, as
part of a professional office permitted.
This site is zoned S1 under X301. A Home
Based Business would allow a tutoring
business subject to the Home Occupation
Zoning regulations under 4.17 of the CZBL.
Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority
(TRCA)
501, 503 and 520
Marksbury Crescent, and
Requested that all or a portion of these
properties be zoned Open Space – OS to
facilitate the completion of the Waterfront
Trail.
As requested by TRCA, 501, 503 and 520
Marksbury Crescent, and 509 Park
Crescent are zoned Open Space - OS in
the draft Consolidated Zoning By-law.
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
509 Park Crescent
Resident/Landowner
1855 Ninth Concession
Road
Oddly shaped sliver overlapping Mapping correction completed
Resident/Landowner
3430 Seventh Concession
Road
Mapping correction needed Mapping correction completed
Miller Thomson LLP
representing GFL
Environmental Services
Inc.
1034 Toy Avenue:
Exception X48(M2-2)
1048 Toy Avenue:
Exception X73 (MC-16)
1060 and 1070 Toy
Avenue: Exception X21
(MC-6)
In principle, we asked that all of these
properties be zoned to an Employment
Industrial zone in recognition of the long
established use and that the continuation of
that use be clearly recognized.
Rezone to E1 all lots (now under one
ownership) to permit as-of-right existing
operations - All the Exceptions for these
properties are carried forward and permit the
current waste management uses.
The second draft of the text of the by-law and
interactive zoning map would zone the GFL
properties as follows: 1034 Toy Avenue:
Exception X48(M2-2)
1048 Toy Avenue: Exception X73 (MC-16)
1060 and 1070 Toy Avenue: Exception X21
(MC-6)
In each case, an old Zone (MC06, MC-16 and
M2-2) established by older by-laws would be
the underlying zone for these properties. The
draft by-law text does not appear to re-
establish these zones going forward.
All the Exceptions for these properties are
carried forward and permit the current
waste management uses. As long as the
Exceptions exist, GFLs' existing uses are
maintained.
These zone codes are from the Parent By-
laws and provisions in the Exceptions are
to be interpreted alongside provisions in the
Parent By-laws. In reference to prior
concerns that 1070 Toy is not underutilized
land and not a “high exposure location” for
redevelopment purposes (refers to Durham
Region OP). Documentation exists noting
that Durham Region refers to the City of
Pickering for implementation. City Staff also
confirm there is no intention to encourage
redevelopment of these properties. The
municipality cannot rezone property without
the owners' consent to do so.
The consolidated Zoning By-law review
does not include confirming the legality of
existing uses. To be explicitly recognized
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
Would you review the interactive zoning map
and Schedule 1 in accordance with our
request that the new zoning by-law zone
these properties within a heavy industry zone
(is this the current use of each lot and how
does each lot differentiate from each other in
their use, i.e. level of environmental
regulation)?
Furthermore, given the Waste Processing
Station and Waste Transfer Station uses are
being carried out on all of these properties,
that those uses are permitted only in the E1
zone and even in that E1 zone are subject to
a footnote which provides “Only legally
existing uses shall be permitted”, we would
ask that the site specific provisions for each
of these properties explicitly permit both the
Waste Processing Station and Waste
Transfer Station uses without that limitation.
That would recognize the reality of the well-
established use of these lands, which are
crucial for the continued economic well-being
and safety of the City and the Region.
requires Zoning By-law Amendment
Application where all the required studies
are undertaken.
The new outdoor storage provisions in the
consolidated By-law would apply, save and
except for any specific statements in the
exception zones. If GFL finds the new
provisions unreasonable, more specific
input is needed. City Staff believe another
meeting with GFL to explain how
Exceptions relate to superseded Parent
By-laws may be helpful, and have reached
out to set up that meeting.
TransCanada Pipelines,
Enbridge, TransNorthern
Pipelines, CN Rail
City-wide
Utility corporations 1) TransCanada
Pipelines; 2) Enbridge 3) TransNorthern
Pipelines, and 4) CN Rail requested mapping
and/or provisions to be added to the
consolidated Zoning By-law.
TransCanada Pipelines a) General
Regulations of the CZBL a) A minimum
The City chose a consistent approach for
utility regulation in the Consolidated Zoning
By-law, based on the following.
The Federal CER Act requires utility
companies to monitor and regulate
development for public safety. Both the
Provincial Planning Statement, and the
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
setback of 7.0 m shall be required from any
part of a principal building or structure from
the edge of the TransCanada pipeline right-
of-way. b) A minimum setback of 3.0 m shall
be required from any part of an accessory
structure from the edge of the TransCanada
pipeline right-of-way. c) A minimum setback
of 7.0 m from the nearest portion of a
TransCanada pipeline right-of-way shall also
apply to any parking area or loading area,
including any parking spaces, loading
spaces, stacking spaces, bicycle parking
spaces, and any associated aisle or
driveway.
Enbridge requested their pipelines and
facilities be indicated on one or more maps of
the Zoning By-law.
TransNorthern Pipelines requested a meeting
to discuss their regulatory framework.
CN Rail Requested a) to add definitions from
the PPS into the CZBL. (Sensitive Land Uses
definition included in the 2nd draft CZBL) b)
to add areas of influence for sensitive land
uses (300 m to railway, 1km to rail yard)
identified in a Schedule.
Official Plan support protecting
infrastructure corridors. However, Section
92(10) of the Constitution Act speaks to
“heads of power”. Provinces and
municipalities do not have jurisdiction over
areas of Federal regulation. Within
Pickering, there are areas where utilities
overlap, and conditions for approval may
need flexibility to negotiate between
utilities, i.e., CN rail and TransCanada
Pipelines. Detailed provisions would be too
prescriptive. Further, operationally,
Pickering's' capacity to support and enforce
provisions (such as setbacks) for Federally
regulated utilities is limited.
In light of these constraints, the City of
Pickering will meet the core interests of
utilities by flagging applications in the
planning process. Further, the CZBL
includes sections 4.29 Public Uses
Permitted in All Zones and 14.2.5 Permitted
Public uses in All zones.
Resident/Landowner
2130 Dixie Road
Zoning should be residential as all other
areas surrounding the property are
residential.
This property is located in the urban area of
Pickering, It was previously zoned
agriculture, yet has a small size, generally
unsuited to accommodate long term
Responses to Public and Agency Comments
Resident or
Organization / Address
Comment(s) Response
agricultural use. The consolidation review
rezones remnant agricultural parcels not
anticipated to remain as agricultural to an
Urban Reserve zone. This property has
been rezoned to Urban Reserve.
Lehman Plan on behalf of
the Archdiocese of
Toronto
Holy Redeemer Parish
796 Eyer Drive
St. Isaac Jogues Parish
1148 Finch Avenue
Requesting that exceptions be created for
these properties to recognize existing place
of worship uses held as-of-right under parent
Zoning By-laws 2511 and 2520. The current
by-law permits both the church and school to
the south of the property in all residential
zones. The proposed R3 zone does not
permit either the church or school.
Also please confirm the place of worship
minimum parking requirement of 10 spaces
per 100 square metres proposed in the draft
Consolidated Zoning By-law is correct.
Holy Redeemer Parish located at 796 Eyer
Drive is zoned R3 by Zoning By-law 2511,
as amended by By-law 7610/18. A
site-specific exception will be created for
this property to permit a place of worship in
the proposed draft Consolidated By-law to
be presented to Council in December for
adoption.
St. Isaac Jogues Parish located at 1148
Finch Avenue is zoned I(C)-ES by Zoning
By-law 3036, as amended by By-law
4091/92. Exception X196 carries forward
By-law 4091/92 for 1148 Finch Avenue.