Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
June 6, 2005
Council Meeting Agenda Monday, June 6, 2005 7:30 PM INVOCATION Mayor Ryan will call the meeting to order and lead Council in the saying of the Invocation. (11) ADOPTION OF MINUTES Regular Meeting of May 17, 2005 1-12 (111) 1. DELEGATIONS Kevin Cahill, representing the Pickering Terry Fox Run Committee, will address Coundl with respect to the Terry Fox Remembrance Rally and to request Council to proclaim Sunday, July 10th, 2005 as Terry Fox Day in the City of Pickering. Don Carr, representing the Rick Hansen Wheels In Motion Tour, will address Council with respect to this event. Angie Littlefield, Executive Director, Durham West Arts Centre, will address Members of Council to thank them for declaring Arts Week and to present their book entitled "The Thomsons of Durham - Tom Thomson's Family Heritage". (IV) 1. RESOLUTIONS To adopt the Executive Committee Report EC 2005-09, dated May 24, 2005. To endorse the Report of the Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb. To proclaim July 10, 2005 as "Terry Fox Day". PAGE 13-17 18-54 55-56 -1- Council Meeting Agenda Monday, June 6, 2005 7:30 PM (V) BY-LAWS By-law 6525/05 Being a by-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3037, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham on the South Part of Lot 18, Concession 9, in the City of Pickering. (A 06/01) By-law 6526/05 Being a by-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham in Part of Lot 33, Plan 228, in the City of Pickering. (A 12/04) By-law 6527105 Being a by-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 6329/04, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, Part of Lot 31, Range 3, Broken Front Concession being Part of Lot 1,2,3,4 and 9, Plan 230, in the City of Pickering. (A 18/05) By-law 6528~05 Being a by-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, in the Region of Durham in the South Part of Lot 34, Concession 2, Part 1 of Plan 40R-11934, in the City of Pickering. (A 09/99(R), SP 2002-02) By-law 6529/05 Being a by-law to amend Restricted Area Zoning By-law 3036, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, Lot 126, Plan 1051, in the City of Pickering. (A 15/04) By-law 6530~05 Being a by-law to dedicate those parts of Lot 7, Concession 5, Pickering, designated as Parts 3,6,7 and 8, Plan 40R-23455 as public highways. 57-59 60-61 62-66 67-77 78-82 83-85 2 Council Meeting Agenda Monday, June 6, 2005 7:30 PM By-law 6531/05 Being a by-law to dedicate that part of Lot 11, Plan 228, Pickering, designated as Part 4, Plan 40R-23443 and that part of Block 19, Plan 40M-1653, Pickering, designated as Part 5, Plan 40R-23443, as public highway (Tomlinson Court). By-law 6532~05 Being a by-law to appoint Ozair Chaudhry to the City of Pickering Public Library Board. 86-88 89 (VI) NOTICE OF MOTION 1. Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Brenner WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering, on behalf of all its residents, do hereby acknowledge the generous financial commitment to the Province of Ontario of a specific gift of $7.5 million dollars towards the Rouge Valley Hospital Foundation; and WHEREAS this gift by Mattamy Homes, Metrus Developments and Lebovic Homes, the three developers of the new Seaton Community, to be built on Provincial lands, is conditional only on seeing the development process move forward and allowing them to commence construction eighteen months hence; and WHEREAS the new community to rise will most certainly need lands for a new municipal fire hall, library, community centre, arena, sports field, Seniors' facilities, a recreation and wellness complex, parks and, but not limited to, perhaps lands for a new City Hall; and WHEREAS Council believes that the timetable requested by the three builders is achievable if all parties needed for approval work efficiently and effectively; 9O -3- Council Meeting Agenda Monday, June 6, 2005 7:30 PM NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering believes that it is now time to assemble a working group comprised of three Members of Council and three senior administrative staff to negotiate the net community benefit to the City and its residents and to report to Council on its findings for deliberation, consensus and ratification. 2. Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor McLean 91-92 WHEREAS The Council of the Corporation of the City of Picketing adopted the Picketing Offidal Plan in March 1997; and WHEREAS the Regional Municipality of Durham approved the Pickering Official Plan in September 1997; and WHEREAS the Picketing Official Plan came into effect in October 1997; and WHEREAS the Official Plan identifies Neighbourhood 8 as the Town Centre, bounded by the C.N. rail line, the rear lot lines of properties fronting Kingston Road, the hydro transmission corridor, and Highway 401; and WHEREAS Pickering Council adopted the Town Centre West Development Guidelines for lands generally west of Liverpool Road, between Kingston Road and Highway 401; and WHEREAS the Official Plan policy encourages the highest mix and intensity of uses and activities in the City to be in the Town Centre Neighbourhood; and WHEREAS the Town Centre Neighbourhood has not realized development activity to the extent envisaged by the Official Plan; and -4- Council Meeting Agenda Monday, June 6, 2005 7:30 PM WHEREAS the February 2005 Draft Provincial Growth Plan (Places to Grow) designates the City of Picketing as an Urban Growth Centre; and WHEREAS the lands within the Town Centre West area are strategically located to provide significant intensification potential and opportunity to implement the direction of the Draft Provincial Growth Plan (Places to Grow) which encourages a density of development of not less than 200 residents and jobs per hectare; and WHEREAS the Town Centre West area is currently served by convenient access to Highway 401 and will be additionally served by a pedestrian bridge over Highway 401 linking the GO transit station to the Town Centre area; and WHEREAS the Province of Ontario currently owns lands strategically located at the northwest quadrant of Highway 401 and Liverpool Road, which lands are an integral component; NOW THEREFORE the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby identifies these lands as a prime opportunity area for intensification; to have a diverse mix of land uses generally planned as outlined in the Draft Provincial Growth Plan; and FURTHER THAT the Province of Ontario be encouraged to consider the construction of the proposed courthouse facilities for Durham Region on the provincially-owned lands located at the northwest quadrant of Highway 401 and Liverpool Road; and FURTHER THAT copies of this resolution be forwarded to: The Honourable Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario The Honourable Greg Sorbara, Minister of Finance · The Honourable Michael Bryant, Attorney General · Wayne Arthurs, MPP, Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge -5- Council Meeting Agenda Monday, June 6, 2005 7:30 PM (w~) 1. CONFIDENTIAL ITEMS To consider a financial matter. 93-101 (VIII) OTHER BUSINESS (IX) CONFIRMATION BY-LAW (X) ADJOURNMENT -6- PICKEFdNG Council Meeting Minutes Tuesday, May 17, 2005 7:40 PM PRESENT: Mayor David Ryan COUNCILLORS: K. Ashe D. Dickerson R. Johnson B. McLean D. Pickles ABSENT: M. Brenner (personal business) ALSO PRESENT' T. J. Quinn E. Buntsma N. Carroll G. Paterson B. Taylor - Chief Administrative Officer - Director, Operations & Emergency Services - Director, Planning & Development - Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer - City Clerk (i) INVOCATION Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order and led Council in the saying of the Invocation. (11) ADOPTION OF MINUTES Regular Meeting of May 2, 2005 fill) PRESENTATIONS Jac~ Engiisr~ of' the Brian English Foundatior~ ~edicated the Defibrillator unit that they donated to the City of Pickering and which is located in the Civic Complex, to the memory of Jim Walker and Brian English. Council Meeting Minutes Tuesday, May 17, 2005 7:40 PM (IV) RESOLUTIONS Resolution #79/05 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Pickles That the Report of the Executive Committee EC 2005-08, dated May 9, 2005, be adopted. CARRIED Resolution #80/05 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor Pickles That Report CS 40-05 regarding the appointment of Debi A. Bentley as the Clerk for The Corporation of the City of Picketing be received; and That the draft by-law to appoint Debi A. Bentley as the Clerk of The Corporation of the City of Pickering effective May 30, 2005, be enacted; and That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. CARRIED Resolution #81105 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson WHEREAS the Regions of Durham, Halton, Peel and York ("the GTN905 Regions") have been and wil~ continue to be the fastest growing regions in Ontario, collectively growin~ at twice the ~rovincia! rate of growth by addin~ more than 90,000 new residents each year; and WHEREAS each year until at least 2011, the GTA/905 Regions will welcome and accommodate almost half of Ontario's annual growth in population; and 2 Council Meeting Minutes Tuesday, May 17, 2005 7:40 PM WHEREAS each year until at least 2011, the GTA/905 Regions will experience a rate of growth in its population of seniors at twice the Provincial growth rate of seniors; and WHEREAS the GTA/905 Regions collectively receive only three-quarters of the age- weighted per capita funding for total health care services when compared to 33 regions, excluding Northern Ontario and the City of Toronto, across .Ontario resulting in a funding gap of $866 million in annual funding that includes $545 funding gap for hospitals and $60 million funding gap for CCACs; and WHEREAS the GTA-905 Regions comprise a significant number of Urban Growth Centres as identified by the Ontario Government's February 2005 Places to Grow: Better Choices, Brighter Future. A Draft Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; and WHEREAS the GTN905 Regions hospitals are, on average, some of the lowest cost providers of the five health care services being targeted by the Ontario Government for reduction in wait times; and WHEREAS the GTN905 Regions will collectively contribute more than $570 million each year in Health Premium revenue to Provincial coffers (once fully implemented for 2005/06) making up 26 percent of $2.4 billion in Health Premium Revenue being collected from Ontario residents; and WHEREAS the GTN905 are facing a collective funding shortfall of $88 million for 2004/05 and a deficit forecast of $126 million for 2005~06 that will require a significant reduction in health care services for the GTN905 Region, layoffs of nursing and other staff and increased wait times for many important health care services; and WHEREAS the Government of Ontario has received over $800 million in new health care funding from the Federal Government and stands to receive an additional $1.2 billion in the 2005/06 fiscal year; and WHEREAS the provision of health care and treatment close to home for the more than three million residents living in the GTN905 Regions is consistent with improving access to care and contributes to improved quality of care; and WHEREAS the buildin9 of hospita! infrastructure and the purchasin9 of medica~ equipment and health care technology is essentia~ for' providing effective health care in GTA/905 communities; Council Meeting Minutes Tuesday, May 17, 2005 7:40 PM NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering demands that the Ontario Government immediately address the 2004/05 funding shortfalls of $88 million for GTN905 hospitals providing care for GTN905 residents; and FURTHER THAT given the Ontario Government's creation of Local Health Integrated Networks (LHINs), and the need to more equitably allocate health care funds to regions across Ontario, the Ontario Government make it a priority to create and use a population, needs-based funding formula for LHINs that reflects: current population, future population growth and aging the increased costs of providing health care services in rural areas, and the increased costs of multi-site health care organizations FURTHER THAT the Provincia~ Government make legislative and regulatory changes so that revenue generated by local governments through Development Charges can be used to support the construction and renovations to hospitals; and FURTHER THAT copies of this resolution be forwarded to: Honourable Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario Honourable Greg Sorbara, Minister of Finance Honourable George Smitherman, Minister of Health and Long Term Care John Tory, Leader of the Opposition Howard Hampton, Leader of the NDP Wayne Arthurs, MPP, Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge Regional Municipality of Durham Association of Municipalities of Ontado Board of Directors, Rouge Valley Health System GTN905 Health Care Alliance CARRIED (V~ BY-LAWS That Councilior Asne~ seconC~ed b'v Councilior Jonnsor;, zoo~. leave to introduce ~y-laws of the City of P~ckerir~: -'4- PICKEIdNG Council Meeting Minutes Tuesday, May 17, 2005 7:40 PM By-law 6521/05 Being a by-law to appoint Kevin Narraway and Don Sunny-Guy as municipal law enforcement officers for the purpose of enforcing the by-laws of The Corporation of the City of Picketing. By-law 6522/05 Being a by-law to appoint Debi A. Bentley as the Clerk of The Corporation of the City of Pickering. By-law 6523/05 Being a by-law to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for certain purposes (Parking Regulation -1210 & 1235 Radom Street, 1310 Fieldlight Blvd., 1975 & 1958 Rosefield Blvd., 1525 & 1535 Diefenbaker Court, 1530, 1540, 1625 & 1635 Pickering Parkway, 1000 & 1400 The Esplanade, 905 & 925 Bayly Street, 1650 & 1865 Kingston Road, 1350, 1360 & 1885 Gienanna Road, 1915 Denmar Road, 1345 Altona Road, 1655 & 1665 Pickering Parkway, 1100 Begley Street.) CARRIED THIRD READING: Councillor Ashe, seconded by Councillor Johnson, moved that By-law Numbers 6521/05, 6522/05 and 6523/05, be adopted and the said by-laws be now read a third time and PASSED and that the Mayor and Clerk sign the same and the seal of the Corporation be affixed thereto. CARRIED (VI) OTHER BUSINESS Resolution #82105 Moved by^ , ' ~.,ouncmlior Johnsor; Seconded by Councillor McLear~ For leave to introduce a motion regarding a grant. CARRIED -'5" HC G Council Meeting Minutes Tuesday, May 17, 2005 7:40 PM Resolution #83105 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor McLean That Mayor Ryan and Council hereby declares Saturday, September 10, 2005 as John Allen Cameron Day in the City of Pickering; and That a one-time grant in the amount of $831.95 to offset the rental fee of the O'Brien Room and Delaney Rink for a fundraising event in support of John Allen Cameron on Saturday, September 10, 2005 be made to the organizers of that event; and That this amount be charged to Account 2195 (Grants to Organizations & individuals). CARRIED Councillor Johnson thanked ali Members of Council for supporting him in his bid to secure the Conservative Party nomination for the Ajax-Pickering Riding. Councillor Dickerson, seconded by Councillor Brenner, introduced a Notice of Motion regarding a community benefit. Councillor Pickles asked staff to investigate the safety of persons who cross Strouds Lane between Rosebank Road and Altona Road. The following matters were discussed prior to the regular Council Meeting: a) The Coordinator, Business Development & Investment, provided an overview of the proposed Durham Strategic Energy Alliance. b) The Coordinator, Business Development & investment, provided an update or, the Provincial RFQ for the Durham Consolidated Courthouse process. Council Meeting Minutes Tuesday, May 17, 2005 7:40 PM c) Resolution #84105 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor Pickles That Council meeting in a Closed Meeting at 7:27 pm to discuss a matter of potential litigation. CARRIED The Chief Administrative Officer provided Members of Council with an update on an issue of potential litigation. Resolution #85/05 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor McLean That Council rise from this Closed Meeting at 7:36 pm. CARRIED (VII) CONFIRMATION BY-LAW By-law Number 6524~05 Councillor Johnson, seconded by Councillor Ashe, moved for leave to introduce a By- law of the City of Pickering to confirm those proceedings of the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering at its Regular Meeting of May 17, 2005. CARRIED 7-' PICKERINIG Council Meeting Minutes Tuesday, May 17, 2005 7:40 PM (w~) ADJOURNMENT The Meeting adjourned at 8:20 pm. DATED MAYOR CITY CLERK -8- HCKER1NG Appendix~)',0~ Executive Committee Report EC 2005-08 That the Executive Committee of the City of Pickering having met on May 9, 2005, presents its eighth report to Council and recommends: OPERATIONS & EMERGENCY SERVICES REPORT OES 13-05 PICKERING MUSEUM VILLAGE -REQUEST TO DE-ACCESSION QUARRY ENGINE That OPerations & Emergency Services Report OES 13-05 regarding the request to de-accession the quarry engine at the Pickering Museum Village, be received; and That the Council of the City of Pickering approve the de-accessioning of the quarry engine from the Pickering Museum Village; and That Council approve the donation of the quarry engine to the Ontario Steam Heritage Museum inc.; and That staff be authorized to enter into an appropriate disposal agreement respecting the quarry engine; and That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto. OPERATIONS & EMERGENCY SERVICES REPORT OES 09-05 TENDER NO. T-1-2005 - TENDER FOR ASPHALT OVERLAY WORKS FOR ROUGEMOUNT DRIVE AND SANDY BEACH ROAD That Report OES 09-05 regarding the Asphalt Overlay Works for Rougemount Drive and Sandy Beach Road, be received; and That Tender No. T-1-2005 submitted by D. Crupi & Sons Ltd. for asp:halt Overlay Works for Rougemount Drive and Sandy Beach Road in the amount of $151,434.75 (G.S.Tr included) and a net cost after G.S.T. rebate of $141,527.80; be accepted; and -t-~._,. the iota!. ~.~ proN~,,......."..',=¢' of ¢~ ~ 7--.,.~, .~,~uu~'~ inciud no~. the tender amoun'~, and other associated costs and s net totaI cost after rebates of $162,528, be approved; and -9- Appendix I Executive Committee Report EC 2005-08 That the total costs of $90,026 for Rougemount Drive to be funded from Public Works Services Reserve Fund, and the amount of $72,502 for Sandy Beach Road being an unfinished work from 2001, to be funded by Development Charges Reserve Fund ($36,251) and Internal Loan ($36,251), be approved; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to bring effect thereto. OPERATIONS & EMERGENCY SERVICES REPORT OES 15/05 FIRE SERVICES EMERGENCY MEDICAL RESPONSE (EMS) That the Region of Durham reimburse all costs associated with the purchase of all medical equipment and training to Municipal Fire Services; and That the City support the recommendation that existing and future fire station locations be strongly considered as joint Emergency Medical Response / Fire facilities; and That the City support the establishment of a local stakeholder committee mandated to review our present Regional tiered response system and implement improvement where possible and practical. CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT CS 31-05 DEVELOPMENT CHARGES RESERVE FUND STATEMENT OF THE TREASURER FOR 2004 That Report CS 31-05 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer respecting the Development Charges Reserve Fund, be received and forwarded to Council for information. CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT CS 33-05 2004 PRE-AUD!T BALANCES OF RESERVES AND RESERVE FUNDS That Repo~ ,'"c "' n-- '' ::" ~ ~reasure, ..,,., ¢o-uu of t~e DIr~.,to,, Corporate Services & "" ~ regarding the 2004 Pre-Audit Balances of Reserves and Reserve Funds, be received and forwarded to Council for information. PICKERING Appendix I Executive Committee Report EC 2005-08 0il CORPOP~TE SERVICES REPORT CS 32-05 2005 ANNUAL REPAYMENT LIMIT FOR DEBT AND FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS That Report CS 32-05 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer concerning 2005 Annual Repayment Limit for Debt and Financial Obligations, be forwarded to Council for information. CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT CS 18-05 STATEMENT OF THE TREASURER RESPECTING 2004 REMUNERATION AND EXPENSES OF MEMBERS OF COUNCIL AND COUNCIL APPOINTEES TO BOARDS, AGENCIES AND OTHER BODIES That Report CS 18-05 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer concerning Statement of the Treasurer respecting Remuneration and Expenses of Members of Council and Council Appointees for the year 2004, be received. CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT CS 23-05 FORMAL QUOTATIONS - QUARTERLY REPORT FOR INFORMATION That Report CS 23-05 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer concerning Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information, be received and forwarded to Council for information. CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT CS 35-05 APPOINTMENT OF MUNICIPAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS 1. That Report to Council CS 35-05 regarding the appointment of two Municipal Law Enforcement Officers, be received; and 2. That the draft by-law to appoint Kevin Narraway and Don Sunny-Guy as lv~unicipal Law Enforcement Officers for the City of Pickering, be enacted~ Appendix I Executive Committee Report EC 2005-08 10. CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT CS 34-05 APPOINTMENT OF BY-LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS That Report CS 34-05 respecting the appointment of Special Municipal Law Enforcement Officers for the purpose of enforcing the Parking By-law on private property, be received; and That the draft by-law to appoint persons to enforce the Parking By-law at 1210 & 1235 Radom Street, 1310 Fieldlight Blvd., 1975 & 1958 Rosefield Blvd., 1525 & 1535 Diefenbaker Court, 1530, 1540, 1625 & 1635 Pickering Parkway, 1000 & 1400 The Esplanade, 905 & 925 Bayly Street, 1650 & 1865 Kingston Road, 1350, 1360 & 1885 Gienanna Road, 1915 Denmar Road, 1345 Altona Road, 1655 & 1665 Pickering Parkway, 1100 Begley Street, be forwarded to Council for approval; and That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. 11. PROCLAMATIONS: "ARTS WEEK" "HEALTH BEFORE PREGNANCY MONTH" "RICK HANSEN WHEELS IN MOTION DAY" That Mayor Ryan be authorized to make the following proclamations: "Arts Week"- May 23 - 29, 2005 "Health Before Pregnancy Month"- June, 2005 "Rick Hansen Wheels in Motion Day" - June 12, 2005 RESOLUTION OF COUNCIL DATE MOVED BY SECONDED BY That the Report of the Executive Committee EC 2005-09, dated May 24, 2005, be adopted. Appendix I Executive Committee Report EC 2005-09 That the Executive Committee of the City of Pickering having met on May 24, 2005, presents its ninth report to Council and recommends: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORT PD 20-05 ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 15/04 R & D INVESTMENTS INC 1741 FAIRPORT ROAD (LOT 126, PLAN 1051) That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 15/04, be APPROVED as set out in the draft by-law attached as Appendix I to Report PD 20-05, to amend the existing zoning on the subject lands to permit the development of nine detached dwellings, on lands being Lot 126, Plan 1051, City of Pickering; and That the amending zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 15/04, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 20-05, be FORWARDED to City Council for enactment. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORT PD 17-05 ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 12/05 ALAN & NANCY FORD 1465 ALTONA ROAD PART OF LOT 33, PLAN 228 That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 12/04 be APPROVED, to rezone the subject property from "R3" to "R4" zone in order to permit the development of four residential lots on lands being Part of Lot 33, Plan 228, City of Pickering, submitted by I. Cot on behalf of A. & N. Ford; and That the amending zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 12/04, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 17-05, be FORWARDED to City Council for enactment as amended to reflect 1.2 metre side yard requirements and 38% lot coverage. -7- Appendix I Executive Committee Report EC 2005-09 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORT PD 18-05 ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 06/01 GLENDA WINTERSTEIN 5015 BROCK ROAD (SOUTH PART OF LOT 18, CONCESSION 9) That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 06/04 be APPROVED to permit the establishment of five dwelling units (apartment units) in addition to the currently permitted commercial uses, submitted by Glenda Winterstein, on the lands being the South Part of Lot 18, Concession 9, City of Pickering; and That the amending zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 06/01, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 18-05, be FORWARDED to City Council for enactment. PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORT PD 19-05 STREET NAME CHANGE OLD BROCK ROAD TO JENASH COURT That the Director, Planning & Development commence preliminary initiatives to change the name of a portion of Old Brock Road to Jenash Court and report back to Council following contact with affected residents. CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT CS 41-05 WARD BOUNDARY ALTERATIONS 1. That Report to Council CS 41-05 regarding alterations to the ward boundaries, be enacted; and That the alterations to the ward boundaries set out in Report CS 41-05 be accepted in principle and the draft by-law to implement the said alterations to the ward boundaries be referred to the Council Meeting of June 20, 2005 to provide the public with an opportunity to address the alterations in accordance with Section 222(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001; and That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. -8- Appendix I Executive Committee Report EC 2005-09 CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT CS 39-05 CASH POSITION REPORT AS AT MARCH 31, 2005 1. That Report CS 39-05 from the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, concerning the Cash Position Report, be received for information. CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT CS 43-05 DEVELOPMENT CHARGES - ANNUAL INDEXING That Report CS 43-05 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, be received; and That effective July 1, 2005, as provided for in Section 16 of By-law 6349~04, the Development Charges referred to in Sections 6 and 11 of that by-law be increased by 6.4 percent being the annual increase in the Construction Price Statistics as reported by Statistics Canada for the year ended March 31, 2005; and That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be given authority to give effect thereto. o CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT CS 44-05 ANIMAL CONTROL SERVICES That Report CS 44-05 regarding Animal Control Services, be received; and That Report CS 44-05 regarding the provision of Animal Control Services be referred to a committee of three Members of Council and the Chief Administrative Officer to develop a work plan that will ensure animal services are available to the residents of Pickering on January 1, 2006; and That Councillors Brenner, McLean and Johnson be appointed to this committee; and That the committee report back to the Executive Committee on June 13th, 2005 with its recommendations. -9- Appendix I Executive Committee Report EC 2005-09 0 J. 7 PROCLAMATIONS: "SPINA BIFIDA AND HYDROCEPHALUS AWARENESS MONTH" That Mayor Ryan be authorized to make the following proclamations: "Spina Bifida and Hydrocephalus Awareness Month" - June, 2005 10. CORPORATE SERVICES REPORT CS 42-05 APPOINTMENT TO PUBLIC LIBRARY BOARD That Confidential Report CS 42-05 regarding an appointment to the Public Library Board, be received; and That Ozair Chaudhry be appointed to the Public Library Board for a term to expire on November 30, 2006 and that the draft by-law to imPlement this appointment, be enacted; and That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. -10- RECOMMENDATION OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE DATE MOVED BY SECONDED BY That Corporate Services Report CS 46-05 regarding the Report of the Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb, be received; and That the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby endorses the Report of the Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb dated January 31, 2005 and prepared for the Ministry of the Environment; and That the appropriate officials of the City of Picketing be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. REPORT TO COUNCIL Report Number: CS 46-05 Date: May 31,2005 From: Bruce Taylor, AMCT, CMM City Clerk Subject: Report of the Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb Recommendation: That Corporate Services Report CS 46-05 regarding the Report of the Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb be received. That the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby endorses the Report of the Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb dated January 31, 2005 and prepared for the Ministry of the Environment. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: The purpose of this Report is to endorse the recommendations set out in the Report the Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb as recommended by the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. The Chief Administrative Officer has forwarded a letter dated May 26, 2005 to the Ministry of the Environment advising that although the dead line for receiving comments on this Report expired on May 26, 2005, Pickering Council would be dealing with this matter at its meeting of June 6, 2005 and sending its comments shortly thereafter. Financial Implications: Not applicable Background: Please find attached to this Report the following documentation: Report CS 46-05 Report of Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb May 31, 2005 Page 2 · correspondence from the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority requesting municipalities within its jurisdiction to endorse the Report of the Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb that was commissioned by the Ministry of the Environment. · correspondence from the Chief Administrative Officer advising the Ministry of the Environment that Pickering Council will be commenting on this matter. · the Report of the Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb. The Ministry of the Environment established an independent experts panel to determine if Sound-Sorb poses any adverse effects on human health or the environment when used as intended. Sound-Sorb is a product derived from mixing paper fibre biosolids (PFB) and soil and is used to construct sound and bullet attenuation berms at numerous gun clubs throughout the Province. The recommendations of the Experts Panel is set out on Page 29 of their Report and are: There is no need to ban the use of PFB mixed with mineral soil (Sound-Sorb) for bulk use in berms There is no need to remove the Oshawa Skeet and Gun Club OSGC berm provided long-term monitoring of the groundwater is continued. Existing berms at other gun clubs should have a hydrogeological assessment. A monitoring regime in accord with the algorithm found in Chapter 4 should be established. Removal of a berm would only be appropriate as a mitigation option is contaminants in excess of the Ontario Drinking-Water Quality Standards were found in groundwater leaving the site or significant risks to human or environmental health were found on an SSRA or other risk assessment. 4. PFB should be composted before it is used in a berm. Before a berm constructed on PFB and mineral soil is placed at any new location, a hydrogeological assessment should be done, and a SSRA done if the assessment indicates that one is necessary according to algorithm found in Chapter 4. The use of the proposed site for a new berm should be subject to MOE control by a Certificate of Approval or legal instrument that provides equal or better protection for human health and the environment. 6. Paper fibre biosolids should be controlled by Certificates of Approval or legal instruments that provide equal or better protection for human health and the environment at all stages from its generation, through transport, composti ng and final use in the construction of berms. The use of paper fibre biosolid material mixed with mineral soil should also be subject to MOE control with respect to its CORP0227-07/01 Report CS 46-05 Report of Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb May 31, 2005 Page 3 preparation and use in the environment by a Certificate of Approval or legal instrument that provides equal or better protection for human health and the environment. Attachments- Letter dated April 25, 2005 from CLOCA Letter dated May 26, 2005 from the CAO to Ministry of the Environment Report of the Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb Prepared By: B r .~'~, Taylor De'~)uty Clerk Approved / Endorsed By: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Tho~s ~ Qu~nn, C¢ief Adm~tr~,ve Off cer CORP0227-07/01 Lake Ontario ATTACHMENT L,L_ TO 100 Whiting Avenue Oshawa, Ontario Tel: (905) 579-0411 Fax: (905) 579-0994 Web: www. cioca.com April 25, 2005 h~ ~,~ ~-k~,~, (;~ tt '~; ~ DIST~UTED . DEPARTMENT M. de Rond, Clerk, Town of Ajax G.S. Graham, Clerk-Administrator, Township of Brock P.L. Basle, Clerk, Municipality of Clarington S. Kranc, Clerk, City of Oshawa B. Taylor, Clerk, City of Picketing ~/ K. Coates, Clerk, Township of Scugog W.E. Taylor, Clerk, Township of Uxbridge D.G. McKay, Clerk, Town of Whitby Dear MuniciPal Clerk: ?nail: maii@ctoca.com CLQCA: ~S, File ASLH 1 W iO N 2 Subject: Report of the Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb EBR Registry Number: XA05E0005 Enclosed is correspondence item (1) from the April 19, 2005 CLOCA Board of Directors meeting regarding the above noted matter. The CLOCA Board of Directors adopted the following resolution in regard to this correspondence item with particular emphasis on the CLOCA letter of March 21, 2005 t© the Ministry of the Environment (SooChan - Reed). Moved by M. Brenner Seconded by J. Neal "THAT a letter be sent from CLOCA to local municipalities urging that municipal councils endorse all of the recommendations offered by the expert panel and specifically underlines its recommendations regarding the need for control measures in the production and application of PFB related products. " I Would appreciate your bring this matter to the attention of council and consideration of support. Yours truly, ,: 4' .. Chief Administrative Officer J~/klt Enc. s:~ssXClerks Apr25-05 soundsorb PICKERtNG 023 Picketing Civic Comple× One The Esplanade Picketing, Ontario Canada L1V 6K7 Direct Access (905) 420-4660 cityofpickering, com OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER Department (905) 420-4648 Facsimile (905) 420-6064 cao @city. pickering.on.ca May 26, 2005 By Facsimile and Reqular Ma Ellen R. Reed Assistant Director's Office, Central Region Ministry of the Environment 5775 Yonge Street, 8th floor Toronto, ON M2M 4J1 Subject: Management of Paper Fibre Biosolid Materials - Report of Experts Panel on Sound.Sorb - EBR Registw Number XAO5E0005 - File: D-1000-00i On March 21, 2005, the Centre! Lake Ontario Conservation Authority CLOCA) wrote the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) advising that CLOCA endorses all of the recommendations offered by the expert's panel respecting the production and application of paper fibre biosolids, and urged the MOE to adopt the Parfel's recommendations. On April 25, 2005, CLOCA sent a letter to local municipalities urging municipal councils to "endorse all of the recommendations Offered by the expert panel and specifically underline its recommendations regarding the need for control measures in the production and application of PFB.related products". While I intend to bring this endorsement request to Picketing Council for consideration at its scheduled meeting of June 6, 2005, this will not meet the comment deadline of May 26, 2005, reflected in the EBR Registry. Please be advised that the administration of the City of Picketing supports CLOCA's position on this matter, l will forward Pickering Council's official position on this matter to your attention following Council's consideration of the endorsement request on June 6, 2005. Thank you for your consideration of this letter. Yours truly TQ:ir Th'°l~Ss J. Quinn R,~.M.R.~ CM~ .... ~ Ch'el Administrabve Officer Members o? Councii "'" .... *~.- Corporate Services & .... sc~ ¢, ~ ! ~.~.~,~ , ~i',c~ f~i~,~'' Director, ~ianning & Development Division Head, Municipal Prope~y & Engineering City Clerk George Rocoski - Acting Director Central Region Ministry of the Environment 8'~ Floor- 5775 Yonge St. North York, ON M2M 4J1 Letter of Transmittal Dear Sir: Attached please find the Final Report of the Experts Panel on Sound-Sorb. This is the Report drafted by the Tier 1 members of the Panel. Qualified individuals appointed by the Ministry to bring their knowledge and expertise to bear on the issues surrounding the assessment of potential adverse effects of Sound-Sorb on human health or the environment. Tier 1 members included the following: - Dr. Brian Gibson - Physician - LAMP Occupational Health Program - Dr. Lesbia Smith - Physician - Toxicology - Assistant Professor of Public Health Sciences - Dr. Les Evans -groundwater chemistry and soils -University of Guelph - Bill Blackport, M.Sc., P. Geo. - Consulting Hydrogeologist - Dr. Merv Fingas - Spill Research and Development-- Environment Canada - Mark Chappel - Risk Assessment Specialist - AMEC Earth & Environmental The members of Tier 2 monitored the Panel workshops to satisfy themselves that the Panel is acting appropriately and meeting the Terms of Reference. Although Tier 2 members were not direct participants in the technical discussions of the Panel, they were empowered to ask questions for clarification, offer suggestions where appropriate and bring any relevant research and studies to the attention of the Panel. Tier 2 members included the following: "ATLANTIC PACKAGING - Todd Kostal - Nancy Downs(Alternate) · COURTICE AUTO WRECKERS -Harvey Ambrose · OSHAWA SKEET AND GUN CLUB - Jim Anderson - Bob Cake (Altemate) · PROTECT THE RIDGES - Deb Vice -David Wade - Environmental Risk Manager & Geoscientist · BROCK LAND STEWARDS - Don Whitcombe · SIERRA CLUB OF CANADA - Maureen Reilly · CITY OF OSHAWA - Warren Munro · MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON -Faye Langmaid · DURHAM REGION - HEALTH & SOCIAL SERVICES COMMITTEE - John Neal- Chair and Regional Councillor from Oshawa (Alternate: Ken Gorman) - Margo McNab · ASSOCIATION OF GUN CLUBS - Canadian Shooting Sports Association (John Simpson) RespectfullyS ubmitted R.J. Ogiivie Independent FacilitaTor ~ U REPORT Table of Contents 1. Introduction and Background ......................................................................... 3 1.1 Expert Panel .................................................................................................................. 3 1.2 Tier 1 - Tier 2 ............................................................................................................... 4 1.3 Workshops ..................................................................................................................... 4 1.4 Final Terms of Reference ............................................................................................ 6 2.0 Review of the Reports and Literature Relevant to Sound-Sorb ................... 7 2.1 Screening for Contaminants of Potential Concern ................................................... 7 2.2 Management Measures to Reduce Risk ..................................................................... 9 2.3 Chemicals Requiring Further Evaluation ................................................................ 12 3.0 Analysis and Conclusions about the Risks .................................................... 15 3.1 Toxicity and Existing Guidelines ............................................................................. 15 3.2 MOE Research Component ....................................................................................... 18 4.0 Algorithm for the Use of PFBs in Berms at Gun Clubs .............................. 20 4.1 General Principles of the Algorithm for Sound-Sorb Berm Management .......... 20 4.2 Hydrogeological Assessment .................................................................................... 20 4.3 Certificate of Approval .............................................................................................. 2 ! 4.4 Materials for use in Berm Construction ................................................................... 21 4.5 Construction and Maintenance ................................................................................. 22 4.6 Monitoring Program ................................................................................................... 22 4.7 Remediation ................................................................................................................ 23 4.8 Management of Existing Berms ............................................................................... 23 4.9 Caveats on Application of the Algorithm ................................................................ 24 5.0 Answers to the Three Questions .................................................................... 25 5.1 Question 1: Does Sound-Sorb, as used as a berm construction material, present a risk to human health or the environment and what is the nature of that risk? ................ 25 5.2 Question 2: If yes, to what degree and what management measures, if any, can be instituted to eliminate or minimize the risks to acceptable levels? ............................. 25 5.3 Question 3: Given the intent to apply the findings across the Province, under what conditions should Sound-Sorb not be used or its use restricted? ............................ 27 6.0 Recommendations ........................................................................................... 29 7.0 Bibliographic References ................................................................................ 30 / TO FIEPORT c-t List of Figures Figure 1: Algorithm Flow Chart List of Tables Table 2.3.1 Table 2.3.2 Chemicals for Further Investigation Detected in Sound-Sorb Berm Chemicals for Further Investigation Detected in Groundwater Appendices Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C Appendix D Appendix E Appendix F Appendix G Tier 1 Members Tier 2- Affected Stakeholders Synopsis of the Conclusions of the 13 Key Reports Summary of Findings from the Draft SSRA CANTOX (May 2004) References from the Binder of Reports Literature Searches List of Submissions 1. Introduction and Background The Ministry of the Environment established an "independent experts panel" to review the available reports, studies and data on a material called Sound-Sorb to determine if it poses any adverse effects on human health or the environment w'nen used as intended. Sound-Sorb is: a product derived from mixing Atlantic Packaging paper fibre biosolids (PFB) and soil at approximately a 3:1 ratio" it is "...used to construct sound and bullet attenuation berms at numerous (8) gun clubs throughout the Province. Sites where Sound-Sorb has been used to construct berms include Oshawa, Madoc, Orillia, Napanee, West Lincoln (2 locations), Aylmer and Peterborough .... Paper Fibre Bio-Solids (PFBs) which are used to make Sound - Sorb are municipal waste as that term is broadly defined in Reg. 347. Municipal waste is any waste other than hazardous waste, liquid industrial waste or gaseous waste. PFBs are not hazardous, liquid industrial or gaseous waste and, therefore, are municipal waste. PFBs also fall within the O. Reg. 347 definition of processed organic waste, which is a type of municipal waste. Residents living near these gun clubs and various citizens' groups have raised concem about its use and the potential for the large berms to harm the environment and contaminate groundwater"(EBR, March 2003). Since December 2001 the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) has pursued a number of studies relating to PFBs and Sound-Sorb. To-date, the ministry's technical review suggests that "there are no adverse environmental impacts resulting from the use of Sound-Sorb as a berm material" (EBR March, 2003). However, some of the affected stakeholders believed that these studies have not answered all of their concerns. As a final step in resolving the concerns regarding Sound-Sorb, the Ministry made the following commitment in its Report on the EBR Application for Review, March, 2003: Based on the technical review that the Ministry has undertaken to date and the work that is either ongoing or still to be undertaken, the Ministry proposes to establish an independent panel of scientific expertise to review and assess existing and new data. 1.1 Expert Panel The Ontario Ministry of the Environment (MOE) established an Expert Panel in February 2004 to provide an "independent-objective-scientific" assessment of the information regarding any adverse effects of Sound-Sorb on human health or the environment. The MOE put three questions to the Expert Panel: Does Sound-Sorb have an adverse effect on human health or the environment? If yes, to what degree and what mitigation measures, if an5,, can be instituted to eliminate or minimize the risk to acceptable levels? Given the intent to apply the findings across the province, are there any site conditions which may be more sensitive to the use of Sound-Sorb? The Panel is a technical advisory mechanism to the MOE. It is not a public heating or complaint review committee. The findings of the Expert Panel will be used by the MOE as an integral part of its decision-making process regarding Sound-Sorb. There was no expectation that the independent Expert Panel will conduct or commission any independent or additional research studies of Sound-Sorb. 1.2 Tier I -Tier2 The Panel consisted of two tiers of participants. Tier 1 was made up of scientists and experts who were asked to render impartial answers to the questions regarding Sound-Sorb. Tier 2 was made up of stakeholders - a cross-section of individuals and organizations who had an interest in the process and the potential outcomes - i.e., the local citizens, Protect the Ridges, Durham Regional Health Unit, Atlantic Packaging, Harvey Ambrose (the developer of Sound-Sorb), Oshawa Skeet and Gun Club, local municipalities, and others. The list of individuals who participated as Tier 1 members can be found in Appendix A. The individuals and organizations who participated as Tier 2 members are listed in Appendix B. The Tier 1 members had the following roles and responsibilities: · To review the reports, studies and data on Sound-Sorb in a peer review format and to render a collective answer to the three questions; · To conduct their o~a reviews of the literature and bring any relevant research to the attention of their colleagues on the Panel; To seek a consensus among themselves and where a consensus was not possible, to represent all differences of opinion in their final report. The Tier 2 members had the following roles and responsibilities: · To monitor the Expert Panel workshops to satisfy themselves that the Panel is acting appropriately and meeting the Terrors of Reference; To participate as observers, to ask for clarification, to offer suggestions and to bring relevant research studies and experience to the attention of the Panel. Robb Ogilvie, parmer with Ogilvie, Ogilvie & Company was retained to serve as the independent facilitator responsible for the integrity of the process, while the experts were responsible for the integrity of their technical analysis and conclusions. Melissa Hirst performed the Secretariat functions for the process and was the recorder for the workshops. 1.3 Workshops The independent Expert Panel was established in February, 2004 with a mandate to hold four public workshops no later than December, 2004. A Public information Session was held by the MOE on February 12, 2004. This start-up session xvith the community was held at the Centennial Centre in Whitbv to explain the approach, answer questions and seek their advice and comments. 0 3 0 The MOE plans to hold another public information session after the release of the final report. The process was designed to be transparent by virtue of stakeholder presence and participation in four workshops. Stakeholders asked questions and raised points for Tier 1 members' consideration. At the same time, the process was informed by the experts in their scientific approach to researching and analyzing the issues and by their hierarchical approach to the development of recommendations. In short, the process and the content were to be dealt with in a manner consistent with the principles of transparency, accountability and objectivity. The First Workshop was held at the Durham Region Council Chambers in Whitby, Ontario of March 22, 2004. It had three goals: 1. To allow the experts to amend and reach agreement among themselves regarding the draft Terms of Reference. 2. To provide an oppommity for the experts to familiarize themselves with the "binder" of reports and other materials that has been prepared for the Panel's use and deliberations. Ministry staff were on hand to answer any questions regarding these repons. 3. To reach agreement on how the experts want to proceed with their deliberations - i.e., the next steps, what support work would be needed, xvhat' would happen between then and the 2nd, 3rd and Final workshops. As a result of the First Workshop additional reports, studies and guidelines were identified for consideration by the Tier 1 members. The initial list of potential hazards (E. coli, acrylamide monomer, total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH)) was expanded to include an additional 20 substances or concems. The Expert Panel discussed and revised the 3 questions. Question 1 was rephrased to include the quantification of the risk and a description of what the risk is. The word "mitigation" was used in the original Question 2. The Panel members believed monitoring should also be included. Since monitoring is a possible management measure, this term was used to replace the word "mitigation." The Panel felt that it was possible to draw conclusions at a "high level of generalization" that could be applied across the Province. The MOE accepted the changes to the Terms of Reference that were proposed. The Second Workshop was held at the Centennial Centre in Whitby, Ontario on May 26, 2004. At that workshop: The Tier 1 experts reviewed the MOE Orders and supporting docmnentation with respect to a berm constructed in Flamborough in a wetland. - The Tier 1 experts reviewed several submissions from Tier 2 members. e The MOE tabled the results of sampling done at the monitoring wells in October 2003 (Sweep 3). ~ The Tier ~ experts asked the MOE about the status of the SSRA being prepared by Cantox Environmental. The draft SSRA was released during the sun~nx~er on a confidential basis to Tier ! members to assist their analysis. 1t was also released to Tier 2 members at the Third 5 Workshop. The Tier 1 members finalized the detailed methodology they planned to use during their summer sessions The Third Workshop was held at the Durham Region Council Chambers in Whitby, Ontario on October 7, 2004. It had two goals: · To present the preliminary findings and conclusions of the Tier 1 experts based on their discussions over the summer. ° To answer an,v questions for clarification and get feedback from the Tier 2 members. Four preliminary conclusions and the reasons for them were presented: 1. There was no need to remove the berm at the Oshawa Skeet and Gun Club (OSGC). 2. Other existing berms do not require removal prior to assessment. 3. There was no need to ban Sound-Sorb. 4. PFB should be controlled by the MOE throughout its life cycle, with or without admixture with soil. The Fourth Workshop was held at the Centennial Centre, Whitby, Ontario on December 17, 2004. The purpose of this workshop was: ° To present the final conclusions and recommendations of the Tier 1 experts. To provide an opporlunity for Tier 2 stakeholders to review and comment on the conclusions and recommendations. The recommendations at the end of this report are substantially the same as those presented by' the Panel on December 17, 2004. One recommendation was split into two. Two of the recommendations were very similar and have been combined into one. 1.4 Final Terms of Reference Question 1- Does Sound-Sorb, as used as a berm construction material, present a risk to human health or the environment and what is the nature of that risk? Question 2 - If yes, to what degree and what management measures, if any, can be instituted to eliminate or minimize the risks to acceptable levels? Question 3 - Given the intent to apply the findings across the Province, under what conditions should Sound-Sorb not be used or its use restricted?" 2.0 Review of the Reports and Literature Relevant to Sound-Sorb 2.1 Screening for Contaminants of Potential Concern Using a series of half-day sessions and teleconferences from early July until late September, the Expert Panel completed their individual and collective reviews of the literature and reviewed twenty three (23) concems developed in the First Workshop. These concerns were related to the following conditions or compounds found in, or related to Sound-Sorb, including: E. coli Acrylamide monomer Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) Temperature Polycyclic aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAl-Is) Surfactants - nonylphenol and nonylphenol etho.xylates Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) (toluene, methyl ethyl ketone (MEK), phenol etc.) Bioaerosols Metals (copper, lead, silver) Nutrients Biological Oxygen Demand (BOD) and Chemical Oxygen Demand (COD) Pesticides Arsenic Formaldehyde PCBs Compounds likely to be found in inks, dyes, laser jet ink Compounds from drinking boxes Waxes and wax solvents Potential for the berms to be anaerobic Potential for leaching and impacts on groundwater and surface water Potential impact on fish habitat and aquatic organisms Groundwater monitoring wells -construction and monitoring and testing procedures Data reliability The reports that had been generated about Sound-Sorb were made available for review by the Expert Panel. Tier 2 members also received a copy of all reports. The Panel also conducted literature reviews of peer-reviewed publications. The complete list of reports and literature that were reviewed are listed in Appendix E and Appendix F. The reports included studies related to the microbiological analysis of bulk paper fibre biosolids (Atlantic Packaging, 2000; MOE June 2002), sampling events at the Oshawa Skeet and Gun Club (Garmer Lee, 200l; MOE June 2002), a report related to the bioaerosol study conducted at the OSGC (GlobalTox, 2004), summa~' reports regarding groundwater monitoring studies conducted at the OSGC by the MOE, and a dra'P~ SSRA for the OSGC (Cantox, 2004}. In addition, some 90 peer reviewed publications were collected following a literature search using keywords related to paper fibre 7 TO REPORT 035 biosolids (PFB), however, only a selected number of papers were considered relevant to this investigation. Although a systematic review of the peer reviewed literature and summary of that literature is beyond the scope of this report, a summary of the conclusions of the 13 key reports examined by the Expert Panel is provided in Table C. 1 in Appendix C of this report. The Panel focused specific attention to the Cantox Environmental draft SSRA. See Table D. 1 in Appendix D. The materials provided by Tier 2 members are listed in Appendix G. The Expert Panel also reviewed the results of the Toxicity Characteristic Leach Procedure (TCLP) analysis on the Sound-Sorb material in the berm at the OSGC was done as part of the Cantox Environmental SSRA (October 2004). 2.1.1 Nine Step Methodology During several sessions in the summer of 2004 the Expert Panel adopted a nine-step methodology to address its Terms of Reference. This methodology entails a stepwise process to examine risks associated with existing berms and new berms. It considers the identification of suspect substances that may be emitted to the environment from the Sound-Sorb mixture, potential concentrations, toxicity, compliance with existing guidelines for groundwater or drinking water, and potential for dispersion to environmental receptors. Those characteristics which depend on Sound-Sorb itself vs. those which depend on site characteristics were also considered in developing a management scheme. The nine steps were: Step A: Supplement the list of suspect substances/concerns about the contents of Sound-Sorb ~4th a literature review. Step B: Develop screening criteria/methods to decide what substances can be dropped iTom further consideration and which ones need further research and evaluation. Step C: Apply the criteria and determine which substances should have more detailed investigation Step D: Based on the data/information available, describe the maximum potential loading that could be in Sound-Sorb. Step E: Extract data from the reports/surveys that describe the measurements found. Step F: Based on the literature, describe the levels that could potentially occur at/in human or environmental receptors. Step G: Review as a team and see if there is a consensus that "we see something". Step H: Compare "G' with the approprime standards, guidelines, thresholds or effects-based reference criteria (for soil, surface wmer. groundwater or air). Step ~: Integrate the results of the draft SSRA into the PaneFs analysis. 8 2.2 Management Measures to Reduce Risk Sound-Sorb is a trade-marked construction material composed of PFBs and mineral soil. It has been used to construct berms at gun clubs in Ontario and is exempt from Ontario's waste management regulation O. Reg. 347.3, Section (2)1. As an exempt material Sound-Sorb has not been subject to MOE control. It has been described as 70 percent PFB and 30 percent sand/mineral soil, but some variation in this ratio does occur. The Expert Panel could not determine to what extent the material was thoroughly mixed. Under the regulatory exemption the material could legally contain municipal, hazardous or liquid industrial waste. Although there was concern from some Tier 2 members that such materials had been put into berms the Expert Panel did not have any verifiable evidence that other materials had been used in berm construction. The samples taken by the MOE from the OSGC berm and other berms appear to be the same material as the raw PFB from Atlantic Packing that the MOE analysed. There has not been sufficient time for slower moving leachate chemicals from the OSGC berm to reach the monitoring wells. The monitoring well results therefore do not provide evidence for or against wastes other than PFBs being used in the construction of the berm. The Expert Panel was not set up to determine what materials might or might not have been used in berm constmction~ The data that was available to the panel allowed it to come to conclusions only with respect to the use of PFBs in berms mixed with clean mineral soil. The Expert Panel felt that it could not come to a conclusion on all of the possible risks to human health and the environment based on the data it had. It also felt that a more systematic collection of data at berms would not provide sufficient additional information to assess future risks. Much of this risk relates to the decomposition of the PFB over decades and possible contamination of the soil on which the berms have been built. On the other hand the Expert Panel believed that the bulk use of PFB in berms could be managed in a way that would reduce any risk to human health and the environment to a minimum. 2.2.1 Removing the exemption on Sound-Sorb The Expert Panel is recommending that the bulk use of PFBs be handled under MOE Certificates of Approval for all steps of its life-cycle or by other legal instruments that can provide equal or better protection for both human health and the environment. The product formulation exemption should not be applied to Sound-Sorb. This measure would ensure that the conclusions based on the data available would be accurate for future berms. 2.2.2 Pre-composting of PFBs. This measure would: kill potential pathogens like E. coli reduce the load of TPHs reduce temperature in a newt~ constructed berm so as to permit immediate vegetative 9 growth on the berm; improve the C:N ratio in the ?FBs that would assist vegetative growth; reduce slumpage of the bem~ material. 035 2.2.3 Requiring monitoring wells for the life of existing berm. The Expert Panel did not have data that would indicate that the Sound-Sorb that was analysed contained anything other than PFBs and sand/mineral soil material. The Panel recognized that other materials could be in the existing berms. It did not have a mandate under its Terms of Reference to attempt to determine what else might be in a berm. Under the management algorithm that was developed the MOE could require, based on its own investigations, monitoring for other substances for which evidence exists. 2.2.4 Setting Standards for the Siting, Construction and Maintenance of Berms These measures would be set out in a Certificate of Approval would control the risk of runoff from berms entering surface waters and the risk of bioaerosols coming from berms. 2.2.5. Short Listing of Parameters for Further Consideration The Expert Panel considered 8 of the parameters for further consideration, including: acrylamide monomer, total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), copper, lead and arsenic, MEK and phenol. The other concems were addressed as follows: E. coli had been identified in the PFBs and a puddle on the OSGC site. (Gartner Lee 2001, MOE June 2002, MOE August 2003, MOE April 2004). The source and the pathogenici .ty of the E. coli could not be conclusively determined. The Expert Panel believed proper composting would control possible hazards related to pathogenic organisms in the material. Temperature- The concem with respect to temperature related to the heat generated by raw PFBs when it is stored in bulk. This heat had prevented the growth of vegetation on the berms during the first season after they were constructed. The Expert panel believed that proper composting over a year would allow sufficient time for the heat to dissipate from the piles of Sound-Sorb. Surfactants such as nonylphenol and nonylphenol ethoxylates- These compounds were measured in raw PFBs and leachate and not detected. (Gartner Lee 2001, MOE June 2002). In addition, the Expert Panel believed that any concentrations of these compounds would be subject to biodegradation and that when subjected to aerobic conditions through proper composting, that these compounds would not be persistenl. This is supported by several studies conducted on the persistence ofnonylphenols in soil (Wild and Jones~ 1992: Maguire~ 1999). ~ 0 038 VOCs- The MOE included VOC scans in its analyses related to Sound Sorb. These analyses showed that these parameters all fell within the soil and groundwater standards provided by the MOE (MOE April 2004). The decomposition of PFBs is likely to generate higher concentrations of phenol than are found in the raw PFBs. The Expert Panel felt that the MOE should conduct sampling of the monitoring wells for phenol on a research basis. See Section 3.2 for more information on this parameter. Bioaerosols- Although PFBs support the growth of bacteria and moulds, covering the berms with properly composted material or other organic material in addition to a vegetative cover would prevent the PFBs from being a source of hazardous bioaerosols. The Expert Panel agreed with the conclusions of the Sporometrics Bioaerosol study that was part of the GlobalTox report that the potential for bioaerosol generation from Sound-Sorb was low (GlobalTox 2004). The fungal and bacterial organisms generated from Sound-Sorb were typical organisms found in soil. There were no criteria to which concentrations of specific organisms determined by air monitoring could be compared and therefore an air monitoring study was not recommended. Silver- Although this metal max~ pose a hazard to ecological receptors, it was not found above guidelines in any of the analyses conducted at the Oshawa Skeet and Gun Club (Cantox 2004). Nutrients- The PFBs in Sound-Sorb contain a very' high carbon to nitrogen ratio. PFBs have a low phoshate content. As such they' are not a significant sources of nitrogen and phosphate nutrients that cause the eutrophication of aquatic ecosystems. When the berm is covered with compost and the compost is vegetated, the structure does not represent a major source of these nutrients in comparison to other organic containing soils. Pesticides- The Expert Panel agreed with the draft SSRA that the most likely source for the pesticides detected (at the detection limit) was agricultural and/or residential use. There should be minimal pesticide residues in the municipal waste paper (MOE August 2003; MOE April 2004; Cantox 2004). Formaldehyde- This compound was not detected in significant concentrations in the analyses that were conducted by the MOE (MOE January 2004). PCBs- PCBs were detected at very low concentrations (MOE June 2002; MOE August 2003; MOE April 2004), and it is expected that there would be very minimal concentrations of PCBs in municipal waste paper. In addition, removing the exemption on Sound-Sorb eliminates this concern for future berms. Compounds likely to be found in inks, dyes, laser jet ink, compounds from drinking boxes and waxes and wax solvents- These compounds are known or may be found in municipal paper waste streams. It is thought that some of these constituents max, have contributed to levels of TPH in the raw PFBs in excess of Table I and 2 site standards listed under O. Reg. 153/04. Those compounds likely to be present in more than minute amounts are covered by the organic scans tha! the MOE did. II 037 Anaerobic Decomposition, Leaching- The Expert Panel believed that there was a significant risk that the berms would undergo anaerobic decomposition and generate an acid leachate. The risks to surface waters can be controlled by the selection of an appropriate site, proper construction techniques, and general and specific maintenance measures recommended by the Expert Panel. BOD- The risk associated with groundwater entering surface water can be monitored by measuring BOD in groundwater. Monitoring Wells- It was not within the scope of the Terms of Reference of the Expert Panel to address all the concerns that Tier 2 members had with respect to the monitoring wells. In general the Panel believes that the data from the OSG-C wells, because of the impermeability of the soil represents baseline conditions rather than significant leachate that has already reached groundwater. Data Reliability- The Expert Panel concluded that the data provided a reasonable characterization of contaminants in the raw' PFBs. The Panel felt that the data from monitoring wells was not representative of leachate that could come from the berms over many decades, both because there was not sufficient time for many contaminants to have migrated to the monitoring wells and because the chemistry inside the berm undergoes significant changes over time. The Expert Panel therefore retained acrylamide, TPH, PAHs, copper, lead and arsenic, MEK and phenol for further consideration. 2.3 Chemicals Requiring Further Evaluation One of the first steps in a human health or ecological risk assessment is to screen for potential contaminants of concern that require further assessment. Typically this is accomplished by comparing measured environmental concentration data to generic criteria, standards, or other suitable guideline values that are published by recognized regulatory jurisdictions, such as MOE (MOE, 2004) or U.S. EPA (U.S. EPA, 2004). The Ontario Ministry of the Environment provides Soil Standards (formerly referred to as generic chteria) for the purposes of accessing chemical concentrations in soil for clean-up purposes with the consideration of various land uses for contaminated sites in Ontario. The MOE's Table 2 (O. Reg. 153/04) (formerly Table A) values have been developed to provide protection against the potential for adverse effects to human health, ecological health and the natural environment on sites which are not considered environmentally sensitive. While no specific criteria have been developed for Sound-Sorb per se, the soil standards (formerly generic criteria) developed by MOE under Part XV. l of the Environmental Protection Act are somewhat applicable for use in screening chemicals of potential concem from requiring further assessment. Table 2.3.1 outlines the chemicals thal were considered by fl~e Expert Panel as requiring further investigali on. 12 Table 2.3.1 Chemicals for Further Investigation Detected in Sound-Sorb Berm. Parameter CCME O. Re~ 1S3/04 Range of 2 x Max. Component Requires further Guidelines (gg/g) or MOE Values Conc. Values (MOE, investigation 1996 (gg/g0 Detected 2004); other (~/g) criteria (~/~) Acrylamide Na Na 0.00036 7.2e-4 U.S. EPA Region No, however, there is no monomer 9 have developed criteria available for a PRG of0.11 ecological receptors. I~g/g for soil. Therefore, aorylamide is discussed further. TPH Refer to Compared to 3400 6.8 x 103 100 (g/d) Exceeds the MOE's 1996 MOE, 2004 MOE 1996 100 (h oil) guidelines, therefore, TPH (O. Reg. criteria, requires additional 153/04) gas/diesel: 100 investigation heavy oils: 1000 B[a]P 1.2 Ixg/g in 0.1~ 0.080 ~tg/g 0.16 [tg/g in 1.2 gg/g in soil; Below the criteria soil; 0.7'°; in soil; soil; considered to be protective of human health and ecological receptors for soil. Lead t40 .ag/g 200 Ixg/g 8.9 to 30 60 ~Lg/g 200 p,g/g Not a concern to human receptors as a result of I direct contact pathways, however; there is a potential tbr mobilization and leaching into ................ g~x)undwater Arsenic 12 ~tg/g 20 }xg/g nd nd 20 gg/g Not detected on-Site. "Agricultural Land Use (CCME, 2003) bResidential Land Use (CCME, 2003) ~Agricultural Land Use, Potable water condition (MOE, 2004) dResidential Land Use, potable water condition (MOE, 2004) ~Criteria from U.S. EPA Region 9 (2002) Table 2.3.2 Chemicals for Further Investigation Detected in Groundwater Parameter CCME O. Reg. 153/04 Range of 2 x Max. Component Values Requires further Guidelines Values Cone (MOE, 2004) investigation (~g/L) Detected Acrylamide na Na 0.3 gg/L' 0.6 gg/L 0.015 gg/L in tap Retained as monomer in gw water~. Benzo[a]pyrene 0.01 I~g/L 0.046 to exceeds 0.01 [tg/L Exceeds MOE Table A 0.440 criteria groundwater standards ~,g/L (ODWQS), therefore, it is retained for further investigation. Copper 24 gg/L 23 [[g/I, 5-7 lxg/I, 10-14 MOE Table 2 Not retained for further ii'om .rig/I, criteria (PWQO) ~- assessment TCLP 23 gg/L study It should be noted that arsenic levels had been reported to be elevated above O. Reg. 153/04 criteria in error in the Garmer Lee (200~) report. The concentration recorded, following revie~v 13 of the laborato~ certificates, was the record applied to barium. Therefore, arsenic was not detected in PFBs at the OSGC site. Copper was not a concem for human health and did not pose a risk to aquatic environment under the management measures recommended. From the screemng-level assessment, only total petroleum hydrocarbons, PAHs and lead were retained as Contaminants of Potential Concern (COPC) for monitoring. Acrylamide, MEK and phenol were considered to require further research by the MOE. See Section 3.2. i4 0 4 0 3.0 Analysis and Conclusions about the Risks 3.1 Toxicity and Existing Guidelines In support of the final suite of chemicals to be monitored, The Expert Panel used toxicity summaries or guidelines for each of the chemicals or parameters of concem to answer the question, why are these substances chosen for monitoring? What is the value of monitoring? 3.1.1. Lead The historical use of lead bullets and shot at gun clubs has left behind elevated concentrations of the metal in the soil associated with shooting ranges. Estimates of lead concentrations in soils at such sites in Florida ranged from 880 to 55,000 mg kgq in one study (Cao et al 2003), whereas 200 mg kg4 is the MOE's Soil Standard for contaminated soils (MOE 2004). In general, lead in soils is considered to be relatively immobile, especially in soils with neutral to alkaline pH values. However, a number of research studies have shown that lead can be mobilized in the presence of organic colloids and that lead-organic complexes can account for large cumulative losses of lead from surface soils. Because of the large quantities of organic material in berms constructed with Sound-Sorb, there is a potential for lead to be mobilized. Therefore concentrations of soluble lead should be measured in the monitoring wells associated with berms constructed with Sound-Sorb at gun clubs to ensure that the metal does not become an environmental concern in areas outside the gun club and berm site. 3.1.2 Benzo[a]pyrene (signature chemical for PAHs) Benzo[a]pyrene (B[a]P) is a polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) primarily derived from incomplete combustion of fossil fuels. It has been identified in ambient air, surface water, drinking water, waste water, and char-broiled foods (e.g., hamburgers) (IARC, 1983). B[a]P is readily absorbed following inhalation, oral, and dermal routes of administration (ATSDR 1990) and is rapidly distributed to several tissues in rats. There is yew little data available conceming the systemic (i.e., non-carcinogenic) effects of B [a]P following administration in humans, and neither a tolerable daily intake (TDI / RfC) or a reference concentration (TC/RfC) has been derived for B[a]P. Numerous epidemiologic studies have shown a clear association beC, veen exposure to various mixtures of PAHs containing B[a[p (e.g., coke oven emissions, roofing tar emissions, and cigarette smoke) and increased risk of lung cancer and other tumors, although it is difficult to separate the independent carcinogenic effect of B[alP from the carcinogenicit,v of PAH mixtures (IARC 1983). A suitable data base is available concerning the carcinogenicity orB[alP in experimental animals. Dietary administration of B[a]P has produced papillomas and carcinomas of the forestomach in mice ~eal and Rigdon, 1967). Exposure by inhalation has resulted in benign and malignant tumors of the respiratoq; and upper digestive tracts of experimental !5 animals (Thyssen et al 1981). Numerous topical application studies have shown that B[a]P induces skin tumors in several species, although mice appear to be the most sensitive species. Consistent with Health Canada policies, B[a]P is considered to be a Group II carcinogen. This designation means that there is evidence that it is probably carcinogenic to humans. Health Canada has assigned inhalation and oral cancer slope factors to be used in risk assessments. The Expert Panel noted the presence of PAHs in the MOE sampling of the monitoring wells in March and May, 2003 (Sweeps 1 and 2). Although these PAHs did not likely come from the berm, PAHs are present in the raw PFBs and have very low permissible levels in drinking water under the Ontario Drinking Water Standards (ODWS). B(a)P was therefore included in the monitoring progran~ Sweeps 1 and 2 by the MOE found levels of seven different PAHs in excess of Table 2 guidelines. The draft SSRA did not retain PAils as a COPC because they were not detected in Sweep 3 (October 2003; filtered samples) or in drinking water wells. The Panel felt that PAHs should be included in on-going monitoring programs. 3.1.3 Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPHs) describe a mixture of organic compounds found in or derived from oil, bitumen and coal. Petroleum products are also in gasoline, heating and lubricating oils. They are characterized by the number of carbons in the compound; gas and diesel usually contain less than 24 carbons, and heavy oils more than 24 carbons. The toxicity of each compound depends on carbon number. Small molecular weight hydrocarbons are of concem because they are highly mobile in soil. However, they are readily biodegradable by naturally present soil bacteria. Higher carbon chain oils, however, are not as mobile but tend to persist once released to the environment. The concern is related to their persistence in the environment, and their potential to reach human receptors or other ecological receptors through various pathwa.vs of exposure. The CCME has developed Canada-Wide Standards for petroleum hydrocarbons in s°il for various land uses. The CCME methodolo~' is based on the fractionation of TPH into four distinct fractions (Fl to F4 corresponding to -- 6-10 carbons, 11-16 carbons, 17-34 carbons and higher than 34 carbons). The generic screening-level criteria developed by the CCME for protection of human health have been adopted by MOE (2004). The CCME's User Guidance manual (CCME, 2001) provides these criteria. For example, for the F3 and F4 fractions, the component values considered to be protective of human health following direct contact pathways such as ingestion are reported to be 18,000 gg/g and 25,000 ~tg/g, respectively. The PFB used in Sound-Sorb contains TPH. Testing for TPH is recommended since TPH is present in the PFB at amounts that exceed Table 1 and 2 guidelines and since TPH can act as an indicator of the possible presence of organic contaminants that could be a concern but are not being monitored. The Expert Panel reviewed the analysis of the hydrocarbons contained in some samples of the PFB and determined that they were similar to a degraded oil mixture and easily capable of being degraded further to levels below guidelines. The most toxic compounds of TPHs are usually the PAHs and these were welt below concern levels in the PFB samples tested by the MOE 16 047. 3.1.4 Acrylamide Acrylamide is a chemical that is used in the manufacture of plastics, synthetic rubber, and several types of polyacrylamide copolymers. Based on limited human data and more extensive animal studies of acrylamide exposure, acrylamide has neurotoxic, genotoxic and reproductive health effects. Neurotoxicity appears to be the most sensitive endpoint. Using animal data, a NOAEL for neurotoxicity of 0.5 mg/kg/day has been set (FAO/WHO, 2002; ECB, 2002). Acrylamide is a known animal carcinogen. However, there have not been sufficient studies in human populations to determine whether it is considered to be a human carcinogen. Ac~lamide is produced in foods that are baked or fried, most likely as a reaction between the amino acid asparagine and natural sugars at high temperatures. Because dietary intake cannot be easily measured it is difficult to compare exposure to acrylamide in epidemiological studies with differences in outcome in terms of cancers. Polyacrylamide is used in some jurisdictions in the treatment of drinking water and wastewater. This use of polyacrylamide results in the potential for human exposure to acrylamide through ingestion of drinking water. In the WHO's Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality (3rd edition, 2004), the guideline value for acrylamide is listed at 0.5 micrograms per litre( In the United States, there is an enforceable maximum contaminant level standard for acrylamide in drinking water. Specifically, The United States Environmental Protection Agency requires that the operators of water treatment systems that use acrylamide must certify that the polyacrylamide used contains no more than 0.05% acrylamide monomer when it is added at a dose of 1 mg/L or equivalent dose, (see w~av. epa. gov/safewater/index.html). There are no Canadian drinking water criteria for acrylamide. Region 9 of the United States Environmental Protection Office has set a provisional guideline of 0.015 micrograms/L (U.S. EPA Region 9, 2002). 3.1.$ Methyl Ethyl Ketone Methyl ethyl ketone (MEK), also known as 2-butanone, butanone, or methyl acetone, is used as a solvent in the application of protective coatings (vamishes) and adhesives (glues and cements), in magnetic tape production, in the de-waxing of lubricating oil, in vinyl film manufacture, and in food processing. MEK has been detected as a natural component of numerous foods, including: raw chicken breast, milk, nuts, cheese (e.g., Beaufort, Gruyere, and cheddar), bread dough and nectarines at concentrations ranging from 0.3 to 19 ~g/g (ATSDR, 1992 and WHO, 1992). MEK is also found in tobacco smoke and volatile releases from building materials and consumer products (ATSDR, 1992). An occupational study reported by the World Health Organization indicate that of 51 Italian workers chronically exposed to MEK, exposure was associated with slight, but not statistically significant, reduced nerve conduction velocities and other symptoms such as: headache, loss of appetite and weight, gastrointestinal upset, dizziness, dermatitis, and muscular hypotrophy, ~ The WHO indicates that this represents the concentratk)n in drinking water associated with an upper bound excess lifetime cancer risk if 10'~ or one additional cancer per 100,000 of tl~e population ingesting drinking water containing acD, lamide at fl~e guideline value for 70 years. Thc Wi-tO also notes thal this represents a rough estimate of risk, which is based on a hypothetical, mathematical modcl, albeit a conservative one. 17 however, no clinically recognizable neuropathy was cited (Freddi et al., 1982 cited in WHO, 1992). The epidemiologic studies from which one could draw conclusions about carcinogenic risks in the human population are currently inconclusive with respect to exposure to MEK (U.S. EPA, 2003). Thus under EPA's draft revised cancer guidelines (U.S. EPA, 1999), "data are inadequate for an assessment of human carcinogenic potential" for MEK. However, it is noted that MEK has not been tested for carcinogenicity in animals by the oral or inhalation routes. Animal studies are available and have been used to set regulatory guidance values, including an RID and RfC value for MEK. These values are available at U.S. EPA IRIS website located at wwav. epa. gov/IRIS. The potential for MEK to be generated from the berms was a concem for the community. There is currently no reliable detection method available to characterize potential exposure to MEK. The Expert Panel felt that the MOE should develop such methods. See Section 3.2. 043 3.1.6 Phenol Phenol is a mono-substituted aromatic hydrocarbon, produced from both natural and anthropogenic processes, and is naturally occurring in some foods, human and animal wastes, decomposing organic material, and is produced within the human gut from the metabolism of aromatic amino acids. Currently, the largest use of phenol is as an intermediate in the production of phenolic resins, which are used in the plywood, adhesive, construction, automotive, and appliance industries. Because of its anesthetic effects, phenol is also used in medicines such as ointments, ear and nose drops, cold sore lotions, throat lozenges and sprays (e.g., over the counter sprays such as Cepastat~_) and Chloraseptic(R) labels), and antiseptic lotions (U.S. EPA, 2002), therefore low-dose human exposure to phenol would not be completely unexpected. The U.S. EPA recently re-evaluated phenol (U.S. EPA, 2002) and has determined that the human and animal data from carcinogenicity studies is inadequate for use in determining a toxicity reference value for this endpoint (i.e., Category D: not classifiable as to human carcinogenicity). The U.S. EPA indicate that they have established a chronic oral reference dose (RID) for phenol based on decreased matemal weight gain from a rat developmental study (U.S. EPA, 2002). The U.S. EPA's Region 9 have established an preliminary remediation goal (PRG) for soil based on the non-carcinogenic effects related to exposure to phenol at 1.8 x 104 gg/g (U.S. EPA Region 9, 2002). The Ontario Ministry of the Environment's Soil and Groundwater Standards for phenol are listed as 40 pg/g and 4200 [xg/L, respectively (MOE 2004). 3.2 MOE Research Component There is a. significant concentration of acD, lamide polymer in PFB. There is a small amount of acrylamide monomer in this material that could leach into groundwater. The detection limit for acrylamide monomer initially used by the MOE (0.30 ug/L) was above the U. S. EPA Region 9 PRG for acrylamide in drinking water (0.015 ug/L). The MOE now has the capacity to measure O44 acrylamide monomer with a detection limit of 0.010 ug/L. The Expert Panel felt that this concem should be followed by the MOE and that sampling should be undertaken on a research basis by the MOE rather than a regulatory requirement put on berm users. There is currently no reliable detection method available to characterize potential exposure to MEK. The MOE should develop such methods. There is the potential for greater concentrations of phenols to leach from the berms as they mature. The MOE should sample for MEK and total phenols in the monitoring wells at berm sites to determine whether these compounds might present a risk to human health or the environment. 19 045 4.0 Algorithm for the Use of PFBs in Berms at Gun Clubs 4.1 General Principles of the Algorithm for Sound-Sorb Berm Management The Expert Panel believes that in principle, the recycling of materials such as PFB presents a favorable use Ofa biosolid as an alternative to landfilling, but the recycling and reusing waste materials must have very low risk for adverse effects on the environment. The Panel felt that such a policy was appropriate for PFB mixed with mineral soil if the following conditions were met: · The reuse of the PFB was subject to a strict monitoring regime/protocol; Hydrogeological assessments of existing Sound-Sorb berms must be conducted to ensure that the environment is adequately protected in these cases (already done for OSGC); · Any new construction of berms using Sound-Sorb was controlled by MOE regulation; · The algorithm developed must distinguish between existing berms and proposed development of new berms. Any algorithm t'or the use of Sound-Sorb to create new berms require that the PFBs be composted prior to use in making Sound-Sorb. The algorithm described below can also be found represented schematically in Figure 1 (p. 33). 4.1.1 Sensitive Sites Before a berm can be constructed at a new site, determination must be made if the site is sensitive as defined in this section. If the area is sensitive, a berm cannot be constructed. An area is defined as sensitive if: ,, it is adjacent or within an area of natural significance including those areas as defined in Section 41(3) of the Records of Site Condition (RSC Regulation) - O. Reg. 153/04. · it is adjacent to or 30 meters from a water body. it were to be constmcted on shallow soil property. Shallow soil is defined here as where ~/3 or more of the area of the property consists of soil equal to or less than 2 metres in depth to rock or bedrock. 4.2 Hydrogeological Assessment Paper fibre biosolids should only be used in berms at gun clubs under a Certificate of Approval 'from the Ministry of the Environment. In order to apply for a Certificate of Approval the proponent for a new berm should engage the services of an APGO-certified hydrogeologist to assess the proposed site. The hydrogeological assessment should determine: · Whether or not it is a sensitive site as set: out in Section 4.1. t. 2O Whether or not the site is or is likely to be controlled under watershed protection legislation; Potential pathways for runoff from the proposed berm(s) to reach surface water; Existing information on soils, bedrock and groundwater at the site with respect to the potential for contaminants to reach human and environmental receptors; Sufficient wells will be drilled and samples taken by a qualified person that are required for assessing the site; Locations for additional monitoring wells may be proposed to further establish direction of groundwater flow, assess upstream and downstream chemical parameters in the groundwater, detect leachate contamination of the groundwater, and impact of leachate off-site. The hydrogeologist may recommend and/or the MOE may require more extensive hydrogeological assessment or a full SSRA to characterize potential pathways of contaminants to human and environmental receptors before a Certificate of Approval is issued. 4.3 Certificate of Approval The MOE should not issue a certificate of approval for sensitive sites or sites controlled against such use by watershed protection legislation. The Certificate of Approval shall cover: The materials that may be used; Construction and maintenance of the berm; ,, A groundwater monitoring program; A requirement to allow the MOE access to the monitoring wells to conduct research; Other conditions the MOE may require. The MOE may choose to use legal instruments that provide equal or better protection than Certificates of Approval to control these berms. 4.4 Materials for use in Berm Construction germs constructed at gun clubs that include PFB shall contain only the following materials: Paper fibre biosilids composted according to the recently amended Ontario MOE Composting Guidelines (MOE May 2004) at a site controlled by a Certificate of Approval. Uncontaminated mineral soil as needed to construct a stable berm. This material will be well mixed with the composted PFB; Other organic compost intended to support the growth of the vegetative cover. This compost shall be provided only from sources in compliance with the Ontario MOE Composting Guidelines (MOE May 2004). 2¸1 047 The PFB should be transported to the composting site unmixed with other materials as a waste. The composted PFB for any bulk use should remain under regulator), control. 4.5 Construction and Maintenance The Certificate of Approval should set out proper procedures for the construction and maintenance ofberms. As a minimum these should include: Measures to prevent erosion of the berm material by wind or rain during the construction period; Installation of any additional monitoring wells prior to completion of berm construction; A requirement to provide vegetated cover and maintain it if additional material is added to the berm; A requirement to repair fissures In the berm should they develop; A requirement for a survey of and a report to the MOE on the condition of the berm at least four times a year. Berms should contain at least 30 percent mineral soil that is well-mixed with the PFBs in order to ensure structural stability. 4.6 Monitoring Program Paper waste releases significant quantities of chloride into leachate as it decomposes. The berm site should be initially monitored for chloride leachate in the spring and the fall in at least one upstream well and sufficient downstream wells (two or more) to detect when the early leachate reaches groundwater. Paper fibre biosolids have high concentrations of chloride. This chloride is highly mobile and most of it will leach out of the berms in the first few years. The average concentration of chloride ions in the Atlantic Packa.~ing paper fibre sludge from the Whitby Plant bunker, sampled in October 2001, was 135 mg kg'. Samples of soil taken from the Sound-Sorb berm at the Oshawa Gun and Skeet Club at 45-65 cm depth and at 50-100 cm contained 540 and 880 mg kgqof chloride, respectively. Concentrations of chloride in background soils in the same location were approximately 3 mg kgq. This data dearly indicates that chloride ions are moving down in the berm and will eventually reach the monitoring wells. As there are few, if any, impediments to the movement of chloride ions in soils and sediments, it is to be expected that the appearance of increased chloride ions in the monitoring wells would indicate the arrival into the wells ofleachate water from the Sound-Sorb berm. As other possible contaminants would am ye at a later time, the appearance of chloride ions in the well waters should trigger the monitoring ot' lead, PAHs, TPH, pH and BOD in all subsequent well-water analyses. It could be argued that, like other composts, the composted PFB should no longer require MOE and monitoring. However the bulk use of composted PFBs presents several concems: * the composting process is not complete at the point the Ontano Composting Guidelines 22 would be met; depending on environment~ conditions where bern were cons~ucted ~e f~er decomposition coOd become aci~c ~d generate ~ acid leachate; · e ~e of composted PFBs in be~ concen~ates l~ge qu~fifies of~e matefi~ in one location. ~e sites where Somd-Sorb h~ been used have a potenti~ for soil core,nation by ~e historic use of lead. In the first year a baseline determination (spring and fall) of lead, PAHs including benzo (a) pyrene, TPH, pH and BOD will be made. These parameters should also be monitored at least twice a year (spring and fall) once chloride leachate has impacted the groundwater. Testing for chloride may then be discontinued. All testing should be done at a laboratory accredited for the purpose. Testing should continue in perpetuity as long as the berm has an impact on the site. The parameters to be tested for are: lead, PAHs including Benzo(a)pyrene, TPH, pH and BOD. Testing for pH is included as a simple measure to assess the decomposition in the berm. A highly acid pH without increases in lead or other metal contaminants may indicate that the berm sits on clean soil. Much of the groundwater at shallow depths enters surface waters within a short period of time. BOD should therefore be part of the monitoring program. All sampling under the monitoring program should be done B, a qualified individual. 4.7 Remediation Lead and benzo(a)pyrene levels should be compared with the Ontario Dhnking-Water Quality Standards. Ir'the ODWS standard for either of these substances is exceeded for groundwater leaving the site, the MOE should take measures to mitigate the risk of contamination of offsite groundwater. These measures could include: · Confirmatory or other further study · SSRA or other risk assessment · Removal of the berm · Lifting the berm and installing a leachate collection system · Removal of contaminated soil 4.8 Management of Existing Berms A hydrogeological assessment as described in Section 4.2 should be done. The Panel felt that the investigations already done at the OSGC site meet this requirement. Monitoring wells should be drilled and the baseline parameters measured as outlined in Section 4.6 in the spring and fall. If the baseline assessment shows the potential for lead or benzo(a)pyrene to move off-site, the MOE should take remedial measures as set out in Section 4.7. 23 If the site conditions determined by the hydrogeological assessment are satisfactory,, the MOE should issue a Certificate of Approval that: · Limits additions of PFB to the berm for repair to composted PFB; Requires an on-going maintenance program as set out in Section 4.5; Requires an on-going monitoring program as set out in Section 4.6; The MOE should take mitigative measures as set out in Section 4.7 if on-going monitoring reveals the potential for lead or benzo(a)pyrene to move off-site. 4.9 Caveats on Application of the Algorithm This algorithm relates only to the paper fibre biosolids produced by Atlantic Packaging at its Whitby and Scarborough operations. The data available to the Panel was on PFB from Atlantic Packaging and its historical use in Sound-Sorb in a number of berms at gun clubs, primarily OSGC. The Panel therefore could only come to conclusion with respect to the use of PFBs from this source when then are mixed with clean mineral soil. The Panel's conclusions do not apply to PFBs if there is a difference in composition that is likely to increase the risk to human or environmental health. This difference could come from either the feedstock or the process chemicals. An), generalizations dravm from these conclusions depend on evidence that indicates a greater or lesser risk from other materials. The information that the Expert Panel reviewed applied to berms constructed at gun clubs. The MOE should consider these principles for berms constructed at other locations. 24¸ 5.0 Answers to the Three Questions 5.1 Question 1- Does Sound-Serb, as used as a berm construction material, present a risk to human health or the environment and what is the nature of that risk? The Expert Panel felt that it could not come to a conclusion on all of the possible risks to human health and the environment based on the data it had. It also felt that a more systematic collection of data at berms would not provide a comprehensive assessment of the risks. On the other hand the Expert Panel believed that the bulk use of PFB in berms could be managed in a way that would reduce any risk to human health and the environment to a minimum. The Expert Panel came to the conclusion that this matehal could with proper regulatory control be used to construct berms without causing an unacceptable risk to human health or the environment. $.1.1 Recommendation The Expert Panel therefore recommends that: 1. There is no need to ban the use of PFB mixed with mineral soil (Sound-Serb) for bulk use in berms. 5.2 Question 2: If yes, to what degree and what management measures, if any, can be instituted to eliminate or minimize the risks to acceptable levels? The berm at the OSGC has not been in place long enough for significant leachate to reach the monitoring wells. The berm also have not been in place long enough to determine the risk for anaerobic decomposition of the material that would render the leachate more acidic. No evaluation had been done of possible soil contamination at the site where the berms were located. The Expert Panel believes that there is a potential for anaerobic decomposition of the PFBs in Sound-Serb material creating an acid leachate. Because of the historical use of lead on gtm club sites there was a possible risk of mobilization of lead from soil beneath berms. The high level of organic material in the berms also presented a risk of elevated biological oxygen demand (BED) for surface water receptors at sensitive sites. 5.2.1 Recommendations The Expert Panel therefore recommends that: 2. There is no need to remove the OSGC berm provided iong-tem~ monitoring of the groundwater is continued. 25 Existing berms at other gun clubs should have a hydrogeological assessment. A monitoring regime in accord with the algorithm found in Chapter 4 should be established. Removal of a berm would only be appropriate as a mitigation option if contaminants in excess of the Ontario Drinking-Water Quality Standards were found in groundwater leaving the site or significant risks to human or environmental health were found on an SSRA or other risk assessment. The Expert Panel came to the conclusion that PFBs before being used as a berm construction material should be composted for the following reasons: the anecdotal reports from several Tier 2 members indicated that Sound-Serb when it was initially used in a berm generated enough heat to prevent the growth of vegetation for one growing season even when a layer of compost was applied on top; · concern had been raised by Tier 2 that E. coli had been found and pathogenic organisms were potentially present in PFBs; · TPH was the only COPC in excess of Table 1 criteria in the PFBs. The specific TPHs would to some extent biodegradable in a composting process. The uncertainties with respect to these concerns could be alleviated by composting. The recently amended Ontario Composting Guidelines (MOE May, 2004) are adequate for this purpose and should be applied. $.2.2 Recommendation The Expert Panel therefore recommends that: 4. PFB should be composted before its use in a berm. It could be argued that, like other composts, the composted PFB should no longer be considered a waste. However the bulk use of composted PFBs presents several concems: the composting process is not complete at the point the Ontario Composting Guidelines would be met; · depending on environmental conditions where berms were constructed the further decomposition could become acidic and generate an acid leachate; · the use ofcomposted PFBs in berms concentrates large quantities of the material in one location. The sites where Sound-Serb has been used have a potential for soil contamination by the historic use of lead. The Expert Panel believed that site-specific factors therefore were relevant to the safety of the use of this material in bulk and that the site locations where it was used should be regulated. The Panel felt that monitoring the site was an efficient wa3' to manage this use, both with respect to costs and reassurance to the community. 26 5.2.3 Recommendation The Expert Panel therefore recommends that: o Before a berm constructed of PFB and mineral soil is placed at any new location, a hydrogeological assessment should be done, and a SSRA done if the assessment indicates that one is necessary according to algorithm found in Chapter 4. The use of the proposed site for a new berm should be subject to MOE control by a Certificate of Approval or legal instrument that provides equal or better protection for human health and the environment. 5.3 Question 3: Given the intent to apply the findings across the Province, under what conditions should Sound-Sorb not be used or its use restricted? 5.3.1 Caveats Regarding the Conclusions The Expert Panel noted that according to current regulation the existing berms could contain wastes other than PFBs. To the Panel's knowledge, none of the sites where existing berms are located had been assessed for possible contamination of the soil at the site before the berm had been constructed. These considerations reinforce the need for monitoring groundwater wells around the existing berms in perpetuity. The Panel recommends that monitoring wells be used for new berms as well because information on the potential leachate from mature berms is not available. The Panel does not exclude the possibility that extensive further study of the PFB material and a thorough assessment of the hydrogeological situation at a particular site might provide sufficient evidence for the MOE to permit the use of the PFB material at a specific site without monitoring wells. The Expert Panel recognizes that the berms are likely to be covered with a thin layer of compost from yard waste/green box sources to assist vegetation of the berms. The Panel did not have data on the composition of and did not come to any conclusion with respect to the actual compost used at OSGC. Such compost should meet MOE composting guidelines. The Experts Panel did not come to any conclusions with respect to the safety of PFB for application to agricultural land (composted or not composted) with regard to human health, environmental or agricultural criteria. There are five current uses of PFB onto land in Ontario: · As a soil amendment on agricultural land; In land reclamation in the Welland area; As a soil mulch in the horticultural industw; · As a component in Nitro-sorb, where it is mixed with composted leaf and yard waste; · As a component of seed bedding materials in the nursery indust~:. The MOE may choose to use legal instruments equivalent or better than Ce~lificates of Approval. The recommendations set om minimum requirements. The MOE m~? add additional requirements as it sees fit as new information becomes available. Under the management algorithm proposed here the MOE could require, based on its own investigations, monitoring for 27 other substances for which evidence exists or becomes available. Paper fibre biosolids are a waste. Their bulk use in the environment even after composting requires regulato~ control. Paper fiber biosolids are used in a number of other bulk applications for land application mixed with compost or as a sole soil amendment. The Terms of Reference for the Expert Panel did not include theSe uses. The Panel felt that Sound-Sorb should not be used in an uncontrolled manner as an exempt waste as it is at present. The Panel believes that regulatory instruments that would control Sound-Sorb in its use in berms should provides the means to exert the regulatory control that the MOE may deem appropriate for other bulk uses of PFB. 053 5.3.2 Recommendation The Expert Panel therefore recommends that: Paper fibre biosolids should be controlled by Certificates of Approval or legal instruments that provide equal or better protection for human health and the environment at all stages from its generation through transport, composting and final use in the construction of berms. The use of paper fibre biosolid material mixed ~vith mineral soil should also be subject to MOE control with respect to its preparation and use in the environment by a Certificate of Approval or legal instrument that provides equal or better protection for human health and the environment. 28 O54 6.0 Recommendations 1. There is no need to ban the use of PFB mixed with mineral soil (Sound-Sorb) for bulk use in berms. 2. There is no need to remove the OSGC berm provided long-term monitoring of the groundwater is continued. 3. Existing berms at other gun clubs should have a hydrogeological assessment. A monitoring regime in accord with the algorithm found in Chapter 4 should be established. Removal of a berm would only be appropriate as a mitigation option if contaminants in excess of the Ontario Drinking-Water Quality Standards were found in groundwater leaving the site or significant risks to human or environmental health were found on an SSRA or other risk assessment. 4. PFB should be composted before it is used in a berm. 5. Before a berm constructed of PFB and mineral soil is placed at any new location, a hydrogeological assessment should be done, and a SSRA done if the assessment indicates that one is necessary.- according to algorithm found in Chapter 4. The use of the proposed site for a new berm should be subject to MOE control by a Certificate of Approval or legal instrument that provides equal or better protection for human health and the environment. 6. Paper fibre biosolids should be controlled by Certificates of Approval or legal instruments that provide equal or better protection for human health and the environment at all stages from its generation, through transport, composting and final use in the construction of berms. The use of paper fibre biosolid material mixed with mineral soil should also be subject to MOE control with respect to its preparation and use in the environment by a Certificate of Approval or legal instrument that provides equal or better protection for human health and the environment. 29 055 RESOLUTION OF COUNCIL DATE MOVED BY SECONDED BY That Mayor Ryan be authorized to make the following proclamations: "Terry Fox Day" - July 10, 2005 r-or~ CANCE-P I~[..c~[-Ar~Cl-I PUN 10&O~O03 April 26, 2005 Mayor Ryan and Members of Council, Sunday, July 10, 2005, marks a very special day in Pickering history. On this day, 25 years ago, Terry Fox ran through our City and forever left his legacy. The Pickering Terry Fox Run Committee would like to commemorate this special day by holding a Remembrance Rally for which we need your specific commitment and help. In an effort to make this a day of true celebration, we would appreciate the assistance of City staff Event Planners to help develop and coordinate events, and for Mayor Ryan and Council to proclaim Sunday, July 10, 2005 as "Terry Fox Day". Once or twice in a lifetime, someone comes along who touches our hearts, deepens our faith in humanity and changes forever the way we look at the world. Someone who exhibits courage, selflessness and tenacity, someone who fights for a dream and works to make it come true. Terry Fox was that kind of person. He touched a common chord that spoke to us of goodness and endless possibilities, of defiance in the face of an enemy, of human decency and most of all generosity. Since the first Terry Fox Run in 1986, the City of Pickering has graciously supported the efforts to carry on with Terry's Marathon of Hope. We trust that on this special occasion, we will be able to rely on the assistance of the City once again. Thank you for your consideration of this matter and I look forward to hearing from you in the near future. Kevin Cahill Organizer Terry Fox Run - 2005 Copy: Chief Administrative Officer City Clerk PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM May 26,2005 To: Bruce Taylor City Clerk From: Ross Pym Principal Planner- Development Review Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 6/01 Glenda Winterstein South Part of Lot 18, Concession 9, Part of Lot 2, Plan 12 (5015 Brock Road) City of Pickering The Executive Committee at their May 24, 2005 meeting adopted a recommendation on the subject application to permit the subject property to have five dwelling units in the existing building. This recommendation differs from the recommendation contain in Report Number PD 18-05 that recommended four dwelling units. The recommendation in Report Number PD 18-05 also contained a zoning by-law amendment based on the staff recommendation. Therefore, a revised zoning by-law amendment is provided that implements the Executive Committee's recommendation to permit five dwelling units. If Council adopts the Executive Committee's recommendation for approval of five dwelling units in the building at their June 6, 2005 Meeting, Council may consider the attached Zoning By-law later on at the same meeting. Please note that this by-law may be given all three readings at the June 6, 2005 Council Meeting, provided Council approves the Executive Committee's recommendation on the subject application earlier that same Meeting. The purpose and effect of this by-law is to permit five dwelling unit and one commercial unit on the subject lands. RP:jf Attachmems Ross Pym, MCIP, 0 5 ~ THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. 652.5¢ 05 Being a By-taw to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3037, as amended, to imp ement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of ~urnam :n the .South ?sr[ of Lot ~,8~ Concession.,, ~ in the City. of ?ickerina.~ ~A. 06/01 ) WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to permit a commercial use with five dwelling units on the subject lands, being South Part of Lot 18, Concession ~'~, AND WHEREAS an amendment to By-law 3037, as amended, is therefore deemed necessary; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: TEXT AMENDMENT Section 9 - General Commercial Zone - C2 is hereby amended by adding the following subsection after subsection 9.3.3: 9.3.4 South Part of Lot 18, Concession 9 (5015 Brock Road) In addition to the uses permitted in Subsection 9.1, for the lands known as Part of Lot 2, Plan 12, in the City of Pickering a maximum of five (5) dwelling units are permitted within a single building along with any other permitted use, subject to the following provisions: (1) Where the building on Part of Lot 2, Plan 12, contains any dwelling units, the following provisions shall apply: (a) Parking Requirements: (i) A minimum of 6 parking spaces shall be provided for the existing building that contains 5 apartment dwelling units and one commercial unit; (ii) Clauses 5.19.2 b), d) and k) of By-law 3037, as amended, shall not apply to this property; (b) Floor Space (i) The maximum commercial floor space in a building that contains residential dwelling units is 36 square metres. 2. BY-LAW 3037 By-law 3037 is hereby further amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as set out in Section 1 above. Definitions and subject matters not specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by the relevant provisions of By-law 3037, as amended. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE This By-law shall take effect from the day of passing hereof subject to the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board, if required. BY-LAW read a first, second, and third time and finally passed this June 2005. 6th day of David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Bentley, Clerk SCHEDULE I TO BY-LAW 6525/05 PASSED THIS 6th DAY OF June 2005 MAYOR CLERK O53 0 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM May 27, 2005 To: From: Subject: Bruce Taylor City Clerk Joyce Yeh Planner I Revised Draft By-law for Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 12/04 Alan & Nancy Ford 1465 Altona Road Part of Lot 33, Plan 228 City of Pickering Further to the Executive Committee Meeting held on May 24, 2005, please find attached the revised draft By-law for the Council Meeting on June 6, 2005. JY:jf Jyeh\rezoning\clerk memo A12_04 Revised draft by-law Attachments / THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. 6.526/05 Being a By-taw to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Picketing, Region of Durham in Pad of Lot 33, Plan 228, in the City of Picketing. (A 12/04) WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Picketing deems it desirable Io ?ez°ne the subject property, being Part of Lot .33, ;lan 228, in order to permit ~.he creadon of four iots for detached dwellings; AND WHEREAS an amendment to By-law 3036, as amended, is therefore deemed necessary; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: SCHEDULE "1" AMENDMENT Schedule 'T' to By-law 3036, is hereby amended by changing the current "R3" zoning designation to "R4" as shown on Schedule "1" attached thereto. TEXT AMENDMENT Section 10 - Residential Detached Dwelling Zone - R4 is hereby amended by adding the following subsection after subsection 10.3.9: 10.3.10 Part of Lot 33, Plan 228 Despite the height requirement provision of Subsection 5.9, the yard requirement provision of Subsection 5.22, the corner lot provision of Subsection 6.4, the side yard requirement provision of Subsection 10.2.3, and the lot coverage provision of Subsection 10.2.6 of this By-law, where any lot having frontage on Rougemount Drive on lands known as Part of Lot 33, Plan 228 in the City of Pickering, is used for a detached dwelling, the following provisions shall apply: (a) Dwelling Height (maximum): 9.0 metres; (b) Side Yard Width (minimum): 1.2 metres; (c) Flankage Side Yard Width (minimum): 4.5 metres; (d) Lot Coverage (maximum): 38% (e) No part of,any attached private garage shall extend more than 2.0 metres beyond the front wall of the dwelling to which it is attached; (f) Despite (c) above, where a single-storey, covered and unenclosed verandah or porch having no habitable space above it is attached to the flankage side of a dwellling unit, such verandah or porch may extend a maximum of 1.5 metres into the required minimum flankage side yard width; BY-LAW 3036 By-law 3036 is hereby further amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as set out in Section 1 and 2 above. Definitions and subject matters not specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by the relevant provisions of By-law 3036, as amended. 4. EFFECTIVE DATE This By-law shall come into force in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. BY-LAW read a first, second, and third time and finally passed this June ,2005. 6 th day of David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Bentley. Clerk 0Of PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM May 27,2005 To: Bruce Taylor City Clerk From: Geoff Romanowski Planner II Subject: Draft Amending By-law to Remove a Holding Symbol Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 18/05 Heights City Church (former Home Hardware) 477 - 481 Kingston Road Part of Lot 31, Range 3, B.F.C. (Part of Lot 1,2, 3, 4, & 9, Plan 230) City of Picketing Further to Council's approval of Zoning By-law 6329/04 on May 17, 2004, that designated the subject lands as "MU-18" with an "(H)"- Holding Symbol, this Department has prepared a draft amending by-law to remove the "(H)" - Holding Symbol from the subject lands (see attached Location Map). The draft amending by-law is attached for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled on June 6, 2005. Prior to an amendment to remove the "(H)" holding symbol preceding the "MU-18" Zone designation on the subject lands, the owner was required to enter into a site plan agreement, to the City's satisfaction, concerning the use of the subject property for the purposes of a mix of institutional, commercial, personal service and office uses. The owner has entered into a site plan agreement, which references drawings indicating the removal of the outdoor storage structures and enhanced landscaping to the City's satisfaction. Therefore, the property owner has satisfied the requirements for the lifting of the (H) Holding Symbol. The purpose and effect of this by-law is to lift the (H) Holding Symbol designation to permit s mix of institutionai, commercial, personal service and office uses on the subiect lands, Draft Amending By-law to Remove a Holding Symbol May 27, 2005 Page 2 If you require further information or clarification, please do not hesitate to contact me at extension 2188. I concur that this by-law be considered at this time. ~..., /,/ I.Y ~-/~:,--.- , 1.¢¢' , D~rector, ~,mng & Development G/~off ¢tbChanowski, CPT Planner Il GXR:jf gromanowski/zoning/rezoning/2003/A13-O3/Step#7/lift H memo to Clerk.doc Attachments OG,:i THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAWNO 6527/05 . Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 6329/04, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, Part of Lot 31, Range 3, Broken Front Concession being ~art of Lot 1,2.3,4, and 9. Plan 230, in the City of Pickering. (A 18/05) WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering passed By-law 6329/04 being a by-law to amend By-law 3036, to permit the establishment of restricted light industrial uses, warehouse uses and a home improvement centre use on the subject property, Part of Lot 31, Range 3, Broken Front Concession being Part of Lot 1,2,3,4, and 9, Plan 230, in the City of Pickering; AND WHEREAS By-law 6329/04 includes an "(H)" Holding Symbol preceding the mixed use zoning on the lands, which has the effect of preventing any institutional, commercial, personal service, and office uses from occurring until such time as the owner enters into a site plan agreement to the City's satisfaction. AND WHEREAS the owner has now entered into a site plan agreement, to the City's satisfaction; AND WHEREAS an amendment to amending By-law 6329/04, to remove the "(H)" Holding Symbol preceding the mixed use zoning on the subject lands is therefore deemed appropriate; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: BY-LAW read a first, second, and third time and finally passed this 6th June , 2005. SCHEDULE I Schedule I to By-law 6329/04, is hereby amended by removing the "(H)" Holding Symbol preceding the "MU-18' Zone designation on the subject lands as set out on Schedule I attached hereto. TEXT AMENDMENT Section 6 - Holdina Provision of By-law 6329/04, is hereby repealed. AREA RESTRICTED By-law 3036, as amended, is hereby further amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as set out in Sections 1 & 2 above, and as set out in Schedule l attached hereto. Definitions and subject matter not specifically dealt with in this by-law shall be governed by the relevant provisions of By-law 3036, as amended. EFFECTIVE DATE This By-law shall take effect from the day of passing hereof. __day of, David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Bentley, Clerk ~--;-~~ , ~ ' ~ Oil}, of Piokefing Planning & Developmenl Depa~ment PROPER~ DESCRIPTION PART OF LOT 3 ~, BROKE~~ FRONT CONC-.SION, RANG~ 3, OWNER HEIGHTS CI~CHURCH DATE MAY 27, 2005 DRAWN BY JB ~/~ FILENo. A 18/05 SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY GR 3ate Sources: Ter~net Enterpriaee Inc, end ira au~pHer.. AIl righta Reaerved. Not o plon of survey. PN-6 2005 MPAC ~nd its suppliers. All rights Rose.ed, Not o ~1~ of Survey. MU-18 PART OF LOT ,.31, ELF.C ..~ (PART OF'LOT 1, 2, -t 9, Pf,-/NN 2...~0) SCHEDULE T TO BY-LAW AS AMENDED BY BY-LAW PASSED THIS 6th DAY OF Ju~e 2005 6329,/04 6527/05 MAYOR CLERK 06, May 19, 2005 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM To: From: Subject: Bruce J. Taylor City Clerk Steve Gaunt Senior Planner Draft Amending By-law for Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 09/99(R) Applicant: Nicou Inc. South Part of Lot 34, Concession 2, Part 1, Plan 40R-11934 (100 Finch Avenue: north side of Finch Avenue, opposite Woodview Avenue) City of Pickering Council, on November 17, 2003, approved the above-noted application to permit residential development of the subject lands (see attached location map). Council also approved the draft plan of subdivision to permit creation of 39 residential building lots, an open space block and a park block on the subject lands. The Director, Planning & Development gave Draft Approval to the draft plan of subdivision on April 30, 2004. Conditions of approval for the rezoning have now been satisfied and a draft amending by-law has been prepared. The subject lands are to be zoned in "S1-14", "S3-7", "O1" and "OS-HL" zone categories on Schedule I of the proposed Zoning By-law. The draft by-law has been circulated to and approved by the applicant and is attached for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for June 6, 2005. A Statutory Public Meeting was held for this application on May 16, 2002. Please note that this by-law may be given ali three readings at the June 6, 2005 Council Meeting. The purpose and effect of tais Dy-iaw is to amend Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, permit the development of 39,~,~,,~'~ .... ~':'",' dwellings on lots with minimum frontage~ between 12.0 and 15.0 metres and minimum lot areas of 350 and 460 square metres on the subject lands. The lots will be located on the north side of Finch Avenue, opposite Woodview Avenue and on a new road to be constructed to the north of Finch Avenue, as shown on Schedule I to the Draft Amending By-law. 0 0 8 Draft Amending By-law for Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 09/99(R) May 19, 2005 Page 2 In addition, the by-law zones the 5.86 hectare block of environmentally sensitive wetland and Rouge Duffins Wildlife Corridor lands located to the north of the new lots for open space/conservation purposes and a 0.052 parkland block for active recreational purposes. If you require further assistance or clarification, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. I concur that this by-law be considered at this time. Di'rector,~Lanning & Development SG:jf Sxg/Ni¢ou/BylawM emoToCler k Attachments Steve Gaunt, MCIP, RPP THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERtNG BY-LAW NO. 0528/05 Being a By-law ':o amena Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering in the Region of Durham ~n ihe South Part of Lo[ 34, Concession 2, Part i of Plan 40R-11934, in the City of Pickering. (A 09/99(R), SP 2002-02) WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to permit the development of detached dwellings on lots with minimum frontages between 12.0 and 15.0 metres, a block for public parkland and a block for open space - environmental protection uses on the subject lands, being the South Part of Lot 34, Concession 2, Part 1 of Plan 40R-11934, City of Pickering; AND WHEREAS an amendment to By-law 3036, as amended, is therefore deemed necessary; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: SCHEDULE I Schedule I attached hereto with notations and references shown thereon is hereby declared to be part of this By-law. AREA RESTRICTED The provisions of this By-law shall apply to those lands in the South Part of Lot 34, Concession 2, Part 1 of Plan 40R-11934, in the City of Pickering, designated "S1-14", "S3-7", "O1" and "OS-HL" on Schedule I attached hereto. GENERAL PROVISIONS No building, land or part thereof shall hereafter be used, occupied, erected, moved, or structurally altered except in conformity with the provisions of this By-law. DEFINITIONS In this By-law, (1) (a) "Dwellinq" shall mean a building or part of a building containing one or more dwelling units, but does not include a mobile home or trailer; (b) "Dwellinq Unit" shall mean one or more habitable rooms occupied or capable of being occupied as a single, independent, and separate housekeeping unit containing a separate kitchen and sanitary facilities; (c) "Dwellinq, Sinqle or Sin.qle Dwelling" shall mean a single dwelling containing one dwelling unit and uses accessory thereto; (d) . "Dwellinq, Detached or Detached Dwellinq" shall mean a single dwelling which is freestanding, separate, and detached from ether main buildings or structures; 070 (2) -9_ (a)"FIoor Area - Residential" shall mean the area of the floor surface contained within the outside walls of a storey or part of a storey; (b) "Gross Floor Area - Residential" shall mean the aggregate of the floor areas of ail storeys of a building or structure, or part thereof as the ;ase may be, other than a private garage, an attic, or a cellar; (s) (a) ~ "Lot" shall mean an area of ]and ~ronting on a street which is used or intended to be used as the site of a building, or group of buildings, as the case may be, together with any accessory buildings or structures, or a public park or open space area, regardless of whether or not such lot constitutes the whole of a lot or block on a registered plan of subdivision; (b) "Lot Coverage" shall mean the percentage of lot area covered by all buildings on the lot; (c) "Lot Fronta.qe" shall mean the width of a lot between the side lot lines measured along a line parallel to and 7.5 metres distant from the front lot line; (4) "Private Garac~e" shall mean an enclosed or partially enclosed structure for the storage of one or more vehicles, in which structure no business or service is conducted for profit or otherwise; (5) (a) "Yard" shall mean an area of land which is appurtenant to and located on the same lot as a building or structure and is open, uncovered, and unoccupied above ground except for such accessory buildings, structures, or other uses as are specifically permitted thereon; (b) (c) (d) "Front Yard" shall mean a yard extending across the full width of a lot between the front lot line of the lot and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; "Front Yard Depth" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a front yard of a lot between the front lot line and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; "Rear Yard" shall mean a yard extending across the full width of a lot between the rear lot line of the lot, or where there is no rear lot line, the junction point of the side lot lines, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (e) "Rear Yard Depth" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a rear yard of a lot between the rear lot line of the lot, or where there is no rear lot line, the junction point of the side lot lines, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (f) "Side Yard" shall mean a yard of a lot extending from the front yard to the rear yard, and from the side lot line to the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (g) "Side Yard Width" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a side yard of a lot between the side lot line and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (h) "Flanka.qe Side Yard" shall mean a side yard immediately adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a street; -3- (i) "Flankaqe Side Yard Width" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a flankage side yard of a lot between the lot line adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a street, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the ~ot; (j) "Interior Side Yard" shall mean a side yard other than a flankage side yard. PROVISIONS (1) (a) Uses Permitted ("S1-14" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "S1-14" on Schedule attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (i) detached dwelling residential use (b) Zone Requirements ("Sl- 14" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "S1-14" on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building except in accordance with the following provisions: (i) LOT AREA (minimum): (ii) LOT FRONTAGE (minimum): (iii) (iv) (v) (vi) (vii) FRONT YARD DEPTH (minimum): INTERIOR SIDE YARD WIDTH (minimum): 460 square metres 15 metres 4.5 metres 1.2 metres FLANKAGE SIDE YARD WIDTH (minimum): 2.7 metres REAR YARD DEPTH (minimum): 7.5 metres LOT COVERAGE (maximum): 38 percent for all buildings and structures on a lot; 07i (viii) (ix) (x) BUILDING HEIGHT (maximum): 9.0 metres DWELLING UNIT REQUIREMENTS: maximum one dwelling unit per lot and minimum gross floor area residential of 100 square metres. PARKING REQUIREMENTS: A minimum one private garage per lot attached to the main building; any vehicular entrance of which shall be located a minimum of 6 metres from the front lot line, and 6 metres from any side lot line immediately adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a street; and, O7£ -4- C maximum projection of the garage front entrance from the wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit shall not exceed 2.5 metres in length, whether or not such garage has a second storey, except where a covered and unenclosed porch or veranda extends a minimum of 1.3 metres from [he wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit, in which case no part of any attached private garage shall extend more than 3.0 metres beyond the wail containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit. (xi) SPECIAL REGULATION: A Notwithstanding clause 5.7(b) of By-law 3036, as amended, uncovered steps and platforms exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade may project a maximum of 2.5 metres in depth into the required rear yard of a lot provided no part thereof exceeds 6.0 metres in width. B Notwithstanding clause 5.7(b) of By-law 3036, as amended, unenclosed covered or uncovered porches with or without cold cellars may encroach a minimum of 1.5 metres into a required front or flankage side yard. (2) (a) Uses Permitted ("S3-7" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "S3-7" on Schedule attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (i) detached dwelling residential use (b) Zone Requirements ("S3-7" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "S3-7" on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure except in accordance with the following provisions: (i) LOT AREA (minimum): 350 square metres (ii) LOT FRONTAGE (minimum): 12.0 metres (iii) FRONT YARD DEPTH (minimum): 4.5 metres (iv) INTERIOR SIDE YARD WIDTH (minimum): 1.2 metres on one side and 0.6 metres on the other side (v) FLANKAGE SIDE YARD WIDTH (minimum): 2.7 metres (vi) REAR YARD DEPTH (minimum): 7.5 metres (vi) LOT COVERAGE (maximum): 38 percent for all buildings and structures on a lot; (viii) BUILDING HEIGHT (maximum): 9.0 metres (ix) DWELLING UNIT REQUIREMENTS: maximum one dwelling unit per lot and minimum gross floor area residential of 100 square metres. -5- 073 (x) PARKING REQUIREMENTS: A minimum one private garage per lot attached to the main building; any vehicular antrance of which shall be located a minimum of 6 metres .¢rom the front lot !ine, and ,6 metres from any side !o[ line immediately adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a street; and, C maximum projection of the garage front entrance from the wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit shall not exceed 2.5 metres in length, whether or not such garage has a second storey, except where a covered and unenclosed porch or veranda extends a minimum of 1.8 metres from the wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit, in which case no part of any attached private garage shall extend more than 3.0 metres beyond the wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit. (xi) SPECIAL REGULATION: A Notwithstanding clause 5.7(b) of By-law 3036, as amended, uncovered steps and platforms exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade may project a maximum of 2.5 metres in depth into the required rear yard of a lot provided no part thereof exceeds 6.0 metres in width; B The horizontal distance between buildings on adjacent lots, shall be not less than 1.8 metres; C Notwithstanding clause 5.7(b) of By-law 3036, as amended, unenclosed covered or uncovered porches with or without cold cellars may encroach a minimum of 1.5 metres into a required front or flankage side yard. (3) (a) Uses Permitted ("OS-HL" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "OS-HL" on Schedule attached hereto use any lot or erect, alter or use any building or structure for any purpose except the preservation and conservation of the natural environment and resource management. (b) Zone Requirements ("OS-HL" Zone) No buildings or structures shall be permitted to be erected, nor shall the placing or removal of fill be permitted, except where buildings or structures are used only for purpose's of flood and erosion control and resource management. 6. MODEL HOMES (1) Despite the provisions of Section 6.1 of By-law 3036, a maximum of four Model Homes, together with not fewer than three parking spaces per Model Home, may be constructed on the lands set out in Schedule I attached hereto prior to division of those lands by registration of a plan of subdivision. (2) For the purposes of this By-law, "Model Home" shall mean a dwelling unit used exclusively for sales display and for marketing purposes pursuant to an agreement with the City of Pickering, and not used for residential purposes. -6- 074 BY-LAW By-law 3036, as amended, is hereby further amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as it applies to the area set out in Schedule i attached hereto. Definitions and subject matters not specifically dealt with in this By-iaw shall be governed by reievant provisions of ~y-iaw 3036, as amended. 8. EFFECTIVE DATE This By-law shall come into force in accordance with the Planning Act. provisions of the BY-LAW read a first, second, and third time and finally passed this ,fnne , 2005. day of David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Bentley, Clerk o~ J 075 SCHEDULE I TO BY-LAW 6578/05 PASSED THIS 6th DAY OF June 2005 MAYOR CLERK , ,,City of Pickerin9 Planning & Development Depa~ment PROPER~/ DESCRIPTION PART OF LOT 34, CONCESSION 2; PART 1, 40R-11934 APPUCATION No. SP-2002-02; A 09/99(R) ~ SCALE 1:7500 CHECKED BY SG , , f FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY PN-14 PA- 3/~N3A ~ &!3]A O00&~ Z 0 0 -J Z C) 0 077 073 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. 6529/05 Being a By-iaw to amend Restricted Area Zoning By-law 3036, to implement the Official Plan of the City of P!ckering, Region of Durham, Lot 126, Plan 1051, in the City of Pickering. (A 15/04) WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to permit 9 single detached dwelling lots on the subject lands, being the Lot 126, Plan 1051, in the City of Pickering; AND WHEREAS an amendment to By-law 3036, is therefore deemed necessary; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. SCHEDULEI Schedule I attached to this By-law with notations and references shown thereon is hereby declared to be part of this By-law. AREA RESTRICTED The provisions of this By-law shall apply to those lands being Lot 126, Plan 1051, in the City of Pickering, designated "(H)S3-12" on Schedule I attached to this By-law. 3. GENERALPROVISIONS No building, land or part thereof shall hereafter be used, occupied, erected, moved or structurally altered except in conformity with the provisions of this By-law. 4. DEFINITIONS In this By-law, (1) (a) "Dwellinq" shall mean a building or part of a building containing one or more dwelling units, but does not include a mobile home or trailer; (b) "Dwellinq Unit" shall mean one or more habitable rooms occupied or capable of being occupied as a single, independent and separate housekeeping unit containing a separate kitchen and sanitary facilities; (c) "Dwelling, Single or Sinqle Dwellinq" shall mean a dwelling containing one dwelling unit and uses accessory thereto; (d) "Dwetlinq, Detached or Detached Dwellin.q" shall mean a single dwelling which is freestanding, separate and detached from other main buildings or structures; (2) (a) "Floor Area - Residential" shall mean the area of the floor surface contained within the outside walls of a storey or part of a storey; (b) "Gross Floor Area - Residential" shall mean the aggregate of the floor areas of all storeys of a building or structure, or part thereof as the case may be, other than a private garage, an attic or a cellar; (3) (a) -2- "Lot" shall mean an area of land fronting on a street which is used or intended to be used as the site of a building, or a group of buildings, as the case may be, together with any accessory buildings or structures, or a public park or open space area, regardless of whether or not such lot constitutes the whole of a lot or block on a registered plan of subdivision; 073 ii (b) "Lot Fronta.qe" shall mean the width of a lot between the side lot lines measured along a line parallel to and 7.5 metres distant from the front lot line; (4) "Private Garaqe" shall mean an enclosed or partially enclosed structure for the storage of one or more vehicles, in which structure no business or service is conducted for profit or otherwise; (5) (a) "Yard" shall mean an area of land which is appurtenant to and located on the same lot as a building or structure and is open, uncovered, and unoccupied above ground except for such accessory buildings, structures, or other uses as are specifically permitted thereon; (b) "Front Yard" shall mean a yard extending across the full width of a lot between the front lot line of the lot and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (c) "Front Yard Depth" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a front yard of a lot between the front lot line and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (d) "Rear Yard" shall mean a yard extending across the full width of a lot between the rear lot line of the lot, or where there is no rear lot line, the junction point of the side lot lines, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (e) "Rear Yard Depth" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a rear yard of a lot between the rear lot line of the lot, or where there is no rear lot line, the junct, ion point of the side lot lines, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (f) "Side Yard" shall mean a yard of a lot extending from the front yard to the rear yard, and from the side lot line to the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (g) "Side Yard Width" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a side yard of a lot between the side lot line and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (h) "Flankage Side Yard" shall mean a side yard immediately adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a street; (i) "Flankaqe Side Yard Width" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a flankage side yard of a lot between the lot line adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a street, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; O) "Interior Side Yard" shall mean a side yard other than a flankage side yard. o PROVISIONS -3- (a) Uses Permitted ("S3-12" Zone) No person shall, within the lands zoned "S3-12" on Schedule ! attached to this By-law, use any lot or erect, alter or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (i) detached dwelling residential use (b) Zone Requirements ("S3-12" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "S3-12" on Schedule I attached hereto use any lot or erect, alter or use any building except in accordance with the following provisions: (i) LotArea (minimum): (ii) Lot Frontage (minimum): (iii) Front Yard Depth (minimum): (iv) Side Yard Width (minimum): 300 square metres 12 metres 4.5 metres 1.2 metres & 0.6 metres (v) Flankage Side Yard Width (minimum): 4.5 metres (vi) Rear Yard Depth (minimum): (vii) Building Height (minimum): (viii) Dwelling Unit Requirements: 7.0metres 12.0 metres maximum one dwelling unit per lot and minimum gross floor area- residential of 100 square metres (ix) Parking Requirements: (x) Special Regulations minimum one private garage per lot attached to the main building and vehicular entrance of which shall be located not less than 6.0 metres from the front lot line and not less than 6.0 metres from and side lot line immediately adjoining or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of the street. A A maximum of 9 detached dwelling units are permitted on the lands designated "S3-12" on Schedule I hereto. B Despite the provisions of Section 5.6 of By-law 3036, the requirement for frontage on a public street shall be satisfied by establishing frontage on a common element condominium street, HOLDING PROVISION - (H) HOLDING SYMBOL (1) Holdinq Provision Requirements (a) Permitted Uses While the "(H)" holding symbol is in place, no person shall, on the lands designated "(H)S3-12", use the lands for any purpose other than for One Single Detached Dwelling Unit subject to provisions of Section 9.2 of By-law 3036. -4- (b) Removal of the (H) Holding Symbol Prior to an amendment to remove the (H) Holding Symbol preceding the above zoning category '%3-12" the following condition shall be met: (i) An appropriate agreement(s) si~ail be executed with and to the satisfaction of the City of Picketing and/or the Region of Durham, and such agreements shall be registered on title to the lands, and the agreement shall include noise and vibration requirements for the development of buildings or structures in accordance with the provisions of subsection 5.(1 ) of this By-law; 7. BY-LAW 3036 By-law 3036, is hereby amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as it applies to the area set out in Schedule I attached hereto. Definitions and subject matter not specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by relevant provisions of By-law 3036, as amended. 8. EFFECTIVE DATE This By-law shall come into force in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this June , 2005. 6th day of Dave Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Bentley, Clerk 08£ SCHEDULE I TO BY-LAW 6529/o5 PASSED THIS 6th DAY OF June 2005 MAYOR CLERK PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM May 16, 2005 To: From: Subject: Bruce Taylor City Clerk Denise Bye Coordinator, Property & Development Services Request for Road Dedication By-Law OwnedApplicant: William Brown Part of Lot 7, Concession 5, Pickering Parts 3, 6, 7 and 8, Plan 40R-23455 LD 220/04 and LD 221/04 RE0505/Roadded.448 The above-noted Land Division Applications are subject to certain conditions. One of those conditions requires the Owner to convey those parts of Lot 7, Concession 5, Pickering, being Parts 3, 6, 7 and 8, Plan 40R-23455 to the City for road widening purposes. As the Owner has conveyed those parts to the City, it is now appropriate to dedicate them as public highway in order to reinstate legal frontage to the adjacent parcels, one of which is being retained by the Owner. Attached hereto is a location map and a by-law, enactment of which will permit legal access to the adjacent lands. This by-law is in the form usually used in such cases and is attached for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for June 6, 2005. DB:bg J:\Documents'Prop & De¢,ROADDED~,SEC\448~memos\merno lo bruce.doc Attachments Denise Bye ¢' Copy: Director, Planning & Development Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering Supervisor, Development Control 08 :, THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. 6~30/0~ Being a By-law to dedicate those parts of Lot 7, Concession 5, Pickering, designated as Parts 3, 6, 7 and 8, Plan 40R-23455 as public highways. WHEREAS The Corporation of the City of Pickering is the owner of those parts of Lot 7, Concession 5, Pickering, designated as Parts 3, 6, 7 and 8, Plan 40R-23455 and wishes to dedicate them as public highways; NOW THEREFORE, the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: That part of Lot 7, Concession 5, Pickering, designated as Part 6, Plan 40R-23455 is hereby dedicated as public highway (Fifth Concession Road); and Those parts of Lot 7, Concession 5, Pickering, designated as Parts 3, 7 and 8, Plan 40R-23455 are hereby dedicated as public highway (Salem Road). BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 6th day of June, 2005. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Bentley, City Clerk Roadded. 448 085 FI~TH CONCE~QN ~QAD City of Pickering Planning & Development Depa~ment PROPER~ DESCRIPTION CONCESSION 5~ PT LOT 7, PA~T 3~ 6,7 ~ 8 40R-23455 OWNER ~. BROWN DATE MAY 13, 2005 DRAWN BY dB FILE No. ROADD~D 448 SCALE 1:3000 CHECKED BY I 088 PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM May 20, 2005 To: From: Subject: Bruce Taylor City Clerk Denise Bye Coordinator, Property & Development Services Request for Road Dedication By-Law Owner/Applicant: G. & J. Vos Part Lot 11, Plan 228, Pickering (Part 4, Plan 40R-23443) Part Block 19, Plan 40M-1653 (Part 5, Plan 40R-23443) LD 074/05/Roadded.454 The Owner herein has applied through Land Division Application LD 074/05 to sever part of Lot 11, Plan 228 into two (2) lots. One of the conditions of that severance was for the Owner to convey a 5.02 metre parcel along Tomlinson Court to the City for future road widening purposes. Further, when Plan 40M-1653 was registered, the City acquired Block 19, 40M-1653 which reserve was to remain undedicated until the adjacent lands were developed in accordance with appropriate controls. As the Owner has conveyed the road widening block to the City and the appropriate controls are in place for the development of the adjacent property, a by-law should be enacted dedicating the 5.02 metre block and the portion of the reserve fronting the newly created parcels as public highway, thereby permitting legal access to the severed/retained lands. Attached hereto is a location map and a by-law, enactment of which will permit legal access to the adjacent lands. This by-law is in the form usually used in such cases and is attached for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for June 6, 2005. DB Attachments Denise Bye Copy: Director, Planning & Development Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering Supervisor, Development Control 08? THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF P!CKERING BY-LAW NO. Being a by-law to dedicate that part of Lot 11, Plan 228, Pickering, designated as Part 4, Plan 40R-23443 and that part of Block 19, Plan 40M-1653, Pickering, designated as Part 5, Plan 40R-23443, as public highway (Tomlinson Court); WHEREAS The Corporation of the City of Pickering is the owner of that part of Lot 11, Plan 228, Pickering, designated as Part 4, Plan 40R-23443 and that part of Block 19, Plan 40M-1653, Pickering, designated as Part 5, Plan 40R-23443 and wishes to dedicate them as public highway. NOW THEREFORE, the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: That part of Lot 11, Plan 228, Pickering, designated as Part 4, Plan 40R-23443, is hereby dedicated as public highway (Tomlinson Court). 2. That part of Block 19, Plan 40M-1653, Pickering, designated as Part 5, Plan 40R-23443, is hereby dedicated as public highway (Tomlinson Court). BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 6th day of June, 2005. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Bentley, City Clerk Roadde~454 08 ER CR~ESCENT ~' _j ~1 ~ ~ ,, , ~ ~ .< FIDDLERS ~ /ER DRIVE L,_ / i i m © ' .~" "'"" VALLEY DRIVE ~ © City of Pickering Planning & Development Depa~ment PROPER~ DESCRIPTION PART LOT 11, PLAN 228 AND PT. BLOCK 19, 40~;-16~$, PARTS 4 & 5, 40R-2344S OWNER G. & ~. VOS. DATE ~AY 19, 2005 DRAWN BY ~B ~/~ FILE No. ROADDED. 454 ...........- SCALE 1:3000 .L CHECKEDBY DB THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. 6532/05 Being a by4aw ~.o appoint Oz~ir Chaudhq/_?.o ~he City cf Pickenng Public Library Board. WHEREAS Mr. Kam Rathee was appointed to the City of Pickering Public Library Board for a term to expire on November 30, 2006; and WHEREAS Mr. Rathee resigned from the Public Library Board effective March 30, 2005; and WHEREAS pursuant to Section 12 of the Public Libraries Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.44, as amended, where a vacancy arises in the membership of a board, the appointing council shall promptly appoint a person to fill the vacancy and to hold office for the unexpired term; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: That Section 16(7) of By-law Number 6211/03 is hereby amended by deleting therefrom the name Kam Rathee and adding thereto the name Ozair Chaudhry. 083 3Y-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this Sth day of June, 2005. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Bentley, Clerk CORP0223-07/01 NOTICE OF MOTION DATE: JUNE 6, 2005 MOVED BY: COUNCILLOR DICKERSON SECONDED BY: COUNCILLOR BRENNER WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering, on behalf of all its residents, do hereby acknowledged the generous financial commitment to the Province of Ontario of a specific gift of $7.5 million dollars towards the Rouge Valley Hospital Foundation; and WHEREAS this gift by Mattamy Homes, Metrus Developments and Lebovic Homes, the three developers of the new Seaton Community, to be built on Provincial lands, is conditional only on seeing the development process move forward and allowing them to commence construction eighteen months hence; and WHEREAS the new community to rise will most certainly need lands for a new municipal fire hall, library, community centre, arena, sports field, Seniors' facilities, a recreation and wellness complex, parks and, but not limited to, perhaps lands for a new City Hall; and WHEREAS Council believes that the timetable requested by the three builders is achievable if all parties needed for approval work efficiently and effectively; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering believes that it is now time to assemble a working group comprised of three Members of Council and three senior administrative staff to negotiate the net community benefit to the City and its residents and to report to Council on its findings for deliberation, consensus and ratification. CARRIED: Btaylor:Notices of Motion:Community Benefit MAYOR 091 PICKERINC NOTICE OF MOTION DATE: JUNE 6, 2005 MOVED BY: COUNCILLOR DICKERSON SECONDED BY: COUNCILLOR McLEAN WHEREAS The Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering adopted the Pickering Official Plan in March 1997; and WHEREAS the Regional Municipality of Durham approved the Pickering Official Plan in September 1997; and WHEREAS the Pickering Official Plan came into effect in October 1997; and WHEREAS the Official Plan identifies Neighbourhood 8 as the Town Centre, bounded by the C.N. rail line, the rear lot lines of properties fronting Kingston Road, the hydro transmission corridor, and Highway 401; and WHEREAS Pickering Council adopted the Town Centre West Development Guidelines for lands generally west of Liverpool Road, between Kingston Road and Highway 401; and WHEREAS the Official Plan policy encourages the highest mix and intensity of uses and activities in the City to be in the Town Centre Neighbourhood; and WHEREAS the Town Centre Neighbourhood has not realized development activity to the extent envisaged by the Official Plan; and WHEREAS the February 2005 Draft Provincial Growth Plan (Places to Grow) designates the City of Pickering as an Urban Growth Centre; and WHEREAS the lands within the Town Centre West area are strategically located to provide significant intensification potential and opportunity to implement the direction of the Draft Provincial Growth Plan (Places to Grow) which encourages a density of development of not less than 200 residents and jobs per hectare; and WHEREAS the Town Centre West area is currently served by convenient access to Highway 401 and will be additionally served by a pedestrian bridge over Highway 401 linking the GO transit station to the Town Centre area; and WHEREAS the Province of Ontario currently owns lands strategically located at the northwest quadrant of Highway 401 and Liverpool Road, which lands are an integral component NOW THEREFORE The Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby identifies these lands as a prime opportunity area for intensification; to have a diverse mix of land uses generally planned as outlined in the Draft Provincial Growth Plan; and FURTHER THAT the Province of Ontario be encouraged to consider the construction of the proposed courthouse facilities for Durham Region on the provincially-owned lands located at the northwest quadrant of Highway 401 and Liverpool Road; and FURTHER THAT copies of this resolution be forwarded to: The Honourable Dalton McGuinty, Premier of Ontario · The Honourable Greg Sorbara, Minister of Finance · The Honourable Michael Bryant, Attorney General · Wayne Arthurs, MPP, Pickering-Ajax-Uxbridge CARRIED: Btaylor:Notices of Motion:Town Centre West MAYOR