The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutOctober 3, 2006,. .:� � �e ��Ir � �` „ �-I� :� .�—,�, � '' : � ,,. � ... �� _� ��•� Councii Meeting Agenda Tuesday, October 3, 2006 Council Chambers 7:30 pm PRE-MEETING HAS BEEN SCHEDULED FOR 7:00 pm I) II) �� INVOCATION Mayor Ryan will call the meeting to order and lead Council in the saying of the Invocation. DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST ADOPTION OF MINUTES Council Meeting of September 18, 2006 "In Camera" Council Meeting of September 18, 2006 IV) PRESENTATIONS V) DELEGATIONS VI) CORRESPONDENCE VII) a) b) VIII) EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORT Executive Committee Report EC # 2006-14 Executive Committee Minutes [For Information Only] REPORTS — NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS a) Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 45-06 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A06/06 S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. 1215-1235 Bayly Street Part of Block Y, Plan M-16 City of Pickering PAGE 1-18 `In Camera" Under Separate Cover 19-20 21-45 46-52 53-63 64-206 .. :�� ,,..,. A� � ��-+I� � � � '-=i � � ,�,- ,. �.� � _ ��_��1_I�� IX) MOTIONS AND NOTICE OF MOTIONS Council Meeting Agenda Tuesday, October 3, 2006 Council Chambers 7:30 pm X) BY-LAWS 207-235 XI) OTHER BUSINESS XII) CONFIRMATION BY-LAW XIII) ADJOURNMENT ,,. ,�r�s�a;� _ �-- .. � ��,..�� , �t��,�• - -�� _��al�� PRESENT: Mayor David Ryan COUNCILLORS: K. Ashe M. Brenner D. Dickerson R.Johnson B. McLean D. Pickles ALSO PRESENT: T. J. Quinn E. Buntsma N. Carroll G. Paterson D. Bentley D. Shields (I) (��) Council Meeting Minutes Monday, September 18, 2006 7:30 PM - Chief Administrative Officer - Director, Operations & Emergency Services - Director, Planning & Development - Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer - City Clerk - Deputy Clerk INVOCATION Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order and led Council in the saying of the Invocation. ADOPTION OF MINUTES Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Brenner Council Meeting of July 24, 2006 "In Camera" Council Meeting of July 24, 2006 Special Council Meeting of September 11, 2006 -1- .-. � � . __ �U� �0�: �� „ ,�_�,'m-�°,� i -�---,� - . � ..—s�,� � , — ....,� :,-„-�,s �_�� '� � (III) PRESENTATIONS 2. 3 (IV) Council Meeting Minutes Monday, September 18, 2006 7:30 PM Presentation of `Certificates of Participation' to Representatives of Community Cultural Organizations Who Participated in `Canadian Tapestry: Weaving the World Together' Coordinated bv Pickerinq Advisory Committee on Race Relations & Equity Councillor Pickles presented certificates of participation to the representatives of Community cultural organizations who participated in the "Canadian Tapestry: Weaving the World Together" event. The event was coordinated by the Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations and Equity. Councillor Pickles thanked and congratulated everyone on the success of the event. Construction of the Italian Social Club Clubhouse Giovanni Conte, President of the Pickering Ajax Italian Social Club presented a plaque to the City of Pickering in recognition of the City's support of the Trillium Foundation grant in the amount of $66,700.00 for the upgrading of the clubhouse and bocce courts. Presentation to the Winners of the Sustainable Pickering Ideas Challenge Councillor Brenner, Chair of the Benchmarking Standards Committee provided a brief overview of `Sustainable Pickering'. He advised that in July, Pickering residents were encouraged to share their sustainability ideas. An added bonus to entering their ideas was a chance to win three great prizes, and tonight the prizes would be awarded. He presented the winners of the Sustainable Pickering Ideas Challenge with their prizes; 1St prize — Rick Scott; 2"d prize — Matthew Surkis and 3`d prize — Smita Patel. Councillor Brenner congratulated the winners and encouraged everyone to continue moving towards a sustainable Pickering. DELEGATIONS 1. Paul Savel, Chair Pickering Public Library Board Update on Board Initiatives Paul Savel, Chair of the Pickering Public Library Board, appeared before Council to provide an update on the Pickering Public Library initiatives. Mr. Savel presented a powerpoint presentation noting what the library had completed over -2- L/ 11 A.J c`� °� Council Meeting Minutes �� ° °=_' ' = Monday, September 18, 2006 7:30 PM the last year. Mr. Savel thanked Council, senior staff for their support and thanked the Library staff for their hard work and dedication to the community. 2. Don Terry, Chair, United Way of Ajax-Pickering-Uxbridge 2006 Campaiqn Update Don Terry, Chair, United Way of Ajax-Pickering-Uxbridge, appeared before Council to provide an update on the 2006 Campaign. Mr. Terry presented the United Way DVD for the campaign and thanked Council and noted that they looked forward to their continued support. 3. Nicole Scarlett Re: Request for Establishment of Designated Off-Leash Dog Parks Refer to CORR. 59-06 Nicole Scarlett, appeared before Council and requested that the City investigate the possibility of establishing designated off-leach dog parks. She noted that a group of citizens are willing to work with staff to provide recommendations for Council to consider. (V) CORRESPONDENCE CORR. 58-06 ONTARIO 9-1-1 ADVISORY BOARD c/o Tom Voisey Peel Regional Police Telecommunications 7750 Hurontario Street Brampton, ON L6V 3W6 Resolution # 124/06 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That CORR. 58-06, from the 911 Ontario Advisory Board (OAB) seeking financial assistance, in the amount of $100.00 from each municipal government in order to continue as the technical and information authority respecting the implementation and operation of 911 Emergency Number systems in Ontario be endorsed. CARRIED -3- 2 �� , . ��$ ,,, ��_y6�E�� s ,��:� .. � , ,--� , ,.,� ..�„�.� � ��_�_�� CORR. 59-06 NICOLE SCARLETT PICKERING DOG PARK COMMITTEE 741 Craighurst Court Pickerinq, ON L1X 2X1 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Brenner Council Meeting Minutes Monday, September 18, 2006 7:30 PM Resolution # 125/06 That CORR. 59-06 from Nicole Scarlett, a Pickering resident, with respect to a formal request to engage the City of Pickering in the investigation for establishing designated off- leash areas for dogs within the City of Pickering.be referred to the Director, Operations & Emergency Services and the City Clerk to report back on the matter. ... � 3. CORR.60-06 MR. BILL AINSWORTH, PAST PRESIDENT PICKERING LAWN BOWLING CLUB 910 Liverpool Road Pickerinq, ON L1 W 1 S6 Resolution # 126/06 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor McLean That CORR. 60-06 from Bill Ainsworth, Past President of the Pickering Lawn Bowling Club with respect to a request that the Club assist with the City of Pickering's Master Plan — Strategic Report be referred to the Director, Operations & Emergency Services to report. ... � 4. CORR.61-06 EILEEN MCLEAN, PUBLIC HEALTH NURSE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM 605 Rossland Road East Whitbv, ON L1 N 0B2 -4- �� °� Council Meeting Minutes :�� , F� �; i� i.a fr. , ; =„ �=t��,� � � - �� 7�� .S — erTtl�..-"—"'� �_ �m13si ��• �_��'� � Council Meeting Minutes Monday, September 18, 2006 7:30 PM That CORR. 63-06 from TESL Durham (Teachers of English as a Second Language) be received and further, that the City of Pickering proclaim the week of November 12-18, 2006 as `English as a Second Language Week'. 7. CORR.64-06 M. J. WEBSTEa Barrister & Solicitor 180 Dundas Street West Toronto, ON M5G 1Z8 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Brenner CARRIED Refer to Consideration of Item #2 of New & Unfinished Business Resolution # 130/06 That CORR.64-06 from M. J. Webster, Barrister & Solicitor, on behalf of Durham Rapid Taxi and Pick-N-Go Taxi be received for information and referred to consideration of Item #2 of New and Unfinished Business. CARRIED (VI) EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORT Executive Committee Report EC 2006-13 of the Meeting Held on September 11, 2006 Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 44-06 Zoning By-law Amendment Application, A25/05 974735 Ontario Inc. (Robert Lennox) 3880 Kinsale Road Part of Lot 3, Concession 6(40R-23226 Parts 1, 2& 3) Citv of Pickerinq COUNCIL DECISION That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 25/05 be approved, as set out in the draft by-law attached as Appendix I to Report PD 44-06, to amend the existing zoning from "A" Rural Agricultural zone to: (i) "CLR6" Cluster Residential zone to permit the establishment of ten lots for residential dwellings on the subject property, being Part of Lot 3, Concession 6(40R-23226 Parts 2& 3), City of Pickering, and � „ :: „ a=.ti�a�� '� � = �� . ��,--� , .,� ..s�— .,.�, ��,.�. �_�� _��_'� � � �) ,�' Council Meeting Minutes Monday, September 18, 2006 7:30 PM (ii) "EP (ND)" Environmentall,y Protected Area Nitrate Dilution zone, and "OS- HL-EP (ND)" Open Space F-lazard Lands — Environmentally Protected Area Nitrate Dilution zone, to ac,knowledge a portion of the property for nitrate dilution purposes serving i�he proposed new residential development and to protect and maintain a portion of the property as open space, on lands being Part of Lot 3, Conce�ssion 6(40R-23226 Part 1), City of Pickering; 2. That in accordance with Sectio� 34(17) of the Planning Act, while the zoning amendment proposed in Report PD 44-06 differs slightly from the information contained in the public meeting notice, and Information Report No. 26-05 presented at the January 19, 2I�06 Information Meeting, such difference is not considered substantial enough to require further notice and another public meeting; and 3. That the zoning by-law to imple�ment Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 25/05, as set out in Appendix: I to Report PD 44-06, be forwarded to City Council for enactment. 2. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 43-06 704858 Ontario Limited Plan of Subdivision 40M-1956 Final Assumation of Plan of Subdivision COUNCIL DECISION That Council pass the follo�ring resolution: a) That the highway being Amaretto Avenue within Plan 40M-1956 be assumed for public use; b) That the services requir�;d by the Subdivision Agreement relating to Plan 40M-1956, which are constructed, installed or located on lands dedicated to, or owned k�y the City, or on lands lying immediately adjacent thereto, including lands that are subject to easements transferred to the City, be accepted and assumed for maintenance, save and except from Blocks �1, 22 and 24, Plan 40M-1956; c) That the Subdivision Agreement and any amendments thereto relating to Plan 40M-1956 be released and removed from title; d) That By-law 1416/82 (Places of Amusement) be amended to include the road being Amaretto Avenue within Plan 40M-1956; and �� °� � Council Meeting Minutes ,�, . " T� $� �� Monday, September 18, 2006 7:30 PM 2. That Council enact a by-law� to dedicate Block 23, Plan 40M-1956 as public highway. 3. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 29-06 No Parking By-law — Park Crescer�t Amendment to By-law 6604/05 COUNCIL DECISION That Report OES 29-06 regarding a proposed amendment to the municipal traffic by-law 6604/05 be re�;eived; and 2. That the attached draft by-I��w be enacted to amend Schedule `B' to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the rE�gulating of parking on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the Corporation of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. 4. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 30-06 Tender T-7-2006 Helen Crescent, Brands Court, Trellis Court Road Reconstruction and Waterm�in Works COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report OES-30-06 rEgarding Helen Crescent, Brands Court, Trellis Court Road Reconstruction and Watermain Works be received; 2. That portion of Tender T-7-2006 submitted by Hollingworth Construction Company for Helen Crescent and Brands Court excluding (Trellis Court) Road Reconstruction and Watermain Works at a cost of $372,022 plus GST be accepted; 3. That the total gross project �;,ost of $644,684.96 (plus GST) including the tender amount, the Region �f Durham's portion and other associated costs and a net total cost of $375,000.00 after recoveries identified in this report be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project through the issuance of debentures through the Region of Durham; and a) That debt financing not exceeding the amount of $310,000 for a period not exceeding 10 years, at a rate to be determined; : :r _„ ,��.�;�a�� _ -,. "'� ' �"'`� ��a.�■ . ��,_ �' �� 5. k(kr t.� V �J . Council Meeting Minutes Monday, September 18, 2006 7:30 PM b) That annual repayment charges in the amount of approximately $42,000 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencir�g in 2007 continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid; and any finar�cing cost be paid out of the 2006 Current Budget; c) That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has certified that this loan and the rep<�yment thereof falls within the City's Debt Financial Obligations approved Annual Repayment Limit for debt and other financial obliga�ions for 2006 as established by the Province for municipalities in Ont�rio; d) That the Treasurer is authorized to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give eff�ct thereto. 5. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 31-06 Glendale Tennis Club Ontario Trillium Foundation Grant i�pplication Requirement Lease Aqreement COUNCIL DECISION That Report OES 31-06 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services be received; 2. That Council acknowledges to the Ontario Trillium Foundation that the Glendale Tennis Club Projec�t for upgrading existing tennis facilities will be permitted at David Farr IWlemorial Park; and 3. That the Mayor and Clerk bE� authorized to execute a lease agreement to permit the newly incorporated Glendale Tennis Club the use of the Tennis Facilities for club purposes at David Farr Memorial Park from October 1, 2006 to September 21, 2012 that is in the form and substance acceptable to the Director, Operations & Emergency Services and the City Solicitor. � �si�l �`�� °� Council Meeting Minutes �� k, ?�s31� ', Monday, September 18, 2006 7:30 PM 6. Director, Corporate Services & Tr�:asurer, Report CS 27-06 Confirmation of Comprehensive Crime Insurance for 2006 COUNCIL DECISION That Report CS 27-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. 7. Director, Corporate Services & Tr�asurer, Report CS 44-06 Cash Position Report as at June 30 2006 COUNCIL DECISION That Report CS 44-06 of the Direc�tor, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. 8. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 45-06 2006 Final Tax Due Dates for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential Realty Tax Class�s COUNCIL DECISION That Report CS 45-06 of th� Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to issue the Final 2006 Tax Bills for (�ommercial, Industrial and Multi-residential properties with a due date of October 13th, 2006; 3. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to make any changes or undertake any actions necessary, including altering the due date, in ordE�r to ensure the tax billing process is completed and in order to comply with Provincial Regulations; 4. That the necessary by-law attached to this report be read three times and approved; and 5. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be given authority to give effect thereto. -10- 0 10 ;:� „ - , ,�=u��,- .. . ;�-„� . � -,� , . ..,�,.�.�� _�_�� ,� i =� Council Meeting Minutes Monday, September 18, 2006 7:30 PM Director, Corporate Services & 1�reasurer, Report CS 48-06 Establishment of Appleview-Spartan Neiqhbourhood Watch COUNCIL DECISION 1. That the letter from the Dur�am Regional Police Service dated July 31, 2006 endorsing the establishment of the Appleview-Spartan Neighbourhood Watch, be received; and 2. That the Council of the C;orporation of the City of Pickering hereby endorse the Appleview-Spartan Neighbourhood Watch and approves the installation of Neighbourh��od Watch signs at the entrances to the subject area. Director, Corporate Services & Tr�asurer, Report CS 46-06 Veridian Corporation Amended an� Restated Shareholder's Aqreement COUNCIL DECISION That the recommendation contairied in the `In Camera' minutes of September 11, 2006, be adopted. 11. Memorandum from the Chief Adrninistrative Officer dated September 6, 2006 with respect to the Pickering, Ajax, Whi�by Animal Services — Termination of Aqreements — Stat�s of Neqotiations COUNCIL DECISION That the recommendation contairued in the `In Camera' minutes of September 11, 2006, be adopted. 12. Memorandum to the Chief Administrative Officer from the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer and the City Solicitor dated September 7, 2006 with respect to the APTA Transfer Update COUNCIL DECISION That the recommendation contained in the `In Camera' minutes of September 11, 2006, be adopted. -11- \� �'y �� °� Council Meeting Minutes �� `� "�� ' ' Monday, September 18, 2006 7:30 PM Resolution # 131/06 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Johnson That the Report of the Executive Committee EC 2006-13, dated September 11, 2006, be adopted. CARRIED (VII) NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS Council Office, Report CO 02-06 City of Pickering 2006 Annual Accessibility Plan Reviewed by the Accessibility Advisory Committee for Council Consideration Resolution # 132/06 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by councillor McLean 1. That Report CO 02-06 regarding the City of Pickering 2006 Annual Accessibility Plan be receiv�d; 2. That Council endorse the City of Pickering 2006 Annual Accessibility Plan as presented and reviewed by the City of Pickering Accessibility Advisory Committee. CARRIED 2. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 43-06 Notice of the Passinq of a Taxicab Licensinq By-law Mayor Ryan advised that a public meeting had been held on July 24, 2006 for the purpose of soliciting comments with respect to the proposed Taxicab Licensing by- law, in accordance with the ll�unicipa/ Act. Comments were received on September 13, 2006 and have been noted as CORR. 64-06 from M. J. Webster, Barrister & Solicitor. He noted tha�t staff had reviewed the comments received and would be presenting the by-law a:� per the July 24, 2006 public meeting held on this matter. -12- I� -' „ ,�sy��,��,- _. r,�.� ..�,.,-�" �`, i�a.�, _��/�_�� .��.� �� k,�'F Council Meeting Minutes Monday, September 18, 2006 7:30 PM Resolution # 133/06 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by councillor McLean That Report CS 43-06 of th� Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That upon review of the public comments, the City Clerk present the by- law at the September 18, 2�06 meeting of City Council. CARRIED (VII) MOTIONS & NOTICE OF MOTIQNS Pickering Lawn Bowling Club Resolution # 134/06 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor McLean WHEREAS The Pickering Lawn Bowling Club has grown from a membership of just 55 in 1998 to 175 members today; and WHEREAS this high rate of growtri can be attributed not only to the wisdom of the Council of the day in providing new greens and a facility to call "home" but also to the aging demographics of Pickering's population; and WHEREAS there is also growing ir�terest from many of our under 55 years old group, which is welcomed by the P�ickering Lawn Bowling Club, but a general disappointment, in that the Club h�s virtually reached the maximum number of members which the current greens can accommodate; and therefore leaves little opportunity for those wishing to be�ome members; and WHEREAS excluding the majority of the initial capital costs associated with the installation of new greens, the Cluk> has raised all funds necessary to carry out maintenance and replacement programs (currently in excess of $40,000 annually) and will commit to continuing this best business practice; and WHEREAS Council recognized, arvd agreed, with the Club that an additionaf green would be required in the not-too-di�tant future and installed certain infrastructure -13- (� 1.:� �`�� °� a Council Meeting Minutes r. � �na .3�,.. , �i�� . Monday, September 18, 2006 7:30 PM (when the temporary parking space was created directly adjacent to the North) for that eventuality; and WHEREAS the performance of thE; Pickering Lawn Bowling Club has been a credit and asset to the City of Pickering over the years; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that City staff be requested to undertake, in conjunction and conversation with the Club, estimates and drawings for a new green ensuring adequate lighting, irrigation and protective sun shading surrounding the perimeter for players; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT Council considers these findings and invite the Club's Executive to meet with �ouncil prior to consideration of the City's budgets for the 2007 year. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THNT discussion and concurrence with the South Pickering Seniors Club also be unr�ertaken and sought. ..- � (VIII) BY-LAWS Councillor Ashe, seconded by Cou�ncillor Dickerson, took leave to introduce by-laws of the City of Pickering: 6696/06 Being a by-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3037, as amended by By-laws 2623/87 and 3450/90, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pi�kering, Region of Durham, on land being Part of Lot 3, Concession 6 i;40R-23226, Parts 1, 2& 3) to permit the establishment of ten lots for residential dwellings on the subject property. 6697/06 Being a by-law to ap�oint Special Municipal Law Enforcement Officers for the purpase of enforcing parking restrictions on private property. 6698/06 Being a by-law to exempt Lots 31, 32, 33, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55 and 56, Plan 40M-2254 from part lot control. (Mavji Homes Development Inc.) 6699/06 Being a by-law to dedicate Block 23, Plan 40M-1956, Pickering as a public highway. -14- �� <<� °� Council Meeting Minutes �� " T-��' �,, Monday, Septem ber 18, 2006 7:30 PM 6700/06 Being a by-law to arr�end 6604/05 providing for the regulating of parking, standing and stopping on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. 6701/06 Being a by-law to establish the 2006 Final Property Taxes and Due Date for the Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential Tax Classes. 6702/06 Being a by-law to lic�nse, regulate and govern taxicab businesses within the City. THIRD READING: Councillor Ashe, seconded by Councillor Dickerson moved that By-law Numbers 6696/06 to 6702/06 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. YEA Councillor Ashe Councillor Brenner Councillor Dickerson Councillor Johnson Councillor McLean Councillor Pickles Mayor Ryan (IX) OTHER BUSINESS CARRIED ON A RECORDED VOTE: ►�� Councillor Johnson gave notice that he would be presenting a Notice of Motion at the next meeting of Council with respect to an indoor soccer facility for the City of Pickering. -15- C1 1 � 1 �`�`r °� Council Meeting Minutes ,�� t -� ' ' Monday, September 18, 2006 7:30 PM 2. The following matters were considered prior to the meeting: Resolution # 135/06 Moved by Councillor Brenner Seconded by Councillor Johnson That Council move `In Camera' for� the purposes of litigation or potential litigation including matters before administr�tive tribunals, affecting the municipality. CARRIED DECLARATION OF INTEREST Councillor Ashe made a declaration of interest in accordance with the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act with respect to a verbal update from the City Solicitor with respect to the OPDA Judicial Review Application due to his interest in the Whitevale Golf Club. Counciltor Ashe left the meeting during the discussion and vote on the matter. Councillor Pickles made a declar�tion of interest in accordance with the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act with respec� to a verbal update from the City Solicitor with respect to David Sanford's Application for Judicial Review, as the subject matter pertains to information he deals with as a part of his employment. Councillor Pickles did not take part in the discussion or vote on the matter. a) Verbal Update from the City Solicitor with respect to the OPDA Judicial Review Application — Requ�st to join in Application for Leave to Appeal the decision of the Ontario Coui�t of Appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada Confidential discussion ensiaed on this matter. Resolution # 136/06 Moved by Councillor Dicker:�on Seconded by Councillor Mcl_ean That the recommendation cc�ntained in the `In Camera' Council minutes dated September 18, 2006 k�e adopted. CARRIED -16- ��r °� . Council Meeting Minutes �� "'�� Monday, September 18, 2006 _ 7:30 PM b) Verbal Update from the Cit�r Solicitor with respect to David Sanford's Application for Judicial Review Re: Seaton Land Exchanq� Environmental Assessment Confidential discussion en�ued on this matter. Resolution # 137/06 Moved by Councillor Ashe Seconded by Councillor Jolhnson That the recommendation contained in the `In Camera' Council minutes dated September 18, 2006 be adopted. CARRIED c) The City Solicitor provided a verbal update to members present of a recent Ontario Municipal Board decision with respect to a recent body rub parlour application. d) Memorandum to the Chief administrative Officer from the City clerk with respect to a request for Waiver of the Hall Rental Fee for pon Beer Arena Banquet Hall Resol�ution # 138/06 Moved by Councillor McLe��n Seconded by Councillor Dic;kerson That the request of Ms. Brianne Arnott for the purpose of holding a fundraiser for `Ethan Phillip' to waive the rental fee of the Don Beer Arena Banquet Hall on October 21, 2006, in support of a fundraising event for `Ethan' be received; 2. That a grant in the amount of $564.10 be made to Ms. Brianne Arnott, co/o `Ethan's Fundraiser' to offset the said rental fee of the Don Beer Arena Banquet Hall; and 3. That this amount be charged to Account 2195 (Grants to Organizations & Indididuals). CARRIED 17- r � � r t,' 1 � :'� „ - ,. ,��;� r�„-_ � .,�,..-� , . �.,�, � - , .:' ,.:� -�--<..m�.�.4'.. ��_��/ ��'� � (X) CONFIRMATION BY-LAW Bv-law Number 6694/06 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, September 18, 2006 7:30 PM Councillor Dickerson seconded by Councillor McLean moved for leave to introduce a By-law of the City of Pickering ta confirm those proceedings of the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering at its Regular Meeting of September 18, 2006. (XI) ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:05 pm. DATED this 18t" day of September, 2006. -18- CARRIED MAYOR DAVID RYAN DEBI A. BENTLEY CITY CLERK DELEGATIONS 1. Pat McNeill Senior Vice President Ontario Power Generation Information on the Pickering B Life Extension Program 2. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 45-06 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A06/06 S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. 1215-1235 Bayly Street Part of Block Y, Plan M-16 Citv of Pickerinq October 3, 2006 a) Bonnie Littley, 1499 Sandhurst Crescent, Pickering b) Paul Crawford, 867 Antonio Street, Pickering c) Carolyn Huston, 898 Antonio Street, Pickering d) Sylvain Trepanier, 1218 Monica Cook Place, Pickering e) Doris Hopper Reide, 204-1210 Bayshore Towers, Pickering fl Paul Fieldhouse, 306-1210 Radom Street, Pickering g) Barb Fannin, 306-121 CI Radom Street, Pickering h) Hazel and Jim Daubeny, 807-1210 Radom Street, Pickering I) Jacqueline Smart, 839 Fairview Avenue, Pickering j) Wilma Robb, 1806-1210 Radom Street, Pickering k) Georgs Kolesnikovs, 7�7-1210 Radom Street, Pickering I) Eileen Higdon, 852 Fairview Avenue, Pickering m) Ed Fulton, 705-1210 R�dom Street, Pickering n) Myrna Picotte, 1210 R�dom Street, Pickering �� 11 +:.. i 1 o) Tim Dobson, 1310 Broadview Street, Pickering p) Norlene Chong, 707-1210 Radom Street, Pickering q) Margaret Drake, 899 Heytan Boulevard, Pickering r) Reece Wolanski, 456 Broadgreen Street, Pickering s) Carmen Montgomery, 239 Lupin Drive, Whitby (formerly 917 Grenoble Boulevard, Pickering) t) Linda Rehel, 1009 Albacore Manor, Pickering October 3, 2006 CORRESPONDENCE 1. CORR. 65-06 Motion to Endorse PATTI BARRIE Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Clarinqton, ON L1 C 3A6 Advising that at a meeting held on September 11, 2006, the Council of the Municipality of Clarington passed a resolution with respect to the shortage of Justices of the Peace in Durham Region and urging Council to give this matter utmost attention. 2. CORR. 66-06 Motion to Endorse YVONNE BOSCH, CHAIR BILL PARISH, CO-CHAIR FRIENDS OF THE AJAX PICKERING HOSPITAL 68 Hills Road Ajax, ON L1 S 3W4 Submitting a letter dated A�agust 21, 2006 advising that the Central East LHIN, of which Durham RegiUn is a part, is in the process of preparing its first Integrated Health Services �lan which is scheduled to be completed by October 31, 2006. The Friends have urged that before the Board of the Central East LHIN adopts this plan, the plan be widely circulated throughout the Central East LHIN inviting public comment and input. They further advise that they provided a submission to the Board of the Central East LHIN, which included five priorities to be included as part of the first Integrated Health Services Plan. Friends of the Ajax Pickering Hospital are requesting Council to endorse their submission ta the Central East LHIN. 3. CORR. 67-06 Receive for Information JOHN S. BURKE DEPUTY MINISTER MINISTRY OF MUNICIPAL AFFAIRS 17t" Floor, 777 Bay Street Toronto, ON M5G 2E5 Advising Council that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs will be entering the third year of the Long-standing S�rvice Program, which is a special recognition � � _k. �� r.. program for locally elected officials who have served 25 years or more in municipal government. Th� letter outlines the nomination process to be followed in this regard. 4. CORR. 68-06 Receive for Information LORRAINE CHIASSON REGULATORY COORDINATOR ENBRIDGE 500 Consumers Road North York, ON M2J 1 P8 Submitting a letter advising that as directed by the Ontario Energy Board in its Letter of Direction to Enbridge Gas Distribution, attached hereto is a copy of the Notice in both the English and French versions, together with a copy of the Application filed by Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. on August 18, 2006. . i�.r' 111 011 Energizing Ontario September 12, 2006 Attorn General Michael Bryani; McMurt Scott Building 720 Bay S et, 11 th Floor Toronto, ON 5G 2K1 Dear Ho!?ourable Sir: RE: Shortaae of Justices of the Peace within Durham Reqion � 2 S'� C�R tZ . f� 5- ofo The Municipality of Clarington re�;ently found themselves in the position of having a number of Municipal Law Enfor�cement charges at the Provincial Offences Court dismissed or stayed because the Court did not have a Justice of the Peace available. This situation in our court system is intolerable. Our staff spends many hours investigating these matters and dealing with our residents in an attempt to resolve the issues. They use great discretion in deciding which matters will proceed to court. Only those matters that cannot be resolved at our level proceed to having charges I�aid, but we now find ourselves in the position of questioning the benefit of laying charges. This situation is not only discouraging for staff, but leaves our residents frustrated and confused and feeling abandoned by the Court system. In light of this situation, the Counc;il of the Municipality of Clarington passed the following resolution at their meetir�g held on September 11, 2006: "WHEREAS there is a shortage of Justices of the Peace in Durham Region; and WHEREAS matters are being dismissed by the Courts as a result of this shortage, thus negatively impacting the law enforcement process in Clarington, NOW THEREFORE BE IT IRESOLVED THAT correspondence be issued to the Attorney General and the Premier of Ontario requesting additional Justices of the Peace to be appointed to the Courts in the Region of Durham; and � m��n -I-a �nakars�� CORP��RATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE :iTREET, BOWMANVII.LE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 4 (� R �i �, `'� Attorney General Michael Bryant - 2- September 12, 2006 THAT a copy of the correspondence be forwarded to Mr. Brian Roy, Solicitor, Region of Durham, Mr. John O'Toole, MPP, The Association of Municipal Clerk's and Treasurers of Ontario, the municipalities within Durham Region, and the Regional Senior Justice." We are aware that two Justices of the Peace were recently appointed to the Central East Region, however much more needs to be done in order to alleviate the current situation. For the benefit of all residents in the Regional Municipality of Durham, I urge you to give this matter your utmost attention. Yours ��. Barr.i.e; A.M.C.T. Municipal Clerk Cc: J. O'Toole, MPP B. Roy, Solicitor, Regional Municipality of Durham I. Diamond-Gleeson, Man�ger, Provincial Offences Court Services M. DeRond, Director, Legislative and Information Services, Town of Ajax G.S. Graham, Clerk-Administrator, Township of Brock S. Kranc, City Clerk, City af Oshawa D. Bentley, City Clerk, City of Pickering � K. Coates, Clerk, Township of Scugog D. Leroux, Clerk, Township of Uxbridge P. Jones, Clerk, Town of 1rVhitby Regional Senior Justice Mews Rssociation of Municipalities of Ontario August 21, 2006 Mayor David Ryan, u�d Members of Council Ci ty of Pickering Pickering Civic Complex One 'I'he Esplanade Pickering, Ontario L1V 6K7 I�'ricncis of t�ie Ajax Pickering Hospital 68 Hills Roacl Ajax, Ontario L15 2W4 n�'�� ti��a H�� .., �••'��. •� '' _"_ _ . _ 1 � llear Mayor David Ryan and Members of Council, {/1 � `i ai �o�� . �G� - ob �.,.. .. --,f, J�-+ 6 i V. $. _._... n_.......� CORR � �.�.��.. TAKE APPR. qCT1pN As you may be aware, the Central East LHIN, of which Durham Region is a part, is in tlie process of preparing its first Integrated Health Services Plan. We, The Friends vf the fljax Pickering Hospital, understand that this plan will be completed by October 31, 2006, arid will ttien be submitted to the Ministry of Healt:h and Long Term Care for approval. The Friends have urged that, before The Board of the Central East LH1N adopts this plan, the plan be �videly circulated throughout thE Central East LHIN inviting public comment and input. On Ju»e 19, 2006, The Friends of the Ajc�, Pickering Hospital submitted to tlie Central East I,HIN what the Friends consider to be the urgent, immediate health and hospital priorities for Ajax, Pickering, Whitby and West Durharn. That submission is attached for your consideration and endorsement. On Juiie 23, 2006, the Fi•icnds met with sc►me meinbers of the Board of the Central East LHIN, and some staff to discuss our submission, ,and to urge that our five priorities be included as part oCtlieir first Integrated Health Services Plan. � Tlie Central East LHIN has tremendous power anci influence as far as liealth and hospital priorities and planning are concerned, and also where these health and hosJ�ital services will be lacatecl and delivered. It is ur�;ent that Catincils and all the people in our communities become very involved in the planning decisions of the Ceniral East LHIN in �ill aspects of health and hospital care, delivery and location. � .Page 1 0l� 2 � �cr4i� +v ��-'J f l �� r�'. .. .- ' �I C � i '1'l1e l�i•iends llrn�ly advocate betler healt.h care closer to lioine. "['hank you for your consideration and endorsement of our submission. We are entering a new � as�ci very important period with respect t� ospita planning and health care delivery. "I'lie people must be very involved in every aspect oi�this plaluung. Sincerely yours, ' ^,�,..� �Jn - �.,,� � . � 7��-� vc,ruie sc�� Bill ParisLi c�-Chair Co-Chair �'� Liiclosure Page 2 o f 2 Juiie 19, 2006 Mr. Foster Loucks, Chair a�1d Members of the Boazd Central East LHIN Suite 20�A, Harwood Plaza 314 Harwood Avenue South �jax, Ontario L1 S 2J1 Friends of'the Ajax Pickering Hospital 68 Hills Rnad Ajax, Ontario � L15 2W4 fi�slYi�nd�d -. llear Mr. Loucks and Members of the Board, .` � s.• Oti behalf of the Friends of the Ajax Pickering Hospital, we attach for the attention of you and your Board the urgent hospital and health services priorities that the Friends believe should be included in your proposed first integrated health services plan that is now in preparation. The inclusion of these five priorities in your integrated health services plan is essential if the best hospital and health services are to be acYueved for the people of Ajax, Pickering, Whitby and West Durham. The Friends of the Aja�c Pickering Hospital look forward to discussing our attachecl submission with you, your Board, and your staff when we meet on June 23, 2006. In canclusion The Friends strongly urge that before the integrated health services plan is finally adopted, the Board circulate the plan wiclely throughout the East Central LHIN inviting public comment and input. Sincerely yours, �'� �._ � � �, �_ �. .� �voruie Bosch Co-Chair copy Marilyn Emery CEO Central East LHIN �7� , � �;� C G� 13i11 P��ish t'o-Cliair L�f C��,J makcs ii very difficult to lravcl outsiae llurltvn region fc�r neeeiecl liospital 8c F�ealth services. Other than the GO train, there is no convenient and depenclable intc�r-regioiia! transit for those needing hospit��l & health care or for visiting relatives and fri�;nds. 'I'raffic; gridlock increases risk factors. ➢ A growing stable major hospita.l at Ajax Pickering will significantly iiriprove stalf inorale and staff sta.bility. In addition, ;such a major liospita.l will help to attract specialists, nurses, technical support staff and the r�uch needed family doctors to Ajax, Pickerin�;, Whitby and West Dur�am. 2. Re�ional Birthin� and New Born Centre to Be Located Now At the Aj� Pickerin� Hos�tal ➢ Ajaac, Pickering, Wlutby and West Durhaln are communities in which tliere are already so many young families. The many expanding subdivisions bring more aud more young families who need expert local medical and hospital services. Our cortununities are known for their mix of babies, children, youths and seniors. ➢ It is obvious, then, that the Aj�: Pickering Hospita.l should be the Kegional �irthing and New Born Centre for our comm.unities. The young families are here; the chilclren are here. ➢ For anyone east of Scazborough it is easier and safer to get to Ajax Pickering Hospital to have a baby than to travel into Scarborough or Toronto. ➢ T'he Friends understand that the Scarborough Hospital will move obstetrics from the Scarborough Grace site to conef;ntrate a11 birkhs at the Scazborough General site. With a proposed birthing centre at Scarborough Centenary, this means Scarborough would have two birthin centres within a few blocks of each other with no regional birthing and new born centre outside Toronto to serve the communities of Aj�, Pickering, W}iitby and West Durham. This we believe is nor�sensical Scarborough centred planning. The population projections do not support this �;carborough Centenary decision. ➢ With a major regional birthing au�d new born centre at Ajax Pickering, two centres of excellence can be developed out.side 'I'oronto: one in women's health and the oX.her a child & youth health centre. ➢ There are so many advantages t�� this priority: it would reverse the very low tnorale of the obstetrical nurses that currently exists; it would attract obstetricians/gynecologists, paedeatricians and family physirians, and enti�e more nurses seeking�career positions. 3. Phase II Aiax Pickc:rin� Hospital lZedevelopmerit Plan Must Be�,in Nuw ➢ Phase I has been in the planning and approval stages for years. l'otistructiati of Phase I will not commence unti12007 with �,c�mpletion in 2010. With such lonr E�erii�ds of p(anning and approvals, Phas�; lI planning must cotr�m�;nc�� at ��nce. �1'he C=f�l��rai Fast L� IIN rYiust rnake Phase II a centre piece of its plaiuun� aiu.l pri��ilics. ➢ Phase II must be pla.nned with lhe objective �.►I'cic��aluping the Ajax Pickering I-lospital as the major hospital serving our cummunitir�s �ai!': the� mucl� �c� de�� per��ai��g rootns, acute care beds, regional birthing and new born centre anc9 centrc:• +�f excellence (women & children's health) included as p�irt of the plantiiii�. -2- �� ,, 'i : � � �, ,., , . A A(1 health prof'essionals and the commwiities rriust be fully engaged in the plantiing uf Phase II. ➢ Phase II is the essential critical immediate follow up to Phase I to add necessary facilities to further reduce wait times by adding operating rooms and active treatarient becls. T'he planning for Phase II must begin at once. 4. Population Based Funding ➢ The 905 regions, which includ� Durham, are among the fastest growing regions in Ontario. The GTA regions make up over a quarter c�f Ontario's population. ➢ A recent Government of Ontario sponsored report on access to health care services shows that the residents of the 90S regions "........have, for three quarters af the services examined, ra.tes of access to hospital services that are lower t.hau the provincial average...even lower lhan the rates in Northern Ontario." ➢ Since 2003 the 905 region, including Durham, residents' per capita hospital funding gap has grown from $156 per person to $187 per person; therefore the annual fundin�; gap has grown from $584 million in 2003 to over $762 million in 2005. ➢ In addition the GTA regions are now paying more than $570 million each yeaz to the provincial government as a result of the new health care premium. ➢ The residents of Durham are nat getting a fair share of hospital and health care resources. For example, with a fairer share of hospital resources, the Aj� Pickering Hospital could reduce its current 13 hour wait times in ernergency. More medical and surgical beds and nurses aze needed now. ➢ Any population based funding formula that is developed must include an adjustment factor or formula to assist hospitals and health services providers in rural areas, small town and city communities and remote districts. ➢ The Central East LHIN must talce the lead in achieving population based funding. 5. Inte�ration of Hosnital and Health Services — Two Basic Principles for Any T'ro sed lntegrations ➢ The basis for the integration of any hospital and health services must be that such integration wil� Provide better health care closer to home. ➢ If and when integration of hospital and health services are proposed and centres of excellence and regional services are planned, such centres and regional services should be based on the above principle and not concentrated in Scarborough and Toronto. C. Conclusion Y These five priorities aze basic �bjectives of the Friends of the Ajax Pickering Hospital. The Friends urge the leadership of the Central Last LHIN to achieve these priorities. Thank you. -3- In Case �t� �rans�r�i�sic,ra ,)i��icultoES, Fle�s� ��1i 41�-8�3-?1G1 er 1- ��6-3�:,�-:�R11 Please De1iver To: Cat�- �f �ickering Min��iry of �tu�niaqp�l �ffair� Mir�i�ter� ��s qfif�ires muw�i�i�aaf�s �n�i H�using et �ita �L��ent OFiice ei the t?epaYy Mini�ter , 7r" Fi€s�r 77 i �uy SSfeEt T�rOnt'� O(V �495a r^.ES 7�1� (41�i) 965•71t�0 !=ax: (416� 585-7%11 �4�.�t��nt�ec �, 2r1�)f� Mem�randlt�� 'i'o: �'.r�x�x�: ��u�ijec�: C3ureau c�u SoUS-ministra 1 �`e etagP f;7, rue Qasr T'ar�nto UN h15ts 2t5 t�(� (�1 fii 58�- 7 i G0 !03�cap��ur, t41E'rj 5a5•7�1i :41t tilur,RC��7:ii CF��,'C.11�k� .i�,�in �. �u�k� r�e�ttty Mi:r.ist�r Lar�g-stanxlirtg ��r-��i�e Frogr�m �� i) �, � `'+' � — � � . L �� , ,�t � �_ The I+�Iinisrry c�� r�iutii�ipal Affairs �.��ili b�� ;raterir.� the ttlird �e�r of tn� Y,=�ng-stai��iir�� Servecu Frc��raz��. i��is ��eci�l recc��itier� �ra�;r�n, i� ti�r 1��:�11y e1�ct�d c�tf�.ials �,�h� ha��j� ��r��ed ''S y��ai•s c�r mt�re in mt�mcipai goverr��ncrit. 'Thi� vear, in adciiti{:�r! tc� the ��-�r��r re�;ipient�, u�z ��r� �rivil�:�ecl to aeknowledg� two in�.i<<i.dua�s �,viti� the e;��;e�3dion��l �t�tt�� f h��i�l� sez-�Fe�i c�v�;r S�l y��r�. 'This ��tt�r is to inforriz �ou oft�e ��izaa�i�n pruce�� anrl rr. �•ec�i.a;:si y�sus• :u��c.�rt t�x� �he Lon�. stanc�it�� S�t�1ice Pto��t�n. �unic.i�,alitis� h�•J� an ir�z�c�rt3nt rai� ic� ptay i�� ider�tify'�r3� th4 iizdi�.�ic�uals t� be re�•p�ni7eti�i —��ve n��il yc��ar �s�istar�ce in l��in�iy-�� fnrLr�ard th� r�arnFS o� �ti�;il�lc; .»,minees. T�ie follo��vin� are the nominatio►i cri�t�ri�: a�5 nr ni�r� years �f sezw�li�� Uri t]1utliCi�fal GOLiric:F!(5� �3 Gf P�G�i1ll:�F �. 2��b (nat r��cess�►til�� r,or,secutivel��i; �,ZCi � cunr�z�tly sax�ing on cU!.�ncil, i e.� in tl�e nc.,*.rxinatio;� ��ear (norni�t��a r��3y h�v� 5c;rv4d on wc�un►,zl in nZOr� tha�a o�xe �iznici�►�lit;��. .h n�rr�ination fc�rm is attached. i'hr zoni�;lete� toi�ia.s �.at� �� fax�r� �r maiic� tc� th� mi�istryr's �L1T11CIpc�i S�rvi��s C3ffi�e sei��i�a� your r�bunidipalityJ. �1 li;;t <�f th� aE�tiC�S tS �Si'OV14"�CC�. PI��.5� senci il�e cotrzj�let�d x��1�s by 1��:srraber 3?, Zt�i)c�, ,� �� :... 1 r1 '`, �r J .. �_ <. 1�ll�Munici,�al i�r'�_C��1C:l�r�,s °T'he,•eaipients wiil b� r�ct�f.�. iiz�d �: os�r rn�nisr�ry's a«nual re�ianal cnnter�nc�s, F'hank y��.� �c�r yrc��ar stippori o�'t�►is �rr�pc�rtar_t zn�ti�tiv�, °Yuurs tf�u�v. �. 3 . r . �' �..' 1� 5 Bu l�e �epuC� i�r1i►�ister �tta.chznct�t CJ a� t� � .. �� : . i �t�;+�f)G��Ti(l�i �!�' �.tIP�T(} ST�NDING S�I2VIE: �; �'�t,C3aG13�"►� The sn��ilgtl� oi Uzttaria has �lways bc�en �e�e�ciet�t: vr� thc spir�t an� ciedic�tion cf its muilicipal politicians, �or it is tl�ose i:�di��iduals �vho cletersnine th� za;£er.�t:vc,�;�:�a oi lt�cal gove��t�lant. The �viiniste�' ��f It�lin,istxy of Muz�i�ip�l t�f#ait-s �t�ti Hc,�u�ing i� pl�;�sed tt� �ckt�oR:ti��ge thE len�th�� u�lic ��z`ti�ice recflrd c��'(�crtariv's niunicip�,l p;�litic�i�rls v�rll�i ��a��e �erved �r� ce�uncil fnr ?5 years ur rrore. program �.'ritexia; • 25+ yearG orse�-v�ce oii municipal ce��ai�cil(:1 as o#'I�ecernbei 1, 24CG tr�L� r��c:e�sar�ly consevutive�y) • Currentl� s�^,ri�ig �ii �ouncil iz� th� n4�nin�Etioj; y��I �IVCl1clAT�E�S ti73`� }lcl JC S�i'W'e� OIl C-t1liI1C11 117 ? i1�I� �Zl�ltl 011Z II'i13AtGZ�3�it�� Aaiun�cipal r�pr�esentative (s��ff/s�ni+�r ok�cial;! �� za�plete ��►e �e��a+;n k�elativ ta in.itiate a recagnirio�.. Nominee's �v;�rrie: _,_,,,m__..� Ivlur�cipal Addrz; � � � E3usiness Ttilepk�o�e: -- Fa�: ___,..e___._._ ._...m,� �.__ Y ears o�' ae��i�e in Loeal C�av�rntnent: Muaaicz�ral.i�y Tv1�at�.i�xpal:t,y �_-- - ��U211C1p8II��' _� email: _ � _. _ . —__ _ —� __._._.____.� _��w.. e.�.=. Joh;n L)ac; L�c:�.� �`ouncil�c�x 1974-1979 �yrs. ��xonal C:o�.cillor 1981-`?�GS 2�yrs. 'L_...�----_�-_..__ _..�e._. � ._..e.�..�._._....__ Years Subrnitt�d bv• �.,��._., `iit.le P�Inrrtin�zor's emai! ar��i��° �al�� - , r.�.....__.� eara ___ --�- ��"S �1 � �� a�e pxati��.�e briei� bingrap�iical i�to.cm�atia� ��r �s��riOj�S1S �4��t�A� Fi€�itline�'S nt�jOl° dC�11E'Jtll'IpIitS. (t�dY �o�'e than ane para�raph) Narrnz�atio�s for the ;vea�° Z046 to b� r�ceave�! b;y: lALS*.enii�gr 31, d0�b �'lease subrruk ta: LC7ti�-st�ndin� Scr�ic� Fro��am �ISQ Re�ionai Uf�ice (re�;i�n�zl lists ;�� attac��:i} .��tFnrian: Re�ioat�il L3ir�cfc;a� . �r,�i�wcd �y. . •__.._,.w..�____ __e._ ______ ___.____ ____. _ . ._ ____ .__......._,_..�....__� ._ .____.___--__ _ _.___. _ .__�.. Mzani�try c�f Yiunieip�! �iafiairs ��d �Idusin�; �tegic�rzal C�zr�ctoz� 500 Consumers Road Lorraine Chiasson � North York, Ontario M2J 1P8 Regulatory Coordinator PO Box 650 Regulatory Affairs Scarborough ON M1K SE3 phone: (416� 495-5962 fax: (416) 4S>5-6072 Email: lorraine. chiasson@enbridge. com ,.,��.. �� September 7, 2006 VIA COURIER C' � � JJ. GdR.f� • b`a --�� / NBR/DGE To: The Clerks of the Municipalities in which Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. Supplies Natural Gas Re: EB-2006-0034 - Enbridge Gas Distribution 2007 Test Year Rate Case Notice of Application ("Notice") dated September 7, 2006 As directed by the Ontario Energy Baard ("Board") in its Letter of Direction to Enbridge Gas Distribution, attached hereto is a copy of the Notice in both the English and French versions, together with a copy of the Application filed by Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. on August 18, 2006. Yours truly, ;f � �. �.� c ' . U'Y'ti, Lorraine Chiasson Regulatory Coordinator cc: Mr. F. Cass, Aird & Berlis (via facsimile – w/o attach.)� ��-�� Ms. T. Persad, Enbridge Gas Distribution (w/o attach.��,�PY — ro Attach. � � �":''�R � 1, FILE E APPR. AGTION �C.� i V� T� l' r n �Q� �,�t, � � �, � r: K t% :J' ,..._ Filed: 2006-08-15 EB-2006-0034 Exhibit A1 Tab 2 Schedule 1 Page 1 of 3 EB-2006-0034 ONTARIO ENERGY BOARD IN THE MATTER OF the Onfario Energy Board Act, 1998, S.O. 1998, c. 15, Sched. B, as amended; AND IN THE MATTER OF an Application by Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. for an Grder or Orders approving or fixing rates for the sale, distribution, transmission, and storage of gas. AF'PLICATION 1. The Applicant, Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. ("Enbridge Gas Distribution" or the °Company"), is an Ontario corporation �nrith its head office in the City of Toronto. It carries on the business of selling, distributing, transmitting and storing natural gas within Ontario. � 2. Enbridge Gas Distribution hereby applies to the Ontario Energy Board (the "Board"), pursuant to section 36 of the Onfario Energy Board Act, 1998 as amended (the "Act"), for an Order or Orders approving or fixing just and reasonable rates for the sale, distribution, transmission, and storage of gas commencing January 1, 2007. For the purposes of subsection 36(3) of the Act, Enbridge Gas Distribution requests that the Board use the cost of senrice (or revenue requirement) method to approv�e or fix just and reasonable �ates. 3. If its currently effective rates remain in effect, Enbridge Gas Distribution forecasts at this time that it will realize a distribution revenue deficiency of approximately $167.8 million during the period befinreen January 1, 2007 and December 31, 2007 (the °Test Yea�') and in each fiscal year thereafter. In the event that the Company's rates are adjusted by the Board effective January 1, 2007 to permit the elimination of this distribution revenue deficiency, the Company estimates that the amount charged to a typical residential sales customer will increase by approximately $85 annually. This would result in an approximate 14 percent increase in the delivery portion of the annual bill or approximately 5 percent in the total annual bill (includes commodity). .�.._ � � � Filed: 2006-08-15 EB-2006-0034 Exhibit A1 Tab 2 Schedule 1 Page 2 of 3 4. In the event that a final rate Order in this proceeding will not be in place on January 1, 2007, the Company requests that interim rates be set and implemented as of January 1, 2007. 5. Enbridge Gas Distribution therefore applies to the Board for such final and interim Orders, accounting orders and deferral and variance accounts as may be necessary in relation to the approving or fixing of just and reasonable rates for the sale, distribution, transmission, and storage of gas in the Test Year. The Company further applies to the Board pursuant to the provisions of the Act and the Board's Ru/es of Practice and Procedure for such final and interim Orders and directions as may be necessary in relation to the Application and the proper conduct of this proceeding. 6. The persons affected by this Application are the customers of Enbridge Gas Distribution. It is impractical to set out tP�e names and addresses of the customers because they are too numerous. 7. Enbridge Gas Distribution requests that a copy of all documents filed with the Board by each party to this proceeding be served on the Applicant and the Applicant's counsel as follows: Mr. Patrick Hoey Director, Regulat�ry Affairs Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. Address for personal service: Mailing address: Telephone: Fax: E-mail: 500 Consumers Road Willowdale, Onta�io M2J 1 P8 P.O. Box 650 Scarborough, Ontario M1K 5E3 416-495-5555 416-495-6072 patrick.hoey@enbridge.com U� � l� � � The Appiicant's ccrunsel: Mr. Fred D. Cass Aird & Berlis Address for personal service and mailing address: Telephone: Fax: E-mail: Ms. Tania Persad Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. Address for personal service: Mailing address: Telephone: Fax: E-mail: DATED August 18'", 2006 at Toronto, Ontario. Filed: 2006-08-15 EB-2006-0034 Exhibit A1 Tab 2 Schedule 1 Page 3 of 3 BCE Place, PO Box 754 Suite 1800, 181 Bay Street Toronto, Ontario M5J 2T9 416-865-7742 416-863-1515 fcass@airdbe�lis.com 500 Consumers Road Willowdale, Ontario M2J 1 P8 P.O. Box 650 Scarborough, Ontario M1K 5E3 416-495-5891 416-495-5994 tania.persad@enbridge.com ENBRIDGE G STRIBUTION INC. � ------�... Per: �. � � � Ontario Energy Board Commission de I'Energie de I'OntarHo NOTI�E OF APPLICATION ENBRIDGE GAS DISTRIBUTION INC. RATES FOR 2007 r� ��'� *� • : . EB-2006-0034 Enbridge Gas Dist�ibution Inc. (the "applicanY', °Enbridge") filed an Application on August 25, 2006 (the "Application") with the Ontario Energy Board (the "Board") under section 36 of the Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998, S.O. c.15, Sched. B, as amended, for an order of the Board approving or fixing rates for the sale, distribution, transmission and storage of natural gas, effective �January 1, 2007. The Board's decision on this Application may have an affect on all of Enbridge's customers. Enbridge has proposed a change to �ts delivery rates which, if approved by the Board, would result in an increase of about �85.00 (or 5%) on a typical residential customer's annual bill. The rate change would take effect on January 1, 2007. The Board will deal with any change:� to the commodity cost of natural gas for customers that purchase gas directly from Enbridge through the Quarterly Rate Adjustment Mechanism. Copies of the Application and the supporting written evidence are available for inspection at the Board's office and Enbridge's office at the addresses indicated below. Participation You may participate in this proceedir�g in one of three ways: 1. You may send the Board a letter of comment. Your letter should include any request to make an oral presentation to the Board, and must be received by the Board no later than 30 days from the publication date of this notice. � J �� ( ��;� �� _ 2_ Ontario Energy Board t � 2. You may request observer status in order to receive documents issued by the Board in the proceeding. Your request must be made by letter received by the Board no later than 10 days from the publi�ation date of this notice. 3. You may request intervenor status if you wish to actively participate in the proceeding. Your request must be made by letter of intervention received no later than 10 days from the publication date of this notice. Your letter of intervention must include a description of how you �re, or may be, affected by the proceeding; and if you represent a group, a description of the group and its membership. The Board may choose to hold a written or an oral hea�ing. The Board will not hold a written hearing if a party satisfies the Board that there is good reason for holding an oral hearing. Your letter of interventian should indicate your preference for a written or oral hearing, and the reasons for that preference. The Board may order costs in this proceeding. You must indicate in your letter of intervention whether you expect to seek costs from the applicant anc� the grounds for your eligibility for costs. You must -- provide a copy of your letter of intervention to the applicant. Need more information? Further information on how to participate may be obtained by visiting the Board's Web site at www.oeb.gov.on.ca or by calli�g our Consumer Relations Centre at 1-877-632- 2727. How to contact us In responding to this notice please reference Board file number EB-2006-0034. It is also important that you provide your �ame and postal address and, if available, an e- mail address. All communications should be directed to the attention of the Board Secretary at the address below, and be received no later than 4:45 p.m. on the required date. � � � -3- Ontario Energy Board For your convenience, the Board acc�pts letters of comment by either post or e-mail. Our e-mail address is Boardsec(a�oeb.gov.on.ca Please include the application file reference number in the subject line c>f your e-mail. Letters of intervention must be sent by regular mail to the address below. Please remember that you must send a copy of your request for intervention to the applicant at the address listed below. Ontario Energy Board P.O. Box 2319 2300 Yonge Street, 27th Floor Toronto, ON M4P 1 E4 Attn: Kirsten Walli Board Secretary Tel: 1-888-632-6273 (Toll free) Fax: 416-440-7656 Email: Boardsec@oeb.gov.on.ca Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. P.O. Box 650 Scarborough, ON M1 K 5E3 Attn: Patrick, Hoey Director, Regulatory Affairs Tel: 416-495-5555 Fax: 416-495-6072 Email: patrick.hoey@enbridge.com IF YOU DO NOT FILE A LETTER SXATING YOUR WISH TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS PROCEEDING, THE BOARD MAY F�ROCEED WITHOUT YOUR PARTICIPATION AND YOU WILL NOT BE ENTITLEt� TO FURTHER NOTICE OF THE PROCEEDING. Ce document est disponible en fran�ais. DATED at Toronto, September 7, 2006. ONTARIO ENERGY BOARD Original signed by Kirsten Walli Board Secretary U�� 1�! � ...._ � � 4� Ontario Energy Board Commission de I'�nergie de I'Ontario AV'IS DE REQUETE TARIFS DE 2007 D'ENBRIDGE GAS DISTRIBUTION INC. lJ ��'� .7- � . EB-2006-0034 Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. (<c Enbridge » ou le « Requerant ») a present� une �equete (la « Requete ») datee du 2� aout 2006 aupres de la Commission de I'energie de I'Ontario (la « Commission »), aux termes de I'article 36 de la Loi de 1998 surla Commission de 1'�nergie de I'Ontari�, L.O., c.15 (Annexe B), telle que modifi�e, en vue d'obtenir une ordonnance de la Com�nission approuvant ou etablissant les tarifs pour la vente, la distribution, le transport ou Re stockage du gaz naturel, lesquels entreraient en vigueur le 1 ef janvier 2007. La decisi�n de la Commission concernant cette requete peut avoir une incidence sur tous les clients d'Enbridge. Enbridge a propose de modifier ses tarifs de livraison, lesquels, s'ils sont approuv�s par la Commission, entraTneraient pour I'abonne r�sidentiel moyen une hausse annuelle d'environ 85 $ ou environ 5%. La modification tarifaire prendra effet le 1 er janvier 2007. La Commission prendra des mesure;> a I'�gard de tout changement du cout du gaz naturel pour les consommateurs qui ach�tent leur gaz directement aupr�s d'Enbridge par I'entremise du mecanisme de rajustement trimestriel des tarifs. Des copies de la Requ�te et des el�rnents de preuve �crits sont disponibles pour consultation aux bureaux de la Comnnission et d'Enbridge situ�s aux adresses indiquees ci-dessous. � r'� _ 2_ Commission de I'�nergie de I'Ontari '�..�' Participation Vous pouvez participer a la presente instance de I'une des trois fa�ons suivantes : 1. Vous pouvez faire parvenir une lettre de commentaires a la Commission. Si vous avez I'intention de faire une pr�sentation orale, votre lettre doit inclure une requete a cet effet. Elle doit parvenir a la C�mmission au plus tard 30 jours apres la publication du present avis. 2. Vous pouvez demander le statut ij'observateur afin de recevoir les documents publies par la Commission durant I'instance. Vous devez presenter votre requete dans une lettre, laquelle doit panrenir a la Commission au plus tard 10 jours apres la publication du present avis. 3. Vous pouvez demander le statut d'intervenant si vous desirez participer activement a I'instance. Vous devez presenter votre requete dans une lettre d'intervention, ,... laquelle doit parvenir au plus tard 10 jours apres la publication du present avis. Votre lettre d'intervention doit decrire la mani�re dont vous etes ou pourriez �tre touche par I'instance et doit pr�ci�er si vous representez un groupe et, le cas echeant, decrire ce groupe et ses membres. La Commission peut choisir de tenir une audience ecrite ou orale. La Commission ne procedera pas par voie d'audience �crite si une partie presente a la (�ommission des raisons justifiant de tenir une audience orale. Votre lettre d'int�rvention doit indiquer si vous preferez une audience ecrite ou une audience orale et pr�ciser les raisons sur lesquelles votre pref�rence est fondee. La ComrYUission peut attribuer des depens dans cette instance. Vous devez indiquer dans votre lettre d'intervention si vous entendez solliciter des d�pens aupr�s du re:querant ainsi que les motifs etablissant votre admissibilite aux d�pens. Vous devez egalement remettre une copie de votre lettre d'intervention au requerant. � � �. tl � � -3- Vous desirez obtenir de plus ampl�s renseignements? Commissfon de I'�nergie de I'Ontario Vous pouvez obtenir de plus amples renseignements sur la participation dans le site Web de la Commission a I'adresse s��ivante : www.oeb.qov.on.ca ou en appelant notre Centre des relations avec les consommateurs au 1-877-632-2727. Comment nous joindre Lorsque vous repondrez au present ��vis, veuillez citer le num�ro de dossier de la Commission EB-2006-0034. II est eyalement important d'indiquer votre nom ainsi que votre adresse postale et, le cas ech�ant, votre adresse �lectronique. Toutes les communications doivent etre adress�es a I'intention du secretaire de la Commission, � I'adresse ci-dessous et parvenir au pYus tard a 16 h 45 aux dates prescrites. Pour votre commodite, la Commission accepte les lettres de commentaires par coumer courant ou electronique. Notre adresse electronique est la suivante : Boardsec�oeb.gov.on.ca. Veuillez inclure le numero de reference du dossier de requete dans la ligne « objet » de votre courriel. Les lettres d'intervention doivent �tre envoyees par courrier courant a I'adresse indiquee plus bas. N'oubliez pas de faire parvenir un exemplaire de votre requete d'intervention au requ�rant � I'adresse indiqu�e plus bas. Commission de I'energie de I'Ontario Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. C.P. 2319 C.P. 650 2300, rue Yonge, 27e �tage Scarborough (Ontario) M1 K 5E3 Toronto (Ontario) M4P 1 E4 A I'attention de : Kirsten Walli Secr�taire A I'attention de : Patrick Hoey Directeur, R�glementation T�I. : 1-888-632-6273 (sans frais) Tel. : 416-495-5555 Telec. : 416-440-7656 T�I�c. : 416-495-6072 � Courriel : BoardSec@oeb.gov.on.ca Courriel : patrick.hoey@enbridge.com _ 4, _ Commission de P�nergie de I'Ontario �' �� SI VOUS NE DEPOSEZ PAS UNE LETTRE PRECISANT VOTRE INTENTION DE PARTICIPER A LA PRESENTE INSTANCE, LA COMMISSION PEUT PROCEDER EN VOTRE ABSENCE ET VOUS Nk RECEVREZ AUCUN AUTRE AVIS CONCERNANT CETTE INSTANCE., This document is a/so available in English. Fait a Toronto le 7 septembre 2006. COMMISSION DE L'ENERGIE DE L.'ONTARIO original signe par Kirsten Walli Secr�taire 0 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORT October 3, 2006 Executive Committee Report EC 2006-'14 of the Meeting Held on September 25, 2006 1. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 32-06 Tender T-12-2006 Sandv Beach Road Bridqe R�placement & Road Reconstruction RECOMMENDATION That Report OES-32-06 regarding the Sandy Beach Road Bridge Replacement and Road Reconstruction be received; 2. That Tender T-12-200�i submitted by Dagmar Construction Inc. for the Sandy Beach Road Bridge Replacement and Road Reconstruction at a cost of $1,694,042.48 (GST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross prc�ject cost of $ 1,827,602.48 (GST included) including the tender amount, and other associated costs and the total net project cost of $1,724,153.28, be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance th� project as follows: a) the sum of $666,665 to be funded from the Canada Ontario Municip�l Rural Infrastructure Fund (COMRIF) Grant Intake 2; b) the sum of $1,O:i0,000 to be financed by the issue of debentures through the Region of Durham, over a period not exceeding 1� years, at a rate to be determined; c) the balance amaunt of $7,488 to be funded from the 2006 Current B�dget; d) the annual repayment charges in the amount of approximately $'138,000 be included in the annual Current Budget fior the City of Pickering commencing in f, �.; t.t � � R� 2007, continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid, and any financing cc�st to be paid out of the Current Budget; e) the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has updated the Cit�i's 2006 Annual Repayment Limit and certified that thi:� loan and the repayment thereof falls within the City's Annual Repayment Limit for debt and financial obligathons, as established by the Province for municipalities in Ontario, and would not cause the City to exceed the upd�ted Limit, and therefore, Ontario Municipal Board approval was not required prior to City Council's authoi�ization; fl the Treasurer is authorized to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. 2. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 33-06 Tender No. T-6-2006 — Playground Construction Request for Proposal — RFP-!�-2006 Playground Equipment Quote Q-51-2006 — Quotatior� for Safety Surface Material RECOMMENDATION That Report OES 33-06 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services r�garding playground construction, playground equipment, and safety surface material be received; 2. That Tender No. T-6-2006 as submitted by Royalcrest Paving & Contracting Ltd. for park and playground construction in the amount of $98,094.00 (excluding GST) be accepted; 3. That the Request for P'roposal, RFP-9-2006 as submitted by Crozier Agencies for tf�e supply and installation of playground equipment in various p�arks in the amount of $108,568.95 (excluding GST) be accepted; 4. That Quotation Q-51-2006 as submitted by Playcare Inc. for Safety Surtace Materidl in various parks in the amount of $33,845.00 be accept�d; 5. That all other associat�d project costs of $59,492.05, and the total project cost of $3q0,000 (excluding GST), be accepted; �' � -:� 6. That the Director Cor��orate Services & Treasurer be authorized to transfer $300,000 fr�om the Parkland Reserve Fund as provided for in the 20(16 Capital Budgets; and 7. Further, that the apprc►priate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. 3. Director, Operations & Emerc�ency Services, Report OES 35-06 Tender T-5-2006 — Concrete Sidewalk Installations Various Locations RECOMMENDATION That Report OES 35-06 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services r�garding the installation of concrete sidewalks in various locations in the City of Pickering be received; 2. That Tender T-5-2006, as submitted by Trisan Construction for concrete sidewalk inst�llations at various locations in the City of Pickering in the amount of $236,975.52 (GST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross prc,ject cost of $263,475.52 and a net project cost of $248,561.81 (GST excluded), including the tender amount and oth�r project costs as outlined in Report OES 35-06 of the Direc:tor, Operations & Emergency Services be approved; 4. That $248,561.81 be financed from Development Charges Reserve Fund ($119,7�4.79), City Share — DC Reserve ($123,855.43) and Property Taxes ($4,911.39) and the Director of Corporate Services � Treasury be authorized to transfer theses fund; and 5. Further, that the appro��riate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. 4. Director, Operations & EmergE;ncy Services, Report OES 36-06 Supply and Delivery of Street Sweeper Q-41-2006/Q-41 A-2006 That Report OES 36-06 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services re�arding the supply and delivery of a Street Sweeper be received; r��.� L 2. That Quotation No. Q-41-2006 submitted by Joe Johnson Equipment for the supply and defivery of an Elgin Eagle Waterless Street Swe�per Factory Stock Demonstration Unit Serial No. FW-2303-� in the amount of $240,500.00 (GST, PST extra) be accepted; 3. That the total gross purchase cost $274,170.00 and a net purchase cost of $259,740.00 be approved; 4. That Council authorizE the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) the sum of $240,000.00 to be financed by the issue of debentures thrGUgh the Regional Municipality of Durham, over a period nc�t exceeding five years, at a rate to be determined; b) the balance am�unt of $19,740.00 to be funded from the general savings realized per project code - 5320-0607- 6178 - Tiger Mawer and 5320-0608-6178 — Hot Box, both paid from property taxes c) the annual repayment charges in the amount of approximately $55,600 be included in the annual Current Budget for the C:ity of Pickering commencing in 2007, continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid, and any financing cost tc be paid out of the Current Budget d) the Director, Coirporate Services & Treasurer has updated the City�'s 2006 Annual Repayment Limit and certified that thi� loan and the repayment thereof falls within the City's Annual Repayment Limit for debt and financial obligati�ons, as established by the Province for municipalities in Ontario, and would not cause the City to exceed the upd�ted Limit, and therefore, Ontario Municipal Board approval was not required prior to City Council's authorization; e) the Treasurer is authorized to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and 5. That the appropriate Ci�y of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action t� give effect thereto. �: ;� p::� 5. Director, Operations & Emer�ency Services, Report OES 34-06 No Parking By-law — Wharf Street Amendment to Bv-law 6604/05 RECOMMENDATION That Report OES 34-06 regarding a proposed amendment to the municipal traffic by-law 6604/05 be received; and 2. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule `2' to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulating of parking on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the Corporation of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. 6. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 49-06 Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act — Adjustment to Taxes RECOMMENDATION That Report CS 49-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the write-offs of taxes as provided under Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act b� approved; and 3. Further, that the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect thereto. 7. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 50-06 Tender/Contract Approval Councils' Summer Recess RECOMMENDATION That Report CS 50-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer reporting or� tendering and contract approvals during Councils' Summer Recess be received; and 2. That Council pass a resolution ratifying the approval of the Tenders and Contracts contained in this Report by the Chief Administrative Officer during Council's summer recess (i.e., from June 26 to July 23, 2006 and from July 24, 2005 to September 11, 2006) being RFP-7-2006 Network Switch Replacement Project; the Microsoft (Software) BPS Enterprise �:; � .�. Agreement and Tender T-2-2006 Lighting Retrofit Pickering Civic Complex and Pickering Public Library. 8. Director, Corporate Services � Treasurer, Report CS 51-06 Veridian Corporation — Promissory Notes RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report CS 51-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the maturity date:� on the Promissory Notes in the amount of $7,095,000 to Veridian Corporation and $17,974,000 to Veridian Connections Inc. be amended to November 1, 2009 at their face value with th� existing terms and conditions including interest at 7.6% per annum; 3. That a By-law in the form attached providing for the approval and execution of a Note Amending Agreement be passed; 4. That the Mayor and Cl�rk be authorized to execute the Note Amending Agreement an behalf of the City of Pickering in the form attached; 5. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to undertake any actior�s including negotiations or amendments to the terms and conditions necessary in order to put the foregoing into effect; arid, 6. That the appropriate officials at the City of Pickering be given authority to give effect �thereto. 9. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 52-06 Investment Portfolio Activity for the Year Ended December 31, 2005 RECOMMENDATION That Report CS 52-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. ! 4 * V, , � 10. Director, Corporate Services �3� Treasurer, Report CS 53-06 Municipal Performance Measurement Program — Provinciatiy Mandated Public Report of Performance Measures RECOMMENDATION That Report CS 53-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for infarmation. 11. Director, Corporate Services � Treasurer, Report CS 56-06 Points of Sale Aqreement for Durham Reqion Transit Fares That Report CS 56-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute a Point of Sale Agreement with tR�e Durham Region Transit Commission (DRTC) in a form sub�tantially as attached and acceptable to the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer and the City Solicitor; 3. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to make any changes necessary to effect the foregoing; and, 4. That the appropriate staff at the City of Pickering be given authority to give effect thereto. 12. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 57-06 Formal Quotations — Quarterly Report for Information RECOMMENDATION That Report CS 57-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. �� :� a� , -!�" 's� �a��.�,��1� �:I , _. � ,�,-� ,. �,�,:��.� � ��•��-��r PRESENT: Mayor Ryan COUNCILLORS: K. Ashe M. Brenner D. Dickerson R. Johnson B. McLean D. Pickles ALSO PRESENT: Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday Septem ber 25, 2006 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean T. J. Quinn - Chief Administrative Offic;er E. Buntsma - Director, Operations & Ernergency Services G. Paterson - Director, Corporate Servi�es & Treasurer D. Bentley - City Clerk R. Holborn - Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering D. Shields - Deputy Clerk ��) �W', ADOPTION OF MINUTES Moved by Councillor Ashe Seconded by Councillor Johnson Meeting of September 11, 2006 MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATIUN CARRIED 1. Director, Operations & Emergencyr Services, Report OES 32-06 Tender T-12-2006 Sandv Beach Road Bridqe Replacement & Road Reconstruction RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Pickles .::a. „ - ,,, . i?� , �al� � � t . 'a ' ��, � wa.�"� ��'�� I�C Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday September 25, 2006 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean That Report OES-32-06 regarding the Sandy Beach Road Bridge Replacement and Road F;econstruction be received; 2. That Tender T-12-2006 submitted by Dagmar Construction Inc. for the Sandy Beach Road Bridge Replacement and Road Reconstruction at a cost of $1,694,042.48 (GST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross projec;t cost of $ 1,827,602.48 (GST included) including the tender amount, and ol;her associated costs and the total net project cost of $1,724,153.28, be approved; 4. That Council authorize th� Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follc►ws: a) the sum of $666,665 to be funded from the Canada Ontario Municipal Rural Infrastructure Fund (COMRIF) Grant Intake 2; b) the sum of $1,050,�00 to be financed by the issue of debentures through the Region of Durham, over a period not exceeding 10 years, at a rate to be dete�mined; c) the balance amount of $7,488 to be funded from the 2006 Current Budget; d) the annual repaym�nt charges in the amount of approximately $138,000 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2007, continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid, and any fin�ncing cost to be paid out of the Current Budget; e) the Director, Corpor�ate Services & Treasurer has updated the City's 2006 Annual Repayment Limit and certified that this loan and the repayment thereof falls within the City's Annual Repayment Limit for debt and financial obligations, as established by the Province for municipalities in Ontario, and would not cause the City to exceed the updated Limit, and therefore, Ontario Municipal Board approval was not required prior to City Council's authorization; fl the Treasurer is authorized to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and �°5� � C,� � •,.! , , -- - ,,, . ;��'��o c�= � _ � ,,..-�- _ „,�„ _. .�� Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday September 25, 2006 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councilior McLean 5� That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to necessary action to give effect thereto. take CARRIED Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 33-06 Tender No. T-6-2006 — Playground Construction Request for Proposal — RFP-9-2006 Playground Equipment Quote Q-51-�nn� _ n,,,,+.,�:.._ r__ „ . . _ _ RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson That Report OES 33-06 of tV�e Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding playground constr�uction, playground equipment, and safety surtace materiai be receivecl; 2. That Tender No. T-6-2006 as submitted by Royalcrest Paving & Contracting Ltd. for park and playground construction in the amount of $98,094.00 (excluding GST) be accepted; 3. That the Request for Proposal, RFP-9-2006 as submitted by Crozier Agencies for the supply and installation of playground equipment in various parks in the amount of $108,568.95 (excluding GST) be accepted; 4 5 That Quotation Q-51-2006 as submitted by Playcare Inc. for Safety SurFace Material in various parks in the amount of $33,845.00 be accepted; That all other associated project costs of $59,492.05, and the total project cost of $300,000 (excluding GST), be accepted; 6. That the Director Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to transfer $300,000 from the Parkland Reserve Fund as provided for in the 2006 Capital Budgets; and 7. Further, that the apprOpriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to `ake the n2CeSSary actions to give effect thereto. CARRIED �� " m _ �ffi, ��; -. �� I�C Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday Septem ber 25, 2006 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean 3. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 35-06 Tender T-5-2006 — Concrete Sidewalk Instailations Various Locations RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Brenner That Report OES 35-06 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the installation of concrete sidewatks in various locations in the City of Pickering be received; 2. That Tender T-5-2006, as submitted by Trisan Construction for concrete sidewalk installations at various locations in the City of Pickering in the amount of $236,975.52 (GST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $263,475.52 and a net project cost of $248,561.81 (GST excluded), including the tender amount and other project costs as outlined in Report OES 35-06 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services be approved; 4. That $248,561.81 be financed from Development Charges Reserve Fund ($119,794.79), City Share — DC Reserve ($123,855.43) and Property Taxes ($4,911.39) and the Director of Corporate Services & Treasury be authorized to transfer theses fund; and 5. Further, that the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. CARRIED 4. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 36-06 Supply and Delivery of Street Sweeper Q-41-2006/Q-41 A-2006 RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Pickles L � M.l ,,.... . ��u�ai� ,� � :-._. a ,�,-��-- , , _�-�� / ��.� l Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday September 25, 2006 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean That Report OES 36-06 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the supp�y and delivery of a Street Sweeper be received; 2. That Quotation No. Q-41-2006 submitted by Joe Johnson Equipment for the supply and delivery of an Elgin Eagle Waterless Street Sweeper Factory Stock Demonstration Unit Serial No. FW-2303-D in the amount of $240,500.00 (GST, PST extra) be accepted; 3. That the total gross purch�se cost $274,170.00 and a net purchase cost of 259,740.00 be approved; 4. That Councif authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) the sum of $240,000.00 to be financed by the issue of debentures through the Regional Municipality of Durham, over a period not exceeding five years, at a rate to be determined; b) the balance amount of $19,740.00 to be funded from the general savings realized per project code - 5320-0607-6178 - Tiger Mower and 5320-0608-6178 — Hot Box, both paid from property taxes c) the annual repayment charges in the amount of approximately $55,600 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2007, continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid, and any financing cost to be paid out of the Current Budget d) the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has updated the City's 2006 Annual Repayment Limit and certified that this loan and the repayment thereof falls within the City's Annual Repayment Limit for debt and firaancial obligations, as established by the Province for municipalities in Ontario, and would not cause the City to exceed the updated Limit, and therefore, Ontario Municipal Board approval was not required prior to City Council's authorization; e) the Treasurer is authorized to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. CARRIED , , s:=; �� _��- ,��:; �mi� �, �,� _. . ��-�1�� Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday September 25, 2006 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean 5. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 34-06 No Parking By-law — WharF Street Amendment to By-law 6604/05 RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Pickles That Report OES 34-06 regarding a proposed amendment to the municipal traffic by-law 6604/05 be received; and 2. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Schedule `2' to By-law 6604/05 to provide for the regulating of parking on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the Corporation of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. 6. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 49-06 Section 357/358 of the Municipal Acf — Adjustment to Taxes RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson 2 3 CARRIED That Report CS 49-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; That the write-offs of taxes as provided under Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act be approved; and Further, that the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect thereto. ... � .. , �i �� .� �� - ,,,.: ;�,�{�a;��--��s� _. a »,—� ;.�� "�.' ��a�:'� ��_:��I� Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday Septem ber 25, 2006 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean 7. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 50-06 Tender/Contract Approval Councils' Summer Recess RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Johnson That Report CS 50-06 nf the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer reporting on tendering and contract approvals during Councils' Summer Recess be received; and 2. That Council pass a resc�lution ratifying the approval of the Tenders and Contracts contained in this Report by the Chief Administrative Officer during Council's summer recess (i.e., from June 26 to July 23, 2006 and from July 24, 2005 to September 11, 2006) being RFP-7-2006 Network Switch Replacement Project; the Microsoft (Software) BPS Enterprise Agreement and Tender T-2-2006 Ligh�ing Retrofit Pickering Civic Complex and Pickering Public Library. � •-- � � 8. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 51-06 Veridian Corporation — Promissory Notes RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Johnson That Report CS 51-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the maturity dates on the Promissory Notes in the amount of $7,095,000 to Veridian Corporation and $17,974,000 to Veridian Connections Inc. be amended to November 1, 2009 at their face value with the existing terms and conditions including interest at 7.6% per annum; 3. That a By-law in the form attached providing for the approval and execution of a Note Amending Agreement be passed; � 1 ' ,,,,. ;� �.�ai� � �� _. '�d ��n-� :.S �r.rt�s,.�� ...� . .�_�� il�� 4 Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday Septem ber 25, 2006 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean That the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the Note Amending Agreement on behalf of the City of Pickering in the form attached; 5. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to undertake any actions including negotiations or amendments to the terms and conditions necessary in order to put the foregoing into effect; and, 6. That the appropriate officials at the City of Pickering be given authority to give effect thereto. CARRIED Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 52-06 Investment Portfolio Activitv for tr�e Year Ended December 31 2005 RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Johnson That Report CS 52-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. CARRIED 10. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 53-06 Municipal Performance Measurement Program — Provincially Mandated Public Report of Performance Measures RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Johnson That Report CS 53-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. CARRIED �; �J r r 11 12 ,,, ��? � ��f��--�-➢'�;� _. ��Y � �_�_�1�� Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday Septem ber 25, 2006 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean Director, Corporate Services & T�easurer, Report CS 56-06 Points of Sale Agreement for Durham Region Transit Fares Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Johnson 1. That Report CS 56-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the Mayor and Cl�erk be authorized to execute a Point of Sale Agreement with the Durham Region Transit Commission (DRTC) in a form substantially as attached and acceptable to the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer and the City Solicitor; 3. 4 That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to make any changes necessary to effect the foregoing; and, That the appropriate staff at the City of Pickering be given authority to give effect thereto. ... , _ . . �� Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 57-06 Formal Quotations — Quarterly R�port for Information RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Johnson That Report CS 57-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. CARRIED (III) OTHER BUSINESS 1. Councillor Johnson questioned staff on when the tender would be issued for Old Brock Road, specifically in relation to his concern of ensuring the proposed sidewalk construction for new school year was completed. „ - ,,, ��- �� -,� _. ;�- �� i� �'�� . _.. ��_��_�S_I_I�►� Executive Committee�' � �� Meeting Minutes Monday September 25, 2006 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean 2. Councillor Pickles requested a status update with respect to lighting and safety upgrades to the pathway/walking area around Palmer Bridge. 3. Councillor Brenner advised that at the recent Regional Health & Social Services Committee meeting, the new ambulance facility in Pickering was discussed and concern was raised on the lack of cooperation with the City of Pickering. He noted that the concerns in fact are not City of Pickering related, but in fact are in relation to the mapping of TRCA flood land� on the subject property. 4. The following matters were considered prior to the meeting: Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Mayor Ryan That Council move `In Camera' for the purposes of litigation or potential litigation including matters before adminisfirative tribunals, affecting the municipality. ... � � _.. DECLARATION OF INTEREST Councillor Pickles made a declaration of interest in accordance with the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act with respect to a verbal update from the City Solicitor with respect to David Sanford's Applic;ation for Judicial Review, as the subject matter pertains to information he deals vvith as a part of his employment. Councillor Pickles did not take part in the discussion or vote on the matter. a) Verbal Update from the City Solicitor with respect to David Sanford's Application for Judicial Rr�view with respect to the Seaton Land Exchange Environmental Assessmerit The City Solicitor provided a verbal update to the Committee with respect to the Application for Judicial Review with respect to the Seaton Land Exchange Environmental Assessment. b) Memorandum to the Chief Administrative Officer from the City Clerk with respect to extension of th� Animal Shelter Arrangement with the Municipality of Clarinqton The Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer provided a confidential brief overview of the contract negotiations that had been held. �!�� ' \i 9 t Ir "' . � �� ,� .-.�„�,�-�-�� .,,�,:��.�!� �_� .��-�_I� c) d) Moved by Councillor Dick�:rson Seconded by Councillor Ashe Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday September 25, 2006 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean That the Animal Shelter Agreement with the Municipality of Clarington be extended for a f�rther six month period, to June 30, 2007; and 2. Further, that the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. CARRIED Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor Brenner That the Committee rise and ratify the actions taken. : _ : : �, The Chief Administrative �Jfficer provided a verbal update on recent Durham Regional Police Services �ctivities. The Chief Administrative (�fficer provided a brief update to members present of a possible strike by the Durham Regional Transit drivers. e) The Chief Administrative c�fficer provided an update with respect to a recent 2007 strategy session held with senior staff. He advised that members would be provided with a copy of the minutes, and noted that the agenda focused on sustainability issues/objectives of the City. fl The City Clerk advised that a request had been made to have the agenda courier delivery times for Members of Council changed to later in the day on Friday's. Based on the discussion, the City Clerk was directed to have the courier time changed to 4:30 pm delivery on Friday afternoons. The timeframe for the agenda a�ploads to the internet will remain the same. (III) ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:15 p„m. October 3, 2006 REPORTS — NEW AND UNFINISHED At the September 11, 2006 meeting of the Executive Committee, Report PD 45-06 of the Director, Planning & Development vwas deferred to the October 3, 2006 meeting of Council. An excerpt of the September 11, 2006 rninutes of the Executive Committee meeting dealing with this matter have been attached as pages 65 to 70, along with a copy of the report as presented on September 11, �?006. 1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 45-06 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A06/06 S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. 1215-1235 Bayly Street Part of Block Y, Plan M-16 City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION That Council adopt the Development Guidelines for the Bay Ridges Plaza area, as set out in Appendi� III, as amended, to Planning Report PD 45-06; 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A06/06 submitted by S.R.& R. Bay Ridges Ltd., on lands being Part of Block Y, Plan M-16, City of Pickering, to amend the zor�ing to permit a mixed use development consisting of apartment buildings containing commercial/retail uses and townhouse dwelling units, be approved, subject to the conditions outlined in Appendix I to Planning Rep�rt PD 45-06, as amended, to reflect 15% of the townhouse development to be withheld until the commercial area is constructed; 3. That the amending zoning by-law, to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A06/06, as set aut in Appendix II, as amended, to Planning Report PD 45-06, be forwarded to City Council for enactment; and 4. That traffic signals be installed at the intersection of Bayly Street and St. Martins Drive, in consultation with the Region of Durham and the City of Pickering, as a condition of �roceeding with development and that the full cost of design and construction be the responsibility of the owner. } q � �� «.t EXCERPT OF THE EXECUTIVE CpMMITTEE MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2006 WITH RESPECT TO REPORT' PD 45-06 OF THE DIRECTOR, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT 2. Director, Planning & Developrnent, Report PD 45-06 Zoning By-law Amendment Appiication A06/06 S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. 1215-1235 Bayly Street Part of Block Y, Pian M-16 City of Pickering Lynda Taylor, Manager, Development Review, outlined the contents of Report PD 45-06 with the aid of a powerpoint presentation. Gardner Church, a represent�tive for the applicant, appeared before the Committee in support of the application. Mr. Church stated that the development would infuse the local economy with almost a fifth of a billion dollars in the coming two or tf�ree years. He noted that it would provide high quality construction jobs and high quality homes. He stated that the Bay Ridges Plaza is no longe� viable and stated that this proposal would revive the retail services in th� area. Mr. Church noted that he had further comments with regards to the Planning report but request to address the Committee after the delegations. John Collins, 849 Darwin Drive, Pickering, appeared before the Committee in support of the application and stated that the development would Improve the existing plaza and attract people to the area. Tim Dobson, Chairman, Pick�ring East Shore Community Association (PESCA), Bay Ridges Plaza fBRP) Redevelopment Committee and Susan Carlevaris, President, I�ESCA, appeared before the Committee in opposition to the subject application. They advised that PESCA was opposed to the application based on the following key points; building heights; traffic and parking congestion in the area; the environmental impacts on the Douglas Ravine and Frenchman's Bay; inadequate retail space allocation and the affect the increase of traffic in the area would have on emergency evacuatian routes. They further stated that a food store was needed in the area but did not feel there would be enough commercial space to attract a food store. Concern was expressed with respect to the existing retail merchants and what would happen to them. PESCA was of the opinion that there was too much of a residential component to the application and that employment lands were being lost. They noted that PESCA recoraimended a 7 storey building and not a 16 and 18 storey building. They felt there was inadequate parking for the site and felt on street parking would become worse. They stated that they wanted a development that would complement the community and felt this , ! � r'. �,� +' ) development did not. In sumw�nary, they noted that PESCA, BRP Redevelopment Committee disagreed with recommendation #'s 1 to 3 of the report and further noted that recommendation #4 should be set aside pending a proposal which is k�etter suited to address the concerns of the residents. John Blue, 4730 Thornton Rc�ad, appeared before the Committee in opposition to the subject application. Mr. Blue stated that he owned the car wash and the laundromat in the plaza located at 1235 Bayly Street and represented some of the tenants. He advised that the merchants had not been asked for their input: into the project. Mr. Blue further noted that he felt there was a lot less retail space for the development and that retail services were important for trie area. He noted that he agreed that the plaza had to be improved but felt that the concerns of the existing tenants in the plaza had not been addressed. Doris Hopper, 204-1210 Rad�m Street, appeared before the Committee in opposition to the subject appNication. She noted that this area was the gateway to the City's waterFront and the City should be more creative in what they build in this locatio�. She noted that the land needed a public component to the development and suggested that a museum for migratory birds would attract people to the area. She felt that the City should look at a private/publi� partnership for the area and noted that residential and retail could be� worked into the concept. She further stated that the residential componer�t was too high. Frances Hanna, 599 LiverpoUl Road, appeared before the Committee in support of the application and advised that the development would bring more people to the area. He also noted that an 18 storey building already existed in the area so this would not be something new. Mr. Hanna felt that most people would be cc�mmuters so traffic would not be an issue. Bob Varga, 1210 Radom Street, Board of Director for DCC #19, appeared before the Committee and expressed concerned with making sure there was enough water, electricity and sewer capacity for the development. He stated that the commercial cc�mponent was very important for the development and noted that iretail services would come into the area if the market could sustain them. Wendy Johnson, 1210 Radom St., appeared before the Committee and stated that her concerns were with the retail services. She stated that retail services were needed in the area for the senior residents and that they needed to economically suit the clientele of the area. She further stated that the current business owners had not been kept very well informed on what was happening. Ms. Johnson stated that she was surprised to learn that DCC #19 sent a letter supporting the development � � �, and in summary advised that she understood that redevelopment was necessary, but not at this level. Paul Crawford, 1867 Antonio Street, appeared before the Committee and expressed concern with the short review period of the report, prior to being presented to Committee. He noted that he would like to see the developer, Council and resid�nts sit down and go over the report point by point. He requested that consideration be made to reduce the amount of residential on the developme�t in the event that the report was to be approved and further, the report should be sent back for further discussion due to the density and height of the proposed development. In summary he stated that he would like to see the plaza redeveloped but would like to see more jobs created. Mr. C:rawford submitted a petition from residents of Bayshore Towers (DCC #'� 9) in disagreement with the letter of July 31, 2006 from the Board of Directors, which supported the subject application and further noting the petitiori was in opposition to the subject redevelopment application. Ed Fulton, 1210 Radom Street, appeared before the Committee and stated that residents needed more time to review a report of this size. He advised that the community riad been poorly served through this application and that much of the application had relied on the availability of transit. He further advised that in his opinion transit was bad in the area and that it usually took two buses to get anywhere. Mr. Fulton stated that he did not support DCC #19 letter of support and noted that the Board did not notify residents of this letter. He also stated that this development would increase the traffic and parking in the area and felt that the developer was misleading by focusing on transit use. Mr. Fulton noted that he would like to see a larger commercial component and less residential development in the subject application. Charmaine Shaw, 1294 Radam Street, appeared before the Committee in opposition to the development. She noted that she did not agree with the high rise and felt this was no� keeping with the existing community. She noted that she was concerned with the increase of traffic and questioned how shadowing tests were cc�mpleted. She stated that there was only a few ways of exiting this area and felt the development would really affect traffic flow. In summary, she advised that she understood that redevelopment was needed but not a high rise development. Pasquale Malandrino, 633 Dunn Crescent, appeared before the Committee in opposition to the application. Mr. Malandrino stated that he was a tenant in the plaza and felt that Council had not supported the tenants and residents in the area with this development. He further stated that he did agree the plaza needed to be redeveloped but would have like his concerns addressed and more support from the City. �' � +:� Barb Vannen, 1210 Radom 5treet, appeared before the Committee and stated that this was one of th� oldest communities in Pickering and felt that more consideration should be given to the redevelopment of the area. She noted that she would like to see a full park, not just a parkette in the middle of the development w�th housing facing all four sides. She stated that soft services like daycar�s, schools, senior services and Doctor's offices were required in order to make it a place that the community would want it to be. Stephanie Newitt, 1001 Alba�:,ore Manor, appeared before Committee and expressed concern with the �ubject application. Linda Rehel, 1009 Albacore IVlanor, appeared before the Committee and noted that she agreed the old plaza needed to be redeveloped and that the proposed development w�ould improve the area. Mark Willis, 1866 Fairport Road, appeared before the Committee and stated that he was in support of the application and noted that he had been dealt with fairly by the cleveloper. He stated that change was always hard to accept but felt the development would bring a new economy to Pickering and hc►pefully bring new families to the area. Byron Palmer, 1294 Radom Street, appeared before the Committee and noted that he was not against the subject development but expressed concern with the increase in traffic the development would create. Eileen Higden, 852 Fairview Drive appeared before the Committee and questioned if any agreements with developers had been made based on the proposed recommendations. She also noted that she would like the report deferred because more time was need to go over the report. Shaun Dunn, 713 Pebble Court appeared before the Committee and advised that he supported th� subject development. Paul Fieldhouse, 1210 Radom Street, appeared before the Committee and noted that redevelopment should go ahead, but not in its present form. Jamie Scrymgeour, 758 Stonepath Circle, appeared before the Committee in support of the redevelopment. The Committee recessed at 10:10 pm and reconvened at 10:34 pm. Jacqueline Smart, 829 Fairview Drive, appeared before the Committee in opposition to the subject application. She stated that the proposal was not l� � � �; dr acceptable in its present form„ but did understand that redevelopment was needed. John Moniz, 1299 Kingston R�ad, appeared before the Committee in support of the subject application. He noted the development was needed, however, he expressed concern with the tenants of existing leases. Carmen Montgomery, 239 Lupin Drive, questioned what part of the proposed development could the Ontario Municipal Board over ride (ie: Go Transit and/or CN comments). She further stated that meaningful negotiations with all parties could allow for a good resolution for everyone. She further stated that she dic� not want to lose the environmental issues noted within the report. Abdul Prenji, owner of the pharmacy within the plaza requested that the statutory meeting minutes of June 1, 2006 be amended to more closely reflect his comments. He ex�►ressed his appreciation to the residents for the support of his pharmacy c>ver the years. Gardner Church, a representative for the applicant expressed appreciation for a very thorough staff report. He stated that the vast majority of the staff comments were consistent with the plan, however, four key issues remained, being; dead end st,reets — the request to create three dead end road with only one vehicle exit from each has not been thought through; commercial space phasing — the requirement that the new commercial facilities be built in the first stage is economically impossible; parking — City staff is recommending 4.5 parking spaces per 100 sq. metres of commercial area, which is 80% of the parking required where land conservation, sustainability and transit orientation were not issues; and, holding by-law — staff proposal to place a holding by-law on the entire property after approval of the rezoning while the site plan is developed is considered redundant. He outlined in detail the four key issues and the specific concerns of the applicant. A question and answer period ensued. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Ashe That Council adopt the Development Guidelines for the Bay Ridges Plaza area, as set out in Appendix III to Planning Report PD 45-06; �''�yl 2. That Zoning By-law Am�ndment Application A06/06 submitted by S.R.& R. Bay Ridges Ltd., on lands being Part of Block Y, Plan M- 16, City of Pickering, to amend the zoning to permit a mixed use development consisting of apartment buildings containing commercial/retail uses and townhouse dwelling units, be approved, with an "(H)" holding provision subject to the conditions outlined in Appendix I to Planning Report PD 45-06; 3. That the amending zoning by-law, to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Applicatior� A06/06, as set out in Appendix II to Planning Report PD 45-06, be forwarded to City Council for enactment; and 4. That traffic signals be installed at the intersection of Bayly Street and St. Martins Drive, in consultation with the Region of Durham and the City of Pickering, as a condition of proceeding with development and that the full cost of design and construction be the responsibility of the owner. CARRIED AS AMENDED (See Following Motions) Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Ash�: That Item #2 of the main motion be amended by deleting `with an "(H)" holding provision" and inserting the following at the end; `as amended, to reflect 15% of the townhouse development to be withheld until the commercial area is constructed." CARRIED Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor Pickles `That Report PD 45-06 of the Director, Planning & Development, as amended, be considered at the October 3, 2006 meeting of Council in order for further discussion to take place prior to final consideration.' CARRIED �� "� �� .. - ,,,. �_ u,� ,,,�� sl ., 1A-7�' �:' �_rrTTt��-'"�'� From: Neil Carroll Director, Pianning & Development REPORT TO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Report Number: PD 45-06 Date: September 11, 2006 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendm�nt Application A 06/06 S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. 1215 - 1235 Bayly Street Part of Block Y, Plan M-16 City of Pickering Recommendation: 1. That Council ADOPT the Development Guidelines for the Bay Ridges Plaza area, as set out in Appendix III to Planning Report PD 45-06. 2. That Zoning By-law Amendmerit Application A 06/06 submitted by S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd., on lands being �'art of Block Y, Plan M-16, City of Pickering, to amend the zoning to permit d mixed use development consisting of apartment buildings containing commercial/retail uses and townhouse dwelling units, be APPROVED, with an "(H)" holding provision subject to the conditions outlined in Appendix I to Planning Report PD 45-06. 3. That the amending zoning by-law, to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 06/06, as set out in Appendix II to Planning Report PD 45-06, be FORWARDED to City Council for enactment. 4. That traffic signals be installed at the intersection of Bayly Street and St. Martins Drive, in consultation with the Region of Durham and the City of Pickering, as a condition of proceeding with development and that the full cost of design and construction be the responsibility of the owner. Executive Summary: The applicant proposes to redevelop the Bay Ridges Plaza for a mixed use condomi¢�ium development consisting of apartment buildings that contain ground floor commercial/retail uses, and townhouse dwelling units, including some live-work units. The mixed use proposal will contain approximately 2,100 square metres of commercial/retail floor area and a total of 473 dwelling units (347 apartment units and 126 townhouses). The proposed mixed use development is aligned with the principles of intensification and transit oriented development. The subject land is in a detailed review area, which requires development guidelines to be prepared. Design guidelines to guide development of the property have been prepared and ars presented for adoption. The application has been assessed against the guidelines. U ! �;, Report PD 45-06 Date: September 11, 2006 Subject: S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. I;A 06/06) Page 2 The recommended provisions to be inciuded in the implementing zoning by-law provide for an appropriate density for an infill site, resulting in transit supportive intensification next to a transit spine. The recommE:nded guidelines and zoning conditions require and encourage the incorporation of elernents of sustainability in both the site plan and building desigr�. Retail floor space of 2000 square metres is recommended to be required to be introduced in the first phase of development to ensure continuity of commercial services to the neighbourhood. The mixed use development will also provide protection to the natural environment associated with the Douglas Ravine. The design, as modified in accordar�ce with this report, is considered compatible with the surrounding land uses. It is recommended that the implementing by-law contain an "(H)" holding provision to ensure that the City, Region of Durham and Toronto Region Conservation Authority interests are addressed through the execution of appropriate agreements. The recommended im��lementing by-law is appropriate as it implements the Official Plan, is in accordanc�: with existing and emerging Provincial policy, continues to provide substantial commercial services to the neighbourhood, and constitutes appropriate land use planning. Financial Implications: proposed development. Background: 1.0 Introduction No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd., submitted an application to amend the zoning by-law to implement proposed redevelopment of the subject lands (see Location Map, Attachment #1). The redevelopment plan proposes to create a mixed use development on a 3.38 hect�re site, consisting of townhouses, back-to-back townhouses, and a mixed use building consisting of ground related retail/commercial uses, office uses and two apartment buildings (see Attachment #2). It is anticipated that a co�ndominium proposal for the townhouses will be a common element condominium for private internal roads, visitor parking areas, a parkette and playground, a walkway and perimeter landscaping elements. A portion of the property contains lands associated with the Douglas Ravine which will be conveyed to a public authority. Since the June 1, development plan. Changes include: 2006 public meeting the applicant has submitted a revised The revised plan is provided for reference as Attachment # 3. • the removal of development from a portion of the lands in the north-east portion of the property; • a reduction in the number of dwelling units; • the establishment of a 10 metre development buffer from the top-of-bank of the Douglas Ravin�;; • a reconfiguration of the proposed park/parkette space; and, �� .. � ,a Report PD 45-06 Date: September 11, 2006 C�' ;� �ubject: S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. (�4 06/06) Page 3 • the removal of townhouse dwelling units backing onto Douglas Ravine. The concept site plan does not propose the creation of new municipal streets, rather the creation of private roads/laneways. All of the freehold townhouse dwelling units will front onto private roads with the exception of those units proposed to have direct acces� onto St. Martins Drive. The statistical information/development detail and comparison of the original plan and the revised plan are outl�ned in the Applicant's Development Detail chart (see Attachment #5). 2.0 Comments Received 2.1 At the June 1 2006, Public Infiormation Meeting A large number of residents a��peared at the Public Information Meeting to voice their opposition to the proposed development and to raise concerns related to: • density/too many dwelling units; • proposed development not �ompatible with the neighbourhood; • loss of the commercial retai� uses; • traffic and parking impacts cm neighbouring properties; • the need for traffic signals at St. Martins Drive and Bayly Street; • height of the apartment buildings; • impacts on the Douglas Ravine; • impacts on schools; • the application not in compliance with the Official Plan; • poor business practices witr� dealing with the plaza tenants; • some residents acknowledged the need for redevelopment of the site. (see text of Information Report and Meeting Minutes, Attachments #7 and #8). 2.2 Written Public Submissions on the application Prior to and immediately �ollowing the Public Information Meeting on June 1, 2006, numerous area residents expressed written objection and concern with the �nitial application. Approximately 30 letters or emails have been received expressing opposition to the application. Issues identified in the correspondence are similar to those expressed at the Information Meeting (outlined above) with the following additional concerr�s: • accessibility of services for the numerous seniors who live in the area and depend on the existing plaza for personal needs; • an evacuation plan for the area needs to be considered given the proposed increase in traffic; • a community that is predominately residential cannot possibly be sustainable; • the residents need to be ab'�e to work and shop in their community, preferably without needing to use cars; • the proposal will have a negative impact on property values in the area; Report PD 45-06 Date: September 11, 2006 �'� ; Subject: S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. (A 06/06) Page 4 • the impact of the development on green space in the area, and not enough parkland space for the number of proposed dwelling units; • with the loss of the grocery store from the plaza there is no grocery store south of Highway 401, which makes it expensive for people to get groceries by taxi (see Attachments #g to #37). The Pickering East Shore Cc�mmunity Association (PESCA) provided written comments on the original application (see Attachment #38). They are opposed to the initial proposal, however„ they are not opposed to the redevelopment of the Bay Ridges Plaza in general. Their specific concerns include: • apartment towers are too high; any building on the site should not exceed seven storeys; • concern with off-site traffic and on-site parking; • the additional dwelling units will increase the already congested roads in the area; • the parking requirements for the dwelling units should be increased; • the environmental impact the proposed development will have on the Douglas Ravine and Frenchman's Bay; • a viable community commercial plaza, of similar size to the existing plaza should be incorporated into the redevelopment of the site; • further demolition should not occur until the plaza is completely vacant; • the impact of the application on the Emergency Evacuation Plan needs to be examined. A letter from the Bayshore Tovuers Board of Directors was received advising that the redevelopment of the plaza has generally been well received and supported (see Attachment #39). 2.3 Agency Comments Toronto and Region Conservation Authority - TRCA provided preliminary comments advising the s�bject property is within the TRCA Regulated area and all applicable requirement and polices will need to be satisfied; - TRCA has verbally advised that their detail requirements can be addressed in the site plan approval process and this will include but not be limited to the conveyance of the portion of the Douglas Ravine and the buffer strip to a public authority; (see Attachment #40). �� ,Report PD 45-06 Subject: S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. (A 06/06) Date: September 11, 2006 Page 5 Region of Durham - the proposal is permitted by the policies of the Durham Region Official Plan; - municipal water supply is available from the existing utilities; - s�nitary sewer service can be provided subject to the replacement of the sanitary sewer from Radom Street to Warf Street at the applicant's e�;pense; - driveway access onto Bayly Street will be restricted to a right-in right-out only and road improvements for the intersection of Bayly Street and St. Martins Drive will be required; - the application has been screened in accordance with Provincial Interests and Delegated Review and th�re is no concern; - th�e application is consistent with the Region of D�arham Community Strategic Plan; - the Region has no objection to the approval of the application (see Attachment #41). GO Transit - re�quires a noise and vibration study to their satisfaction and the entering into an agreement with G� transit (see Attachment #42). CN Rail - requires a noise and vibration study to their satisfaction and the inclusion of warning clauses in all development and purchase agreements (see Attachment #43). No other agency that provided comment has objection to the applications. Certain technical issues and requirements related to the proposed use of the site can be addressed during the site plan/condominium process, should this application be approved. 2.4 City Departments Development Contro� - will require a stormwater management report and various other detailed engineering information (at site plan review stage) (see Attachment #44). Report PD 45-06 Subject: S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. (A 06/06) 3.0 Discussion Date: September 11, 2006 �'� � Page 6 3.1 Development Guidelines are recommended for approval; proposed redevelopment generally reflective of the guidelines and supported subject to certain revisions The subject land is within a Detailed Review Area of the City's Official Plan, which requires development guidelines to be established for major development. The preparation of the development guidelines were undertaken with initial assistance of a consultant. City staff revised and finalized the draft development guidelines. An Urban Design VWorkshop/Charrette was held in December 2005 to obtain input on the guiding prir�ciple for redevelopment of the Bay Ridges Plaza and the abutting plaza. The objective of the develo�ment guidelines is to articulate urban design guidelines for the redevelopme�t of the site. The guidelines for these lands have been prepared within the coritext of Provincial policy, City of Pickering and Region of Durham Official Plaris, as well as Transit Oriented Development and Sustainable Development principles. The guidelines will help ensure that development will be designed appropriately and will assist in the review of this rezoning application. Attached as Appendix III to th�is report are the recommended guidelines. The principles of the guidelines are: • to create a higher intensity of development and to provide a mix of uses to create a vibrant development; • to provide for a range of housing choices for residents; • identify, protect and enhance the public realm and open space features; • to pr�mote the developm�nt of the site with sustainable development principles; • to provide retail commerc�al uses at a scale to serve the surrounding community. The application has been assessed against the proposed Development Guidelines and generally the a�plication complies. There are a few elements of the application that will need to be modified to comply with the guidelines. Conditions are being recommended to ensure full compliance with the guidelines. Generally, the following is recommended: • permit the redevelopment of the subject lands for a mixed use development; • allow for the maximum density permitted by current Official Plan Policy; • allow for apartment buildings having the proposed height of 16 and 18 storeys; (.+ � .', t_ �eport PD 45-06 Subject: S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. (;A 06/06) Date: September 11, 2006 Page 7 • restrict development within ten metres of the top-of-back of the Douglas Creek; • requi� � that the commercidl component of the proposal be constructed in the first phase of development; • require all independent vehicular access to dwelling units be provided by internal private roads other than the primary internal road system (especially the east-west road which should be designed and enhanced as a pedestrian friendly area with wider sidewalks); • require that the intersection of St. Martins Drive and Bayly Street be signalized at the owner's expense; and, • require a walkway for public use be incorporated into the Douglas Ravine buffer area site design, 3.2 The Proposed Density/Number of Dwelling Units is Supportable and Complies with the Official Plan The subject land is designated Mixed Use Area — Mixed Corridors Area in the Pickering Official Plan. Permissible uses within Mixed Use Area — Mixed Corridors Area includes, amongst others, a variety of residential uses including townhouses and apartment buildings, retailing of goods and services, offices and restaurants. The Pickering Official Plan establishes a density range of over 30 and up to and including 140 dwelling units per hectare for development within a Mixed Use Area —�'�Sixed Corridors Area. The subject land is considered an appropriate location for intensification and this type of mixed use/higher density development near a transit corridor is supported by the recently approved Provincial Places to Grow Plan. This Provincial policy identifies various growth centres, of which Pickering is one of two growth centres in Durham Region. It is anticipated that this location will be within Pickering's growth centre due to its proximity to the GO Station, lending further support to allowing the maximum density permitted by the current Official Plan. A maximum of 473 dwelling units are permitted on the site based on a net designated area of 3.38 hectares. The revised application proposes the maximum permitted number �f dwelling units, being 473. The current plan has 347 apartment units (240 units in building "A" and 107 in building "B") and 126 townhouses (38 traditional design townhouse units, 76 back-to-back townhouse units and 12 live-work townhouse units). It is anticipated that the allocation of the dwelling units may be modified slightly in order to incorporate the staff recommended changes, however the maximum number of dwelfing units over the total site will not exceed 473. Report PD 45-06 Date: September 11, 2006 '��,� � Subject: S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. (A 06/06) Page 8 3.3 Proposed Mixed Use Development is Compatible with Existing Neighbourhood The subject land currently contains a commercial plaza of approximately 5,500 square metres which has been serving the surrounding neighbourhood for years (original plaza built in the mid 1960's). The neighbourhood is primarily a mix of detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, townhouses and an apartment building in the immediate area. The subject land is located in an evolving part of the City. Recent development (Canoe Landing townhouses at Bayly/Begley, Captain's Walk and Frenchman's Bay Village on Liverpool Road Scauth) is indicative of the change occurring in the neighbourhood. The site's prox�mity to the GO station (approximately a five minute walk) makes it a suitable and ciesirable location for a mix of uses as proposed by the applicant. The existing commercial plaza has historically played an important role in servicing the neighbourhood� Residents advise of their need to walk to commercial facilities, especially the seniors living in area. Therefore, in order to meet the needs of residents, it is appropriate to retain substantial commercial floor space within the project. While it is unlikely a food store will locate within the mixed use building, it is anticipated that other appropriate retail uses serving the day-ta-day needs of the neighbourhood will locate in the project. Currently an 18 storey apartm�nt tower exists directly south of the subject lands. The proposed 18 and 16 stor�y apartment buildings will provide noise buffer to the remainder of the site and the area to south, frame the street and provide a focal point to the area. The pr�oposed townhouses are also very compatible with the neighbourhood, considering part of the subject site abuts an existing townhouse complex. Therefore, the proposed land uses are considered compatible with the surrounding area. 3.4 Site Access and Traffic Movements on Bayly Street and St. Martins Drive are Acceptable with the Installation of a Traffic Signal at the intersection Bayly Street, where it abuts the subject property, is designated as a Type A Arteria/ Road in the Region of Durham Official Plan. Type A Arterial Roads are the highest order arterial roads and are designed to carry large volumes of traffic at moderate to high speeds. Bayly Street is a four-lane cross-section in the vicinity of the subject property. St. Martins Drive, where it abuts the subject site, is designated as a Callector Road in the Pickering Official Plan which is designed to provide access to individual properties, to local roads, and to other collector and arterial roads. St Martins Drive is currently a two-lane cross section adjacent to the subject lands. (} n V � -Report PD 45-06 r Subject: S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. (A� 06/06) Date: September 11, 2006 Page 9 The applicant's traffic consultar�t has submitted a traffic report that recommends that intersection improvement� be undertaken, including the incorporation of turning lanes and the installation of traffic signals at the intersection. The study identifies that with the proposec� development, turning movement characteristics of Bayly Street and St. Martin� Drive will function at a poor level of service in morning and evening peak ho�rs. With the suggested recommendations and improvements, the intersection would then have an acceptable level of service function. The Region of Durham has aclvised that a road widening and eastbound right turn lane is required for Bayly �treet, and that vehicular access to the site from Bayly Street will be restricted to a right-in/right-out only. Intersectic�n improvements will be required on Bayly Street at St. Martins Drive, including the construction of d westbound left turn lane. It is noted that the Region of Durham is not recommending the installation of traffic signals at the intersection, as traffic warrants have not been met. City staff recommend that full signalization of the intersection be required coincidental with development, to ensure the intersection operates at an appropriate level. As part of the conditions of approval, it is recommended that the intersection improvements be undertaken coincidental with development and that the applicant be responsible for all �osts related to these improvements. 3.5 Provision of Commercial/Retail Opportunities Required in Initial Phase of Development One of the major concerns ex�ressed by area residents is the loss of retail ftoor space from the site (especially �the food store) that will result with redevelopment. The Bay Ridges Plaza has provided an important retail commercial resource for the Bay Ridges Neighbourhoud since the late 1960's. The Plaza contains approximately 5,500 square metres of retail space, which until recently included a food store of 1, 280 square metres. The applicant's proposal introduces approximately 2,133 square metres of retail commercial floor space, prim�rily within the ground floor of the mixed use buildings (apartments). Howev�er, as the timing of construction of the mixed use element of the project is subject to market conditions, there is no guarantee as to when this `replacement' commercial floor space will be introduced. The loss of commercial services to this neighbourhood will have significant impacts which will only be increased with the early introduction of 126 new townhouse units. Clearly it is important to minimize the duration of the loss of retail commercial services to area residents. Report PD 45-06 Subject: S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. (�� 06/06) Date: September 11, 2006 �' �' `�l Page 10 To address this matter, the applicant is working to relocate some of the important retail commercial services (such as pharmacy) to the adjacent small plaza (525 square metres) at 1261 Bayly� Street, which they recently purchased. While some existing tenants at 1261 Bayly will be displaced, the opportunity will be provided for certain tenants of the Bay Ridges Plaza to relocate so that service can be continued now and duri�g the construction of the project. Staff commend the applicant for the initiative they have taken in this matter. However, while this action will provide for the interim and proximate supply of limited retail services to the neighbourhood during the construction period, there is no assurance that this floor space will continue to be provided. It is still considered essential that permanent new replacement commercial floor space be introduced in the first phase of the proiect, within the mixed use buildings adjacent to the St. Martins Drive/Bayly Street intersection. This will ensure commercial services are provided as an integral component of the project, and at as early a stage in development as possible. It will serve to maintain some of the commer�ial facilities that the neighbourhood has come to rely upon. A commercial component of a rninimum 2,000 square metres is recommended to be required in the first phase af development, in a true mixed use fashion. This requirement will be included in the site plan/development agreement and the zoning by-law. 3.6 Parkland The City will be requiring cashi-in-lieu of parkland from the applicant in order to satisfy the full provisions of Section 42(1) of the Planning Act. Further, the applicant will be required to deaign and construct certain amenity areas, including a`parkette' within the development in order to provide outdoor amenity space for residents of the project. For development of this nature, and in accordance with the Planning Act, the City of Pickering Official Plan provides two options for the calculation of required parkland �edication. The first is the conveyance of land or cash-in-lieu of land at an amount of five percent of 1:he proposed land to be developed. The second option, as an alternative for H�gh Density Residential Area or Mixed use Areas, requires land or cash-in-lieu of land at a rate of up to one hectare for each 300 dwelling units proposed. It is recognized that the second option may have significant financial impact on the viability of the project. The first option, being the five percent calculation, is recommended as this may assist the economics of site development, especially v�rhen considering the significant costs associated with sanitary sewer upgrades �nd installation. U � _�� ;�eport PD 45-06 Subject: S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. (A� 06/06) 3.7 Sustainable Principles are be�ng addressed Date: September 11, 2006 Page 11 The City of Pickering is undertaking a number of initiatives to promote and encourage sustainable developiment. Staff are evolving criteria to help measure the level of sustainability of ��evelopment proposals. Applications are now reviewed with consideration c�iven to environmental, social, and economic sustainability. Elements of sustainability hav�; been included in the Development Guidelines and provide direction in both application and site plan review. These elements include: • mix of housing types to prGVide diversity; • walk to GO Station; • protection of natural environment, enhancement of public open space; • providing commercial/retail floor space to serve the neighbourhood; • intensification / compact urban form; • reduction of reliance on thE; automobile; • enhanced pedestrian envir�onment; • employment opportunities; • recycling encouraged; • walkway and connection to a transit spine with public access through the site; • energy and resource efficiency; • LEED or green technology building design. The applicant's current site plan incorporates many of these elements, others will be introduced and considered as the design progresses and the site plan is finalized. 3.8 Some areas of the applicatiori will need revision in order to meet the intent of the recommended Development Guidelines The applicant's revised conc�;pt plan reflects general compliance with the recommended development Guidelines. However, there are areas of the applicant's concept plan and requested zoning standards that are not in compliance and where modifications are recommended by staff, as outlined below. A staff concept plan illustrating a�ecommended areas of revision to the applicant's plan is attached (see Attachment # 4). 3.8.1 Parkinq Ratio to be increased to provide residential visitor parkinq and adequate commercial parkinq The applicant and staff have agreed on a parking ratio (including visitor provision) of 1.25 spaces per ur�it for the apartment units, and 2.2 spaces per unit for the townhouse units. These requirements are considered appropriate considering the project's close proximity to the Pickering GO Station and the applicant's stated intent to market a transit oriented project. Report PD 45-06 Date: September 11, 2006 (� �� Subject: S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. (A 06/06) Page 12 Resident parking for the apartment buildings will be provided in underground garages, while parking for the tnwnhouses and retail/commercial floor space will be surface parking. The locatian for visitor parking will be determined through the site plan process (see applicant's parking rationale letter — Attachment #6). For the commercial component of the project, the applicant proposes a parking ratio of 3 parking spaces per 100 square metres of floor space. The most common by-law standard for cammercial development in the City is 5.5 parking spaces per 100 square metres �of floor space. While a significant component of retail business will be through walk-to traffic, this commercial floor space will also serve the broader Bay Ridges Neighbourhood and will attract considerable automobile traffic. Staff recommend that a comnnercial parking requirement of 4.5 spaces per 100 square metres of floor space be imposed. This requirement recognizes that there will be a degree of shared parking in the mixed use component of the project, with residential visitor parking and some commercial parking being shared on a regular basis. 3.8.2 Direct Drivewav Access onta the primarv road s rLstem identified in the Development Guidelines is not �upported The recommended Development Guidelines place a special prominence on the `primary internal road system', which includes both the east/west road from St. Martins Drive and the north/south road from Bayly Street. This road system links St. Martins Drive and Bayly Street and provides for continuous pedestrian movement both to and through the site. Direct vehicle access (driveways and aisles) to the primary internal road system should be minimized to support priority to the pe�estrian environment �nd maximize opportunities for on-street parking. With the elimination of driveways, garages, and aisles, the streetscape will be improved and a better framing fc>r views to Douglas Ravine will be provided. This access restriction will help �create a high quality pedestrian environment that is not disrupted by driveways �nd aisles, creating a safer and more pleasant walking environment. The elimination of garages from the front of these townhouse units will allow for <� more attractive streetscape, and assist in the creation of an attractive internal pedestrian promenade. 3.8.3 Live/Work townhouse require improvements to streetscape throuqh the elimination of direct drivewav ac�ess from St. Martins Drive The driveways that are proposed to access onto St. Martins Drive for the live/work units should be eliminated. The live work units should be ground oriented and present a pleasant streetscape that is not encumbered by driveways and garages. These live/work units should have their vehicle access from an internal road at the rear of the unit. Therefore, the back-to-back form of townhouses is not appropriate at this location. ...� � ( ,j � �,1 �� `� " Report PD 45-06 Subject: S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. (p► 06/06) Date: September 11, 2006 Page 13 The opportunity for enhanced �n-street parking in front of the live/work units (on the east boulevard of St. Martins Drive) will be explored through the site plan process. 3.9 Technical Matters 3.9.1 Site Plan Aqreement will be required to address the importance of Site Desiqn A site plan agreement betwe�;n the City and the owner of the lands will be required to ensure that all mafiters of interest to the City are protected and the design of the site achieves compliance with the Development Guidelines. Matters to be addressed included, but are not limited to, ensuring the site can accommodate recycling/3-strE;am refuse, noise attenuation, stormwater management, sustainable building designs, and the opportunity to introduce some at-grade accessible uniirs for the physically challenged. This required agreement, and several other development implementation matters, are incorporated into the recomme:nded conditions of approval for this application, and are found in Appendix I to this Report. 3.9.2 Proposed Zoninq By-law to Include a"(H)" Holding Provision to address Citv and Aqencv requirements The draft implementing zoning by-law recommends that the subject property be rezoned to permit the proposec� mixed use development containing a maximum of 473 dwelling units. The by-law proposes permitting townhouses in the southern portion and the ap�rtments and commercial uses in the northern portion. The remaining portior�, being the valley lands and the buffer area, are recommended to be zoned open space. The amending zoning by-law incorporates an "(H)" holding provision that will require the owner to satisfy certain conditions prior to the Ilifting of the holding provision. These conditions will include entering into a site plan/development agreement with the City to address matters listed in . Appendix I to this report. These matters include requirements of the City, Region, and Toronto Region Conservation Authority and will require the constructior� of 2,000 square metres of commercial/retail floor space in the initial phase of dev�elopment. The draft zoning by-law contains perFormance standards that would permit development in accordance with the recommendations of this report. This includes, amongst others, � minimum commercial/retail floor space of 2,000 square metres, a maximum height of 18 storeys for the apartment buildings, 2.2 parking spaces for all townhouse units, and a minimum parking ratio of 1.25 spaces per apar�ment dwelling unit and a minimum commercial parking ratio of 4.5 spaces per 100 square metres of gross leasable floor area. Report PD 45-06 Subject: S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. �A 06/06) Date: September 11, 2006 � � �.� Page 14 The lifting of the "(H)" holding provision will occur promptly after ali the required conditior�s have been met. The lifting process is within the control of Council and there is no public notice requir•ed, nor can the public appeal the lifting of the "H". The City has used "H" holding provisions in its zoning by-laws on several occasions, where project complexity and associated development conditions of both the City and agencies warrant a higher level of control. The utilization of the holding provision also allows the City the opportunity to advance rezoning applications prior to the applicant satisfying all requirements of other agencies such as the Region of Durham and Toronto Region Conservation Authority. Utilization of the ("H") holding provision allows the zoning to advance and become final, while ensuring that appropriate development conditions are secured. 3.9.3 Sanitary Sewer replacement re uired As noted by the Region of Du�ham the sanitary sewer that services the subject land does not have the capacity for the number of proposed dwelling units. The Region requires the replacernent of the sewer from the subject lands to WarF Street at the applicant's expense. This replacement will alleviate certain problems that currently exist downstream along the run of the sewer. 4.0 Applicant's Comments The applicant has been advis�ed of the recommendations of this report. The applicant does not agree with the recommended parking ratio for commercial floor space, the requirement to prohibit direct driveway access onto the primary internal road system, the requir�ement to build commercial floor space in the first phase of construction, and th� placement of an ("H") holding provision on the amending zoning by-law. APPENDICES: APPENDIX I: Recommended Conditions of Approval for A 06/06 APPENDIX II: Draft Implementing Zc�ning By-law APPENDIX III: Recommended Development Guidelines il �"i .,' �; U ,1 y ,Report PD 45-06 Subject: S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. (a 06/06) Attachments: Date: September 11, 2006 1. Location Map 2. Original Development Plan 3. Revised Development Plan 4. Staff Concept Pian 5. Appiicant's Development Detaill Chart 6. Applicant's Parking Rationale L.etter 7. Text of Information Meeting Report 8. Minutes from June 1, 2006 Sta�utory Public Information Meeting 9. Resident Comments (Attachm�;nts #9 - #37) 38. Pickering East Shore Community Association 39. Bay Shore Towers 40. Agency Comments - TRCA 41. Agency Comments - Region of Durham Planning Department 42. Agency Comments - GO Transit 43. Agency Comments - CN Rail 44. City Department Comment - Development Control Page 15 Prepared By: Approved / Endorsed By: -> ��. � . :'. .. � .. r . . Ross Pym, MCIP, Neil Carroll, ��°R Principal Planner - Development Review Director, Pla ' Development �.— — f r��' � Lynda T lor, 1P, PP Manager, Development Review RP: jf Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideratian of - Pickering City Cou w = lpy = �' . � Thomas J. Quinn, RDMR., CMM II�I �''�� Chief Administrative Officer � �� g � � � � �/ Q �/ � � � ^.;,,,. �pIJ� �Y: k ��. . 1��'V�'�,;_�� +�►M►� -z � � � � �� v � tfi � � Q Q cn � o � � � c� zz � z z z W��p X � � Q� ��xJ Z� � � 0�/ � O�C W m � ` :.. � � � � _ .� �'* I a � (+'�YOG KJUAGI�/ \� � � ,' . � �-: � ��, $ p n� _ "� 3 �,. � � � ��t � � •�:� � � N � O _ z O � s�snourvMOl �AIZlGI SNU2R�W '.6S Q� � -t2r107 �{�Vb'1 ..i� � w � 0 � � � � � fl � � Q � � � �� a� 1 � """ � w .� �' U i �:T'r�°�rs�l,•.,��;!i �:_..,1.�.T� `;�`€�'��i ir PC�� • c:� � �, � �. � � � f.� APPENDIX I TO REPORT NUMBER PD 45-06 RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR APPLICATION TO AMEND ZONING BY-LAW A 06/06 f�,' �� ,j -� u RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 06/06 to be Included within the Proposed Zoning By-law "(H)" Holding Requirements 1. That the amending zoning by-I��w include an "(H)" holding provision that requires matters to be addressed to thE; City's satisfaction prior to the lifting of the "(H)" holding provision. Prior to thE: lifting of the "(H)" the owner shall execute and register a site plan/developm�nt agreement, satisfy the Region of Durham, financially and otherwise and satisfy the Toronto Region Conservation Authority, financially and otherwise. 2. That the owner enter into an :�ite plan/development agreement with the City to reflect the comments of the report of the Director, Planning & Development report number PD 45-06. The agreement shall ensure the fulfillment of the City's requirements, financial and otharwise, which shall include, but not necessarily be limited to: (a) the construction of a walkw�ay within the Douglas Ravine buffer area; (b) providing any required eas�ments; (c) parkland dedication; (d) noise attenuation; (e) satisfaction of the City financ�ially with respect to the Deve/opment Charges Act; (f) construction management �lan; (g) stormwater drainage and management system; (h) design of some units to meet accessibility requirements; (i) design the development for 3-stream refuse handling (j) that all buildings address LEED components 3. That the site plan/development agreement include a clause that the owner shall provide to the City of Pickering a clearance letter from the Region of Durham that advises that all of the Regiorial matters, financial and otherwise, have been addressed including, but not limited to, satisfactory arrangements for the sanitary sewer services to the subjeclt lands, satisfying all requirements of Regional delegated review responsibiliti�s and the installation of traffic signals at the intersection of St, Martins Drive and Bayly Street. 4. That the site plan/development agreement include a clause that the owner shall provide to the City of Pickering a clearance letter from the Toronto Region Conservation Authority that ��dvises that all of TRCA matters have been addressed. 5. That the site plan/development ac�reement and zoning by-law include the requirement for 2000 square metres of newlv constructed retail floor space to be constructed in the first phase of development. _ c�� APPENDIX II TO REPORT NUMBER PD 45-06 DRAFT IMPLEMENTING ZONING BY-LAW ZONING BY-LAW AM�NDMENT APPLICATION A 06/06 _ � ., � � ��. THE CORPORA,TION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY'-LAW NO. a � Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 2520, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham in Part of Block Y, Plan M16, in the City of Pickering. (A 06/06) WHEREAS the Council of The c�orporation of The City of Pickering deems it desirable to permit a mixed u�se development of apartment buildings that contained commercial uses and i:ownhouse dwelling units on the subject lands, being Block Y, Plan M16, in The C;ity of Pickering; AND WHEREAS an amendment to By-law 2520, as amended, is therefore deemed necessary; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNC,IL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. SCHEDULES I and II Schedules I and II attached hereto with notations and references shown thereon are hereby declared to be part of this By-law. 2. AREA RESTRICTED The provisions of this By-law shall only apply to those lands in Part of Block Y, Plan M16, Pickering, designated "RH/MU-2", "SA-LW", "SA-8", "MD-H6", and "OS-HL" on ;ichedule I attached hereto. 3. DEFINITIONS In this By-law, (1) "Adult Entertainmen� Parlour" shall mean a building or part of a building in which is provided, in pursuance of a trade, calling, business or occup��tion, services appealing to or designed to appeal to erotic or s�xual appetites or inclinations. (2) "Bakerv" shall mean a building or part of a building in which food products are baked, prepared and offered for retail sale, or in which food products baked and prepared elsewhere are offered for retail sale. � I �b4A �{y'x � �F � ,.G, � .��G S (3) "Bodv Rub Parlour" ir�cludes any premises or part thereof where a body rub is performe�, offered or solicited in pursuance of a trade, calling, business or occupation, but does not include any premises or part thereof where the body rubs perFormed are for the purpose of inedical or therapeutic treatment and are performed or offered by persons otherwise diuly qualified, licensed or registered so to do under the laws of the Province of Ontario. (4) "Build-to-zone" shall mean an area of land in which all or part of a building elevation of c�ne or more buildings is to be located. (5) "Business Office" sl�all mean a building or part of a building in which the managerrient or direction of a business, a public or private agency, a brc�kerage or a labour or fraternal organization is carried on and which may include a telegraph office, a data processing establisr�ment, a newspaper publishing office, the premises of a real estate or insurance agent, or a radio or television broadcasting station and related studios or theatres, but shall not include a retail store. (6) "Convenience Store" shall mean a retail store in which food, drugs, periodicals or similar items of day-to-day household necessities are kept for retail sale primarily to residents of, or persons employed in, the immediate neighk�ourhood. (7) "Dav Nurserv" shall mean lands and premises duly licensed pursuant to the provisions of The Day Nurseries Act, or any successor thereto, ai�d for the use as a facility for the daytime care of children. (8) "Drv Cleaning Depolt" shall mean a building or part of a building used for the purpos� of receiving articles, goods, or fabrics to be subjected to dry cle�ning and related processes elsewhere, and of distributing articles, c�oods or fabrics which have been subjected to any such processes. (9) "Dwellinq" shall meai� a building or part of a building containing one or more dwelling uriits, but does not include a mobile home or trailer. (10) "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. � } � �' �.� a- 'rr 3t �'�r,- ,. � }��`� � � �: ^� � F ,+� u .'r :: (11) "Dwellinq Sinqle Att�ched or Sinqle Attached Dwellinq" shall mean one of a group of n�t less than three adjacent dwellings attached together horizontally by an above grade common wall. (12) "Financial Institution"' shall mean a building or part of a building in which money is depc�sited, kept, lent or exchanged. (13) "Floor Area - Resid�ntial" shall mean the area of the floor surface contained within the outside walls of a storey or part of a storey. (14) "Food Store" shall mean a building or part of a building in which food, produce, and other items or merchandise of day-to-day household necessity are stored, offered or kept for retail sale to the public. (15) "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, otf ier than a private garage, an attic, or a cellar. (16) "Gross Leasable Flaor Area" shall mean the aggregate of the floor areas of all storeys ��bove or below established grade, designed for owner or tenant oc�:,upancy or exclusive use only, but excluding storage areas below established grade. (17) "Laundromat" shall mean a self-serve clothes washing establishment containing washing, drying, ironing, finishing or other incidental equipment. (18) "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 group of buildings, as the c;ase may be, together with any accessory buildings or structures, or a public park or open space area, regardless of whethE;r or not such lot constitutes the whole of a lot or block on a registered plan of subdivision. (19) "Multiple Dwellinq-F�orizontal" shall mean a building containing three or more dwelling units attached horizontally, not vertically, by an above-grade wall or walls. (20) "Multiple Dwelling-V�rtical" shall mean a building containing three or more dwelling units attached horizontally and vertically by an above-grade wall or� walls, or an above-grade floor or floors, or both. -4- �� t�� ; ��k (21) "Personal Service Srio�" shall mean an estabiishment in which a personal service is �performed and which may include a barber shop, a beauty salon�, a shoe repair shop, a tailor or dressmaking shop or a photograK>hic studio, but shall not include a body-rub parlour as defined in the Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1980, Chapter 302, as amended from time to time, or any successor thereto. (22) "Private Garaqe" shall mean an enclosed or partially enclosed structure for the stor��ge of one or more vehicles, in which structure no business or service is conducted for profit or otherwise. (23) "Professional Office" shall mean a building or part of a building in which medical, legal or other professional service is performed or consuftation given, and which may include a clinic, the offices of an architect, a charterE;d accountant, an engineer, a lawyer or a physician, but shall not include a body-rub parlour as defined in the Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1980, Chapter 302, as amended from time to time, or any successur thereto. (24) "Restaurant - Type �4" shall mean a building or part of a building where food is prepared and offered or kept for retail sale to the public for immediat� consumption on the premises or off the premises, or both, Ibut shall not include an adult entertainment parlour as defined he�rein. (25) "Retail Store" shall mean a building or part of a building in which goods; wares, merc;handise, substances, articles or things are stored, kept and offe�-ed for retail sale to the public. (26) "Storey„ shall meain that portion of a building other than a basement, cellar or �ttic, included between the surFace of any floor and the surface of th� floor, roof deck or ridge next above it. (27) "Yard" shall mean ��n area of land which is appurtenant to and located on the sam� lot as a building or structure and is open, uncovered, and ur�occupied above ground except for such accessory buildings, structures, or other uses as are specifically permitted thereon. 4. PROVISIONS ("RH/MU-2" Zone) (1) Uses Permitted ("RH/MU-2" Zone) No person shall vvithin the lands designated "RH/MU-2" on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure �or any purpose except the following: . _. ., �,% V ` t �2) (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) �9) (h) ��) �J) (k) (I) (m) (n) -5- bakery business office convenience store commercial club day nursery dry cleaning de�pot financial institu�ion food store laundromat multiple dwellir�g-horizontal multiple dwellin�g-vertical personal service shop professional ofi�ice retail store Zone Requirements ("RH/MU-2" Zone) � t t �. ;ta+. ) � �"�' .� � � � d :,:: ts . . � � ; x No person shall Wvithin the lands designated "RH/MU-2" on Schedule I attachedl hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building except in ac:cordance with the following provisions: (a) (b) BUILDING HEIGHT: (i) For Multiple Dwelling Vertical uses: Minimum Maximum 5 Storeys and 15 metres 18 Storeys and 60 metres (ii) For Multiple Dwelling Horizontal uses: Maximum 12 metres BUILDING LOC;ATION AND SETBACKS: (i) Buildings and structures shall be located entirely within the building envelope shown on Schedule II attached hereto; (ii) No multip�e dwelling-horizontal shall be permitted within 60 metres from the lot line that abuts Bayly Street; (iii) No buildir�g, part of a building, or structure shall be erected w4thin the "RH/MU-2" Zone, unless a minimum of 70% of th�; length of the build-to-zone, contains a building or part of �� building; ��Mi� � L i '1''.: .'^ ��k4� � o : � �. � �; "� ?� iti • MhT ,p�, " A . 5. I � . (iv) Despite Se:ction 4.(2)(a)(i) above, a 2 storey, 6.5 metre, building height may be permitted at the north-west corner of the property, adjacent to the intersection of St. Martins Drive and 13ayly Street, as a component of the minimum five storey building; (v) No multipl�s dwelling horizontal uses shall be erected, unless a minimum of 70°/a of the length of the build-to- zone, as illustrated on Schedule II attached hereto, contains a building or part of a building; (vi) For multiple dwelling-vertical buildings located within the "RH/MU-2" Zone, and within the build-to-zone, any portion of � building or structure in excess of 13.0 metres in height, shall be set back a minimum of 3.0 metres from the main wall of the building or structure; (vii) Notwithsta�nding clause A above, below grade parking structures shall be permitted beyond the limits of the building envelope identified on Schedule I attached hereto, bu1t no closer than 0.5 metres from the limits of the lands; (viii) The horizontal distance between multiple dwelling- horizontal buildings shall be a minimum of 1.8 metres; (ix) Despite thE: provisions of Section 5.6 of By-law 2520, the requiremer�t for frontage on a public street shall be satisfied bN establishing frontage on a common elements condominium street. (c) PARKING REQUIREMENTS: (i) There shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 4.5 parking spaces per 100 square metres of gross floor area for all permitted uses listed in Section 5(1) of this by-law, except for multiple dwelling-vertical, multiple dwelling-horizontal uses. Non-resident parking shall be provided at grade, in a below grade structure, or both; (ii) For multi��le dwelling-vertical uses, there shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 1.0 parking space per dwellir�g unit for residents, and 0.25 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors. Parking spaces for residents shall be provided in a below grade structure; 7 r�� . _ _- ��>:; - - � � � �, ,,� t (iii) For multipl�e dwelling-horizontal, there shall be provided and maint��ined a minimum of 2.0 parking spaces per dwelling ur�it for residents, and 0.2 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors. Parking spaces shall be provided at grade, in a below grade structure, or both. Parking sp;aces may also be provided in a private garage attached ta the rear of the dwelling unit it serves; (iv) All entrances and exits to parking areas and all parking areas shall be surFaced with brick, asphalt or concrete, or any combir�ation thereof; (v) At grade ��arking lots shall be permitted no closer than 3.0 metres from the limits of the "RH/MU-2" Zone identified an Schedule I attached hereto, or any road. (d) SPECIAL REGULATIONS: (i) Non-resid�:ntial uses shall only be permitted within a building cantaining dwelling units. The non-residential uses shall be limited to the first two storeys of a building; (ii) The minimum aggregate gross leasable floor area for all non-residential uses shall be 2,000 square metres; (iii) The maximum aggregate gross leasable floor area for all restaurant type "A" uses shall be 500 square metres; (iv) No drive �through facilities are permitted on the lands designatec! "RH/MU-2" as illustrated on Schedule I of this by-law; (v) Despite S�ction 4(2)(b)(i) of this By-law, outdoor patios associatedl with a restaurant type "A" are permitted to encroach beyond the building envelope as illustrated on Schedule II of this by-law; (vi) Despite Section 4(2)(d)(ii) outdoor patios associated with a restaur��nt type "A" will not be included within the aggregate gross leasable floor area requirements of subclause (ii) above; (vii) Clauses 5.21.2(a), 5.21.2(b), 5.21.2(e), 5.21.2(f), 5.21.2(g), and 5.21.2(k) of By-law 2520, as amended, shall not apply to lands designated "RH/MU-2" on Schedule II attached hereto. 5 PROVISIONS ("MD-H6" Zc�ne) (1) �2) � Uses Permitted ("MD-H6" Zone) �`� � � �T �t �a �' "tij'S,. M1°� �$ . +{�d �l1� � "' fi '°�� ., .,, No person shali with�n the lands designated " MD-H6 " on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (a) Multiple dwellin� horizontal Zone Requirements �("MD-H6 " Zone) (a) Lot Area (minimum) (b) Lot Frontage (m�inimum): (c) Front Yard Depih (minimum): 70 square metres 6.0 metres 3.0 metres (d) Side Yard Widtri (minimum): 1.2 metres except that no interior side yard shall be provided on the side where dwellings on adjacent lots are attached together (e) Building Height (maximum): (f) Gross floor area� (minimum) (g) Building Separation: (h) Parking Requirements: 12A metres 100 square metres per dwelling unit Despite section 5(2)(e) a minimum 1.8 metre separation between blocks of multiple dwelling horizontal shall be permitted (i) For ea�h dwelling unit there shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 2 parking spaces, one of which rnay not be located within a driveway, and one of whic'� must be provided within an attached garage of the dwelling, any vehicular entrance of which shall be located not less than 6.0 metres from any street or drive aisle providing access to those lots, plus a minimum of 0.2 visitor parking spaces per unit. `� �ly� ��;� -s- � a'�� µ . l�J� PROVISIONS ("SA-8" Zone) (1) Uses Permitted (°S��-8" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "SA-8" on Schedule I attached hereto, us�; any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure for any pur�ose except the following: (a) Single attached dwelling residential use; (2) Zone Requirements ("SA-8" Zone) (a) Lot Area (minirn�am): (b) Lot Frontage (minimum): (c) Front Yard Depth (minimum): (d) Rear Yard Depthi (minimum): 100 square metres 4.8 metres 3.0 metres 5.0 metres (e) Side Yard Width (minimum): 1.2 metres except that no interior side yard shall be provided on the side where dwellings on adjacent lots are attached together (f) Building Height (maximum): (g) Gross floor area �(minimum): (h) Obstruction Of Y��rds: 12.0 metres 100 square metres per dwelling unit (i) Des��ite section 5.8(b) of By-law 2520, covered and unenclosed porches, verandahs and flankage entr��nce features not exceeding 1.5 metres in height above the established grade may project no mor�: than: � : 1.5 metres into any required front or rear yard 0.6 metres into any required side yard -10- (i) Parking Requirernents: U) �„ t y r,i!, ,it} �'i��t:; ," � �lt _;. (i) for each dwelling unit there shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 2 parking spaces, one of whi�h may not be located within a driveway, and one of which must be provided within an attached gar�ge of the dwelling, any vehicular entrance of whic:,h shall be located not less than 6.0 metres from any street or drive aisle providing access to tho�e lots, plus a minimum of 0.2 visitor parking spa�;es per unit Special Reg�lations: (i) No rnore than 8 units shall be attached horizontally (ii) Despite section 6(2)(e) a minimum 1.8 metre sep��ration between blocks of single attached dwellings shall be permitted. 7. PROVISIONS ("SA-LW" Zone) (1) Uses Permitted ("SA-LW" Zone) No person shall withi�n the lands designated "SA-LW " on Schedule I attached hereto, usE� any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: Residential Uses: (a) single attached dwelling Commercial Uses: (a) business office (b) commercial schaol (c) personal service shop (d) professional office (e) retail store (2) Zone Requirements ("SA-LW" Zone) (a) Lot Area (minimum): 180 square metres (b) Lot Frontage (minimum): 5.0 metres (c) Unit Width (minimum): 5.0 metres (d) Front Yard Deptf� (minimum): 3.0 metres (e) Rear Yard Depth (minimum): 6.0 metres .. � � .r � � - 11 - ��. (i) Despite clause (d) and (e) above, front yard balconies, verandahs� and decks, both uncovered and covered, may project fully into any required front or side yard; (f) Side Yard Width (minimum): (g) Building Height (maximum): (h) Gross floor are�i (minimum): (i) Parking Requirernents: 1.2 metres except that no interior side yard shall be provided on the side where dwellings on adjacent lots are attached together 12.0 metres 100 square metres per dwelling unit (i) For each dwelling unit there shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 2 parking spaces, one of which may not b�; located within a rear yard, and one of which must be pu-ovided within an attached garage located to the rear of the dwelling, any vehicular entrance of which shall be located not less than 6.0 metres from any street or drive aisle providing access to those lots, plus a menimum of 0.2 visitor parking spaces per unit; (ii) Clauses 5.:21.1 a) to 5.21.2 f), inclusive of By-law 2520, as amended, shall not apply to the lands designated "SA- LW" on Schedule I attached hereto; (j) Special Regulatioris: (i) Despite se�tion 7(1) of this by-law, non-residential uses permitted within the "SA-LW" zone designation may be established only within the ground floor of a dwelling unit; (ii) No driveway� access from St. Martins Drive for individual dwelfing unit,s shall be permitted; (iii) Despite Section 2.46 of By-law 2520, St. Martins Drive shall be considered as the front lot line; (iv) Despite section between blocks permitted. 7(2)(f) a minimum 1.8 metre separation of single attached dwellings shall be CR T� h�` �� '� �r ^� " f �: �,� � �. r tf ' y 8. GENERAL PROVISIONS I;"RH/MU-2", "SA-LW", "SA-8", "MD-H6" Zones) (1) For residential uses�, the lands designated "RH/MU-2", "SA-LW", "SA-8", "MD-H6"" �on Schedule I attached hereto, shall be developed at a den:�ity of over 30 units per net hectare and up to and including 140 units per net hectare up to a maximum of 473 dwelling units; (2) Despite Section 5.6 of By-law 2520 and Clause 3(18) of this By- law, the requiremer�t for frontage on a public street shall be satisfied by establishing frontage on a common elements condominium street; (3) All visitor parking spaces that are required for multiple dwelling- horizontal for each z:one may be provided within any of the lands designated "RH/MU-2", "SA-LW", "SA-8", and "MD-H6"; (4) That the internal �.one lines separating the residential zone categories shall be deemed to be the center line of the internal private road. 9. PROVISIONS ("OS-HL" Zone) (1) Uses Permitted ("OS-HL" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "OS-HL" on Schedule I attached hereto use any lot or erect, alter or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (a) preservation and conservation of the natural environment, soil and wildlife; (b) resource manag�ment; (c) pedestrian trails & walkways. (2) Zone Requirements ("OS-HL" Zone) (a) 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 purposes of flood and erosion control, resource management, or pedestrian trail and walkway purposes; (b) Despite Clause (a) above, tot lots, visitor parking spaces and associated traffic aisles are permitted within the "OS-HL" Zone as illustrated on Schedule I attached hereto. _ `"�� -13- 10. PROVISIONS ("F�" Zone) (1) Uses Permitted Zone Reauirements ("H" Zone� Until such time as th�e "H" Holding provision is lifted, the lands shall not be used for any purpose other than any use permitted by the General Commercial Zone "C2" of Zoning By-law 2520, subject to the provisions of Sec;tion 11 of By-law 2520. (2) Removal of the "H" I-iolding Symbol The "H" Holding Syrnbol shall not be removed from any zone until such time as a Site Plan Agreement and/or a Development Agreement has be�n executed with the City of Pickering and registered that provides for: (a) Appropriate arr��ngements have been made to the satisfaction of the City of Pickering that all the requirements for the development o�F the mixed use have been complied with, including but not limited to, environmental and engineering requirements, building designs, phasing of construction including the requirement for a minimum of 2000 square metres of new commercial floor space in the first phase of development, E�asements, urbanization of the boulevard, installation of tr�ffic signals at the intersection of Bayly Street. and St. Martins Drive and all financial matters; (b) Appropriate arrdngements have been made to the satisfaction of the Region af Durham for the provision of sanitary, water and transportation services and environmental and engineering requirements; (c) Appropriate arrangements have been made to the satisfaction of the Toronto F�egion Conservation Authority for the provision of environmer�tal, engineering and land conveyance requirements. 11. BY-LAW 2520 By-law 2520, 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-law shall be governed by relevant provisions of by-law 2520, as amended. -14 - � �- �. :. �� 12. 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 day of 2006. David Ryan, ; 4 ��,. ��f:� Debi Bentley, City Clerk ��. � po � � � H1GNw A�( � / / � � � / w > � _ � WAYFARER IJaN E _ � - z F�- _ � _ Q _ � � ~ N \ � \ � _ �p1 G •N •R' BP��`l S� R�G� 19.6m 45.7m ry�. � . PIAN M16 PT. 20.8m I BLK Y RP WR-41 PART 1 TO 3 � (H)RH-MU-2 PLAN Mi6 NORTH PART OF BLOCK Y 40R-3151 PART 2 TO 5 �e Q � (H)MD-H6 � �/� PIAN M16 NORTH PART OF BLOCK Y V� 40R-3751 PAFtT 2 TO 5 E � N � 140.6m � (H)SA-8 � m � � RADO M STREET SCHEDULE I TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2006 MAYOR - DAVID FiYAN CITY CLERK - DEBI A. BENTLEY I 3' � Y/�lO.Om � ryti � i �F / Y � � E n h �� S-HL� a 1 �tO.Om i I � 1m / / I I � � N H1�Hw PY �� i �� - �� w > � _ � WAYFARER LAN E — � — z � — � — a — � � ~ � � � �p1 C •N •R' BA�I�� a � � _ S�REE� �' `�' I � 3.Om � � � � m 1 11 (H) � H-M U-L , , , , , , , , , ---------------�-------, (H) M D-H6 (hi)SA-8 � BUILD-TO-ZONE I ------- BUILDING ENVELdPE � � � RADOM STREET \ ..._ � � ' ' 1 I I �l , ,i , ��S-HL � 1 � I , � � � � � N SCHEDULE II TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2006 IYINiV�7 � UAYIN 11iHIV �°"d � v CITY CLERK - DEBI A. BENTLEY l�� f APPENDIX III TO REPORT NUMBER PD 45-06 Recommended Development Guidelines , - ��,_��_, __ �7+, ': �r -�� m 1 -..-,� ��/��1�� i� � ••� ' • •• �•• I , � 0 �� Ba Rid es Plaza Redeu I y g e opmen� DEVEL4PMENT GUIDELINES 0 � ROTARY BAY 0 DGES PLAZA &4Y EAST PARK LAKE ONTARIO � �� .- , ,�� _$ _ '' Cµ�y',N ALLw+CE C / _ � / � � — s g BAYLY � STREET wvenue �o oacwve 0. g A � � PMK � '� I�MD I COMME�C STRCET � ❑ enwwiEVr p� � STREET 1 �� µNyVJD STREET w�� STREEi � m �� wsu � N� ' � \ � � � ^ ] f e�w. J i FANSINW PL � ATON AVEN�C R W S'A1EAA151DE _u =J CRT. � ,} � i oj YnLl.OW31D CRT. :OLAMR AVE. � �� o PMIfIMM CrtEi. NWSMEN PARK I � a ALE% ROBERISON CMK } O � �w� ouwLEr !T. � Q O � FEIASPM PICKERINC CENERATING IY u I� � m I I 1 t� � � Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment Deve�opment Guidelines - Table of Contents Section C1.0 General Description C1.1 Guiding Principles for Redevelopment C2.0 Land Use Objectives C2.1 Urban Design Objectives C2.2 Urban Design Concept C3.0 Urban Design Guidelines Page 2 2 3 3 4 4 C3.1 Site Context: views, ��treet edges, intersections, adjacent public transportation and the ravine 4 C3.2 Site Organization: street and blocks, major open spaces and linkages, service areas 6 C3.3 Built Form 8 C3.4 Streetscaping and Landscaping 10 C3.5 Parking, Parking Locations and Treatment 11 C3.6 Sustainable Design Practices 12 C3.7 Signage 13 C3.8 Lighting 14 C4.0 Phasing of Development Figures Figure A— Urban Design Concept F'lan Figure B— B�ild to Zone, Vistas and Views Plan 14 The Bay Ridges Plaza R�sdevelopment Guidelines were adopted by Pickering City Council on . Bay Ridqes Plaza Redevelopment Paqe 2 .� ' i ""tj��. C1.0 General Description The Bay Ridges Plaza is located at the north limit of the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood. The Neighbc�rhood lies generally on the east side of Frenchman's Bay and extends from Highway 401 to Lake Ontario. The site subject of these de�velopment guidelines comprises an area of approximately 4.3 hectares and supports two commercial plazas located on the south side of Bayly Street between St. Martins Drive and Douglas Ravine. These plazas are municipally known as 1215-1235 Bayly Street and 1261 Bayly Street, and currently contairi retail and office uses. These commercial plazas serve the surrounding neighbour�ood. Vehicular access to the site is from St. Martins Drive and from Bayly Street. Highway 401 and The Canadian National Railway (CNR) mainline are located immediately north of Bayly Street. The site is bounded by: • the CNR mainline and Highway 401, located immediately north of Bayly Street, are major transportation corridors that are readily visible from the north side of the site. • Douglas Ravine provides a major open space feature for the area generally, and for the subject site specifically on the east side of the site. • detached homes with reversed lot frontages are located on the west side of St. Martins Drive. • a residential development south of the subject site includes an 18-storey apartment building and towr�houses. C1.1 Guiding Principles for Redevelopment The site is located in an evolving area of Pickering. The Bay Ridges Neighbourhood is primarily a mix of 1960's and 70's detached, semi-detached, townhouse and apartment dwellings developed over the 1950's, 60's and 70's which can be described as a neighbourhood in a zone of revitalization and transition. Further west of the site, off Bayly Street, a townhouse development was while south on Liverpool Road a nautical village has evolved the Captain's Walk and Frenchm�n's Bay Village, The Miller WaterFront boardwalk. These developments are indicative of helping to revitalize the housing stack and rejuvenate the area. constructed in 2003, by Lake Ontario with �ium Square and the intensification that is The guidelines for these lands have been prepared within the context of Provincial policy, City of Pickering and Region of Durham Official Plans, as well as Transit Oriented Development and Sustainable Development principles. Transit Oriented Developments (TOD) are pedestrian-friend/y, mixed use communities that encourage residents and workers to drive their cars less and ride transit more. ,A A •;g � � _` Bav Ridqes Plaza Redevelopment Paqe 3 c":; ,. W, . , The major principles of TOD inclucie: - A grid network inste�id of a discontinuous road network - Street-oriented uses along arterial roads - A mix of higher density uses - Improved access bel:ween arterials and the interior of blocks - Reducing reliance or� automobile use and parking Sustainable Development and Building is generally defined as: "The use of design and construction methods and m�terials that are resource efficienf and that will not compromise the health of the envi�onment or the associated health and well-being of the building's occupants, builders, the general public, or future generations." As a backgr�und for the preparation of development guidelines, an urban design workshop was conducted on DecE;mber 13, 2005 to obtain stakeholder input for the redevelopment of this site. There was general agreement at the workshop that the site is a good candidate for redevelopment with a mix of uses, including high density housing particularly in light of its proximity to the Pickering GO Station. The site's proximity to the Pickering GO Station is approximately 400m or a 5 minute walk away, which makes it a very suitable location within the City of Pickering for redevelopment and intensification with a mix of residential and commercial uses. C2.0 Land Use Objectives The objective of this document is to articulate urban design guidelines for the redevelopment of the site. The guidelines will help ensure that development is designed appropriately and will a5sist the municipality in the review of applications for redevelopment. C2.1 Urban Design Objectives These Development Guidelines �atilize the urban design objectives of Chapter 9 "Community Design" and ChaptEr 13 —"Detailed Design Considerations" of the Pickering Official Plan as a found�tion. It is the intent of these guidelines to further those objectives and introduce and augment those listed below: • to create a higher intensity of development and to provide a mix of uses to create a vibrant urban community • to provide for a range of housing choices • to identify, protect and enhance the public realm and open space features • to promote development of the site based on sustainable development principles • to retain retail commercial uses at a scale that serves the surrounding community. �.1 �. Bav Ridqes Plaza Redevelopment Paqe 4 An Urban Design Concept has bE;en prepared to graphically illustrate the basis for the guidelines. This concept incorporates input gathered at the public workshop, as well as coordination meetings with the Planning & Development Department and the planning and design team preparing the development master plan for the site. (See Figure A— Bay Ridges Urban Desugn Concept). The primary elements of the conc�pt (as shown on Figure A— Urban Concept Plan) include: • an ar�a for high density rnixed use buildings along the frontage of Bayly Street • surface parking for mixed u,�e development behind the Bayly Street buildings • a primary internal road system comprised of two main roads ru n n i n g east-west througf� the site and a north-south road that connects to Bayly Street. • the primary access roac� from St. Martins Drive, which becomes a main east-west connectior� for the site will provide pedestrian access and views to Douglas Ravine • the north-south road, whichi connects the east-west road to Bayly Street will provide additional access to� the site • an area for townhouses south of the east-west road, including traditional townhouses with backy�rds, back-to-back townhouses and stacked townhouses • an amenity area/parkette and a pedestrian walkway adjacent to the edge of Douglas Ravine C3.0 Urban Design Guidelines These guide!�nes have been prepared in keeping with the City of Pickering Official Plan objectives, site-specific development and design parameters, discussions with City of Pickering officials, and the findings of the urban design workshop regarding this site. C3.1 Site Context: vaews, street edges, intersections, adjacent public transportation, and the raerine Basis Higher density and compact urban forms are more able to support public transit than traditional development. This site's strategic location, adjacent to Bayly Street and in very close proximity to the Pickering Go Station, provides a significant opportunity to introduce a more compact and dense built form. Municipal policies encourage and require more sustainable developr�ent densities along key transit corridors and/or in close proximity to transportation nades. �l� BaY Ridges Plaza Redevelopmeni Page 5 There is no possibility of developrnent on the north side of Bayly Street, across from the site, as it is dominated by the CNR mainline and Highway 401. Therefore, it is important to provide a strong built form along the south side of Bayly Street. A built form edge should be aligned with �the Bayly Street right of way, which would act as a buffer to any development on th� interior of the site. Any widening of the Bayly Street right of way adjacent to the site should be kept to a minimum width to support a pedestrian environment. The site should be landscaped along the street frontages and building siting and massing should provide presence to the street and appropriate interfaces with existing developments and the Douglas Ravine. Guidelines 1. Recognize the prominent loc:ation of the site at the intersection of an arterial corridor (Bayly Street) and � collector road (St. Martins Drive). Design the development to have an enl-ianced presence along the two public roads with generous and appropriately ��laced landscaping to help create the pedestrian environment, and prominent k�uilding massing and articulation. 2. Provide architectural design that is well articulated and reflective of the prominence of the site location at the intersection of St. Martins Drive and Bayly Street. 3. Create a strong built form along the Bayly Street frontage of the site by providing for a continuous slreet edge of buildings with height and massing emphasis to help "frame" the street. 4. Ensure a widened right of way for Bayly Street is minimized to support a compact built form, and a pedestrian street environment. 5. Organize the site layout of buildings, roads, laneways and open spaces to take advantage of the Douglas Ra�✓ine as a protected and enhanced natural feature. No residential rear yards are to be located adjacent to the ravine. 6. Configure the site to provide convenient pedestrian access, both from and through the site, to the nearby� Pickering GO Station. 7. Provide traffic signals at the intersection of St. Martins Drive and Bayly Street, in consultation with the Region of Durham. Bav Ridqes Plaza Redevelopment Paqe 6 �✓i ri iv�r' r,L i r�..,l J L.. �,.,,,..� ��._.I-�� aviii ��1�\A/S I�I�n C3.2 Site Organization: street �nd blocks, major open spaces and linkages, service areas Basis The site is rectangular in shape with street frontages on its north and west sides. Bayly Street is an arterial corridcar and is uniquely positioned to provide for high density buildings containing mixeci uses such as residential and commercial. The potential building footprints, associated service spaces and parking for the high density development along Bayly Street significantly influence the layout of the full site. Development with lower �ensities should be considered mainly for the southerly sections of the site to ta�ce advantage of the noise attenuation provided by the high density development alon� Bayly Street. St. Martins Drive is a collector road capable of carrying greater traffic volumes than local roads. Vehicular access to the site shall be provided from both Bayly Street and St. Martins Drive. Full signaliz�tion is recommended at the Bayly Street/St. Martins Drive intersection. The primary internal road system should link with St. Martins Drive and Bayly Street and provide for continuous pedestrian movement both to and through the site. The east-west road section from St. Martins Drive should provide a vista to the Douglas Ravine, provide vehicular and pedestrian access to the interior of the site, and link with the north/south road section from Bayly Street. Direct vehicular access (driveways/aisle�) to the primary internal road system should be minimized to support priority to the pedestrian environment and maximize opportunity for on-street parking. .�..�•t � i ;�� Say Ridqes Plaza Redevelopmen�t Pa�e 7 l., . ., The presence of Douglas Ravine at the site's easterly periphery is a major asset. A parkette to serve residents of the site shall be required adjacent to the ravine top-of-bank to take advantage of the views intc� the Douglas Ravine, and assist in integrating the development with the ravine feature. A pedestrian walkway shall be introduced on public lands along or near the top of bank of the ravine to provide a link to the Bayly Street sidewalk and the Pickerinq GO Station. This pedestrian link is an important part of the larger pedestrian netwUrk which is also intended to connect the Pickering GO Station to the north side of Highway 401 through a future pedestrian bridge. A landscaped focal point should also be considered centrally on the site, preferably at the intersection of the two primary internal roads. Currently, there is a pedestrian connection between the site and the residential buildings south of the site. This cc�nnection should be reviewed in light of the layout of the site and maintained if feasible. To create an attractive public streetscape, service areas should not be visible from the streets and should be designed as an integral part of the buildings. Landscaping should be used to provide bufferinc� of service areas on the site where required. Guidelines 1. Place high density mixed u�e development along the Bayly Street frontage, with particular emphasis at the intersection of St. Martins Drive and Bayly Street. 2. Provide commercial uses, v,rhich are visually and physically accessible to pedestrians from Bayly Street, and from the northerly section of St. Martins Drive. 3. Situate medium density residential development south of the high density residential and commercial developments along Bayly Street. 4. Locate a main east-west entry point and access road/laneway from a central location along St. Martins DriWe. Ensure that this access provides, and suitably frames, views into Douglas Ravine and provides for a pedestrian walkway that connects to the parkette at thE: terminus of the east-west road. 5. Provide a primary internal ro�d system comprised of two linking main roads; one running east-west through the site from St. Martins Drive, and the other running north-south from Baylyr Street. 6. Design the east-west road to provide for two-way traffic with on-street parking and an ample pedestrian sidewalk on both sides. 7. Design the primary north-south road to provide for two-way traffic, with access controls to and from Bayly S�reet in consultation with the Region of Durham. This road is to provide for an �mple pedestrian sidewalk on both sides. il�a Bav Ridges Plaza Redevelopment Paae 8 .. �, 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. Ensure a high quality pedestrian environment by limiting the number of north-south streets, to ensure that vehicul�r access will not disrupt the pedestrian walkway along the east-west road. Furthermore, no residential driveways are to access directly onto the main internal east-west road. Locate a parkette at the edgE; of the ravine and ensure that it is linked to the rest of the site visually and physically. Place a walkway on public I�nds along or near the top of bank of Douglas Ravine, which provides a cont,inuous link between the Bayly Street sidewalk, so as to enable connection to thE: Liverpool Road and Bayly Street intersection as a means to create a strong link between the existing neighbourhood, the site, and the Pickering GO Station. Locate a landscape area centrally on the site that provides for a landscape amenity. Provide a pedestrian walkvvay between the subject site and residential community located to the south either by maintaining the current location or by a new connection, if feasible. Incorporate storage and garb�ge areas into the buildings they serve and locate them away from public streets. Ensure that the internal layout of mixed use buildings are designed to accommodate recycling programs. Use landscaping to buffer serriice and parking areas, particularly to shield views from public roads. All mechanical equipment rriust be adequately screened and all commerci�l buildings should contain their rooftop mechanical equipment either in small roof top elements or under roof profiles. 16. Attractive exterior seating areas or courtyards that include benches, bicy�cle lock-ups and garbage receptacles, and are safely removed 17 : from vehicular routes will be e�ncouraged. For all restaurant uses, r•estaurant cooking ventilation systems shall inc��rporate ecologizer water wash, ultravioiet or oth�r equivalent odour extraction mechanisms sufficient enough to ensure that the resulting substantially odour free and will not affect the surrounding residents. No drive-thru facilitates are pf,rmitted for any use. C3.3 Built Form exhaust is Basis Buildings should be located in c�roupings that enable the efficient movement of vehicles and pedestrians on the site. J:. g- °� : � Attention should be paid to the Bayly Street and St. Martins Drive intersection, where buildings should be located in clo5e proximity to the corner, appropriately massed and articulated to take into account their prominent location to both public street frontages an�i to provide a landmark. Building heights for high-rise builciings should respect a pedestrian scale. In this regard, a layered building approach should be considered, which expresses a base, or podium, upon which the high-r�ise component of the building would be placed. Further massing measures should be considered depending on the proposed heights of high-rise buildings. Medium density buildings, such as traditional townhouses or back-to-back townhouses, should be designed t;o provide a variety of rooflines, massing features and articulated fa�ades. Revers� lot frontages should be avoided along existing public streets or any new internal streets. Building fa�ades must be design��d to provide an attractive presence. Particular design emphasis should be placedl on all building farades adjacent to public streets. As well, development adjacent to the primary road system should have buildings oriented to compliment the street, vvith main entrances facing this main axis. Having main entrances on these streets vvill support an active streetscape and promote the principle of "eyes on the street". Guidelines 1. Locate the highest buildings along the Bayly Street frontage. A"landmark" presence should be provided at the intersection of Bayly Street and St. Martins Drive. 2. For high-rise buildings, provide a minimum two-storey base building, or podium, above which the high-rise pc�rtion of the building would be placed, using set backs to maintain the pedestrian scale of the base. BaYRidqes Plaza Redevelopment Paqe 10 l�� 3. Require a sunshade analysis� to ensure that impacts of building heights to the existing neighbourhood are rriitigated. 4. Consider massing or building farade treatment measures to express the upper floors (tnp) of high-rise buildirigs. 5. Use architectural elements such as cornices, entry features and upgraded material treatments to add vi�ual interest to all buildings on the site. 6. Promote an active streetscape, commercial building farades using ample glazing facing the public strE;ets. Place commercial building entrances to be visible and accessible to pedE:strians. 7. Avoid monotonous rows oif townhouses by providing appropriate breaks between rows of townhou�es. Design a dynamic farade for a block of townhouses by occasionally �iarying the front yard depths, using large windows, and by providing a varied roofline. 8. Create a strong built form edge along the main primary internal road system, with main entrances facing the street, porches, and visible living areas on the ground floor. 9. Avoid reverse lot frontages �For townhouses along the public streets and any internal streets or laneways. C3.4 Streetscaping and Landsc:aping Basis Architectural and landscaping design elements should be complimentary to create a distinctive development. The p�ablic streetscape must integrate with the private development to form a high quality� urban environment. The Bayly Street frontage is the main arterial frontage of the site. While a strong built form image is recommended along this frontage, street tree plantings on both the north and south sides of the street would further enhance the area. The plantings on the north side of Bayly Street are intended to provide a visual buffer to the CNR mainline and Highway 4Ci1. Street trees, and other landscaping using trees and shrubs, should be used extensively within the site to delir�eate internal streets and laneways, major access points into the site, and accentuat� open spaces. To provide for a more immediate landscaping impact on the site, the use of larger caliper deciduous trees and taller c�oniferous trees is recommended. �1.� Bay Ridqes Plaza Redevelopment Paqe 11 Guidelines 1. City of Pickering and Regiori of Durham public streetscape initiative�� are to be implemented in concert with the landscaping on the subject si1:e to create a pedestrian supportive and plE;asant urban environment. 2. Plant street trees on both sides of Bayly Street. Plantings on the north side of Bayly Street, in consultatic�n with the Region of Durham, shall contain deciduous and coniferous tre��s to provide year-round visual buffering. 3. Design the public side�alk, street furniture and plantings on the south side of Bayly Street to promote p�:destrian use by providing a minimum �'_m sidewalk width, decorative paving, pedestrian- scaled street light fixtures and other pedestrian amenities. 4. Provide a minimum width o�f 3m in the front yard of buildings along� St. Martins Drive for landscaping. 5. Delineate internal streets arid laneways 0 by using trees and shrubs. Provide a variety of native plantings on the parkette and open spaces. Require decorative features :�uch as gazebos for the Douglas Ravine. 7. Require a minimum caliper ot� 70mm trees for deciduous trees and a minimum height of 2m for coniferous tr�es in landscaped areas. 8. Refer to Arterial Corridor Guidelines prepared by the Region of Durham when selecting street tree species fc�r the Bayly Street frontage. C3.5 Parking, Parking Locations and Treatment ��Y L�NT PED. EUh �T ��srnY uc-�rinr,5u5N� �ma��r �aw��su.� parkette adjacent to the Basis The City's desire to create a tr�ansit oriented and sustainable accomplished with higher densitie;� and reliance on the number of car �trips requirements for the site should t,ake i Pickering GO Station and the g�eate residential density. more compact urban forms and demand for parking nto consideration the close r "walk to" opportunity pro development is with a reduced spaces. Parking proximity of the vided by higher Bay Ridqes Piaza Redevelopment Paqe 12 -� �� An abundance of surFace parking �ften creates environments that are desolate and not supportive of pedestrian.activii:y. Where they have to be used, measures such as perimeter landscape screening and landscape islands, assist in creating a more satisfactory design for surface p�arking areas. To create a site design that is dominated by well-designed buildings and landscaping, particularly for high density mixed use buildings, parking should be located underground. In certain instances, such as for retailing and for townh�ouses, parking may have to be placed at grade. Along public street frontages parkirig will not be placed in front of buildings. Guidelines 1. Consider reduced parking ratios for residential and commercial developments on the site. 2. Use underground parking, particularly for high density mixed use buildings. 3. Where surface parking lots are used, provide generous landscape screening along the perimeter of the lot. In addition, place landscape islands within the parking lot to reduce the amount of hard paved surfaces. 4. Delineate the major pedestriar� routes within a surface parking lot, which lead to 5. adjacent buildings, with decor��tive paving or similar treatments. If surface parking is used foir townhouses, particularly if located in the yard, provide landscaping on t.he adjacent areas. Consider the use of decorative paving for hard surFaces. 6. There shall be no surface parking in the front yard of buildings along St. Martins Drive. 7. Encourage on-street parkinc� on the primary internal road system. 8. Consider providing on-street parking on the east side of St. Martins Drive, soutri of the entrance to the site subject to boulevard improvements to help set out and delineate the parking area. C3.6 Sustainable Design Practices Basis front The City of Pickering is currently undertaking an initiative that seeks to achieve long- term environmentally, socially and economically sustainable communities through design principles such as: • creating socially cohesive and diverse communities through a mix of housing types and employment opportunities • promoting alternative transpartation and energy • promoting efficient use of resources • locating residential areas close to recreational and commercial services with pedestrian and cycling conn�ctions �R P� ^' R:�Bav I�i�qes Plaza Redevelopment _ Paqe 13 These design principles should be followed in the development of this site in support of creating a sustainable neighbourhood. While several rating systems are ��vailable to measure environmental performance of buildings and sites, proponent:s are encouraged to use LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) as the rating system. LEED measures and ranks a building's environmental performance under six general categories: Sustainable sites; Water efficiency; Energy an�d atmosphere; Materials and resources; Indoor environmental quality; Innovation a�nd design. Benefits of employing sustainak�le building technologies include measurable reductions of waste, decreased water use, energy savings, reduced operating and maintenance costs and improved iridoor air quality. Guidelines 1. Encourage, as a minimum, the achievement of LEED — Silver to ensure sustainable building practice:� are achieved on the site by considering the following: - energy saving windows, co�nstruction materials, fixtures and systems - greenroofs building design - innovative stormwater management techniques, such as porous surFace paving materials - water conservation measur�es - recycling and composting ��rrangements - use of native tree species in landscaping - maximizing the natural irrigation of trees - recycling trash chute for metal, paper and mixed trash for apartment buildings - smart meters, which recc�rd the time of day that electricity is used so customers can use electricity at less expensive times of day C3.7 Signage Basis Signs are an important element of commercial activity. Types of signage regularly used for commercial uses include: fascia signs; rooftop signs; and free standing ground signs. Signage should be part of the over�all development design and work in concert with buildings and landscaping on the site. In placing signs on a site or a building, proponents should be mindful of imf�acts on the public streetscape. Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment Paqe 14 �� Signage can also be used as a creative tool. In certain instances, a coordinated sign system, which utilizes up-tc�-date display technologies, lighting and other means, can contribute to a vibrant and animated streetscape. In this regard, Bayly Street should be considered a prime candidate for any such creative expressions. Guidelines 1. Incorporate all signage intc� the design considerations for buildings and landscaping. 2. No freestanding roof-mounted billboard signs shall be permitted. 3. Fascia signs that are in proportion and architecturally coordinated with the building farade will be encour�aged. 4. Limit the use of ground signs, except when incorporated into the landscaping. C3.8 Lighting Basis The use of lighting to enhance a d��velopments attractiveness and safety of the built environment is accomplished by piromoting the use of lighting that is of appropriate quality, intensity and design. The City of Pickering promotes limiting the effects of unwanted lig"t on people, property and the natural environment. Guidelines 1. Lighting design should compl�:ment the design of the development. 2. Promote the use of lighting to enhance and define the aesthetic and functional quality of the public spaces such the pedestrian walkway and parkette. 3. Promote the use of lighting fixtures that are compatible with the scale of pedestrian activity. 4. Exterior lighting shall not spill �ver onto adjacent properties or streets. 5. Lighting shall be downcast th�ough the use of full cut off fixtures to avoid light pollution. 6. Lighting and light standards iri public areas including parking lots should relate to the pedestrian and be limite�d to a height of 6 metres. 7. Promote the use of lightinc� that is environmentally friendly in terms of generated light levels and energy conservation. C4.0 Phasing of Development Basis The Bay Ridges Plaza, built in the 1960's provided 5,500m2 of retail, personal service, office and food store servic�e to the neighbourhood. Commercial retail uses � r, . �, i.. �J Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment Paqe 15 n '�. . _. comprise an important aspect o�f the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood and must be provided in any redevelopment of i:he site. Guidelines • encourage efforts to provi�de continuity of service during the construction phases in the commercial areas of significant relevance, through business relocation and phasing inceintives • require the inclusion of significant replacement service commercial floor space (new construction) �n the first phase of redevelopment of the site (approximately 2,OOOm2). � � �T7l;GHi•,�EP�►T #._ a TO �;�:�':�H? � PCi. �' � ` C3 � INF�RMATION COMPIL�D FROM APPLICANT'S SUBMITTED PLAN S. R. & R. BAY RIDGES LTD. A 06/06 From Informatioi� Report No. 07-06 F(H1 SGW£ 41oA'ES LtF 71fE APPUG1Nl'S SLIBAA'17ED PUN ARE ANWA�YE ft�R NEW6YG AT 1ME d7Y Of R'CKERWC PLIMNN�G t 0.Rt'LAqIL�Nl LIEAIRIAA9VT. 7J�' 161P IWS A'PDO(/CED BY 71AE GYIY G�f' AC/(ERYhC PL9AtlM4�C d� GEYECO°AI�Nr GEPAIPlA1LHI, AN�DRA6fAGN � S(#'PCA4T SERNCES A[IY Q ZQ06. ,� r� ,. �� l�a'� INFaRMATICJN CQMPILED FROM APPLICANT'S REVISED SUBNYITTED PLAN S. R. & R. E3AY RIDGES LTD. l� 06/06 .r _ _ ;F�� .�.�....�..��r�J ., � !'�:�z_ `y`��- � �? x._�...�..,� fULC SGItE COFYE5 GK' 7l,L� APf'C/GNJ"S 5Lt61W77E0 AUN ARE AN6YABCE fDR NEWING AT 1Nf' CpY OF PoAKEANYC P/AANIWI+C 8� DEM£LQ°I/EMT L�A�R7A�'NT. 7IN5 ANP N:1S PRODUCED BY 7HE CHY �' PICKE�!'i PLUMNW' i lAEYECA°MENl AER4RIA!£NT, a�o,atunow er stiw�avr sEm�rc� AUGf/Sl !Q 2�6 a � � �3 Fp��P'ItJI ielei:S�1t 1 77�.� 1�,! � 1 ►�r l,� Ei.:F'U(ii �a p(� �f ✓ ` c� G ___�.A •- �- — STAFF GONCEPT PLAN SCALE:1:7500 �.�,.�� ,.� Y STRBSTq,.�,�.,...,�,.,. Fl111pCE flN�JlS RMOt3 RlklC4 / •�: • � � l8AfB4 H�ILDPOR lRii86 DBY�+�I/@�C � I rnu � �� ,.. , ' �. �. � Attachment # 5 APPLICANT'S DEVELOPMENT DETAIL Details of Application Original Plan Revised Plan (Attachment #2) Attachment #3) Total ross lot area — 4.067 ha — 4.308 ha Valle lands land below to of bank — 0.609 ha — 0.609 ha Road Widenin — 0.007 ha — 0.09 ha 10 metre buffer from to of bank — — 0.223 ha Net lot area — 3.38 ha — 3.38 ha Number of Traditional Townhouses — 71 — 38 Number of Back-to-Back Townhouses — 78 — 76 Number of live-work Townhouses — 12 — 12 Total Number of Townhouses — 161 — 126 Number of A artment Units Buildin ",A" — 243 — 240 No. of One bedroom Units in Buildin "A" — 140 — 150 No. of Two bedroom Units in Buildin "A" — 103 — 90 Number of Apartment Units Buildin "B" — 168 — 107 No. of One bedroom Units in Buildin "B" — 101 — 60 No. of Two bedroom Units in Buildin "B" — 67 — 47 Total Number of Apartment Units — 411 — 347 Total Number of One bedroom Units — 241 — 210 Total Number of Two bedroom Units — 170 — 137 Total Number of Dwellin Units — 572 — 473 Apartment Buildin "A" Hei ht — 16 store s — 16 storeys A artment Buildin "B" Hei ht — 18 store s — 18 store s Commercial - Gross floor Area — 2,062 m — 2,133 m Surface Parking for — 60 spaces — 58 spaces a artment/commercial buildin Underground parking for — 462 spaces — 546 apartment/commercial buildin Total parking for apartment/commerci�l — 522 Spaces — 604 buildin Parkin er townhouse — 2 s aces — 2 s aces Townhouse Visitors Parkin — 9 s aces — None desi nated Total townhouse arkin — 331 spaces — 252 spaces Total Parkin on the site — 853 s aces — 856 s aces � � 1,:.� r F i_� ._.._�J...�"� �? .._.. .,... L �i � �� rci a l�u �� vi s� ry ��vi �e� � n c� 69 Yorkville Ave., Toronto, Ont. M5R 188 Tel: 416 712 9309 Fax: 416 972-9588 Affiliated with �� C�mmeraal �us lr�� E Mail: CFAServicesCcilaol com August 18, 2006 Mr. Neil Carroll, M.C.I.P. RPP Director, Plarning and Development Department City of Pickering, Ont. L1V 6K7 Att: Ms. Lynda Taylor Delivered by E Mait Dear Ms. Taylor : Re: Parking Standards Rationale As per our meeting August 10, 2006, we agreed to provide for your consideration our parking standards rationale for the subject rezoning application. In our planning report supporting the rezoniiig application, the theme of a"New Paradigm" of Land Use Planning in Ontario and that of Transit Supportive Redevelopment principles were put forward throughout the planning justification docum�nt. At the risk of being repetitive, in Attachment C(Transit Supportive Land Use Planning Guidelines of the Province) we took guidelines 4.5.1 on redu�ing parking requirements, and applied it to the subject site. As well, with Attachment D in the plannir�g report, we applied some of our experiences in other jurisdictions on the key ingredients of Transit Oriented Development. Specifically, these experiences all point to a reduced parking standard near transit nodes with similar characteristics as the Liverpool GO Station surrounding area. Lastly, we examined the MBPD prepared February 2006 Draft Urban Design Guidelines. On page 4 of the repo�, it is stated that a major principle af Transit Oriented Development is the need to put limits on parking. On page 24 of the report it is stated that " A significant corollary to the desire to create more sustainable, higher density and compact urban forms is the reduced reliance on the number of car trips and a reduced demand for parking spaces. Therefore, given the close proximiry of the plaza site to the Pickering GO station, any development pruposal should consider reduced parking ratios for the residential as well as commercial buildings." The repo�, in addition, provided additional guidance with guidelines 35, 36 and 37on page 25. Lastly, and most importantly, we examined the approaches of suburban municipalities in the GTA to determine their approaches to transit oriented development and sustainable redevelopment. The Region of York passed Official Plan Amendment 43 in response to changes in terms of sustainable development and in order to implement the York Region Rapid Transit Plan. As a result, the plan permits 2.5 FSI at Regional Centres and encourages the local municipalities to encourage transit oriented development by addressing "appropriate parking design and standards". As a result of this policy initiative, the following are repres�:ntative examples of how the municipalities have adopted new standards: The Town of Markham in their Markham City Centre By law (2004-196) applies parking standards of 1.2 spaces for apartments as a maximum. One spot per apartment unit with .2 for visitors. For townhouses they require one spot within the structure and one spot on the driveway. The secondary � n _ _ _ .l.. ;,. , a �, . , �S .�' U.. • Page 2 August 18, 2006 plan calls for on street parking: " It is interided that on street parking will be encouraged at appropriate locations on all roads, except Regional ro�ds, busways alleys and lanes, in order to provide some of the parking required for adjacent development to assist in calming traffic movement and thereby enhance pedestrian safety. The Markham City Centre By law applies to an area that can be compared to the Bay Ridges area and the subject application. The Town of Richmond Hill has implemented the Regional Policy by adopting a graduated scale for parking standards for higher density transii: oriented development at the Langstaff GO Station, ranging from 1.5 parking spaces/ unit for units greater than 1,000 sq. ft, 1.2 parking spaces for under 1,000 sq. ft. 1.0 spaces for under S00 sq. feet to .9 parking spaces/unit for units under 500 square feet plus .25 spaces for visitors parking. For Block townhousing such as back to back units, 2 spaces plus .25 for visitors standards are applied. The site attributes of this Langstaff Go Station development are very comparable to the Liverpool Go Station are� and the Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment application. . The City of Vaughan applies 1.5 parking spaces per unit for multiple family units and 2 spaces for town housing. The City of Mississauga is implementing a new zoning by law in the fall of 2006 and the proposed by law proposes the following standards: Condominium Apartment Dwellings: 1 spa�e per bachelor unit, 1.25 per one bedroom unit, and 1.40 for two bedroom units. For Condominium tUwnhousing 2.0 spaces and .25 visitors spaces per unit. In summary, this application represents Trai�sit Oriented Redevelopment within the greater City Centre, within a short walking distance of the Live�pool GO Station. As well, the site is serviced by Durham Transit The redevelopment of the subject site has been designed to reflect the latest sustainable planning design standards for parking. The standard of 1.1 parking spaces per residential unit with .15 for visitors for the high rise residential units, mostly accommodated underground, represents good transit supportive planning. In addition, additional surface parking spaces are provided for the commercial components at 1 space per 34 ;sq m. of retail area reflects current planning standards in the GTA. As well for the townhousing, 1 parkirig space per unit in the garage, and 1 parking space per unit in the driveway, supplemented by surface visitor parking at strategic locations throughout the site, represents good planning and in conformity with provincial policy guidelines and the recommendations of the draft urban design guidelines prepared for the area by MBPD. Please contact us should your require further clarification on the planning approaches taken on this exciting transit oriented redevelopment application. Yours sincerely, —_.._ Stephen I. Fagyas, M.A., M.C.I.P. Commercial Focus Advisory Services �� l,Ti�t,r�i:'.pr.p.,�7 �.....�...�......_��} :;r'� r':+..,... ��..Jc . L7....�� . ,. , J„ �1�1_---- ! W �'�uiWLI�=.;-� . m'' .:� '� u.�+t�.�1;14- INFORMATION REPORT NO. 07-06 FOR F�UBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF .June 1St, 2006 IN ACCORDANCE WITH TFIE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendm�ent Application A 06/06 S. R. & R. Bay Ridges L.td. 1215 - 1235 Bayly Stre�:t Part of Block Y, Plan M-16 City of Pickering 1.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION - the subject lands are loca�ed at the southeast corner of the intersection of Bayly Street and St. Martin;� Drive; - a property location map is provided for reference (see Attachment #1); - the property is currently occupied with the Bay Ridges Plaza that contains a variety of commercial uses including retail, personal services, office uses and a car wash; - the vast majority of the property not occupied by the building is paved for parking purposes with the exception of the portion of the property along the eastern side which is sloped and forms part of the Douglas Ravine; - the site's topography, other than the Douglas Ravine portion is relatively flat; - the property is encumbered by an existing easement in the eastern portion of the property for sewer purposes; - access to the existing site is provided by a driveway off of Bayly Street and two driveways off of St. Martins Drive; - the subject application doe�� not include the lands associated with the smaller plaza at 1259 Bayly Street: - surrounding land uses are: north - on the opposit� side of Bayly Street is the Highway 401; south - townhouses and apartment building; east - open space lands being the Douglas Ravine; west - on the opposite side of St. Martins Drive are lots that front onto Tanzer Court. CN rail line and detached dwelling � r�, -., � �3 t�' � .� J � - f�iformation Report No. 07-06 2.0 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL . � �,, ,-% , i E� =� t�� f �>G�._„� � - c-� E Page 2 - S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Lt;d. have submitted an application to amend the zoning by-law in order permit a mixed use development consisting of townhouses, back-to-back i:ownhouses, and a mixed use building consisting of ground related retail/commercial uses and office uses and two apartment buildings; - the applicant also proposes to create some live-work units that will front onto St. Martins Drive; - the applicant's proposed site plan is provided for reference (see Attachment #2); - the proposed apartment tov�ers on top of the commercial units are located at the north-west corner of the property with the rest of the development being occupied by grade related residential development in the form of freehold townhouses and back-to back townhouses; - the proposed site plan doe� not propose the creation of any new municipal streets, rather the creation o�f private roads/laneways; - it is anticipated that the indiwidual townhouse dwelling units will be created by means of an application for ,� common element condominium; - the condominium proposal will be a common element condominium for private internal roads, visitor parking area, parkette and possibly some perimeter landscaping elem�nts; - it is anticipated that the aK�artment building will be subject to a traditional condominium application in �rder to create the individual dwelling units; - the apartment building complex with the commercial component will have underground parking for the residents and surface parking for commercial users; - the proposal is intended to be developed in phases, the first phase being the freehold and back-to-back tc�wnhouses in the southern portion of the site, with the commercial component and the apartment buildings being built as later phases; - the following chart outlines the existing site details: Details of Proposed Development Total gross lot area Valley lands (land below to�� of bank) Road Widening Net lot area Num�er of Traditional Townhouses Number of Back-to-Back Tc�wnhouses Number of live-work Townhouses Total Number of Townhouses Building "A" Building "B" Number of Apartment Units Total number of Dwelling Units — 4.067 ha — 6,089.4 m2 — 750 m2 — 3.383 ha — 71 — 78 12 161 243 168 411 572 ��.T�ti.�i�'Ii�4�C�V� �'».p�:�.„�.�.,.�/1 A.F �;l" V �r: f �' 3`i f ._ ..!, `J .....,,�j, Srt .,�.:....--- Information Report No. 07-06 3.0 3.1 3.2 Apartment Building "A" Height Apartment Building "B" Height Office - Gross floor Area Retaii - Gross floor Area Commercial - Gross floor Area Surface Parking for apartment/commercial building Underground parking for apartmenUcommercial building Total parking for apartment/commercial building OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONINI� Durham Reqional Official Plan Page 3 16 storeys 18 store�rs 1,021 m 1,041 m2 2,062 m2 60 spaces 462 spaces 522 Spaces - designates the subject land�s as Living Areas; - areas designated as Living Areas are intended to be predominantly used for housing purposes, and ma�/ include limited office, retail and personal service uses; - in consideration of developiment applications in Living Areas the intent of the Plan is to achieve a compact urban form, including intensive residential, office, retail and service and mixed uses along arterial roads and in conjunction with present an�� potential transit facilities; - Bayly Street where it abut;s the subject lands is designated as a Type A Arterial Road; - the proposal appears to con�form to the Durham Region Official Plan; Pickerinq Official Plan - the Pickering Official Plan designates the subject lands as Mixed Use Area — Mixed Corridors Area and �pen Space Systems — Natura/ Areas; - permissible uses within Mixed Use Area — Mixed Corridors Area include, amongst others, a variety of residential uses including townhouses and apartment buildings, retailin� of goods and services, offices and restaurants; - the Pickering Official Plan �stablishes a density range of over 30 and up to and including 140 dwelling units per hectare for development within a Mixed Use Area — Mixed Corridors Area; - the proposed application is proposing 572 dwelling units to be located on a net designated area of 3.38 hectares resulting in a net density of 169 dwelling units per hectare; - the current number of dwelling units does not comply with the density provisions of the Official Plan, maximum density of 140 dwelling units per hectare; - Mixed Use Areas are intended to have the widest variety of uses and highest level �f activities in the City when compared to other designations; - the lands that are designated Open Space — Natural Area represent lands that are in proximity to the aouglas Ravine; 1�� ,r , a .� :J +: fi � _ , ,. _Information Report No. 07-06 ` � ' r `�� ` �� _ •,�_ . - permissible uses within land designated Open Space — Natural Area include conservation, environment�l protection, restoration and passive recreation; - the subject lands are within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood of the Official Plan; - the subject lands are within a Detailed Review Area which requires development guidelines lfor major development and no development guidelines currently exist in the Official Plan Compendium for this area of the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood (see Section 3.3); - in cunjunction with this application staff are preparing development guidelines; - Schedule II of the Pickering Official Plan - Transportation System designates Bayly Street where it abuts the subject site as a Type A Arterial Road; - Type A Arterial Roads are 1:he highest order arterial road and are designed to carry large volumes of traffi� at moderate to high speed; - Bayly Street is designated as a Transit Spine where a higher level of transit service is to be encouraged; - Schedule II of the Pickerinc� Official Plan - Transportation System designates St. Martins Drive where it abuts the subject site as a Collector Road; - Collector Roads are designed to provide access to individual properties, to local roads, and to other collector and arterial roads; - Schedule 111 of the Pickerinc� Official Plan - Resource Management designates a portion of the subject lands associated with the Douglas Ravine as Shorelines and Stream Cor�ridors; - Shorelines and Stream Corridors identify lands that may be prone to water impacts, such as flooding, erosion and slope instability, and requires an environmental report to k�e submitted that appropriately addresses any environmental constraints o�n the subject property; - the subject application will be assessed against the policies and provisions of the Pickering Official Plan during the further processing of the applications; 3.3 Development Guidelines for �the Bav Ridaes Neiqhbourhood - with the submission of the subject application the need for development guidelines for the subject lands was identified; - Development Guidelines will examine the land use mix and arrangement, the scale and intensity of use the transportation network and .community design requirements; - the preparation of the development guidelines has been initiated by the City with the assistance of a cor�sultant; - the preparation of the development guidelines included an urban design workshop that included rep�resentatives of the area residents, applicant, City staff, Regional staff and TRCA staff; - a draft of the Development Guidelines was prepared by the consultant and is currently being reviewed; - the development guideline� will address the mix of land use, development layout, open space distribution, built form, street presence, building height/massing and articulation, view corridors and sustainability practices; ,. �.,. � Information Report No. 07-06 � �� . Lf `.--. �i C-� 3.4 4.0 4.1 � �. 3 `f Page 5 . _ _ - a copy of the Draft Urban Design Concept is provided for general reference (see Attachment #3); - preliminary review of the dr,aft guidelines indicates that certain design matters will need further investigatian resulting in refinements and enhancements; - it is anticipated that the De�✓elopment Guidelines will be finalized by staff and brought before City Council for consideration; Zoninq Bv-law 3036 - the subject lands are curr�ntly zoned "C2" — General Commercial Zone by Zoning By-law 2511, as am�nded; - the �xisting zoning permits a variety of commercial uses including retail stores, restaurants, servic�; stores, business and professional offices, car wash, dry cleaning and laun�dry and automobile service station; - an amendment to the zonir�g by-law has been requested by the applicant in order to permit the proposec� mixed use development; - the applicant has requested an appropriate zone that would permit the proposed uses. RESULTS OF CIRCULATION Resident Comments - written comments have been received from numerous residents providing comments and concerns/opposition with the application; - comments included concerr�s with: • loss of commercial faciVities/grocery store, specifically to the number of seniors living in the imm�diate neighbourhood; • site density/number of units; • inr,reased traffic in the area; • access locations to the site; • impacts on schools/cap�city for students; • on-site traffic movement:>; • construction activity, ph��sing of development, timing of demolition of the existing plaza and impacts on the remaining businesses; • impact on the ravine/environmentally sensitive lands; • dangers to pedestrian traffic; • urban design; 4.2 Aqencv Comments - no formal agency comment;� have been received to date; . 3...�'3�� fr^� ,� �,J, 7 .,E, � " c ' F ��rvi^Fi;��i.�' • 7! .,.r�. .,, f i..� ��..: � _ . .. . .:... information Report No. 07-06 ` `rt'�' ' `'m` `�� . `° �' - Page 6 4.3 Staff Comments - in reviewing the application to date, the following matters have been identified by staff for further review arid consideration: • concluding/reducing on the number of dwelling units to ensure compliance with the Official Plan derisity maximum of 140 units per hectare; • reviewing the traffic r�port to determine the impact of the proposed development on the exi�ting traffic in the area; • comparing the application to the final version of the development guidelines to ensure �eneral compliance to the guidelines which will include development layout, building locations, massing, height and lotting fabric, streetscapes, vista, compatibility and integration to surroundings; • ensuring that the propo>ed development is compatible with, and sensitive to, surrounding land uses including shadowing, noise, pedestrian linkages, scale and intensity of thE� uses; • reviewing the site servic;ing and down stream constraints and the related financial impacts on the site development will have to be addressed; • ensuring adequate par�cing is provided on the property in appropriate locations; • need to analyze the constraints and benefits the application will have on both the subject property and on the surrounding community, given the role of the existing use ��rovide to the community; • need to consider the er�vironmental impacts on the Douglas Ravine, the limit of development associated with the top-of-bank, and trail locations/connections wNth the open space system; • stormwater managemer�t matters as they relate to the Frenchman's Bay Stormwater Managemer�t Master Plan; • reviewing the lotting pa�tern of the townhouses to ensure an appropriate urban design in terms oi` the need to front onto primary roads and to avoid backing onto the ravine; • reviewing the proposed development to ensure that adequate information is provided, that technic<�I requirements are met and that the proposed site design is appropriate; • reviewing the emerging Provincial Policies related to urban growth such as the Places to Grow Policy which has identified Pickering as a growth centre (therefore the need to achieve certain intensification requirements at appropriate locations that will exhibit a high quality urban design based on appropriate development design guidelines); • ensuring the applicati�n can achieve a high level of sustainable components; - the Planning & Development Department will conclude its position on the application and its design after it has received and assessed comments from the circulated departments, agencies and public. :;�`TC!'r�n,RE�,t�' �.� � � �'�� Information Report No. 07-06 > � � - �� 5.0 PROCEDURAL INFORMATION 6.0 6.1 Page 7 �, � _�- il � _. - written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the Pianning & Development D�partment; - oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting; - all comments received will be noted and used as input in a Planning Report prepared by the Planning & Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council; - if you wish to be notified oi� Council's decision regarding either the proposed zoning by-law amendment �pplication, you must request such in writing to the City Clerk; - if a person or public body that files an appeal of a decision of the City of Pickering in respect of th� proposed zoning by-law amendment, does not make oral submissions at tlhe public meeting or make written submissions to the City of Pickering bef�re the zoning by-law is passed, the Ontario Municipal Board may dismi�s all or part of the appeal; - if you wish to reserve the o�tion to appeal Council's decision of the proposed zoning by-law amendment application, you must provide comments to the City before Council adopts any by-law for this proposal. OTHER INFORMATION Appendix No. I list of neighbourhood resid�nts, community associations, agencies and City Departments that have commented on the applications at the time of writing the report; 6.2 Information Received full scale copies of the applicant's submitted plans are available for viewing at the offices of the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department including: • proposed development plan; • Traffic Impact Study, prepared by Javar Consultants Inc., dated February 2006; • Phase I Environmental Site Assessment, Engineering, dated August 13, 2004; • Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Engineering, dated August 30, 2004; prepared by Jacques Whitford prepared by Jacques Whitford • Planning Report, prep�red by Commercial Focus Advisory Services Inc., dated February 23, 20U6; • Shadow Study, Prepared by Kirkor Architects & Planners, dated February 3, 2006; the need for additional infor�nation will be determined through the review and circulation of the applicant's current proposal; � � 1� � � _ information Report No. 07-06 '' `3 `�. �.° .��,�� Page 8 i - also available is the draft clesign guidelines that is currently being reviewed with an expectation it will be refined prior to being finalized for Council's consideration (a copy of thE; draft guidelines is available on the City' website cityof�,ickering.com or from �he Planning & Development Department. 6.3 Companv Principal - the owner of the subject lan�s is S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd.; - Stephen Warsh is a princip�l of S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. ORIGINAi, SIGNED BY Ross Pym, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner - Development ReviE;w RP:Id Attachments Copy: Director, Planning & Developmf;nt ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Lynda Taylor, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review ' ,,= 7 ,; �� w�� s F�i:i _._`.?�,5�- c?_ G APPENDIX NO. I TO INFORMATION REPORT NO. 07-06 COMMENTINC RESIDENTS AND LpNDOWNERS (1) �2) (3) (4) (5) (6) �7) �$) �9) (10) (11) (12) (13) Ekkehard Zorn Joyce Harkness Margaret Sutton Mary Jeffery Jean Taylor Brenda Wessely Meredith Clark John Smith Maureen St. Jean George Kolesnikovs Pasquale Malandrino Patricia Elson Mike Danischewsky COMMENTING AGENCIES (1) none received to date COMMENTING CITY DEPARTMENTS (1) none received to date '� .��': � l�.j , �, ,,,,, , , u,- ��;��1�_ � = , A 1A1 �_�.f1T�'7 � "�'�'� 4 �i � �► PRESENT: Councillor Ashe - Chair Councillor McLean Councillor Dickerson Councillor Pickles Councillor Brenner (8:30 pm) STAFF: �TTACH[�EN � #�_.�,,,_TO R�PURT �' P[I �t' ; ," ,�'�� „�, Minutes / Meeting Summary Statutory Public Information Meeting Council Chambers Thursday, June 1, 2006 7:05 pm. Ross Pym - Principal Planner, Development Review Neil Carroll - Director, Planning & D�velopment Birgit Wilson - - Recording Secretary GUEST: - Stephen I. Fagyas - Lead Consultant for S.�. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. ;ouncillor Ashe provided a brief explanation of the purpose of the meeting and introduced staff. Ross Pym, Principal Planner, Development Review, provided an overview of the requirements of the Planning Act and the Ontario Municipal Board respecting this meeting and matters under consideration there at. Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Ref # (summary of discussion) 1. ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 06/06 S.R. & R. BAY RIDGES LTD. 1215 —1235 BAYLY STREET PART OF BLOCK Y, PLAN M-1 � CITY OF PICKERING 1. Planner Comments Ross Pym, Principal Planner, DeWelopment Review, provided an overview of the property location, applicant's proposal and City's Official Plan policies pertaining to this site, as outlined in Informatior� Report No. 07-06. He confirmed that the subject application did not include the lan�s associated with the smaller plaza at 1259 Bayly Street. Page 1 CORP0228-2/02 Item / I Details & L�iscussion & Conclusion Ref # (summary of discussion) 2. Applicants Comments ;,{.�.,.,,, , r.,i D r � IF',�,�"{i1iLl�� #,..,r,�� a.�i�C�RT � PD 4�.5° t�� ;, Stephen i. Fagyas, Lead Consultant for S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. provided an overview of the proposed development using a PowerPoint presentation. Mr. Fagyas stated that this presentation will be made available to the public on their website. He further stated that this propos�l has a high level of sustainability and they had conducted a comprehensive plan�ing analysis, considered all the possible impacts and concluded the application cornplies with all relevant policies. He concluded his presentation by introducing the architect and landscape personnel who worked on the design of this proposal. 3. Comments from Members of the Public Robert & Marlene Gardner 1890 Vallev Farm Rd.. Mr. & Mrs. Gardner purchased a unit on Radom Street for their physically challenged son 3 weeks ago. Mrs. Gardner stated that the prime reason for purchasing in the area was that their son could hav� safe access to essential services, i.e. grocery store, pharmacy, dry cleaners. She asked the Chair why potential homeowners were not informed of this proposal. Mr. & Mrs. Gardner also stated that this proposal lacked consideration for all seniors living in this area as their essential services would be taken away and that the increased density of the area would cause major traffic problems, making this a very uns�fe area for pedestrians. Jim Dobney Radom Street. Mr. Dobney expressed concern about the boutique style stores that are proposed for the area, should the re-zoning be accepted. He stated these stores would not reflect the fact that senior citizens are on a fixed income and need to have access to stores, and services that reflect price poir�ts for their limited income. Ed Fulton 705-1210 Radom Street. Mr. Fulton objected to statements made that the Price Chopper store was in financial difficulty. He noted that this staternent was made by a 17 year old employee of the store and that no one in management would have discussed serious financial matters with this employee. He disagreed with the statements made. Lefitia Wise 31-1230 Radom St. Ms. Wise expressed concerns with the parking spaces in the proposal. She noted that the proposal allowed for 532 spaces, however, there would be 582 units.. She also had concerns that essential services, i.e. grocery store, pharmacy, dry cleaners, would no longer be available to s�niors and that the proposed "little shops" would be too expensive for people on a fixed income. Also, that the proposed towers are too Page 2 CORP0228-2/02 �� , l. #.. Item / I Details & Discussion & Conclusion F � `� �,� r KG �s' mm�� Ref # (summary of discussion) :: � p 1 s �, 4r �.- .� C high for this neighbourhood. She stated her objection to the fact that no additional traffic lights being proposed. Doris Hopper 204-1210 Radom Street Ms. Hopper stated that the community did not agree with any of the proposed plans and that the plaza should not be torn down as it is a fully sustainable plaza. She further expressed concern that th�� proposed 16-18 storey condominium/apartment complex as this conflicts with the city's own zoning guidelines. She stated that these lands are the gateway to the beautiful waterFront of Pickering, and it should be developed to attract tourism. Sh� asked the City Planners, Councillors and the Mayor to have a vision that promotes development of cultural components for this area, looking at the example of the GT�. She proposed that instead of another townhouse, condominium complex the city partners with private, corporate sponsorship to build a Concert Hall, Museum or Theatre. She concluded that any plans which displaces current storeowners should include fair compensation, which to date has not been addressed. Paul Crawford 867 Antonio St. Mr. Crawford noted the Official Pl��n is Mixed Corridor, therefore there needs to be a mix of uses and the need for jobs. Does not support the application as the area is a stable neighbourhood. His opinion the application does not comply with the Region or City Official Plan. Carmen Montgomery 239 Lupin Drive She is also concerned with losing the essential services the plaza now provides and that no fair compensation has be�n offered to the business owners to vacate their current leases if the plaza is torn down. She spoke of the environmental issues with this proposal. She stated that the proposed high-rise building contravenes the current height restrictions of the area. The high density will require more ambulances, police, etc., and this cost will not be incurred by S.R.& R. Bay Ridges Ltd., rather the taxpayers. She stated that the tr�ffic study, which Mr. Fagyas reported on, was not correct and that if .traffic patterns �re observed at 5:00 pm instead of 6:30 pm the conclusion will be a lot different. L_astly, she reiterated that the residents of this area are vehemently opposed to this proposal and the city should listen and look for a more sustainable plan for the residents/taxpayers of the Bay Ridges area. Tim Dobson 1310 Broa��liew Street Mr. Dobson is the President of the� Pickering East Short Community Association (PESCA). He represented the m�mbership at the meeting and voiced the following concerns for this proposal: • PESCA should have been properlv informed i.e.: a formal presentation. Only a Page 3 CORP0228-2/02 Item / I Details & Discussion & Conclusion � , ,..;; : ; ; ; �_ Ref # (summary of discussion) �,��,�� , ��,�i .�� C' _� _ . . brief inention was made at a general meeting. The Councilior provided little or no information. • April 2006 members of PE�CA voiced strong objections to proposal. • Any re-zoning requires extensive public meetings, one meeting is not enough. • Traffic concerns — more congestion to the surrounding area — unsafe for chilar�en, seniors. • Estimates 250% more traffic in the area. • Object to proposed building heights—no taller than 5 storeys. • Proposed parking spaces are not enough. • Negative waterfront enjoyment. • Environmental impact needs to be addressed. • Health and safety issues. • Demolition of phase 1— haw will this impact tenants/store owners who will remain during this phase. • New retail spaces are at risk. • No Emergency Evacuation Plan has been put forward. • PESCA is not opposed to the Bay Ridges area development, however, much more discussion, alternative proposals, and consultation with all concerned must take place. Mr. & Mrs. Rozenfa/s 816 He/en Crescent Mrs. & Mrs. Rozenfals questionedl why the developer was only interested in building residential units. They stated the need for the growth of local business development and commercial space. Pasquale Malandrino Chipue Hairstvling,1215-1235 Bayly St. Unit 450 Mr. Malandrino explained the diffi��ulties that are being encountered by the plaza business people when trying to cantact S.R & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. First a wrong telephone number was printed on a flyer and then when the correct number was obtained, messages are not returr�ed. He stated there is a high level of frustration among the business owners, as there seems to be no accountability by the developer to tenants or the public for their s�fety or any financial restitution being offered to vacate leases early. He concluded by stating that negotiations must take place and that business owners must receiv�� compensation for vacating their leases early. Eillen Higdon 852 Fairview Ave.. Ms. Higdon is opposed to this development. She is concerned that not enough in- depth studies have been done to :�ustain this development. In particular she is not happy with the environmental imp�act, traffic impact. She concluded by stating that tenants must be dealt with fairly if they are being asked to vacate their leases early. She feels more clarification on the lease issue is required and that to date the aqqroach bv the developer in this area has been "draconian". CORP0228-2/02 �4�:' Page 4 -' �.�:3 Item / Ref # Details & Discussion & Conclusion (summary of discussion) �,,. ,, 8 _ � ��x�;�i�t� � ��:.��.v�-� F:..� .. Dave Mathews 794 Annlands Street He also opposes this developmer�t. He cited environmental issues as well as traffic issues. When the existing tower ��n Radom Street was built it was recognized as a mistake and should not be repeated. He further stated that the citizens of this area would not let this project happen wvithout a fight. John B/ue 4730 Thornton Road Mr. Blue stated that they own an� operate a Laundromat and Car Wash business. Over the past 10 years they have been able to grow their businesses significantly and wonder why S. R. & R. Bay Ridg�;s Ltd. has not been able to sustain the plaza. Their issue with this development is also the lack of negotiations and fair compensation for vacating their lease. Ken Devine 1210 Radom Street, Apt. 506 Mr. Devine stated that the Bay Ri�iges area does not need more residential units but rather affordable shopping for seniors south of the 401. He noted that a Hasty Market grocery store is not affordable for people on a fixed income. . Jacqueline Smart 829 Fairview Ave. Ms. Smart made the following comments in stating his objections to this development: • Price Choppers did not want to close; however their rent increased 85%. • Traffic lights on St. Martins Drive are required. • The entire traffic flow in this area needs to be studied further. • Wha# is the timeframe for F'hase 1, 2, & 3; 5 years apart? • Not enough parking space;� are allotted to each unit at present. • Even though this plan is in accordance with the Durham Region Plan, it is not acceptable to the residents; of this area. • The proposed high-rise units should be limited to 5 storeys. • Will there be more medical services provided to sustain the increased population, i.e.: doctors. She concluded that all opposition to this project should be directed in writing to the Ministry of the Environment, The I�egion of Durham and their elected officials. Carolyn Huston 898 Antonio Street She stated her objections to the f�ct that in both the Durham Regional and Pickering Official Plan there was no projection of the population growth for this project. Page 5 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Ref # Details & Discussion & Conclusion (summary of discussion) . � � �.:. ��eE� � F i�„e.�. • � �....e..r.. �V . ' r t ��e� � ��"....��.s _ �� Bonnie Littley 1499 Sandhurst Crescent She is with the Ontario Smart Gr�wth Network. She stated that this proposai had merit, the Site Plan looks good, but not for the Bay Ridges area. The Site Plan shows no schools, sidewalks, only drive�ways, and the proposed playground/parkette is extremely small. She concluded by stating that more than one meeting needs to take place to find a more suitable solution to re-building the Bay Ridges area. Bianca D'Souza 1117 Tanzer Court She stated her opposition to this proposal, as she is concerned for the safety of the children in this area. She fears that Radom Street will become a speedway if no traffic lights are installed. Pedro Gonzales 875 Chapleau Drive Mr. Gonzales shares the concern� of the previous resident and in addition questions whether there is a budget for mor�e schools, police and medical facilities to sustain the increase in population. He also �tated that if there is a nuclear accident, the limited exit routes from this area would cause a bottleneck, thus prohibiting speedy evacuation. Tom Rock 961 Mount Castle Crescent Mr. Rock is concerned that there are too many grey areas with this development. He feels there is non-compliance with regard to the wetlands. He also noted his disappointment with the public inf�ormation process as he feels the public are not given all the facts. He also stated that the applicant/developer is not listening to the community and questions wheth�r the development will actually be built as proposed or will there be changes made alang the way without notifying the public, once the developer has all the approvals. Lastly, he stated that there should be height restrictions on any highrise proposal for this area. Mark Willis 1866 Fairport Mr. Willis owns the dance studio in the plaza and is now the largest tenant. Initially had many concerns with the applE�cation, however have had very professional discussions with the new owners and feel he has been treated fairly. Paul Avis 931 Liverpool Rd. Mr. Avis stated that to date the OIVIB has turned down all appeals of this nature. He suggested that the best solution iy for the City of Pickering to negotiate with developers for the best, most suitable development that addresses all the concerns by residents thus far. Lastly, he r�oted that written comments against this proposal are the best wav to qet action. CORP0228-2/02 �4 � Page 6 ,, . i�a� Ifem /( Details $ Discussion c� Conclu�sion Ref # (summary of discussion) �i-� � 7 �' � � . r �.E��" ( . . " . . .... , . � . ..��N 4' �- . Angelina Moore 1235 Random Street She stated that if this development goes through, the schools in the area would be overpopulated. The student/teacher ratio will result in teachers being over worked. She also expressed concern with the increased traffic for the area and that the parking on Radom Street will als�� become an issue. Christopher Dean 1155 Tanzer Court Mr. Dean questioned the accurac;y of the Traffic Impact Study, as he believes that this development will cause major traffic problems, increased street parking and generally unsafe conditions for pedestrian�. Abdul Prenji 1011 Sherman Street Mr. Prenji stated that he is the ovwner of the local Pharmacy and wanted to express thanks to all the residents of the ��rea for their support by coming to this meeting. 4. Response from Applicant Mr. Fagyas encouraged the public to visit their website in order to view the PowerPoint presentation of this p�roject. He stated that all technical documents are available for review and that this application complies with all the required elements. He also explained that the Plaza is financial difficulty and will be torn down. Lastly he stated that the application is for a zoning change and this is the right of the owners. 5. Staff Response Ross Pym, Principal Planner, Derrelopment Review, stated that there is some misinformation in regard to this application and encouraged all interested parties to come to the Planning & Development Department at the City Hall to Iook over all the documentation that is available. ,An example of the misinformation is the parking spaces being provided on the sitE; and many people have been referring to the wrong number of total spaces available. 6. Comments from the Chair Councillor Ashe advised that the Planning and Development Staff would be available for a short period of time after th� meeting for anyone who wished to speak with them. The meeting adjourned at 10:30 pm Page 7 CORP0228-2/02 Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment Page 1 of 1 , { �. t;i?:�ul�P.�E�,iT #__._�._�...TO �. 4 i:l E;Lf�URi �I PG � -� � � � � _._ .� ... Pym, Ross _ ___ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ __ .... _ _. _ __ _ From: Elaine Cote [emc@gzlegal.com] Sent: April 26, 2006 10:56 AM To: Pym, Ross Subject: Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment Mr. Pym: I have received the notice forwarded by Councillors Dickerson and McLean with respect to the above noted redevelopment. I have concerns about this redevelopment proposal with respect to the environment, population density, availability of services and vehicle access. I would appreciate receipt of information regarding the proposal as it is available and look forward ta the opportunity to attend public meetings in this matter. Elaane Cote emc@gzlegal.com telephone: 416-642-5415 fax: 416-512-9992 This e-mail message is privileged, confidential and subject to copyright. Any unauthorized use or disclosure is prohibited. O 1 /09/2006 Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment Proposal Page 1 of 1 , .i. �S � . , /8 _ __ . F� .�='ubs! r5 ir'i.+�...,.�.�5 c7 �O .�w._.:.� Pym, Ross __ _ _ ._ _ _ . _ _ _. __ _. _ From: Drapeau, Deborah [Deborah.Drapeau@tdsb.on.ca] Sent: April 26, 2006 12:51 PM To: Pym, Ross Cc: Dickerson, Doug, Councillor; McLeari, Bill, Councillor Subject: Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment Pi�oposal When will the public meeting be held? I am getting the impression that this is a done deal and there is no chance that the people of Pickering will be able to halt this development if it is something they do not desire. Surely the meeting at the East Shore Community Centre is not intended to be "the public meeting" indicated on your flyer? Deborah Drapeau O 1/09/2006 {i ��„��;,rs:r.t1 �`,,..,��,_.�.,�,.R,��"e �� iwli ,.._ - S F;. "ur`i ! �r� 3� { z ._Q �.5_. � � . � _.... Pym, Ross From: Georgs Kolesnikovs [waterworid@rogers.com] Sent: April 27, 2006 7:46 AM To: Pym, Ross Subject: Bay Ridges Piaza redevelopment Sir-- I am most concerned about the negative effect such a development will have on my neighborhood and would like to request that you add my name to your email list for updates. I'd also like a my own copy of any notification that is sent to my condominium board. We need stores, banks and other services south of the 401, not 560 additional households with the resulting problems for� traffic, education and other municipal services. --Georgs Georgs Kolesnikovs 1210 Radom Street #707 Pickering, Ontario L1 W 2Z3 Telephone: 905.837.0102 Facsimile: 905.837.9253 E-mail: waterworld@rogers.com �. 4 � .. �,� �t ., . . , � �� a. E c:� , . a. ; F e �� .,.�.�'. �?..� �... From: Johnny [mailto:bayridges6@sympatico.ca] Sent: Thu 27/04/2006 10:18 PM To: McLean, Biil, Councillor Subject: Bay Ridges Devolpment Dear Mr McLean There was a very good turn out ��t the PESCA meeting April 26th. Myself I think most residents will settle for the townhouses but cannot accept the building of high-rises. You may remember several times it was mentioned that the City of Pickering had promised and I think put into writing, that no high-rises would be built on the south side of the 401 and that all high-rises would be built around the town centre area where the Tridel apartments are now. May I suggest that you and the other councillors or the planning department search the archives, because I really believe that this statement was made and it's only fair for the council to be faithful to the residents. Regards John Smith Page 1 of 2 ' � ". �� ,, � -; .. . � 3 ' �� ,r Pym, Ross _ _ __ _ __ From: Ekkehard Zorn [ekkehard@sympatic�o.ca] Sent: April 29, 2006 9:00 AM To: Dickerson, Doug, Councillor; McLeari, Bill, Councillor; Pym, Ross Subject: Bay Ridges Plaza Development Pro�osal Gentlemen � � ,�. ryi , J. `/ � . As a long time resident of the City of Pickering, I am somewhat concerned about the recently announced plans for the Bay Ridges Plaza. It is my understanding th��t the plaza is to be re-developed with, according to the flyer sent out by Mr. Dickerson and Mr. McLean, some business development, as well as 161 townhouses and two apartment buildings having a total of some 400 units. By my calculations, this would amount to approximately 561 units, exclusive of the commercial development. Please do not misunderstand, I am not against the development. On the contrary, I suggest that some form of overhaul of the plaza is long overdue. This should have occurred some time ago. From a business point of view, this would create numerous jobs and other sources of business opportunity. It would help the City grow and prosper. Having said that, my concerns involve, firstly, the loss of the last real shopping facility south of the 401 and, secondly and most importantly, the traffic chaos that a proposal such as this will no doubt create. Concerns such as the proximity to the ravine will, no doubt be handled appropriately by the Toronto Conservation Authority. With respect to the first point, while inconvenient, I am sure that some alternatives will appear, possibly from the proposed commercial component on the main floor of the development. People will adapt and find new alternatives once the existing ones disappear. My main concern is one that has been growing over the past number of years. It involves that the fact that the existing intersection of Liverpool Road and Bayly and the current plaza entrance, including the St. Martins Road alternative, are extremely dangerous places to be, whether on foot or in a vehicle. On almost a daily basis, accidents occur in this area due to the ever increasing traffic flow and the lack of changes over the years. I have witnessed near misses, both vehicle against vehicle and vehicle against pedestrian at the Liverpool / Bayly intersection. In addition, leaving the existing plaza, whether by the existing access / egress point or from St. Martins Road, is, to say the least, an adventure, Pven during times of slower traffic. As a pedestrian, I have witnessed and been invol'ved in near misses involving vehicles and pedestrians resulting, as a general rule, from the fact that drivers are s�eking to gain a slight advantage over on-coming traffic and, in doing so, tend to forget pedestrians using the Liverpool Road / Bayly Street crossings in accordance with the existing lights. Once again, with the increased traffic flow, this situation will undoubtedly increase in frequency. While I am not a planner and cannot offer solutions to this obvious problem, I merely wish to state that, as a user of this intersection and the existing commercial development, I am concerned that, with the increase in traffic flow caused by this development, this entire intersecti�n will become a much more dangerous place to be, unless remedial action is taken during the planning stages. To attempt to correct the problem after the fact would, at best, be most difficult. Logically speaking, one must assume that, of the total of 561 proposed units, at least an additional 561 vehicles would use the existing traffic arteries, many during peak times. Realistically, the actual number of cars added during the peak periods could be considerably higher. If one assumes that each home will have two cars, the numbers become much more unnerving. The thought of this increased traffic volume using this intersection in its present state is truly frightening. Once again, please let me re-iterate that I am not against the development of this land. In fact, I look forward to the increased population base since it will undoubtedly increase the taxes coming in, thereby allowing the City to offer a greater range of services and facilities. I anly wish to voice my concerns about the traffic problems that have existed for a number of years and were aggravated by the opening of Tim Hortons and will, undoubtedly, be O l /09/2006 Page 2 of 2 �. � ��. ,��racH��n►� �%3�:��...�r� ��a�� f �t�....�' %..-..� � . _ further aggravated by this development. Thank you for taking the time to read this letter. Ekkehard Zorn, AACI, FRI, CST Zorn Appraisal Services Limited, P.O. Box 184, PICKERING, Ontario L1V 2R2 Phone:905-831-6780 - Fax:905-831-9209 Email: Business - zornapps@sympatico.ca (Personal - ekkehard@sympatico.ca - for all non-business matters only) NOTE: This email communication and any attachments to it are intended solely as a private and privileged communication between the sender and the party or parties specifically named in the original message and is for the sole use of such party or parties. If this email was sent to you in error or if you are not an intended recipient, please delete the e-mail and any attachments immediately without making any for�n of copy or placing any reliance upon any information or comments herein contained and notify the sender by return email of the error and our records will be amended accordingly to prevent any further occurrences of this error. At the time of sending, this email and any attachments thereto are thought to be free of any known virus or any other form of harmful defect that might affect any computer system receiving same. It is the sole responsibility of the recipient to ensure that it is, in fact, virus free and the sender accepts no responsibility for any loss or damage arising in any way from its use. O 1 /09/2006 4;; t•+ 3��L�C�. 1`��; From: Georgs Kolesnikovs [mailto:waterworid@rogers.com] Sent: Sat 4/29/2006 9:21 AM To: Dickerson, Doug, Councillor Cc: *****Mayor; McLean, Bill, Councillor Subject: RE: Bay Ridges Plaza redevelopment >After listening to our reasons why we believed there ought to be a >commercial/retail component in any redevelopment, they eventually >presented a plan to our Planning Dept. including some 40,000 sq ft for >just those purposes. Many of us in the neighborhood are grateful for the action you and your colleagues have taken so far. >However, the process is just getting underway and there �s much >negotiating to be completed before arriving at a Council xneeting - and >even then the plan is subject to changes before being voted upon. What >we do not particularly wish to see is for the proposal to go off to the >Ontario Municipal Board for a decision. I would suggest that right now you, we, everyone concerned, start planning on how to keep the OMB out of this matter--or all municipal and neighborhood concerns will be for naught. --Georgs Georgs Kolesnikovs 1210 Radom Street #707 Pickering, Ontario L1W 2Z3 J„ � A i' , / -� ._._ .. � 7 � � �-? ��,L , _ From: Maureen St. ]ean [mailto:mstjean7@rogers.c�m] Sent: Tue 5/2/2006 4:37 PM To: Dickerson, Doug, Councillor Subject: RE: PESCA Meeting, April 26th/2006 Hello Mr. Dickerson, Thank you for your detailed response to my very angry e-mail. Please understand my complete frustration and sadness about the closing of the Bay Ridges plaza. I moved to Bay Ridges in 1969 and have lived in two locations. My three children attended Holy Redeemer School from 1975 to 1985. I was a volunteer with the PTA, Boy Scouts, Block Parents, Red Cross Blood Donor Clinic and a baseball coach. During this time, I have done my best to support local merchants. I have purchased my groceries, required prescriptions, flowers and hair cuts at this plaza. It was convenient, friendly and provided a perfect alternative to the Mega stores. My biggest concern about the closing is the many sen.iors or folks that don't drive and living south of Highway 401. They are now forced to take a cab or the Flag Bus. However, this was a daily walk and k:ept them active. Special Note: The Flag Bus is a wonderful concept and the drivers are �xceptionally kind. You are correct that any business needs to make a profit. l'lus, a business or new development needs to be a good fit for the community. I am not opposed to new homes in the area. I do think that South Bay Ridges needs a better focal point better than the Shell station and the Tim Horton's. I honestly thought that Pickering council had more power. You did explain this in detail. Thank you. I am sure you know all of the following information: . The Plaza stores have no basements. The townhouses on Bayly Street have sump pumps in their basements. The condo building on Radom Street has redone their underground garage twice. Thanks for listening to my comments, Maureen St.Jean Mstjean7@rogers.com '905-831-5187 {; /W 1Rd t t1 r ��tGt,�;� t'G_,? 5' C7.(�t �.�.,. -� �'`� - From: Maureen St. Jean [mailto:ms�ean7 �ro�ers.com] Sent: Thu 4/27/2006 1:13 AM To: newspaper; Dickerson, Doug, Councillor; McLean, Bill, Councillor Subject: PESCA Meeting, Apri126th/2006 Gentlemen, How dare you think that Bay-Ridges residents are si� stupid? Why did you put Linda Taylor in the hot seat? She was just the messenger of your plans. Please pass this on to Dave Ryan. Sorry, I don't have his e-mail address. All three of you had very weak responses. All of you were not aware of the Bay Ridges Plaza closing would affect many people. Please wake up and smell the coffee. None of you live south of Liverpool Road, I assume. This development plan has been "in the works", for a couple of years. CIBC closed in July, 2004 and no leases were granted unless on a monthly basis. Price Choppers was not allowed to renew their lease. You, guys know this and do you care? When does a non-resident owner dictate his rules to the community? This owner is systematically forcing small business' owne�s out. He raises their monthly payments or forecloses. He must pay you a lot of money for this destruction. I am disgusted that you sent a stupid letter before the meeting. You were just trying to cover your asses. You don't have to respond, I honestty can't believe that elected officials turn a blind e}+e to insane developments that do not nurture or care for the community. Please rethink this entire revamping of the Plaza. Tl�ank You, Maureen St.Jean 905-831-5187 . _��'�; _.�.. ,,._ : ,; �' <t / � ... c ks� ,� � GS�E�:.f'C P' f"�.�a., �„.;�,,,..� V.o ......... .........,.. From: Johnny [mailto:bayridges6@sympatico.ca] Sent: Sat 06/05/2006 8:52 PM To: McLean, Bill, Councillor Cc: DCC#19 O�ce; Dickerson, Doug, Councillor Subject: Bayridges Re-Development Mr McLean Are you or any body in planning aware of what seems to me an improper statement on the, Application to Amend Zoning By-Law submitted by the owner of the plaza. On page 2 section 10 they hav� answered no to the question of a right of way, well there is a right of way that runs from the rear of the Condominium 1210 Radom st, it runs from the rear drive way up too the start of the bayridges property. People have used this right of way for many years to get through to the plaza and Bayley street. It was my understanding having lived here for many years that the right of way path could not be closed to the public. John Smith Apt 410 905-839-8524 Page 1 of 1 �S a�t �5,_, Pym, Ross _ _ _ From: joyce harkness [houston1937@hotmail.com] Sent: May 12, 2006 6:12 PM To: Pym, Ross Subject: Bay Ridges Plaza Dear Mr. Pym, We are planning to be at the meeting of June 1, 2006 if I can make it, but in case I can't I would like the city to know why the plaza meant so much to many residents in this area. We live in the 1235 Radom St. townhouses and I am not able to get out a lot of the time due to illness. My husband who is blind and had a stroke cannot walk too far any more. Price Choppers was just within what he could mannage. Now, I know there are many older or disabled people within the houses and appartment and seniors building who cannot go too far either and some probably cannot drive, so how are they to get their food to eat? Many are probably alone and maybe do not have family to help them. My two kids work in Richmond Hill and 40CI north of Hwy. #7. By the time they get home they are very tired and have families and lives of their own to look after. They do what they can, but with the stores up the steet we can do for ourselves. A lot use Radom to short cut to south Liverpool now, can you imagine what it will be like with more traffic on Balley? People do not know what a white cane stand� for anymore, my husband has nearly been hit a couple of times crossing Liverpool and Balley, by left turning cars. Think what is going to happen when slow walking seinors try crossing to get to Loblav��s. I do hope we will be able to attend the meeting as we are interested in what happens in our area. Thank you Joyce Harkness 1235 Radom St. #95 Pickering Ol /09/2006 , 5.�� .a.. /9 7 L� ' -3 . C�%. Pym, Ross _ From: Sent: Cc: Subject: Hello Mr. Pym Jean Taylor [jeansilver1�@hotmail.com] May 12, 2006 9:49 PM Pym, Ross Brenner, Maurice, Councillor; Ashe, Kevin, Councillor Bay Ridges Plaza Having finally found out what the proposed use for the Bay Ridges Plaza is in the note Councillors Brenner and Ashe sent out I felt it necessary to contact you to find out a little more as well as voice my concerns. Having lived in the area for thirty years, this year, 24 of them in the townhouses at 1235 Radorr� St. and most recently for the last 6 just off Bayly on Vistula Drive, I feel I am representative of the Community. When the proposed plan a number of years ago wa� to demolish the Bay Ridges plaza and put in Low rental Highrises, I and my neighbours were vehemently opposed to it for the same reasons I am now opposed to this new proposal. DENSITY!!! TRAFFIC!!! CONGESTION!!! The Town thoughtfully took away the Eastbound Exi�lEntrance ramp to the 401 from Liverpool about 20 years ago which continues to affect the traffic and congestion on Bayly street, with commuters trying to get to & from the 401 daily having to exit at Whites & travelling at breakneck speeds along bayly St. With over 661 townhouses and condos proposed, this could easily equate to a minimum of an additional 700 cars (in actuallity, the number will most likely be more than 1000) using Bayly St. daily to try and get to & from the 401. I would like to ask if you have ever tried to get anywhere on Bayly eastbound or westbound in the morning or evening, with the volume of traffic we currently experience? I drive to Markham daily, using Bayly both ways, and my husband takes our youngest son to school daily (Pickering High) & we both experience tra�c conyestion. If this proposal is in consideration, I would like to add a few things to consider at the same time. What is going to be done about Bayly Street? What is going to be done about the sidewalk on Bayly which is mere feet from the road that cars travel at speeds of 80-100 km on (even though the speed limit is 60kph)? What is going to be done about the continual speeding? What is going to be done about giving the St. Martins� Seniors a place to shop? What is going to be done to protect the creek and surrounding area for the wildlife? IYs a mess now and there was only a plaza there. What consideration is going to be given to the current residents of this community and the havoc that this added congestion will wreak on them? I understand that this is a prime peice of land and alv�ays has been due to its' proximity to the Go Train, but the only issue here �should not be how much money the developer can make or share with Y�is advocates, it should be + �-. Is this reail� the best use of this land for the residents of this ��'' �` r `� ��y �-�•-��T� ' �. 5�:� Community. My vote is a STRONG NO! I hope you get thousands of emails with these sentiments and that someone actually listens to them! Thank you for your time. Jean Taylor 970 Vistula Drive, Picketing, Ontario L1 W 2L5 905-839-1454 Designer Mail isn't just fun to send, it's fun to receive. Use special stationery, fonts and colors. http://join.msn.com/?pgmarket=en-ca&page=byoa/prem&xAPID=1994&D1=1034 &SU=http://hotmail.com/enca&HL=Market_MSNIS_Taglines Start enjoying all the benefits of MSNO Premium right now and get the first two months FREE*. . / . 1 J � r�_ � u ,. � ;.� �,� . ., . ��f ,� �c� (:��.._._ Pym, Ross .. , . �., From: WILLIAM SUTTON [tylersutton@rogers.com] Sent: May 15, 2006 2:44 PM To: Pym, Ross Subject: New Development (Bay Ridges Plaza) To Mr. Ross Pym; Mr. Pym I have been a residence of Pickering for th� past 30 years. I live in the lNestshore area. My main concern about the future development replacing the Bay Ridges Plaza is the additional traffic in that area. Presently I try to avoid going to the area of The Pickering Town Centre, as the amount of traffic and accidents have substantially increased along Bayly. What is the plan for street lights on Bayly? I know that they have radar set up on Bayly on the weekends, as I spend many times going back in forth to Don Beer Arena, but try setting one up during rush hour between 4:30 and 7:00 PM and I am sure that your police will hit their quota on speeding tickets very quickly. This is a very dangerous road and now adding to the amount of people using the corner of Liverpool and Bayly sounds rediculous and I cannot believe this project was passed. Nevertheless, it has been p�ssed and it will be very interesting to see your plan for traffic conjestion. I look forward to hearing from you. Mrs. Margaret Sutton i j f r f'` � i �"' " ... .:�� . -�� ' ..:. . . . . ,- �.�.s`� + ; � �, �� , !�/ .S' C3 (� .�. �.1 ' From: Meredith C. [mailto:nurse_mere@hotmaii.com] Sent: Mon 15/05/2006 5:23 PM To: McLean, Bill, Councillor Subject: New Development in Bay Ridges : This is Meredith Clark, Jim Clarks daughter. I thought I would email you with my concerns about the new town homes going in at St.Martins and Bayly. I recently moved in to this area because I liked the fact that I could run up to the store if I needed somthing. My Grandmother used to also live in the aprartment building right behind the plaza, and would go to the plaza daily for groceries. I think putting this new develpment in this area is a bad idea for many reasons. 1. There are so many eldery people who depend on the convience of the grocery store. 2. There is not one Grocery store south of the 401, which makes it expensive for people to get groceries by taxi. 3. I have three friends who have already los�t their only income with the recent closure of Price Choppers, and are now forced to travel by bus to Scarborough or Whites road for employment. 4. Town homes are ugly, and expensive, and have a tendency to become slums. Also my generation doesn't want houses that have no land. And the baby boomers don't want them because they can't do the stairs with thier weakening bones and muscles. 5. These new homes will bring more crime to our area. 6. The traffic in this area is horrible, and to put in homes and Appartment buildings, with buisness under them on Bayly is a very bad idea. It is hard enough to get out of Begley from 8am - 8pm what do you think adding 300+ more cars to the problem will do? 7. I have four kids in school right now, and they are forced to be in split classes due to the high volume of children. The average home has 1- 3 children in it that attend school. I'm tired of my kids being in split classes, and this is only going �o get worse. Plus they take the bus, and now there will have to be more buses on route to the local schools i � :� °��" ---- YS-��_�., 8. I think that Pickering is more concerned �bout bringing up the volume of people living here, and not thinking about the visual effects that town hc�mes and buildings have on everyone. Where did our pretty Pickering go? 9. I know for a fact that since my Mom and Uad moved to pickering 30 years ago, my Dad has gone to that Barber. Now he has to go somewhere else. There are so many people in this world who don't like change, how many other people have to find a new barber now Ok so I'm stretching o�± my concerns a bit, but if you lived in this area you would be fighting too. As you know having a nice big house is comfortable and gives a feeling of pride. Being able to send my kids in to a backyard where they'r� safe is important. I remember growing up with Shannon and playing in your backyard all the time. These new town homes won't have the same safe feel. I agree with occuping some of the space for some riice detached homes, but there should be a grocery store facing Bayly with the homes all around it, mF,ach like Finch and Dixi plaza. Thank you for taking time to read my concerns. I hope they will be taken seriously. Mereclith Clarlc (905) 421-9388 10 ] 6 Albacore Manor Pickering v%. a� . . w . 7° S- G� �o,. 11 (� ^; a From: Brenda Wessely [maiito:Bwessely@eol.ca] Sent: Mon 15/05/2006 4:39 PM To: McLean, Bill, Councillor Subject: development in Bay Ridges Dear Mr McLean; While it is possible that I will attend the meeting on June 1st, I wanted to let you know of my many concerns regarding development in and around Bay Ridges. It was very disappointing to read the recent newspaper article, especially after having received your letter that you as counselors have not taken a position. If this is so, then why did the News Advertiser state that the development was seen by the city as "not a bad thing for Pickering"? This sounds like a position to me, but as usual I'm not surprised. As many noted at the PESCA meeting, there seems to be no concern on the part of ANY elected official in Pickering for the people of Bay Ridges. We say this because EVERY development that we as rate payers have opposed over the years has gone through anyway. Let me enumerate: Radom Tower, Canoe Landing, Liverpool Road Townhouses, all built and all hinderir�g the community in one way or another. The waterfront development of which the city is so proud cannot be easily enjoyed by the very ratepayers who helped foot the bill. There is completely inadequate parking and the road allowance was narr•owed making access difficult. Canoe Landing is far too close to the road and that back row of townhouses is constantly having new owners as people realize their proximity to the highway and traintracks. Some lovely old trees were cut dowri to build these homes and some of the view of the bay has been impeded. As for Radom Tower, it was supposed to be the ONLY tall structure EVER allowed south of the highway and will now be used as justification for building more. The cities development plan Doug spoke of is, I thought, meant to encourage development in the downtown core. This would be located north of the highway in proximity to the Pickering Town Centre and the city hall, not in Bay Ridges. It is little wonder that we are skeptical of any meaningful dialogue or resistance to whatever changes developers want and have already planned. The Rose Coperation, who h��s purchased both the Plaza and Art Thompson Arena has 2 developments listed on their website and both are listed as high density. In saying that you would address concerns regarding traffic, local schools etc, did you know that the Catholic School Board has plans to close Holy Redeemer School? I would think this would seriously jeopardize easy accessibility to schools for planned new residents. As well, should the school close that property would be sold and also likey be developed. Additionally I have concerns about the Krosno Plaza as it seems if there are empty stores (INhich there are) we run the risk of this happenning all over again in another year or two at two more locations in Bay Ridges. Both of those sites would afford views of the lake and the bay if a builder built high enough and believe me they wouNd if allowed to do so. Do you live in Bay Ridges? I know that our homes are the oldest in the community and most likey the lowest valued. Believe me, that's definitely the message I get every time council approves yet another development that I don't want and that is not, in my view, to the betterment of my comrnunity. Of course those new developments provide a larger tax base of more expensive homes, so why not go for it and forget the needs and concerns of those already here? If city hall and the counselors truly haven't taken a position, why did the paper report otherwise? Sounds like just another case of crocodile tears to me. Sincerely, Brenda Wessely 905-839-4081 ��.� From: Mike Danischewsky [mailto:danischm@nflcan�da.com] Sent: Thu 5/25/2006 10:13 AM To: Pym, Ross Cc: Dickerson, Doug, Councillor; McLean, Bill, Councilior Subject: RE: Bay Ridges Development �� 1 y� - � y Ross, I recently received the memo from the City of Pickeriu�g Councillors' Office regarding the proposed re-development of the Bay Ridges Plaza. Unfortunately, I will not be able tc� attend the meeting on June 1. I would like to receive any minutes/notes from the meeting if there are any. After studying the proposed plan from the applicants in the newsletter, I have some concerns relating to the proposed development: 1. # of units (density). I believe that there are t��o many units in the proposal that will lead to overcrowding in the area. Many complexes that are constructed to fit in "as many people as possible" lead to a general downward spiral in conditioning of the units. 2. Size of condominiums. The two buildings ar� too tall for the area. The current apartment building just south of the proposal sticks out like a sore thumb in the neighborhood. Two more buildings would make it worse. 3. Traffic. I understand a traffic impact study will be undertaken. It is a fairly quiet neighborhood currently and I believe the number of units will lead to increased traffic congestion. This is a residential neighborhood, quite different than the townhouses located near the Pickering Town Centre which is a higher traffic area 4. Green Area — Similar to many condominium developments in Toronto, this proposal has one tiny parkette in the plan. This has made Toronto a concrete jun�le. Pickering has many parks but I believe any proposal should address the lack of green space on the prop�rty. I believe Vancouver has a by-law that addressed this issue with condo developers and I believe a similar condition should be applied to this plan I am not against the re-development in this space, however, I do not believe the current plan is satisfactory. I would be much more prone to support a development similar tu the one on the waterFront on Liverpool (by the marina) — higher priced low-rise condos/townhomes with retail involved. This would keep this quiet, residential area in tact, address the traffic congestion issue (fewer units) while also incre�se local property values. The location is excellent for commuters given the proximity to the 401 and GO Station. If the developers could sell fewer properties at a higher price and make the same amount of money they would be pl�ased. I appreciate you taking the time to read my comments and, again, would appreciate any updates, feedback or more information on this. Regards, Mike Danischewsky Coordinator, Evenfs 8 Football Development NFL Canada 50 Wellington Street East, 3rd Floor Toronto, ON M3C 2A9 (416) 322-6214 - ph (416) 322-6725 - fax �;��%;�P�i�`:t;4�`t��! � � T 6 Q �,E:i•'J�� ' I��: `r�,� - �? �... ,.. , Pym, Ross _ From: NoraleaPicont@aol.com Sent: May 28, 2006 11:32 AM To: Pym, Ross Cc: Dickerson, Doug, Councillor Subject: Bay Ridgs plaza Page 1 of 1 , � s-� Sir: This is to register a complaint against the proposed redevelopment of Bay Ridges plaza. Much of the information being circulated is to say the least suspect. Other than Price Chopper , the busineses that have left were forced out by the strong arm tactics of the present owner! There is no indication on the proposed plan for any retail space. Nor is there any indHCation where the existing retailers who wish to remain will be located during redevelopment. The phases proposeci seem to preclude this. There are many seniors in the area whom rely on the pharmacy for their necessary prescriptions, as well many do not own cars so have to walk!!! theother shops such as the barber and beauty outlets; provide much needed services. Further more the adition of a minimum of 500 cars will cause many problems on baily street. This in my opinion is nothing but a get rich scheme by the developers. Please do not let it go forward in iYs present form. ni mai�nnti Page 1 of 2 � � ry � , � - , , �� 5 .�,��c� , . �..� ,. . , ; � � ; r' � ,,..a,� � � ��,,.. � � ... . _ ,. _. Pym, Ross From: Jennifer Dempsey [Dempsey.J@sympatico.ca] Sent: June 4, 2006 11:11 AM To: Pym, Ross Cc: info@dougdickerson.ca; McLean, Bill, Councillor; Mayor Web Email; Ashe, Kevin, Councillor; Brenner, Maurice, Councillor; Pickles, David, Councillor; Johnson, Rick, Councillor Subject: Bay Ridges Plaza Zoning By-law Amendment Application - A 06/06 To: Ross Pym, Principal Planner - Development Review From : Jennifer Dempsey 1152 Tanzer Court Pickering On L1 W 3S6 phone: (905) 420-4236 RE: Zoning By-law Amendment Application - A 06/06 I do not support the above Zoning By-law Amendrrient Application. I attended the Public Meeting on June 1, 2006. Many residents spoke out against this amendment, and I can honesty say I did not disagree with any point any of these speakers presented. The uniformity of public opinion on this application is truly remarkable. There is indeed something wrong with the democratic process in Pickering if the town staff and politicians support this application. Below are a few of the reasons I cannot support t�is application. - Sustainable communities - Pickering claims to be embarking on the sustainable community process. A community that is predominately residential cannot possibly be sustainable. The residents need to be able to work and shop in their community, preferably without needing to use cars. As someone at the meeting pointed out, the sole purpose of this huge residential development is to allow commuters to Toronto close access to the GO station, perpetuating the town's role as nothing more than a bedroom community of Toronto. If I were to see an application to build 2 office towers instead of 2 residential towers I would be supportive. I might actually be able to get a good-paying job in Pickering and noi: have to commute to Toronto every day! - precious green space - when the transformer spill polluted the waters of Pine Creek, the town expressed great outrage and pressed the offender to clean up and restore the creek. (Indeed much of the landscaping currently in and around Bay Ridges Plaza is due to this remediation, not to the previous or current owners of the plaza.) If Pine Creek and Douglas Ravine are indeed so important to the town, then the town planners and politicians need to be particularly vigilant in protecting them from f�rther degradation. The application to build to 'top of bank' is truly alarming. The short term construction damage and the longer term damage from runoff and people activities would doom the creek and ravine, and the downstream Frenchman's Bay. � - There is no doubt Bay Ridges Plaza is in trouble and requires investment to become viable again. I do not know how much effort the previous owner put into trying to keep the Plaza vital, but I did not see any signs of investment. I saw many'to lease' notices, but few businesses would be attracted to a site that is clearly being allowed to be run down by the owner. This situation reminds me of a previous application in the town to turn agricultural land into a cemetary. The new owner deliberately allowed the land to become overgrown, etc. then argued it was not profitable to farm it. This application was approved. A few years later, the proponent went bankrupt, the land went up for sale, and guess what it is being used for now - agriculture! Similiarly, did the previous Bay Ridges Plaza owner deliberately let the plaza degenerate so that it could be sold to a residential developer for a higher price than if it was sold commercially ? Possibly yes, or possibly the previous owner did not know how to revitalize the plaza or was unwillfng to take on the investment. Most businesses require continual improvement and investment to remain profitable - it is part of doing business. - There is no doubt the current owner is deliberately letting the Plaza run down so that an argument can be made ni inai�nn� Page 2 of 2 as , . � �,�- a � �. S � for this rezoning. If the town allows this rezoning to go through, the few smaller commercial hubs in Pickering are at risk of the same fate. The town should make it clear to developers that if they buy a commercially zoned site, they will have to develop a commercial property. - I could go on and on about this application. One �nal comment I will make is that I do not believe this applicant has any intention of either building any commercial properties, or of building the apartment towers. Once most of the site has townhouses on it, the applicant would announce it is not viable to build the commercial buildings or the apartments, and apply to build more townhouses. If this site is ever deemed mixed-use, it should be stipulated and enforced that the commercial is built first, before any residential development is allowed. Sincerely, Jennifer Dempsey r.� •m. ��.�.�.� � , x , � y' 07 (7 v.. � �a ; _., ._. � J 0 - � .� C7 (� Crawford, Paul Subject: summary or presentation June 1/06 CLARIFY: PKG OP Map: Does it show present zoning or planned zoning? Is it NOWMixed Corridor? OR is it intended to be Mixed Corridor?�,-- �°�"'��"I��'�� It is noted (page G2) that Mixed is Retailing, Offices, Restaurants, Community and Recreational uses, and Residential........Similar to Table 2 Land Use Category/Criteria/and Sub-Categories. This being a Mixed Use Area. (Note: Keeping this property as is and making the present Plaza viable keeps the Job Component PLUS property remains available (open) for future expansion to preferred uses that are outlined in Regional Plan and other policies relative to Jobs and Population Ratios.) Once use for Residential its gone!!! I DO NOT SUPPORT THIS APPLICATION FOR REZC)NING. WE NEED TO LOOK AT SOMETHING THAT IS IN KEEPING WITH OPs AND POLICIES/ Pickering's OP (page 59, 3.6) says City Council SHALL encourage widest variety of uses on Mixed Use areas. but seems to limit the highest intensification to Kingston Rd and The Downtown area. AND refers to The Durham Regional Plan. THE DURHAM REGIONAL PLAN: Section 1 Goals and Directions, Item 1.1.1. C) "employment opportunities are important" & 1.2.1 Goals of this Plan, Item C) in part "increase job opportunities for its residents" , AND 1.3.1 E) "increasing employmea�t opportunities and balancing growth in population with growth in employment. Section 2.2 all about environment and protection of waterways and sensitive areas. and Section 3 Economic Development. Item 3.1 GOALS, item 3.1.2 "To match population growth with an adequate increase in ernployment opportunities. ltem 3.2.2 Regional Council shall ad�opt a ratio of jobs to population of 50%. 3.3 Policies, Item 3.3.1 in consultation with municipalities, develop and economic strategy" .....3.3.1 D) "means to achieve the ratio of jobs to population at 50%; 3.3.2 ..."the need to balance population growth with employment opportunities...." and 3.3.4....to monitor Regions progress in achieving employment target..." and goes on to describe various ways of encouraging employment and growth.......and ENDS with Item 3.3.10 (page 15 of ROP): "In the preparation of Municipal OPs, Coucils shall ensure the inclusion of Policies and �esignations to implement the intent of the Plan (ROP) and the provision of this Section" � M..iF�tV�ii,'irlL.�!•! jt ��+,....s�..�i��+° �"ii.`.P�QE'i� i�'� �U........ �.'�-."_L? �.,.�..,,,.�,.:.,. f' -- r� �. s � This brings us back to the Pickering Plan which refers to the Regional Plan and these sections. And back to this application for rezoning and this proposal. Does it conform to these expectations? AND if it doesn't, why are we allowing this preferred area be changed??? � ;� .. ) �;�,,..�, . � �� _ 5','� ;; � � ;j �,��' �, �.� � � r �p ..�- � ' �� 0 ,,,� / � • �� .� A ('' , � � �,.� : I�t�' �`��'.i.1�'� 7� � � ..... # or . w •_i � a._h'l3Pl e il ��! .,,... -!,...�e.,..,.....,....t.� _ l�.s... � ...._. � � -/ ,� �.� � ? . , .' � �.;.r' )��.a.. ' 1� � <�,,�� ;�. +f ^ � � � ,:Lft�. �,y ` 4 1'�_ � ' 1 1 / I L� > / /�+� �l/.. _ �,= �."f "�,'�..' � G' . / . � . ./ � 4.�-'�,. �C% . � � . -�.i �'",� -��. -'��'� t.�,�. ' ;.,,,,, �; � G �� y ! .�,�-�-�' �l"�"� . . % - �'�- � � „ ,, .., � ! , '� i /� ��.�-Z��: � . ".i % � . � r'�y��...r-L.�' /�J/��7 `G� :.;2� �"'�`i?/'vi �J � f /,.G{�/L � ` .,. �� `�,,,�,��.f--�: �.•''�.•'�e'"�-..� �.,,.- :�'��-�t' �" , ) ., -�P' yy'� � " � j ,�,� f' f'. �.' ' . � � �'��,�� ..C��'E./1.�9 . .� �:: JUN � 1 2006 p1.1ANNlNG�B DEVE OPM' EN �E�ART9l�ENT C: �a � 3 .�, ;`"L ,, �..Z:'�.. �� / J � ` V l 1 -� } , ,..� �, �� :�, �, , � .�,� ` `,,�,�' fL�" , � �,. �, . ti: . �`,�,�.,-4..`-�" ��. ''" � .. r.. �.. � :/ . =� '�,.�� - �� , .� �, �,, �.-, ,�''2--- , �'�" ��. ��.�-= �' � 'J J ,� �''�` ''�;�' �", . ` �/ � �r .-, �' / r'` ,7. -:...� '�� c--� /0 � � �'�./ /'' , A... �^�„r. ' � r%"'� �' �" - /�%� � 7 .t � ,.. • .'\.��'`+Tj ��.,�`.�i,_ �� .•T6 / �% � � /-� ��.- r��l� `�� r � �, _ w�.. � � / /J � 9 .,.�,�{ ss�C,�sF'./5 ,�,�(/ "" .,;r` `G Z7.. .'-�,'`�K..� , J'� + � y� 7.••'�G ""_ S 1 sCl.�r�� 1 �, � �--�- �° ' � �� .� �' ° . �� .�-��`�'� � � ��' �� ' ��.��°t,�„�'� _ ,,,�t,.� ,�('-��'�'�� , � �� .-�,c.. - �. -,�� .��.- ;� ,,�. ,,�-t,_-• .�� - , .� �� ..�,�� .. -��._: -��'�� `~' �A ,�,,�,�-� . � , .� � ,,�' <,.� � ' � �`-'"� � �� r ��--�- �.� h � � ` l . ) M ��f ./ /l� f�X,�/�. � . . /\ J /�l..i�r /q �e�al,.�i r \�� '� � l.' l.r� I � �','� ��/ `� �-G�,.--v' e� � ` , . � �� ,�.� - - .�� . .--� -��- �--�.�`�'� �' � �.- � t ,�� . �,�'� , .��- . ,`� -�; �,J � �� ,�P , ��. �,� �c�-c�-' �. /�.��-�y -.-�' - - `� .�- 4 � ,. ... ✓�` ... 4 �.+✓�� .�.�'� �±�r�� t . / �' - g✓ ,✓ � c�,�:.��,,. ��Q��%�� .��-�� ..��X� � �� L.��fl � . �� :� �� .,� '� J�'�.. �� GiJ�� .�� _ ��n �� t �� ✓�,,�--' � ��,��—, �>`' . ,� C��t-� .,..� .�""�' � - �.��'L� .�� e ��//�✓-�.`-�-' .�'.�'` -- .�� ' •�'� � . G�� ti . , i.� _. .�, �- �� : �+� -�✓`�%��— i .. .,..�' � � a �� . , � ., � . - ) � . �/ S c U �%v��i�'�-�� rf � .J�V✓� 'r • a/ `� � � ��r�� •%�� .• � i , � �.__..�..li%%� � 1 C G/ „ Z��GL ' _`-� � ✓�, �.� �� -� ./� .�� . ` -�'�_e� �-��L_��i '�� ✓�� . . /- . '�. � ��'�� l� � � � . �� . � � ��-�� -�'�" �� . � � .� t� /�� ;��,,�:,�.�.�� ..��i�� ; � . c ` �1�.�- :/�''�'�vC'..��'1'� �i'�- � �7.�.^ti.ti�.�? .:t.'�/ ./�`,1� �� ,� ��9�-C�/`� . ��.�� , _ J.,�'L�--� _�,,U.��-u �� °� �� . .� . ��--� �� . �� ; ,�,G'c,-c cr,��-��'�'�-' �•�" �w f , -y-��C�i �� 0'l�C i.��-�� `��'�/ ' ry✓//��? /'f ' �iQ.� �)p��,�c�`//t�'�" ,• , � ��y ,�� ..,. ` t rl�� . � � �� -�� .� � �� o� �� - �s� ,� �� . .�� '�=��¢ �� c . ,� �`�� ° -cs .� ��`�%3�� '� .r. . � � ' � �-�i`� Q�,�a��" �7�-� � ��,�� c�c,��'�"��. �� ,2' % , ��, �Q �'''ti' `�� , � ..� �- ` �.J ;� ��; , . � � ��2.'��'� , � � ��'`' � J �� c�oG-` <-��aG . Page 1 of 1 _.. � �- i .�. ` `� C ' � 5�� 06 Pym, Ross _ __ _ _ __ _ _ __ _ _ _.. ___ ___._. __. _ _ _ . . From: FRED ARCHER [fredarcher@rogers.com] Sent: June 1, 2006 9:49 AM To: Pym, Ross Cc: Brenner, Maurice, Councillor; Ashe, I�evin, Councillor; Dickerson, Doug, Counciilor; McLean, Bili, Councillor Subject: bay ridges plaza Mr.Pym, As a resident of 1100 Begley St. I am very concerned about the above "proposal" to add "high density" structures and ruin the "landscape" of this are;a. As a Member of the Board of Directors of D.S.C.C. 176, I request to be added to the mailing list for any information. Our residents are concerned about traffic flo�v and a perceived decline in the value of their home investments if the proposal includes high rise: buildings and I know there are concerns from the South Liverpool Condo owners, MANYof whom purchased these Homes with no knowledge of this POSSIBLE POTENTIAL EYESORE & PEI�CEIVED DECLINE IN THEIR INVESTMENT. I would like to think that there are many opti��ns and a tremendous opportunity for a DEVELOPER who is innovative and wo�king with the Planners can devise a"UNIQUE", "PLEASING" addition to the area rather than striving to load in as many tenants/owners as possible. Let's pray that the CITY AND DEVELOPER:S take a long term approach and DEVISE AN AWARD WINNING REDEVELOPMENT Fred Archer D.S.C.C.176 TREASURER 905 839 6912 ni m4i�nn� � �' �. �� ,� �i..! . G�,. � _ ., .�. � f._ Sent: Monday, ]une 05, 2006 9:48 AM To: 'rpym@city.pickeirng.on.ca' Cc: 'bmclean@city.pickering.on.ca'; 'info@dougdickerson.ca' Subject: Bay Ridges Plaza Rezoning and Development proposal Mr. R. Pym Planning Department City of Pickering Re: Bay Ridges Plaza Re-zoning/Proposed Development Monday, June 05, 2006 Dear Mr. Pym I attended the meeting on Thursday June 1�s well as the previous meeting held at the East Shore Community Bldg. on May 10t" regarding the above development. I realize that this site needs to be developed and wish to put forth my comments on the proposed changes. 1) 1) Traffic — I live just south of Radorr�. Radom is used by the local residents as a means to get to their homes from Bayly and the plaza. There are also people who use Radom as a means to access Liverpool Rd. during busy times on Bayly. As you know, Bayly can become quite congested, particularly in the left hand turn lane during rush hour as people are trying to either get over the bridge or get onto the 401 Westbound. If the residents on the new development have trouble getting into the left hand turn lane or the wait is overly long, they can take Radom over to Liverpool Rd., turn left and go from there. The problem with this is that there are already wait times for peopl� at Radom and Liverpool (and Haller and Liverpool) to turn. I know, I do it every day. And the wait times are not only during rush hour. For instance last night I was going to Kinsman Park at 8:55 p.m. I sat at Haller and counted 21 cars going south. The 17t" car slowed down to IE;t me turn right. Adding more cars (and they will use Radom [& Haller if Radom get too corigested]) will just cause more problems. And additional traffic in the residential area south of Hadom. (P.S. The stop sign at Douglas and Chapleau doesn't work — it slows some people down but many ignore it altogether). Added to this mix is the amount of parking allowed on Radom. Having more traffic will cause huge problems and potentially more accidents. 2) 2) Parking — There is absolutely not �nough parking allowed in the proposed development. Notwithstanding the provincial encouragement to use public transit (as was so kindly pointed out by one of the presenters at the May 10th meeting), if sufficient parking is not provided, there will be no fix for this problem. There is no other land that can be made available for parking. Cars will be illegally parked, tempers will flare, there will be discord among the locals and the problem will not go away. This is not to be taken lightly. You can't ban cars from the development or put a limit on how ma�y cars per unit (i.e. only 1 car). Any businesses that are in the development won't have suffici�nt parking to keep customers and we will then be left with unused units. What will you do tc� fix a parking problem in this area? The only solution I can see is to pave behind the homes backing on to Bayly, just west of St. Martin's. Wouldn't they love that! Of course you could always rent the northwest corner of Bayly & Liverpool and put parking there. �!, �" , ? �• . � �� - L� � 3) 3) Density — Lowering the density will help with both the parking, traffic, & schooling problems. Also I think that the size of the buildings (two condo towers) is far too high. The people on the west side of St. Martin's will have zero privacy. I would prefer to see buildings less that 8 stories — this would look a lot nicer too. 4) 4) Schooling — With the current density proposed, where are the children to go to school? I know Sir John A. Macdonald takes th� children from the current condo building. With the potential loss of Holy Redeemer, there could be a real problem with schooling even divided between Bayview Heights and Sir John A. Also, kids will be walking on Bayly to go to school. Right now there are not a lot of elementary kids who use Bayly. With the Tim Horton's traffic, the development traffic, the Shell Stn traffic, there could be a lot of problems. If the kids cross Bayly at Liverpool, is there going to b� a school crossing guard? That would certainly not help traffic at the intersection during rush hour. I know there is a crossing guard at Tatra but you can't force kids to not cross Bayly at Liverpool. 5) 5) Loss of amenities to South Pickering — many people in south Pickering are feeling abandoned. We lost the library, then the hardware store, post office (although the variety store at Krosno has nnw picked that up), the banks (Royal and CIBC) and now our grocery store. The closest store is Loblaws. Although a great store for quality and variety, it is also expensive and you have to cross the bridge to g�t to it. Have you ever walked that bridge? In the middle of winter? Any one who did walk to Price Chopper and wants those products and prices now must drive (or take'/2 to 3/ of an hour by bus) to get to another low price store. Remember the comment under parking about using public transit? Well, everyone now uses their car to get groceries. This makes the bridge even more congested more of the time. This includes our summer residents at the marina of co�rse. We will certainly see that this year. 6) 6) Evacuation — At the May meeting, the developer was not aware that there was an official evacuation plan for the area. Has this been taken into consideration with the amount of people being added to the area? It must be r�oted that many single family dwellings in Bay Ridges are not single families. There are multi generational families and many basement apartments — not all legal and therefore not on the tax rolls. When I first moved into my home nearly 26 years ago, there was not a lot of stre�t parking and certainly not the number of basement apartments. Now, all streets have pa�king all night, basement apartments on every street and there is a lot more traffic in the residential areas. Evacuation is limited to access of the bridges at Whites, Liverpool and Brock. Should there be a problem with 1 of those access points, 1/3 of the population must go to the other points. We have very limited ways of going north and adding a lot of people will just make it that much harder. I can't emphasize enough the problem I hav� with the traffic that will be generated from this development. Please do not approve this without having a full plan in place to contain the traffic and parking. Once done, it can't be undone. Respectfully, Valerie and Randy Blyth 863 Chapleau Drive Pickering, Ontario �_1W 1P6 (905) 839-7441 rdvrs863@rogers.com cc B. Mclean Regional Councillor Ward 2 & D. Dickerson City Councillor Ward 2 _., .,_ � ......,..�.b Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Attention: Dear Sirs: �o � �f 5 c�� t a s ore owers �urham Condominium Corporation No. 19 12 �. 0 Radom Street Pickering, Ontario L 1 W 2Z3 Te1:905-839-I246 Fax:905-839-7714 Planning and Development Re: Bav Ridges Re-Develonment Plans ,� , ��. ,1�J�1i ? � Z00� t;IT�' t�� ERIh1i� PLANNiNG & D��E! OAMEN�" �Ei�Al�TM�NT The Board of Directors of Durham Condominium Corporation No. 19 (DCC 19) has concerns with regard to the redevelopment of Bayridges Plaza (the Plaza). DCC 19 has invested significant physical and financial resources attempting to ascertain the source and repair leaks in the underground parking garage. The Board of Directors is concerned the ongoing problems we have experienced may largely be due to the volume of water draining from the adjacent Plaza lands. The notable difference in the elevation between the two properties results in significant run-off toward our building. In addition, the car wash located at the south east corner of the "Plaza" may be compounding the problem. We also have concerns about the condition of the buried services discharging water from the premises. On Wednesday, June 7, 2006, an ovwner in the building reported seeing soap bubbles coming from several areas in the lower level of our underground parking garage. On Thursday, June 8th, 2006, Guardian Property Management Services contacted the City of Pickering to report this problem. We were pleased to have Mr. Mike Hillis, City of Pickering, Foreperson, Skilled Sho�►, Municipal Property & Engineering Division, Operations & Emergency Services Department, attend 1210 Radom Street, Pickering, that morning to observe first-hand, our complaint. He visually inspected the car wash and reported that all of its bays' catchbasins were full of water and bubbles. As the development of the Plaza continues, DCC 19 respectfully requests that the City of Pickering takes all necessary steps to ensure the Plaza property is adequatley drained. We , . _ 30 - 1��;, ; ; ' _�5-c3 � ask that a"Water Shed" study or an� appropriate alternative be commissioned to ensure that the new development does not adversely affect our property in any way. Please be advised that we will be monitoring the redevelopment of the plaza very closely to ensure that we do not experience dny "side effects" such as cracking in the foundation walls of the building. We would appreciate this matter being tabled for discussion in the near future. Representative from our Corporation are available to discuss this matter at any time. As the plans for development evolve, the Board of Directors for DCC 19 would also like an opportunity to meet privately with all pa.rties involved. We thank you in advance for you�r consideration. If you have further questions or concerns, please contact Mr. Andrew Slater, R.C.M., Property Manager, Guardian Property Management Services Ltd. at (905) 427-8535, extension 27. Sincerely, an Stainton, Building Administrator, DCC 19. cc: Mayor, David Ryan City Councillor, Ward 2, Doug; Dickerson Regional Councillor, Ward 2, �3i11 McLean City of Pickering, Bylaw Depa:rtment, Brad Suckling Board of Directors, DCC 19 Page 1 of 1 3r � '� `% $'� � (� _ � �.. .� ..�. t� t.. Pym, Ross _ __ �_ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ __ From: PAUL CRAWFORD [paulc6@rogers.com] Sent: June 10, 2006 2:50 PM To: Pym, Ross Subject: BayRidges Plaza you may further this to Bill McLean and Dou� Dickerson. Our concerns are: Why the loss of the plaza iri particular a grocery outlet? What caused Price Chopper to leave? Why can't we have grocery service during change to Plaza? We would like to see the services kept as is or up-graded and for services to rerriain where they are. Marilyn Crawford, Sharon Crawford, 867 Antonio St. �'��Im��T.� Pa�;e 1 �f 1 �,. .,-� � �� S. �?, � Pym, Ross ___. _ _ _ _ __ _. _ __ __._ From: Rourke, Heather on behalf of Planning Web Email Sent: June 16, 2006 8:48 AM To: 'Hotmail' Cc: Pym, Ross Subject: RE: Bay Ridges Piaza redevelopment - parking Good morning, Mr. Fages, and thank you for using the City of Pickering's Planning Web Email. By copy of this message to Mr. Ross Pym, Principal Planner, Development Review, your comments below will be placed accordingly within the Application file. Thank you for providing your input into this Development Application. Regards, Heather Rourke Planning & Development Clerk =Planning & Development Dept. The City of Pickering 905.420.4660 ext 2022 hr.ourke.Gcity_.pickering_on,ca -----Original Message----- From: Hotmail [mailto:patfages@hotmail.c:om] Sent: Friday, June 16, 2006 7:36 AM To: Planning Web Email Subject: Bay Ridges Plaza redevelopment - parking To whom this may concern, I would like to comment on the Bay Ridges Plaza redevelopment. I live in the Bayshore towers just south of the proposed redevelopement site. Since we have already lost most of our retail stores in the Bay Ridges plaza, everytime you need to buy something you now have to take the car. I was suprised to hear in the new initial pro�osal, #hat parking allocation was not very generous. You currently can not park on St-Martin or Bayly. Parking north of Bayly will not even be option to consider because of the train track. That would meaii that all additional parking requirements (created by insufficient parking allocation in the new project) would have to spill out south towards Radom street which is already fully used most of the time. I am in favor of a quick approval & redevelapment of the plaza site, but please consider adequate parking requirements. Even if people go to work using the GO trains, you still need cars for shopping & visitors. Thanks Patrick Fages 1210 Radom, apartments # 1708 -# 1709 Pickering f,•`'-t� ��i't; '��'� �r,3 .,�.��i , ` :' „ � i� �'� � 7 J �....�.. R.d,. : �� ;� 1 � �� ,,� � r:�� Input and Appeal from the Tenants of Bay R�dges Plaza JU�1 0 5��Of - Delivered June ls`' 2006, at the Pickering Council Chamber �tTV o� ��c��R�NG - re: Bay Pridges Plaza Re�:oning Application ��NNiDEPAfi7MEN�T�MENT will be speaking today, on behalf of the majority of existing tenants at Bay Ridges Plaza .... Given that the rezoning under d�scussion today is the last barrier of major of significance to the execution of the Master Plan ..... .. we, as tenants and citizens of Pickering .. . feel it is the right thing to do, to pass on an indication of what our experien�e has been in dealing with the developers / owners / landlords over the past 10 months. This may serve to provide insigl�t into the nature of future interactions with these people as they proceed to establish themselves in your community. ---------------------------------------�----------- This Public Relations Bulletin is a typical example of the type of approach we've come to know from the developers, which often involves hiring an arms length, third party to act as a face or front for their strategies. In this case, they have hired Public Relations firm to re-frame reality in their favour. This document, which we have already responded to in print: .. firstiv ... Claims that tenants plan to vacate as thei� own leases conclude. this is not, at all, a true representa.tion of the overall picture. In fact, the developers intend to start executing their re-construction based plans long before our leases are actually up. ... secondlv this document claimh• the plaza will continue to languish. If the plaza is languishing, it is a�iirect result of their own actions. Actions such as .. .. locking tenants out ..... actually turning off tenants' electricity ..... and otherwise att�mpt to scare them into leaving ... while not allowing any of the empty units to be rented out. l: 3 3 .. �� 5 c� .'�. �. �t � , ,..� , � .__. And finally .. . for now, considering the time constraint ... this document contends the plaGa will become a potential safety conce�n. This claim would seem to serve no other purpose than to scare local residents into thinking they should be in favour of a safer alternative — ie, rezoning and redevelopment ! Instead of scaring people with the prospect of crime or danger, shouldn't a responsible landlord take firm responsibility for their business plans? Shouldn't they be making the cammunity's safety their absolute first and foremost concern? Is that not a priority of the Mast�r Plan ? Instead of identifying plaza security as a responsibility and a priority, they see fit to use it to scare people ta choose their preferred end result. These are a few examples of reframing the facts for their own gain, that we have seen on numerous occasion.s. And possibly most interesting of'all, there is no disclosure of accountability on the Bulletin. Not even the Public Relations firm has put their name on it. Calls to the phone number on the bulletin .... were either not returned, or were responded to with inaccuracies. One patron of the plaza called the number, worried about what was going to happen to her friends' business. The response ??..... In an attempt to portray a picture of perfect cooperation from the landlords, the caller was told that numerous phone messages were left with the business, in other words, a commendable communication effort on the part of the developers. In reality, the l�usiness in question does not even have an answering machine. The claim w<�.s absolutely not true in the slightest. ----------------------------------------�------------------------ And this is just a microcosm of what we have experienced since the new owners took control. � ._ ' , * ,.... .. j 1��.� ' ',� 3' - c� �, And at the end of the day, if and when we confront them with these types of perspectives, they outright deny any wrongdoing,... and instead, go on the offensive, by saying they are offended by the nerve of ANY such a suggestion. So, what are we to do?.... ?? Just be satisfied to let them tell their own version of the plaza reality? ---------------------------------------------------------------- Many of us have several years left on our leases. In order to allow a hypothetical redevelopment in any timely manner .... we would have to forego the right to do business for the remainder of our lease terms. And we would be willing to make that compromise. But in such a case, it seems only right that we would be fairly compensated for closing down what we've established here, and clearing the way for these elaborate plans. In fact, other than the huge sacrifice business-wise, we are NOT against the bigger picture of community re-development .... If the community sees it as an improvement to the present plaza and the services it provides them, that's good enough for us. But how can we be willing to accept a version of the truth that predicts or allows the plaza to turn into a crime zone,...... And can we trust that the developers will not use the prospect of demolition as a means to force us out, WITHOUT proper compensaton. This proposed process would already be a major road block to the running of our businesses, without that kind of crippling disruption. All we feel we can do now, is look to the community and the councillors, and if plans do proceed, to the developers,...... to help ensure it all proceeds with honesty, compassion, and accountability. I '�t ) �1 � � ..3,3 :,: � ._ <<_� , 1 �.:�. ,.a �......: So, at this time, long before any potential shovel goes into the ground, or any bulldozer starts shaking the foundations of Bay Ridges .... we appeal to all of you - not to forget about us. If thi's does proceed to the point of reconstruction ... we, as tenants, are all absolutely willing to commit to fair and�equitable negotiations ... - negotiations towards agreements that would move us out, and clear the way for demolition ... However, we appeal to you, on moral terms, if nothing else, to help us ensure, specifically, that demolition is not used as a tool to uproot us ... and that it does not start .... until fair and equitable negotiation has taken place .. .. and the plaza is empty. Thanks a lot for you tirne ... attention Page 1 of 1 .3� �s-�� . � �� _ _ �W ...� Pym, Ross __ _ __ _ From: Bianca D'Souza [dsouzabc@hotmail.com] Sent: June 19, 2006 4:21 PM To: Pym, Ross Subject: Bay Ridges Redevelopment Proposal Good afternoon, Attached below are my comments regarding the Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment proposal. Regards, Bianca D'Souza 1179 Tanzer Court 905 831 2893 *** eSafe scanned this email for maliciaus content *** *** IMPORTANT: Do not open attachments from unrecognized senders *** O l /09/2006 � �� , . � V 43 . . 3..:� v ..f.�.i : �_5.� � �.. , _ .. As a resident of the Bay Ridges area, I am extremely disappointed regarding the proposed amendment application to change the Bay Ridges Plaza to a residential/commercial area. I have many concerns on many issues which will affect the area in which we live. Existing businesses-As someone who continues to support the businesses that remain in the Bay Ridges Plaza, what will become of those business owners who do not wish to leave? Traffic Flow- There is a strong concern for safety with regards to speeding on Bayly Street. The erection of a light at the corner of St Martin and Bayly is fundamental to the well-being of everyone who lives and drives in the area. With the construction of over 500 units, the traffic flow will increase radically in an area that as already flooded with constant speeding cars. There will also be a large increase in the volume of cars that will use Tanzer Court as a shortcut to Bayly Street. Speeding traffic on our residential street full of children is not welcome. Lack of parking on residential streets-If residents of the new proposed townhomes/condominiums are assigned only one parking spot, St Martin's St., and Radom St do not have the space to support additional parking Accessibility to services-When my husband and I chose our home, two of the major reasons that we selected this location was safety, proximity to basic services, and also environmentally protected area. Now a113 of these factors are being slowly eradicated. Too many homes in a small area is cause for concern, and the land itself is a commercially zoned area. Why the change? Why the existence of by-laws if they are so easily altered? Thank you in advance for allowing me to share my comments. I look forward to updates on any changes that will affect me, and my young family. Best Regards, Bianca D'Souza 1179 Tanzer Court 905-831-2893 � J �-� "C"�(� -----Original Message----- From: Hazel Daubeny [mailto:hazel.daubeny@sympatico.ca] Sent: Tuesday, ]une 06, 2006 7:38 PM To: Planning Web Email Cc: tdoyle@durhamregion.com Subject: Bay Ridges Plaza .�.�� . Gentlemen Surely it is time for common sense to prevail! Instead of greed. Bay Ridges is a residential community very much in need of revitalizing by a new "modern" plaza. As residents since 1964, we have lived in a house now as retirees we have moved into Bayshore Towers, like manv other residents we are dependant on having a GROCERY store and DRUG store at least. Traffic congestion on Bayly Street is severe at present and the addition of a High Rise building makes no sense at all. Should there ever be an emergency requiring evacuation (Hydro Plant) there would be no chance of leaving the area. Congestion in local schools is also another reason to re-consider the re-zoning. Let alone the parking problems. We are asked constantly NOT to use cars in hot weather in particular due to air pollution, fat chance for seniors that have chosen to live in our peaceful community. The Developer is not doing us any favours, their interest is to make money for themselves (understandable) however: We need consideration, this land will be lost forever and more thought must be given. At worst scenario a low rise (5 story) building AFTER the shopping area has been �ompleted. As one person at the meeting stated, if they build the housing first they can just up-roots and leave without the shopping facility ever being completed. Surely we have been manipulated by "Big Business" enough, listen to the residents. ]im and Hazel Daubeny 905-837-8216 ��.a F r I ..,' � r -f :;,a � � ...., � �€ j �,i�'.`? , s �i.. � .5 U (o _ �..._ :, ...._ -----Original Message----- From: Anna & Syivain [mailto:Anna.Sylvain@masi.com] Sent: Sunday, July 09, 2006 9:10 PM To: info@bayridgesplazainfocentre.ca Cc: ddickerson@city.pickering.on.ca; bmclean@city.pickering.on.ca; rpym@city.pickering.on.ca Subject: Recycling... In Durham Region, more than 22,000 residents are serviced by the weekly Apartment Building and Townhouse Complex Blue Box Recycling Program. To be eligible for this service, the buildings and townhouses must receive municipal garbage collection services. Will the new compiex be serviced by this Recycling Program? Also, Pickering has now a new Green Bin Program. However, Apartment Bui�ding and Townhouse Complex are excluded from this program as they have not been constructed to accommodate it. Will the new St. Martins Square be constructed to accommodate such program for all its residents? Regards, Sylvain Trepanier Email: Anna.Svlvain(a�mail.com rage i or i f ��c;n�< <,::�"T ��. � 7 ��'� .. ,:�,� � ��E�� 5�.�� . .�_:� . _ 1 � �i� , Pym, Ross _ _ _ _ From: Jennifer Dempsey [Dempsey.J@sympatico.ca] Sent: July 9, 2006 4:23 PM To: Pym, Ross Cc: Johnson, Rick, Councillor; Pickles, David, Councillor; Brenner, Maurice, Councillor; Ashe, Kevin, Councillor; Mayor Web Email; McLean, Bill, Councillor; info@dougdickerson.ca Subject: Re: Bay Ridges Plaza Zoning By-law Amendment Application - A 06/06 July 9, 2006 To: Ross Pym From: Jennifer Dempsey Dear Mr. Pym: I received a phone call from the development company that bought Bay Ridges Plaza. They indicated they got my name and phone number from the sheet I signed at the June 1, 2006 public meeting. I did indeed provide this information. However, I assumed this information would be used by the City of Pickering. I admit I do not remember if there was any notification on the form that the information would be shared with the developer. In future, I will be much more careful before I provide such information at any city function. I would not have provided the information if I had known it would be given to the developer. I have signed such lists before at previous Town meetings and was never contacted by developers or interested parties. If there was no notification on the form that the information would be shared with the developer, then I believe the City of Pickering has violated privacy laws by sharing this list with the developer. I request that the City inform the developer I DO NOT want to be contacted by them again. I want my name and phone number removed from all their records, and I refuse the City of Pickering permission to share it with any other party. Unfortunately, this incident has increased my concerns about the too-friendly relationship between the City of Pickering and developers. Sincerely, Jennifer Dempsey i nrmnnnti ��. �� o 6�� June 1, 2006 1 iF`:; , ,�.f�� .7b t . � C �°: � 'r.�� _ � E ys� . �. �_ . Pickering E ast Shore Community Association Subject: Redevelopment of Bay Ridges Plaza (BRP) The Pickering East Shore Community Association (PESCA) has established an Ad Hoc Committee to review the Bay Ridges Plaza (BRP) redevelopment proposal and to establish the PESCA position on this proposal. The Committee consists of a cross-section of inembers of the PESCA Board of Directors, and the Board has authorized and supports the position taken by the Committee and the recommendations included in this briefing. PESCA welcomes the opportunity to summarize the concerns of the citizens of Bay Ridges at the Public Meeting of June 1, 2006. However, it is PESCA's position that any changes to the existing zoning and approval of any Development Plan should be preceded by extensive public consultations. A. PESCA 2006 Annual General Meeting PESCA members are the residents of the Bay Ridges neighborhoods. At the 2006 Annual General Meeting, held on April 26, 2006, PESCA members were very vocal with respect to the proposed redevelopment of BRP. Many residents rose to express their concerns at the meeting, and in fact the vast majority expressed opposition to the proposal. Some of the issues which emerged at the AGM included the following: • very little information had been distributed in the area to explain the nature and timing of the Developer's proposal; • the project included excessive density in a small area; • the condominium towers were viewed as being too tall; • the local residents oppose the lass of retail facilities on the south side of Highway 401; • there were many concerns about additional parking and traffic congestion; • the Developers' tactics to remove the existing retail tenants came into question; • the health of Douglas Ravine and Frenchman's Bay were a concern; • the impact on the emergency evacuation plan was questioned. �y�ORE C�"'At�2 �� s .� �� B. Specific Concerns �j, r.`;°�r � ,.��, �, f�.. °�� -;� ; s �•' , k � .�,r e} f...-r-.�'" C:% �' Pickering E ast Shore Community 1�ssociation PESCA is opposed to the Developer's current proposai. However, PESCA is not opposed to the redevelopment of the Bay Ridges Plaza in general. Specific concerns we have with the current proposal include the following: 1. Condominium tower height 2. Traffic and parking 3. Environmental impact 4. Loss of retail businesses and 5. Impact on the Emergency Evacuation Plan These concerns are examined in more detail below. 1. Building Height and Dwelling Unit Density PESCA is concerned about the proliferation of very tall buildings at this location. We acknowledge the presence of an existing 18- story building, but we feel very strongly that this is a trend which should not be encouraged. There are many who regret the proliferation of tall condominium buildings along the waterfront in the city of Toronto, for example, and we believe that policies which promote the same trend in Pickering are misguided and short-sighted. With regard to density, the Pickering Official Plan calls for a range of 30 up to 140 dwelling units per hectare. The proposal, at 169 units per hectare, significantly exceeds even the highest density specified in the Official Plan. PESCA proposes that the Developer examine options which incorporate buildings that are a maximum of seven storeys tall. 2. Traffic and Parking: The existing traffic study has been examined, and the results were found to be unsatisfactory. We have the following cancerns: • the current proposal allocates only 1.1 parking spaces per living unit. According to a University of Toronto study, the average household in this area has 1.9 vehicles. It can be expected that many new families will seek parking elsewhere, causing further congestion on surrounding streets • based on internal vehicle counts, a traffic increase of 250% can be expected on St. Martin's Street ��li ,� �) -., r ��-"� ��o�coM►w�� 3 � � � �� _ 3g_ � � �. ,. '. . � � S- �a G �.,. __ .. Pickering E ast Shore Community Association • the Liverpool Rd/ Radom St/ St. Martin's St/ Bayly St corner is already heavily congested. We believe the addition of approximately 600 new dwellings will contribute substantially to this congestion. This congestion will threaten vehicle, bicycle and pedestrian safety, have an overalt negative impact on the quality of life in our community and adversely affect the enjoyment of the WaterFront Trail for all. It is proposed that the City of Pickering conduct more detailed traffic impact studies to determine the true impact on road safety and congestion at a very early stage in the approvals process. 3. Environmental Impact: PESCA is concerned about the long- term health of the Douglas Ravine and Frenchman's Bay, especially in view af Pickering's stated commitment to environmental sustainability and the work conducted as part of the Frenchman's Bay Watershed Rehabilitation Project. Specifically, the proposal so far is very short on detail with respect to the potential impact that demolition, construction and dense habitation patterns will have on the ravine, the watershed and the Bay. It is proposed that the Developer work with PESCA and knowledgeable local citizens on an Environmental Impact Plan for this project. 4. Commercial/ Residential Mix The loss of significant retail facilities is seen as a major concern, and PESCA lacks confidence that the Developer will provide adequate retail services to compensate for the loss. To quote Ms Doris Hopper of Bayshore Towers, in Danielle Milley's article in the News Advertiser on May 8, the plaza is a"lifeline." Ms Hopper and other area residents, especially older residents at Bayshore and the St Martin's seniors' residence are lasing critical amenities such as a supermarket and pharmacy. The Developer's current proposal increases residential units in Bay Ridges by approximately 20% while decreasing the commercial amenities by 80%. There are additional concerns regarding the existing tenants. It has been suggested by the Developer that demolition of some of the plaza could commence while the remaining tenants continue to operate their businesses. This raises significant issues, including the viability of the businesses trying to operate on a demolition/ construction site and the threat to public safety on the site. ,��3 W / � � � 2 � � , � ;3 �. ,�S.�ca �� Pickering E ast Shore Community Association PESCA proposes that any new develnpment on the site include increased commercial space, more closely approximating the facilities to be lost. Further, it is PESCA's position that no demolition should occur on the site untif all existing tenants have vacated. 5. Emergency Evacuation Plan Bay Ridges neighborhoods co-exist with the world's largest nuclear plant. Most residents are very aware that emergency evacuation from the area, while only a remote possibility is a contingency which must be addressed. Liverpool Road and Bayly Street are major evacuatior� routes and to date, no information has been collected to indicate the potential irnpact of the redevelopment project on the local emergency evacuation plan. It is PESCA's position that this impact should be carefully examined before any redevelopment is approved. In conclusion, PESCA favours a cooperative approach as the future unfolds for the Bay Ridges Plaza site. We seek the support of Pickering City and Regional Councillors, the Planning Department and the Developer to address all of these important concerns, and we urge area residents to provide their input at every opportunity. Tim Dobson Chair, BRP Redevelopment Committes Pickering East Shore Community Association 1��1 � �. � :�- .�. �yia+E COMAMIry�� s `�- �$ �� . � :,� _z. 8 v. . ,, � , �. � . _,.E ; �5' .� �, Pickering E ast Shore Community Association Summary: PESCA's Officiai Position on the Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment PESCA is opposed to the current proposal to redevelop the Bay Ridges Plaza. We are in favour of redeveloping the Bay Ridges Plaza in general, but feel the following concerns need to be addressed: 1. Building Height Any buildings on the site shou/d not exceed seven storeys. 2. Traffic and Parking A more comprehensive and up-to-date traffic study is needed and the parking allocation shou/d be increased from �.1 vehic/es per dwelling to more c/ose/y reflect the City average of 9.9 vehic/es per dwelling. 3. Environmentallmpact An environmental lmpact Plan shou/d be deve/oped wiih input from PESCA and know/edgeab/e loca/ citizens and environmenta/ groups. 4. Commercial/Residential Mix Our residents need a viable community commercial p/aza of similar size to the existing p/aza, especially with the proposed increase of residences. As well, there shou/d be no demolition of the existing plaza until such time as it is completely vacant so as not to infringe on the rights of the remaining tenants to conduct their business and protect the safety of the members of our community who still freguent these businesses. 5. Emergency Evacuation Plan The impact of the additional residences on the existing evacuation p/an shou/d be carefully examined before any redevelopment is approved. r-�u��-i-�GG6 G�:�Sf� FR�f�i: , � ,:. .... � T0:416y729S°^ � r. , � �.$ �� t�, / 1 ' ` � � S R& R Bay Ridges.Ltd. 69 Yorlcville Avenue Suite 400 Toronto, ON MSR 1B8 Attention: Mr. Steven Warsh Dear Sir: Durham Condomi�nium Corporation No. a9 1210 Radom Street Pickering, t3ntario L1W 2Z3 Tel: 905-�39-1246 Fax: 905-839-7714 Redevelopment of Bav Rid�es Plaza The Board of Directors of Durham Condominium Corporation No. 19 wouid like to extend their appreciation for youx assistance with alternative temporary parking arrangements for our residents. Many of our residents have participated in the inforrnation seminars that youz firm has provided. They have commented that the meetings were very informative. Although there are always hurdles to overconne in a project of this nature, the redevelopment o:F the plaza has generally been well received and supported. Should you require any additional support or assistance in this regard, please feel free to contact us. �- We would like to welcome you to our i�eighbourhood and we anticipate a long and mutually beneficial relationship. � Sincerely, � O Board of Directo: Durham Condom � .�C��.� um Corporatian No. l 9 fl . ? %'i �� JUIY-✓Jl-G✓JCJO C10•�-FJ 3�,� C . 1l�RONTQ AND REGIQN �y-� ons�rv� t�on for The L�ving�City. May 30, 200fi VIA MAIL. AND FAX (fax. 416..972.958$) Steven M. Warsh � Partner . � 5& R Development Group Limited � 69 Yo�kville Avenue, Suite 400 � Toronto, ON M5R �1�B8 � �. � . r . r�l+ r�,.� � � � � '� �^" Y n+uw. � '� '� �:'�'T�� ii��!JT.,� d .�T'U w� E�"P''GR P �' �p� �5-. � , ��.� � � �--�---.�--��,.�.. �._.�.,_ �� o i iQOs PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CFN 37347.�6 � " � /� . I� � .r�� . � . � , �~ m /�y � � �r � �C� ,. - -_ �°'�► � Re: . Zoning. By�Law Amendment�Applic�tion,Na. A p6106 � . 121 S �� 1�235 �8ayly.5treet� (Bay Ridg'�s Plaza) . � � � � Clty of Pickering � . . ' S. R..&�R. Bay Ridges�limited . �Dear Mr. Warsh: Thank you for meeting with TRCA staff on May 29, 200�6 to discussed your proposal for the redevelopment of the Bay Ridges Plaza�.in the City of Pickering. Attendence at this meeting at our head o�ce included Mr. Steven M. Warsh, S� R Developm�nt Group Limited,'Mr. Stephen I. Fagyas; Commercial Focus Advisory Services, Inc., and Steven H�uchert, Senior Planner, TRCA. During this meeting we re�Ferred to Drawing Nq. R,Z-02, Site Plsn Project�Statistics, p�ep�red by Kirkor Archi�ects, dated March 2T, 2006, received by City of Pickering Planning��nd D�velopment on April 5, 2006, and received by TR�A st�ff on May 11, 2006. Although we hav� not r�ceived a complete application from S& R Development Group or the Ciiy af Pickering,�we woultl IikE to'cl�rify the TRCA's progr�rn and policy interests rel�ting to your Zoning By-Law Amendment Application. as follows: � TRCA oermit Requiremenfs 7he subject property is.partially within a TRCA Regulat�d Area. In a�ccordance with Ontario Regulation 166I06 (Development, Interference with Wetlands�and Alteration� to Shorelines and Watercourses), a permit is required from.the TRCA prior #o any of the following works t�aking place: � . . � . �. straightening, changing, diverting or intertering in any�way with the existing channel of a river, creek, stream or watercourse, or for changing or intertering in any way with a � wetland; • 2. development, if in the opinion of the �uthoriiy, the control of flooding; erosion, dynamic beaches or pollution or the conservation of land may be affected by the development. Development is defined as: . . � � 1. the construction, reconstruction, erection or�placing of a building.or str.ucture of any �kind; 2. any change to a�building or structure that would have the effect of altering the use or . � pot�ntial,use of tlie building or structure, increasing the size of the building or structure or increasing the numbEr of dwelling units in the building or structure; 3. site grading; � . �� . . f .y . �, ,. L. � � � ; : .,� � 5" - c� :�� ,. , � ��. i r. ., f F.. ....... ..... ,.,�.... :..��... _.. �� JU�1 � � ��4f Steven M. Warsh � - 2- Y a� �',��E�� Ma 30, 2006 • � p�N p�pARTMENT . • 4. the temporary or permanent placing; dumping or removai of any material, origin�ting on �he site or elsewhere. � � . � Please contact YRCA staff to�obtain permit epproval prior to the issuance of any municipal grading or building pErmits. � � . � � TRCA Policy and Program Interesis Notwithstanding permit tequirements, the Toronto and Regi.on Ganservation Authority's policies for defiining valley carridor boundaries are gu'ided by our "v�lley and �Stream Gorridor Management Program" (�SC,MP). The VSCMP guides aur r�view of development�proposals and permit and planning applicati�ns. The �verall Qbjectives of these policies is'to prevent new development from occurring within areas that may introduce a risk to life and property associated with flooding, .erosion and slope inscability, or is not compatibi� with the protection or rehabilitatian of these areas in their natural state. For the suhject property, the VSCMP .policies define the valley corridor boundary as�follows: 1. If the valley slope is stable, a minimum of 1Q metres�in(and from the tap of the vatley . � bank; or � � � , � � �. �If the valley slope is not stable; a minimum of 10 metres�from the predicted (ong term stable slope projected from the exisiing stablelstabilized tos (base) of.slo�e, or th� predicted location nf�the tae of the. slope as shifted as a result�of. stream erosion over a � 10� yEar period; or , � � � 3. If there is� signific�nt vegetatian, the limit of�this vegetation plus ten metres. In s.ummary, the limits of the valley corridor will b� defined by the greater of the top of�bank, the pr�dicted long term .sta�le slope �line or the limit of vegetation, plus a minimum 10 metre �uff�r. No developm�nt is permitted within the valley corridor. . ldenfification of Development Limlts� The.development�lirnits on the subject property nE�d to be identified;�as follows: 1. The top of'bank as staked in 200� �as not been identified to aur.satisf�ction. .The tvp of � bank should 6e illuskrated on�a full size Plart �of Survey, provided to TRCA, �nd confirmed in writing by TRCA staff. The top of b�nk is valid for a period of �ve years, at which time if devefapment is not substanti�lly underway then a new t�p af bank st�kirig will,be required. , � 2, The long term stable siope line has not�been identified. The�efore, a detaifed . Geotechnical Slope 5tability Study is required in �reas where the slope factor of safety is less than 1.5. The Study should�be based on a�subsurface investigation, and cross- sections,identifying the long term stable slope line, along with the location of the line on the Plan of Survey, should be provided ta TRCA and confirmed in writing by TRCA staff. 3_ The limit of vegetatinn associated wi#h th� valley (the dripline) has not been identified. This can be appraached in one Qf iwo ways: 1) TRGA staff can visit the site with your � Su�rveyor and stake the dripline of v�getation; or 2) your environmental consultan# can F:�HOME\PUBUC�DEvELOPMENT SERVICESIDURHAM REGION\PICKERING11215- 1235 BAYLY_1•pOC , � � �� .+ v� i u �. �vvv c�� - �—r 1 . 'UJ/ C.JJ , `�G ; F� . <: �w. .. A �� , � , . .f.�'6 . ��-'� �-' Steven M. Warsh - 3- May 30, 2006 identify the dripline, stake the feature �n the ground, and TRCA staff will visit the site to con�rm the location is accurate. The dripline shouid then be illustr�ted on �the Plan of Survey, provi.ded to TRCA, and confirmed in writing by TRCA staff. Once identified, #he valley corridor (including the 10 metre buffEr) should be renaturalized with native trees and shrubs appropriate for the soil conditions, re-zQned to an C7pen Space designatian and tr�nsf�rred to publ'tc ownership. pevel�pment, in�luding r��r yards, roads, and accessory structures, etc. are not permitted in the bu�fer. We are willing to discus� the appropriate location for a pu�lic access'tr�il relatiue to the b�ffer zone if such access is required by the City of Pickering. . Clarification At our meeting of MaY 29, ZQ�6� You rePresented that the proposal illustrated on Orawing RZ-02 referenced above was substantially "approved" by Caralyn Woodland of our o#ice�af a previous meeting�on F�bruary 1�, 2b06, Please be advised that this ►epresentation is f�lse and, rath�r, the importance of praviding a 1 Q metre. buffer from the various features identified above was expressed by.our staff at that mEeting. Applicatior► and �Clearance Fee PleasE be advised that the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority has imp.lemented a r�vised fee schedule for our planning application r�view servic�s. This application is subject to a$8,650 minQr multi=unit application fee, An additional $2,$75 clearance fee will become due upon final clearance. The applicant is responsible for fe� payrriEnt and should �provide the fee, made payable to Taronto and Region Conservation Au#harity to the City of Pickering upon acceptance af a complete application. Othervvise, you can forward the application f�� directly to this office as soon as p�ssible in arder to ensure timely review, If convertien#, tfie clearance fee may also be pravided at this time. Please disregard if the fe� has already been sent.� We trust this letter clarifies the public interest �elative to nakural heritage and hazard land management. We support the principal of this important urban regsneration project and we look forward to warking with you. � PleasE feel free .to contact m� if you have any�,further questions. Sincerely, � . � � 5teven H. He�chert, MCIP; RPp, MRTPI Senior Pl�nner � Planning and Development � Extension 5311 � � cc: Stephen I. Fagyas, Commercial� Focus Advisory Services Inc. (fax. 416.972.9588� Ross f'ym, Ciiy o� Pickering (fax. 905.420.7fi48) � F:�t-�OM��PUauC��EVELOPMENT S6RVICES\OURHAM REGIONIPICKERING11215 -1235 6AYl.Y 1.CJOC t?i�RHA�+t REGI�iN The Regiona! iVlunicipality of Durham Pianning Department 60,5 ROSSLAND ROAD E 4T" FIOOR P.O. BOX 623 WHITBY, �N LiN 6A3 (905) 668-7711 Fax: (905) 666•6208 E-mail: planning@ region.durham.on.�a www.region. du rham.on.ca A.L. Georgieff, MCIP, RPP Commissioner o� Planning "Service Exeellence !i.�{ ot:rCommunitres" f, s� , r �I �.� i.;�i�� pii �� 9� „�/ ... �`�.. z �; �.., ' 'T � w t,, l . c:��.�i'�t . ri . _ .�,..: �� -_..,: August 24, 2006 Ross Pym, Principal Planner Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplande Pickering, Ontario L1 V 6K7 Mr. Pym: Re: Zoning Amendment Application A 06/06 Applicant: S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Limited �ocation: 1215-1235 Bayly Street South side of Bayly Street, west of Liverpool Road Municipality: City of Pickering This application has been reviewed and the following comments are offered. �� .!. .:1 f'1 The purpose of this application is to amend the zoning of the subject property to permit a range of residential, retail and office uses in the redevelopment of the Bay Ridges Plaza site. The site plan includes streetfront and back-to-back townhouses, including live/work units, and finro apartment condominium buildings with ground floor commercial office and retail uses. Reaional ��cial Plan The lands subject to this application are designated "Living Area" in the Durham Regional Official Plan. Living Areas are to be developed in a compact urban fiorm through high densities and by intensifying and redeveloping existing areas, particularly along arterial roads. Living Areas are predominantly for housing purposes. Limited retailing of goods and services in appropriate Iocations as components of mixed use developments may be permitted within Living Areas provided that the functions and characteristics of the Central Areas are not adversely affected. Provincial Policies & Delenated Review Responsibilities This application has been screened in accordance with the terms of the provincial plan review responsibilities. Phase 1 and Phase II Environmental Site Assessments (ESA), prepared by Jacques Whitford Limited, have been submitted in support of the application. A subsurface investigation of the site indicated that measured concentrations were below the Ministry of Environment (MOE) criteria and that no further environmental investigation of the subject property is considered to be warranted at this time. As a Phase II ESA was completed for the subject property and as a more sensitive land use is being proposed, Regional policy requires that a Record of Site Condition be submitted to the MOE and fited electronically on the Province's Environmental Site Registry. *('� , ,: �� f ,.� �:� 3.. �+ � .. , � � .,�j G 4 � . _� .,... �.u�....,�.�. Page 2 An Environmental Impact Study (EIS}, prepared by Watershed Management Ecology, was submitted in support of the applic�tion. As the subject property is adjacent to a stream tributary of Frenchman's Bay, comments from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA} are required upon review of the EIS indicating that the proposal addresses the Natural Heritage policies (Section 2.1) of the Provincial Policy Statement. TRCA is to ensure that the recommendations as outlined in the report, including the mitigation methods and the setback from the valley top of bank, are sufficient pratection from adverse impacts from development. A Noise and Vibration Study, prepared by Semas Associates, has been submitted in support of the application to address traffic noise generated from Highway 401, Bayly Street and the CN and Go-Transit Railways. The study has been reviewed by this depa�tment and provides calculations and recommendations that would meet the requirements of the Region of Durham and the guidelines of the MOE. An agreement between the City of Pickering and the applicant should contain the necessary provisions to ensure the implementation of the noise attenuation measures, including warning clauses, as recammended in the report. The City of Pickering is encouraged to use a holding symbol "H" in conjunction with the requi�ed zone category, and indicate the uses permitted at such time in the future as the holding symbof is removed by amendment to the by-law. Prior to the removal of the holding symbol, all requirements af the Region's delegated review responsibilities including; the completion of the Region's reliance agreement letter, the submission of a Record of Site Condition, confirmation from TRCA regarding the EIS recommendations, and the inclusion of noise provisions in a City of Pickering agreement, are to be completed to the satisfaction of the Region. Reqional Services Municipal water supply is available to the subject property from existing utilities on Bayly Street and St. Martins Drive. Sanitary sewer services are available; however, upgrades are required to adequately service the proposed density. Please see the attached Works Department review of this application for further details on water supply and sanitary sewer services. Transaortation. Access and Intersection Imarovements Bayly Street, Regional Road 22 is designated as a Type "A" arterial road in the Durham Regional Official Pl�n. Type "A" arterial raads are to have a right-of- way width ranging from 36 to 50 metres. The Region will require a minimum road width of 18.0 metres fram the centerline of Bayly Street across the entire frontage of the property. , f1n. 3�+ � `l f"5 '/' J� �4��irt ii�� 1�, r-.� �'1 . .i,. .. � � ;�� .�...��:�� Page3 A right tum lane and raised centre median are required for the Bayly Street access to the site. Access to Bayly Street will be restricted to right-in/right-out movements only. A left turn lane on Bayly Street is required at the Bayly Street and St. Martins Drive intersection. The left turn lane should be designed to incorporate the centre raised median on Bayly Street. Please see the attached Works Department review of this application for further details regarding transportation requirements. The use of a holding "H" symbol is further encouraged and should not be lifted until the requirements of the Works Department, including servicing and transportation improvements, have been identified in agreements through the site plan approval process. Communitv Stratepic Plan The proposal is consistent with a number of Community Strategic Plan (CSP) actions including developing a viable, affordable and integrated transit plan by promoting higher density land uses. The proposed intensive development supports the revitalization and development of the urban area and implements effective land use planning that supports compact development. A primary objective of the CSP is to ensure balanced growth and livable communities by encauraging development that enables an improved iive-work relationship. The development would appear to achieve this objective by contributing to the mix of residential, office and commercial development being proposed. If you have any questians or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. � ` '} f '� , i� � ,� i� ; �� , i Dwayne Campbell, Planner Current Planning Attach: Works Department review comments cc: Peter Casteflan, Regional Works Department (no attachment} � a �` . -' � ` : " �� ° . .. ,�. J •� .. ..�"� ! . . . `7�� c a �: �: � � IN�TFROFFICE lUIEM�RAIVDUM � .` Ta: Dwayne� Campbeil� . � � � .� � . � . Current Opera�ions Branch � ` ____....,.,..... ... .. �� V;:;: i � �—.�,.__° , •, ,, • • � �.� •7�i+,: ."kr r?�'' . , . • .. , ••�' ' . ��..�: �i �• . . � ' .� —�. . ey • , . � ' ', ,-, • �M11� ' �-.::..'_`_ •- .. .. ._ . .r ._ _ ' � ;l%% , . ,J()t�� . b. ZOt��i � . ��. ,�t�T Ti": •, , �., . . .; � • . . • . � • , . , . � ...:....;. ,.�.__ ,�`'"'r.��r•�:: '[ti�_ .1.��:...._ .. . From: Pete C.astellan� � � � . � � . ��--. C_. ,..;t� � . . . � ' ' � ' � ' � � ' � ' � FILE�. . , . -• . „ ,_ r . � . � . Development.Appr4vals Division� . . . �' �`- • . . . . . . . .. . . . ,. -� � � � � � �. ., � � . � � . --. � .� �, . � � � � : ..Dat+�:. �July 25,.20Q6 �� .� . . . . . � � � . � . . � . � . . . � The.IRegional, � � R9:� �Zoning.By-!aw Amendment Appli�atibn A06/06 � � � � � .� � .' � � �. . � Mu�ioip�iity. � , � � ',�AppliC��t: S�,R. 8� R. Bay.Ridges Plaza�. .. . �. . . � ., � . of Durham• • ' • ' • • . . . . • . ' • . . - � . � � � � 1215�1235 Bayly. Street � � . .. � . . . �: .. : . . � . �. . � � � �. . . . � . . . . w��$ o4P�mp�c � � . �. �City of� Pickering . . . . . . . . . . . . . � sosROSS�aN� Ro. E. :. �. �: ,Our File: RZ, 08�O��P � . : � . . � . . . � . � : � . • P.O. BOX. 623 ' . � ' � � � � � ' • � � ' � ' • � • ' ' � ' � . wNrre,r on, ��n� sas� •� Th.e .Region of. Durham Warks Department � has reviewed�.��the above-�noted � CANADA .. , . .' � 9o�-6�e-7�,� : � .�: . . �� tezonir�g applicatiori and offers the foflowing �comments.� � , . . , � �. � . � • FaK: 805-666-8206 � • � : • ' .' ' • • • . . • � . , . . . . . :-mail: � . . : General � � . . . . . , . ... . . . � . . - . . . . . . . . . . . works�region.durham.9n.ca�. ' •� .' . . . . . . , : . . . �. ' . ' • �. . . . � ..The � subject � pr.operty, . is: cu�rently. serviced ��.with �.municipal watermains and • � � . w�.region.aUn,em.o�,�a sa�itary sewers.�:Any.exisfing sErvices not u.til.ized must be abandone.d at the ' � . �c. a: c�r��s, P. Eng., MsA :mainlines, at the. app}icants expense: . ��. � . . � : • . � � � � � �. . . . . . � , Commissionerof Works• • � ' • " �' '' ' . • : • • • ' , ' ' ' . ' • . � • '. ' . . ; . : : � . : � : Sanitary Sewar Ser.vice � � . : � . : . � � � � . . . . � . � :: �. • � .: � . � . �. � `The subject, properly is pa�t of the s�anitary dfai.n�ge area �that is.tribut�ry to the � � . . " � . � . � � � : � tiverpo�ol Roa� �$anitary Sewag�� Pumpir�g Statian. Sanitary flows� from� the � � � �., .� �. � '.� � �. subjec� property �are conveyed to�,#he Liverpoot� Rpad�� S.S,P.S.. through .a � � � . � � � : . �� . �: �residential area.along�Dougl�s.Av.en.u.e, Front Rbad, Wharf Street and Liverpool. . ', � . �� .: .:. Road..;Based on a sanitary sewer analysis of the existing sanitary sewer syst�m� .: � � , � . � � � � � . '. • : (using�an 'infiltration rate� of �0�.52� I/s due to faundation drajn conriections), the . . . : �. � ' � . � : � :.: theoretical; flows in-the sanitary �sewers 'indicate. thst several � legs o� sanitary �� . .. ... '�... s�wer are preser�tly, operating in'.a surcharged condition.•. Ther�. h�ve� be�n � • � � . . . . � . .� instances of basement floo�ing which has occurre� during significant rainfaAs . . . �. � ,��:�.� with the� rriost re�ent basement flooding resulting� from: the significant� rainfall �� .�. � event on August 1.9, 2005. �With the redeve�lopment.of the �su bject prop�rty from �. . . �:: �� a.commercial companEnt to; a� re�idential comp.onent; an increase in sanitary� . ��: �;�. sewer flows and �.therefore,,surcharging within the existing sanitary sewer system � � � . � � � � � �� is exp�cted:�" ThEr� i� no sartitary s�vtirer capacity� available withir� �the existing � : . � ... ..�. sanitary sewer..system for�the �,proposed dEnsi#y�of the subject�development.� . .� .. The�e is capacity for approxitTtatEly �0 uni#s based on�calculated flows from the�. � � . � , . � . ��xisting iand use. To.prbvide adequate�sanitary sewercapacityforihe propoSed �� . . . � �. . . : �development, the�:existing sanitary,sewer..will� require: replacemenf�between. � .� �: ... Radorra Street and Liverpoot� Road at W harf Str�et with a� pipe of higher c�pacity �� .� ...� and a# a.lower elevation �ta incre�ase.�the sa#�ety f.actor agairtst the potentiat of �� : : � �.� . � . � bas�ment.flaading occurrences.. �� . . � � � � � ... � � . � . � � � � , ,.., .,., . . � . . .. � . . . . . . . . -. . . � . . . . . . . . /� �r,y;".�y�,�,w,�� .L .,�er�vaa� ence . . . • .. . . . : . � , � '. � ' • � • ..b!'�F�l+�!�9`::.lfl11CS" , � . � � � ' � ' • , ' � , . • ' : ' ' 9 _ " ' _ _ _"_ __ " ._"" .... ............. ,.��..,vvvvuv�.+ a .vv.r .• , . '. . • . . , . : . . . � E i �1�'. � � t,,_ �/ ' :. ' • ' ' ' ' • ' � � • .. . �.. • . �. • .� . . . . • .�� • '. ' • • • ' � • ' . < <�''E ,:. Lf. S--c�,b• • ' .� • � . • �.. �1 k')�. � � . . : � . . . . W .�.;� � . a, . . . . _ � . . : , �... .�. .�:...� �; . ... .: . � .�_� . �.� : �� . � "�..�.. .� ��,. � � �. �: , � . � � � �..�. . ,. � . ,., . , � . , . , . ., � . . � . . . . �... �. . . . . :.. � � � • � �:� � � .. '. . . . . . � . . � ' Municipai. Water Suppiy � . .: � . . . , . . . : � . . : . . . . . �.. � � : � �: � ' . � The subj2ct�prop�rly�is located�.within the Zone 1 �Water�Pressur� District of the��. .� � � � � � � . � � � water�supply.syS�em for Pickering. ��.The estimated static water.pressure �orthis �� . . � � � : � �. �. �. � .� area �ranges. between�,80. psi to $5 psi:� Since the�estimated�static vriater pressure� � �: � � � � : �: � � exceeds the,.maxi.mum��a�lowance.�of �8� psi; pressure reducing valves.wi�l 6e .� . � . , � � ; �: :: � requir�d to b�e loca�ted�with�in #he�subject.development. � � �� : . �� . . � : .: � � � ' • .. � :W�ter supply to the su.bject-property is available firorr� �either..th�e �xi.s,ting �50 mm� : . �� ... .: watErr.nain op�: B�ayl�/.�S�tree��o� the existing:200. mm waterrnain.�on� St,.Marti�s� .� . , �. •�. . � . : • . . . . � � � � - � � . � � - . : : , � : . ; .. Dr�ve�; � .. . � . �. � ' �. . . . �� :' � � :. . � � ' . , . �: . . . . : .. : .� , . � � � . . . : � � � Transportati:on � � � . . . � . � : . � � . . � . �. � � �� .� � . � � �. �. � � � � �� .The Regional-Works Dep�rkment:irvill,require the.Owner.to��convey sufficien#��road. .� � � �. �. . �: .allowance�� wi.dening �to pravid�, a �minimurn��of ��18.p m� measured: from��tlie' ..� ;.. � �: _ � : � . : � � . . � �centceline of the righf afway�to th.e south�stre.�t line a.cross��the..total..B�yy�Street �, � � . � • fro�ntage. . . . .. . . . � � . � � , � . . � . . � � � � � � . . . � � � . . � ' �' . . .. . � �� ,... � ' . .. .� � . � .. . �.� The �Deve�loper will,be respo�sible for all�.costs.�associated with� providing safe ,: . . . � �; . � . ". �. . . � � � � � � �: access to th� d�eveloprrient.� :This shall includ� tf�e.;construction of �an� sastbound � � , � � �. ' �. � . � �� .: �.r�ght �.turn lane �fdr th� �proposed •entr.ance �.to. Bayly Stre�t. 7he � Bay.ly Stre'et; . �: � , �� : � . � � �. . � ��: access will be r�strict�d�to a:right=iri/right-out operatioh..by means of..a center . � � �� , .. . . . � : � . : . �raised median. .. � . � � . � � � � : � :. �. .. : . �, . � � � . ,. .. . : • . • . . . . , . ' ' � � �� Additionally; road improvements are required at tlie inter.section of �Bayly Street� . . . .; �� . � , ��and.St. Mar.tins��Drive: �'his requires tt�e'co.nstru�tion o.fa�west6ound�left�turn �� . � . � . � � �..�: lane on:Bayly.S�reet. �The�left tum'lan�.shoutd be designed to in�orpot�:te the � � � � � � � �� . � � �:. � c�ntet;�raised median.�on. Bayly�Street �iQted �above.� This will .result in median� � � � . � , : �- �� ,�, �" : consfruction�from the inte�ection �of Sfi:..'Ma�rtins Dr+ve to:25:,tnetres ea'st,:ofithe: ��:�. ; �. . � .. � � �. : . .propd,sed entr.ance. . , . ' � , � �. � � . � �� . � � . � � . � � � � . . '� � � . � . . . � . ; . . . � � �.� .'� �AI.I :road ��mprovements �are.� to b�., �des'rgned �� in., accordance :with ttie: �TAC � �.� � . �. � . � . . � �.gu�del�nes.. . .. . . . . . .. . � . . .. . . . � � .. �� . � �� • � .. . � � . ...: � �,. , .. .. .�.....: . .. . . .. . � . � � : . : � . � � . � ..� S.umiriac�► � . .� � � : . .. �, : . . . . . . � �.. . . . � �. .. � � . � : . . . . : . � � : � � . � � � Th.e Regiot�'s Works Department has .no obje�tion to the further p�rocessing �of� . �� . � . � � .. � � ��this� zoning ��amendmen#. ap�licatiqn.' 1'h�.�applicant,�.�.shall .submit detailed �: � ' � � � . . : . ; � �engineering �� drawings , �for�, ft�e sanitary sewe'r �improvements� . and '�:road � � � � . .. . � . . irnp�ovemer�ts �m suppo.rt. of �the �ubsequent site plan application: � . � • . � . - �. . � .��.P,ete: Cast�llan �.. � .. . � .� . . . . . : . .: . . .. . : : .. � . . ..... � :�� . . .. �. , . . . .. . . .� ' Development:Approvals �Division �:� : . . � � . . . � � . . � . �� c.: �� E�ngineerin� Plann�ing 8��tudies . � . : . . . .� ' � � . � . . � �. . . . .� . . :. . �. . ... ��.Transpo�r�ation.�rifrastru.ctu�e��. . .. . , � � . . . .. : . , . _ ; �� a: i � k� �k�h�,� . ;�. ` � Transit � 20 Bay Street • Suite 600 • y� Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5J 2W3 � .�, -`F ` '� �' � � Phone: (416) 869-3600 • www.gotransit.com May 23, 2006 Ross Pym Principal Planner - Development Review Planning and Development Department City of Pickering Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario L 1 V 6K7 Dear Mr. Pym: Phone: (416) 869-3600 ext. 5408 Fax: (416) 869-1563 Email: adams@gotransit.com ,� ' ° ` �� f�� .F`i �!i`Y C'�� p��'Q�tN� ��MNING & pEV�LOPMF�3 ��P�RTMENT Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 06/06 Proposed Mixed Use Development - S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. 1215-1235 Bayly Street, Pickering GO Transit Comments � � �� A'fi� � r�/J i�� ,� ro 2G�� `�'�� `�'�`i � 9,�,r� � This letter is in response to your May 10, 2006 notice regarding the above-noted application. GO Transit operates commuter rail service on the GO Subdivision, located north of the CN Kingston Subdivision and the subject site. Given the close proximity of the rail corridor, this development will be expected to comply with GO Transit's Principal Main Line Requirements. Key factors to be considered aze identified below. Specific details relating to each can be clarified once formal development plans are circulated. Ultimately these matters should be addressed in the Conditions of Draft Approval for these lands, to be cleared by GO Transit. 1. Appropriate building setbacks (up to 3Q metres) and safety measures (berm structure or equivalent) will be required for residential development with exposure to the rail corridor. Specific requirements and design parameters will be dictated by the nature of the land uses and the site development configuration proposed. 2. The Owner will be required to engage a consultant to undertake an analysis of noise and vibration in order to recommend abatement measures necessary to achieve acceptable conditions for the proposed residential land use. A warning clause will be required for residential uses within 300 metres of the rail corridor. Subject to the review of the noise report, GO Transit may consider other measures recommended by an approved Noise Consultant. In addition, the Owner shall, through restrictive covenants to be registered on title and all agreements of purchase and sale or lease, provide notice to the public that the subject mitigation measures are not to be tampered with or altered and further that the Owner shall have sole responsibility for and shall maintain these measures to the satisfaction of GO Transit. GREATER TORONTO TRANSIT AUTHORITY " � . i',.�� / .`�, . � i,�' •• _ 6.�.. l.i r;.� s. C�s� i p e�i:t�.'�� ....,..v �-�.. Page 2 of 2 <r.. ._ �_.__. 3. A three-party agreement should be established to stipulate how GO's and CN's concerns will be addressed. This agreement should be registered on title prior to the passing of the By-law. We trust that the City will have regard for the above-noted requirements in their decision regarding this application, and we request notice of any further developments related to these lands. Please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned should you have and comments or questions regarding this letter. Sincerely, ��v-� Adam Sn � Transportation Planner cc: Geoff Woods - CN Dan Francey - GO Transit Page 1 of 1 ��,. �� t �.3 �r . ; �;. _,._ .., ,�' , f , i r : 'S� j�._ c� (� Pym, Ross _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _. From: Geoff.Woods@cn.ca Sent: June 15, 2006 5:00 PM To: Pym, Ross Subject: Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment, File No. A 06/06, 1215-1235 Bayly Street Ross, CN has reviewed the above noted application and has the fol►owing comments: 1. The Owner is required to insert the following warning clause in all development agreements, offers to purchase, agreements of Purchase and Sale or Lease and include in a Noise Impact Statement: "Warning: Canadian National Railway Company or its assigns or successors in interest has or have a right-of- way within 300 metres from the land the subject hereof. There may be alterations to or expansions of the rail facilities on such right-of-way in the future including the possibitity that the railway or its assigns or successors as aforesaid may expand its operations, which expansion may affect the living environment of the residents in the vicinity, notwithstanding the inclusion of any noise and vibration attenuating measures in the design of the development and individual dwelling(s). CN will not be responsible for any complaints or claims arising from use of such facilities and/or operations on, over or under the aforesaid right-of-way." 2. The Owner is required to engage a consultant #o undertake an analysis of noise and vibration and provide abatement measures necessary to achieve the maximum level limits set by the Ministry of Environment and Canadian NationaL We request notice of Council's decision. Regards, ## �############�# Geoff Woods, BES, MCIP, RPP Manager, Community Planning and Development CN Business Development & Real Estate 1 Administration Road Concord ON L4K 1 B9 Tel.: 905-760-5007, Fax: 905-760-5010 Email: geoff.woods@cn.ca ######�## ########### 15/08/2006 �.•,��ps.� .:r'qt'q Jl �Z1L �FF �}j i � P• asl sC P . � lwr �1 �� ,�� JF� � { 6''s`� �/ .� L�) � . _ PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM June 23, 2006 To: Ross Pym Principal Planner- Development Review From: Robert Starr Supervisor, Development Control Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 06/06 S.R. & R Bay Ridges Ltd. 1215 —1235 Bayly Street Part of Block Y, Plan M-16 City of Pickering - Development Plan - Phase 1 and Limited Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessments by Jacques Whitford - Scoped Environmental Impact Study by Watershed Management Ecology - Traffic Impact Study by Javar Consultants Inc. - Noise & Vibration Impact Study by Sernas Associates - Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment Planning Report - Shadow Study We have reviewed the above noted reports and Plans in support of the application and provide the following comments: General Comments 1. The City of Pickering's Fill & Topsoil By-law prohibits soil disturbance, removal or importation to the site unless a permit has been issued. No on-site works prior to Site Plan Approval is permitted without a permit. A copy of the By-law and Permit Application is attached and should be forwarded to the applicant. 2. All off-site works may require the applicant/owner to enter into a Development Agreement with the City. 3. We will require a Stormwater Management Report to be submitted. The report must address quality and quantity controls. As well, the report should minimize any discharge of stormwater to the valtey & stream corridor. �o l li r � fp� t tr fl,� ("� �#H �_i 1�� f�oss Pym t� f June 23, 2006 ��A�06/06 — S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. `t� � � ��`�' `f-S �}°�° --. 1215-1235 Bayly Street Page 2 4. We will require a grading and drainage plan which indicates that redevelopment of the site can be completed without adversely affecting the neighbouring properties and without affecting the adjacent stream corridor to the east of the site. 5. We will require a Construction Management/ Erosion & Sediment Control Plan to be submitted which clearly shows how the applicant will ensure that no silt will leave the site and contaminate the adjacent valley & stream corridor. As well, the plan must address mud and dust control. 6. We will req�ire a Tree Preservation Plan. The plan must ensure protection of the valley wall. 7. Relocation of any utilities in the road allowance will be the responsibility of the applicant. Site Plan 1. The applicant is to provide documentation from TRCA indicating approval of a S.Om setback from the staked top of bank on the east side of the proposed development. 2. The Site Plan should address any proposed offsite works such as, but not limited to, sidewalk installation, road widening and lane realignment on Bayly and St. Martins Drive. Noise & Vibration Impact Study 1. The Vibration Study (Appendix 4) references CP Rail guidelines. The Rail tracks adjacent to the site are owned by CN Rail and GO Transit. The report should be revised to reflect the proper guide�ines. Phase 1& Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment 1. No specific comments. Scoped Environmental Impact Statement 1. Ensure that the Construction Management and Erosion & Sediment Control Plan addresses the concerns detailed in the report with respect to silt control measures to prevent sediment loading of the valley and stream corridor. Ross Pym �:��,�r� r�-�,,,� �.�.,.`�` �`� ::._ °�f�; June 23, 2006 `��,.(,� :.n; A06/06 — S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. :�: �� ;:' °'� � .a. `�5 -.o.�= . 1215-1235 Bayly Street Page 3 Planning Report 1. No specific comments. Shadow Study 1. No specific comments. Traffic Impact Study 1. We will require a more detailed conceptual design of the Bayly St./St. Martin's Rd. intersection and left turn lane to identify the works required on St. Martin's and to determine if additional road allowance is required. The design is to ensure pedestrian safety is accommodated. Should there be any questions or concerns regarding the above comments please contact the undersigned or Paal Helgeser� at 905.420.4617. Robert Starr Supervisor, Development Control RS:ph I?Developnent\ ZoNnp BydawAmentlmeM Applieriion A06/08-5.R 8 R. Bay Ritlges lld. Copy: Coordinator, Development Appravals Technician, Development Approvals () p"` <.� i � BY-LAWS October 3, 2006 6705/06 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 in Part of Block Y, Plan M16, in the City of Pickering. (A06/06). [Refer to Council Agenda pages 64 to 206 . Draft by-law is attached.] 6706/06 Being a by-law to approve and authorize the execution of a note amending agreement made as of the 1St day of October, 2006 in respect of promissory notes dated September 28, 2001 issued by Veridian Corporation and Veridian Connections Inc. in favour of The Corporation of the Town of Ajax, The Corporation of the City of Belleville, The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington and The Corporation of the City of Pickering , and to approve the issue of seconded amended and restated promissory notes dated as of the 1St day of October, 2006. [Refer to Executive Page 75] 6707/06 Being a by-law to amend By-law 6604/05 providing for the regulating of parking, standing or stopping on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. [Refer to Executive Page 49] 6708/06 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 in Part of Lot 7, Concession 5(Parts 1 and 2 Plan 40R-23455) in the City of Pickering. (A 25/02). [Refer to attached pages] r l �. l�„ � �t PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEM�JRANDUM September 25, 2006 To: Thomas J. Quinn Chief Administrative Officer From: N�il Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. 1215 - 1235 Bayly Street Part of Block Y, Plan M-16 City of Pickering At the September 11, 2006 Executive Committee, staff were requested to conduct additional consultation with area representatives and the applicant regarding the Bay Ridges Plaza rezoning application, and to further outline the purpose and benefit of applying an "(H)" Holding provision within any resultant implementing zoning by-law. A meeting was held on September 21, 2006, with representatives of the Pickering East Shore Community Association (PESCA), the applicant, and Planning & Development staff. While the meeting provided an opportunity for information exchange and more thorough explanation of positions and concerns, a`compromise development proposal' was not achieved. PESCA continues to express the opinion that the application represents over development (with excessive density) and does not provide sufficient retail/commercial floor area to serve the needs of the neighbourhood. The applicant considers the project to represent appropriate land use that complies with Provincial, Regional and City policies. Requests of PESCA to lower building heights, reduce residential density, and provide increased commercial floor space (including a `traditional' food store), were unacceptable to the applicant due to market conditions and project economics. In accordance with the direction of the Executive Committee the draft amending zoning by-law has been revised to delete the "(H)" — hold�ng provision and to add a requirement holding back approval of 15 percent of the townhouse dwelling units until 2000 square metres of new commercial floor space has heen constructed. The draft by-law was also revised to address minor technical matters that do not alter the intent of the by-law. The applicant continues to disagree with the commercial parking standard of 4.5 spaces per 100 square metres gross leasable floor area recommended by staff and contained in the draft by-law. Further, the Development Guidelines for the Bay Ridges Plaza area have been modified to clarify the Executive Committee's direction on the application that the commercial component is encouraged in the first phase of development, as opposed to being required in the first phase. e"� : 4 •,�` Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 06/06 September 25, 2006 �' �f '� Page 2 Planning & Development staff continue to support the imposition of a"(H)" holding provision, as set out in Report PD 45-06. The holding provision is especially useful in complex development applications such as this, where detailed agreements must still be established to satisfy the City and other agencies, including the Regional Municipality of Durham and the Toronto Region Conservation Authority. A holding provision allows the City to move forward with zoning, while ensuring the opportunity to secure necessary agreements prior to development. Should Council adopt the recommendation of the Executive Committee, the attached by-law may be enacted. The by-law does not contain an "(H)"-holding provision, does not require the construction of 2000 squGre metres of new commercial floor space coincidental with construction of the tawnhouses, but does hold back approval of 15 percent of the townhouse dwelling uni�s until 2000 square metres of new commercial floor space has been constructed. Should Council wish to apply a"(H)" holding provision, direction is required as to the requirements Council wishes to include in the holding provision. � �� :.�� ..'- ,,/,. �� RP:jf J:\STAFFVpymlPlan Files\Bay Ritlges PlazaUnemo to council bay ridges-3 Attachment Copy: City Clerk City Solicitor � � �� THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF :P C ERING �� . ��; �� BY-LAW NO. , , Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 2520, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham in Part of Block Y, Plan M16, in the City of Pickering. (A 06/06} WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of The City of Pickering deems it desirable to permit a mixed use development of townhouse dwelling units and apartment buildings that contain commercial uses and on the subject lands, being Block Y, Plan M16, in The City of Pickering; AND WHEREAS an amendment to By-law 2520, as amended, is therefore deemed necessary; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. SCHEDULES I and II Schedules I and II attached hereto with notations and references shown thereon are hereby declared to be part of this By-law. 2. AREA RESTRICTED The provisions of this By-law shall only apply to those lands in Part of Block Y, Plan M16, Pickering, designated "RH/MU-2", "SA-LW", "SA-8", "MD-H6", and "OS-HL" on Schedule I attached hereto. 3. DEFINITIONS In this By-law, (1) "Adult Entertainment Parlour" shall mean a building or part of a building in which is pravided, in pursuance of a trade, calling, business or occupation, services appealing to or designed to appeal to erotic or sexual appetites or inclinations. (2) "Bakerv" shall mean a building or part of a building in which food products are baked, prepared and offered for retail sale, or in which food products baked and prepared elsewhere are offered for retail sale. ,'p �a -2- � �'�� '� �� n � } S�:«: �' ... S�; <� : �'� (3) "Bodv Rub Parlour" includes any premises or part thereof where a body rub is performed, offered or solicited in pursuance of a trade, calling, business or occupation, but does not include any premises or part thereof where the body rubs perFormed are for the purpose of inedical or therapeutic treatment and are perFormed or offered by persons otherwise duly qualified, licensed or registered so to do under the laws of the Province of Ontario. (4) "Build-to-zone" shall mean an area of land in which all or part of a building elevation of one or more buildings is to be located. (5) "Business Office" shall mean a building or part of a building in which the management or direction of a business, a public or private agency, a brokerage or a labour or fraternal organization is carried on and which may include a telegraph office, a data processing establishment, a newspaper publishing office, the premises of a real estate or insurance agent, or a radio or television broadcasting station and related studios or theatres, but shall not include a retail store. (6) "Convenience Store" shall mean a retail store in which food, drugs, periodicals or similar items of day-to-day household necessities are kept for retail sale primarily to residents of, or persons employed in, the immediate neighbourhood. (7) "Day Nurserv" shall mean lands and premises duly licensed pursuant to the provisions of The Day Nurseries Act, or any successor thereto, and for the use as a facility for the daytime care of children. (8) "Dry Cleaning Depot" shall mean a building or part of a building used for the purpose of receiving articles, goods, or fabrics to be subjected to dry cleaning and related processes elsewhere, and of distributing articles, goods or fabrics which have been subjected to any such processes. (9) "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. (10) "Dwellinq Unit" shall mean one or more habitable rooms occupied or capable of being accupied as a single, independent, and separate housekeeping unit containing a separate kitchen and sanitary facilities. �,��.� r �� "�:^�?' u � ° u � ,�4`�. �, �1 -3- �� ,� �� <'� "� (11) "Dwellinq Sinqle Attached or Single Attached Dwellinq" shall mean one of a group of not less than three adjacent dwellings attached together horizontally by an above grade common wall. (12) "Financial Institution" shall mean a building or part of a building in which money is deposited, kept, lent or exchanged. (13) "Floor Area - Residential" shall mean the area of the floor surface contained within the outside walls of a storey or part of a storey. (14} "Food Store" shall mean a building or part of a building in which food, produce, and other items or merchandise of day-to-day household necessity are stored, offered or kept for retail sale to the public. (15) "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. (16) "Gross Leasable Floor Area" shall mean the aggregate of the floor areas of all storeys above or below established grade, designed for owner or tenant occupancy or exclusive use only, but excluding storage areas below established grade. (17) "Laundromat" shall mean a self-serve clothes washing establishment containing washing, drying, ironing, finishing or other incidental equipment. (18) "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 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. (19) "Multiple Dwelling-Horizontal" shall mean a building containing three or more dwelling units attached horizontally, not vertically, by an above-grade wall or walls. (20) "Multiple Dwelling-Vertical" shall mean a building containing three or more dwelling units attached horizontally and vertically by an above-grade wall or walls, or an above-grade floor or floors, or both. , § t y a�� :r� � � , �., — 4 — ' «1 . £��` "� C� � . �. i �� .' � �� Y,.� , . . " 1 (21) "Personal Service Shop"' shall mean an establishment in which a personal service is perFormed and which may include a barber shop, a beauty salon, a shoe repair shop, a tailor or dressmaking shop or a photographic studio, but shall not include a body-rub parlour as defined in the Municipa/ Act, R.S.O. 1980, Chapter 302, as amended from time to time, or any successor thereto. (22) "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. (23) "Professional Office" shall mean a building or part of a building in which medical, legal or other professional service is perFormed or consultation given, and vuhich may include a clinic, the offices of an architect, a chartered accountant, an engineer, a lawyer or a physician, but shall not include a body-rub parlour as defined in the Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1980, Chapter 302, as amended from time to time, or any successor thereto. (24) "Restaurant - Type A" shall mean a building or part of a building where food is prepared and offered or kept for retail sale to the public for immediate consumption on the premises or off the premises, or both, but shall not include an adult entertainment parlour as defined herein. (25) "Retail Store" shall mean a building or part of a building in which goods; wares, merchandise, substances, articles or things are stored, kept and offered for retail sale to the public. (26) "Storev„ shall mean that portion of a building other than a basement, cellar or attic, included between the surFace of any floor and the surFace of the floor, roof deck or ridge next above it. (27) "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. 4. PROVISIONS ("RH/MU-2" Zone) (1) Uses Permitted ("RH/MU-2" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "RH/MU-2" on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: � "� 4 — J — � t „� � � nQ�'�� T ° :�� .L' `� � � *�� , �� E,� :�a�{ .. (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) �fl i9) (h) ��) G) (k) (I) (m) (n) (o) bakery business office convenience store commercial club day nursery dry cleaning depot financial institution food store laundromat multiple dwelling-horizontal multiple dwelling-vertical personal service shop professional office restaurant - type A retail store (2) Zone Requirements ("RH/MU-2" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "RH/MU-2" on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building except in accordance with the following provisions: (a) BUILDING HEIGHT: (i) For Multiple Dwelling Vertical uses: Minimum Maximum 5 Storeys and 15 metres 18 Storeys and 60 metres (ii) For Multiple Dwelling Horizontal uses: Maximum 12 metres (b) BUILDING LOCATION AND SETBACKS: (i) Buildings and structures shall be located entirely within the building envelope shown on Schedule II attached hereto; (ii) No multiple dwelling-horizontal shall be permitted within 60 metres from the lot line that abuts Bayly Street; (iii) No building, part of a building, or structure shall be erected within the "RH/MU-2" Zone, unless a minimum of 70% of the length of the build-to-zone, contains a building or part of a building; '� � i�+ � � �� aa'e",2z,4: ; �� . �`.��? L -s- 5 �1� ,�_ ��, (iv) Despite Sectian 4.(2)(a)(i) above, a 2 storey, 6.5 metre, building height may be permitted at the north-west corner of the property, adjacent to the intersection of St. Martins Drive and Bayly Street, as a component of the minimum five storey building; (v) No multiple dwelling horizontal uses shall be erected, unless a minimum of 50% of the length of the build-to- zone, as illustrated on Schedule II attached hereto, contains a building or part of a building; (vi) For multiple dwelling-vertical buildings located within the "RH/MU-2" Zone, and within the build-to-zone, any portion of a building or structure in excess of 2 storeys in height, shall be set back a minimum of 3.0 metres from the main wall of the building or structure; (vii) Notwithstanding clause A above, below grade parking structures shall be permitted beyond the limits of the building envelope identified on Schedule I attached hereto, but na closer than 0.5 metres from the limits of the lands; (viii) The horizontal distance between multiple dwelling- horizontal buildings shall be a minimum of 1.8 metres; (c) PARKING REQUIREMENTS: (i) There shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 4.5 parking spaces per 100 square metres of gross leasable floor area for all permitted uses listed in Section 4(1) of this by-law, except for multiple dwelling-vertical, multiple dwelling-horizontal uses. Non-resident parking shall be provided at grade, in a below grade structure, or both; (ii) For multiple dwelling-vertical uses, there shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 1.1 parking space per dwelling unit for residents, and 0.15 of a parking space per dwslling unit for visitors. Parking spaces for residents shall be provided in a below grade structure; c��i:l .. t s., x s�j` s� a?�;n�." `• ",�. : � kr � —7— s � ,; .�: ` � #� � (iii) For multiple dwelling-horizontal, there shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 2.0 parking spaces per dwelling unit far residents, and 0.2 of a parking space per dwelling unit for visitors. Parking spaces shall be provided at grade, in a below grade structure, or both. Parking spaces may also be provided in a private garage attached to the rear of the dwelling unit it serves; (iv) All entrances and exits to parking areas and all parking areas shall be surfaced with brick, asphalt or concrete, or any combination thereof; (v) At grade parking lots shall be permitted no closer than 3.0 metres from the limits of the "RH/MU-2" Zone identified on Schedule I attached hereto, or any road. (d) SPECIAL REGULATIONS: (i) Non-residential uses shall only be permitted within a building containing dwelling units. The non-residential uses shall be limited to the first two storeys of a building; (ii) The minimum aggregate gross leasable floor area for all non-residential uses shall be 2,000 square metres; (iii) The maximum aggregate gross leasable floor area for all restaurant type "A" uses shall be 500 square metres; (iv) No drive through facilities are permitted on the lands designated "RH/MU-2" as illustrated on Schedule I of this by-law; (v) Despite Section 4(2)(b)(i) of this By-law, outdoor patios associated with a restaurant type "A" are permitted to encroach beyond the building envelope as illustrated on Schedule II of this by-law; (vi) Despite Section 4(2)(b)(i) of this By-law, covered walkways with supporting structures, are permitted to encroach beyond the building envelope as illustrated on Schedule II of this by-law; (vii) Despite Sectian 4(2)(d)(ii) outdoor patios associated with a restaurant type "A" will not be included within the aggregate grnss leasable floor area requirements of subclause (ii) above; 5 PROVISIONS ("MD-H6" Zone) (1) �2) : Uses Permitted ("MD-H6" Zone) �, � ,, t,y � �,�. � � x$S` t 73w " " [r i � . � ��, x �: � ... ,r�� No person shall within the lands designated " MD-H6 " on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (a) Multiple dwelling horizontal Zone Requirements ("MD-H6 " Zone) (a) Lot Area (minimum): (b) Lot Frontage (minimum): (c) Front Yard Depth (minimum): 70 square metres 6.0 metres 3.0 metres (d) Side Yard Width (minimum): 1.2 metres except that no interior side yard shall be provided on the side where dwellings on adjacent lots are attached together (e) Building Height (maximum) (f) Gross floor area (minimum): (g) Building Separation: (h) Parking Requirements: 12.0 metres 100 square metres per dwelling unit Despite section 5(2)(e) a minimum 1.8 metre separation between blocks of multiple dwelling horizontal shall be permitted (i) For each dwelling unit there shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 2 parking spaces, one of which may not be located within a driveway, and one of which must be provided within an attached garage of the dwelling, any vehicular entrance of which shall be located not less than 6.0 metres from any street or drive aisle providing access to those lots, plus a minimum af 0.2 visitor parking spaces per unit. ��y� � � �'�� PROVISIONS ("SA-8" Zone) 9 - 7 `� � �� :�,� j'��'. � ,,� �a (1) Uses Permitted ("SA-8" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "SA-8" on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (a) Single attached dwelling; (2) Zone Requirements ("SA-8" Zone) (a) Lot Area (minimum): (b) Lot Frontage (minimum): (c) Front Yard Depth (minimum) (d) Rear Yard Depth (minimum): 100 square metres 4.8 metres 3.0 metres 5.0 metres (e) Side Yard Width (minimum): (i) 1.2 metres except that no interior side yard shall be provided on the side where dwellings on adjacent lots are attached together (� Building Height (maximum) (g) Gross floor area (minimum) (h) Obstruction Of Yards: (ii) Despite Section 6 (2)(e) (i) a minimum interior side yard of 0.6 metres is required adjacent to an Open Space Zone 12.0 metres 100 square metres per dwelling unit (i) Despite Section 5.8(b) of By-law 2520, covered and unenclosed porches, verandahs and flankage entrance features not exceeding 1.5 metres in height above the established grade may project no more than: � . 2.0 metres into any required front or rear yard 0.6 metres into any required side yard -10- (i) Parking Requirements: U) .�,( .n!. #':�eY�. « � � �� r � VJ' � � sz (i) for each dwelling unit there shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 2 parking spaces, one of which may not be located within a driveway, and one of which must be provided within an attached garage of the dwelling, any vehicular entrance of which shall be located not less than 6.0 metres from any street or drive aisle providing access to those lots, plus a minimum of 0.2 visitor parking spaces per unit Special Regulations: (i) No more than 8 units shall be attached horizontally (ii) Despite section between blocks permitted. 7. PROVISIONS ("SA-LW" Zone) (1) �2) 6(2)(e) a minimum 1.8 metre separation of single attached dwellings shall be Uses Permitted ("SA-LW" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "SA-LW " on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: Residential Uses: (a) single attached dwelling Commercial Uses: (a) business office (b) commercial school (c) personal service shop (d) professional office (e) retail store Zone Requirements ("SA-LW" Zone) (a) Lot Area (minimumj: 125 square metres (b) Lot Frontage (minimum): 4.9 metres (c) Unit Width (minimum): 4.9 metres (d) Front Yard Depth (minimum): 3.0 metres �� 4 . +� {,,,, !„ � ,f, � :t� ..� " ,$a� _ 1', � rY .�`�a �.i� }rr�„�" r Y £� ,n i ��; s�r� .. _ ,. r�' (i) Despite clause (d) above, front yard balconies, verandahs and decks, both uncovered and covered, may project fully into any required front or side yard; (e) Side Yard Width (minimum): 0.6 metres except that no interior side yard shall be provided on the side where dwellings on adjacent lots are attached together (� Building Height (maximum) (g) Gross floor area (minimum) (h) Parking Requirements: 12.0 metres 100 square metres per dwelling unit (i) For each dwelling unit there shall be provided and maintained a minimum of 2 parking spaces, one of which may not be located within a rear yard, and one of which must be provided within an attached garage located to the rear of the dwelling, any vehicular entrance of which shall be located not less than 6.0 metres from any street or drive aisle providing access to those lots, plus a minimum of 0.2 visitor parking spaces per unit; (ii) Clauses 5.21.1 a) to 5.21.2 fl, inclusive of By-law 2520, as amended, shall not apply to the lands designated "SA- LW" on Schedule I attached hereto; (i) Special Regulations: (i) Despite section 7(1) of this by-law, non-residential uses permitted within the "SA-LW" zone designation may be established or�ly within the ground floor of a dwelling unit; (ii) (iii) No driveway access from St. Martins Drive for individual dwelling units shall be permitted; Despite Sectian 2.46 of By-law 2520, St. Martins Drive shall be considered as the front lot line; (iv) Despite section 7(2)(fl a minimum 1.8 metre separation between blocks of single attached dwellings shall be permitted. ,� . v�y � w �1�,� �, !1 .� - 12 - . �. ,� _k � �� ' ti �: .�. 8. GENERAL PROVISIONS ("RH/MU-2", "SA-LW", "SA-8", "MD-H6" Zones) (1) For residential uses, the lands designated "RH/MU-2", "SA-LW", "SA-8", "MD-H6"" on Schedule I attached hereto, shall be developed at a density of over 30 units per net hectare and up to and including 140 units per net hectare up to a maximum of 473 dwelling units; (2) Despite any other provision of this by-law, a maximum of 85 percent of the single attached dwellings and/or multiple dwellings horizontal, as shown on a City approved site plan may be permitted until such time as a minimum of 2000 square metres of gross leasable floor area for uses permitted by Section 4(1) of this By- law, on lands zoned "RH/MU-2" has been constructed (3) Despite Section 5.6 of By-law 2520 and Clause 3(18) of this By- law, the requirement for frontage on a public street shall be satisfied by establishing frontage on a common elements condominium street; (4) All visitor parking spaces that are required for multiple dwelling- horizontal for each zone may be provided within any of the lands designated "RH/MU-2", "SA-LW", "SA-8", and "MD-H6"; (5) That the internal zone lines separating the residential zone categories shall be deemed to be the center line of the internal private road. (6) Clauses 5.21.2(a), 5.21.2(b), 5.21.2(e), 5.21.2(fl, 5.21.2(g), and 5.21.2(k) of By-law 2520, as amended, shall not apply to lands designated "RH/MU-2", "SA-LW", "SA-8", "MD-H6" on Schedule I attached hereto. 9. PROVISIONS ("OS-HL" Zone) (1) Uses Permitted ("OS-HL" Zone) No person shall within tl�e lands designated "OS-HL" on Schedule I attached hereto use any lot or erect, alter or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (a) preservation and conservation of the natural environment, soil and wildlife; (b) resource management; (c) pedestrian trails and walkways. -� . -' y � r� � > ��"�P a�� 3��: -13- �� (2) Zone Requirements ("OS-HL" Zone) (a) 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 purposes of flood and erosion control, resource management, or pedestrian trail and walkway purposes; (b) Despite Clause (a) above, tot lots, visitor parking spaces and associated traffic aisles are permitted within the "OS-HL" Zone as illustrated on Schedule I attached hereto. 10. BY-LAW 2520 By-law 2520, 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 aftached hereto. Definitions and subject matters not specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by relevant provisions of by-law 2520, as amended. 11. EFFECTIVE DATE This By-law shall come into force in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. BY-LAW read a first, second, and third time and finally passed this day of 2006. ��`� David Rya r ��y_�� q¢!r� 8 � `P+� Debi A. Bentley, City Clerk N,�Hw A�{ / � � / / / � w _ > _ � 0 WAYFARER LAN E - � - z � - � - Q � � ~ � � � � � � � q,p 1 C •N •R' RADOM STREET S�REE� � � I � � SCHEDULE I TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF � 2006 �" -��-; �, ,, � MAYOR - DAVID RYAN <, ` �� ;� �� P• F`�� CITY CLERK - DEBI A. BENTLEY � /��. �(...� ti�� p1 H1�hw A�l �NR• / � � / / / � � WAYFAR E R LAN E � � � � � � w > � 0 � z � � a � � � S�REE� BUILD-TO-ZONE � BUILDING ENVELdPE � RADOM STREET � � � � � SCHEDULE II TO BY-LA1N PASSED THIS DAY OF 2006 �� •':e3 �t ti d��' 'I' � � �� MAYOR - DAVID RYAN Y�� r z9, Y CITY CLERK - DEBI A. BENTLEY � I � � � � d��r� �. �. + .� PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM September 25, 2006 To: Debi Bentley City Clerk From: Steve Gaunt Senior Planner Subject: Draft Amending By-law for Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 25/02 Applicant: Brown/Bitondo Lot 7, Concession 5(Parts 1& 2, Plan 40R-23455) (north side Fifth Concession, west side Salem Road) City of Pickering Council, on July 25, 2005, approved the above-noted application to permit country residential development of the subject lands (see attached location map). Council also approved the draft plan of subdivision to permit the creation of nine country residential building lots and two open space blocks on the subject lands, provided certain conditions can be satisfied. One condition, protection of the hedgerow at the north edge of the subject lands, will be satisfied by conveyance of the hedgerow block to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and by restrictive open space zoning. A reduced copy of the Draft Plan of Subdivision is attached for reference. The Director, Planning & Development, gave Draft Approvat to the draft plan of subdivision on July 24, 2006. 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 "ER-3" and "OS-HL-EP" 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 October 3, 2006. A Statutory Public Meeting was held for this application on March 20, 2003. Please note that this by-law may be enacted at the October 3, 2006 Council Meeting. �) �7 ._•. i..i.�� Draft Amending By-law for Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 25/02 September 25, 2006 Page 2 The purpose and effect of this by-law is to amend Zoning By-law 3037, as amended, to permit the development of nine country residential dwellings on lots with minimum frontages of 30 metres and minimum lot areas of 0.4 of a hectare on the subject lands. The lots will be located on the west side of Salem Road, north of the Fifth Concession, as shown on Schedule I to the Draft Amending By-law. In addition, the by-law zones the three blocks (3.28 hectares) of environmentally sensitive lands for conservation 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. � �� r � • '�� - - �• SG:cm SG; Brown-Bitondo/0ylawMemoTOCIeAc Attachments Steve Gaunt �j, , , .n.+ ! I � __,,�� -.., • f � f�\ (...., l.,r \i „� . . .. . .. ., _._ - trncs �� . .. :� : ., g � � � i^ , `i6-.-i � a ' i �i i.u,-c,-.i } ,�-�F ��.. rm:tiot .... ;1 � ; .. .. ..�.,..... i � ' ^� .,.. �...... ... � ...-..... . _ .. . .. __ . . ..__'e'_—..._,_•��," •�'_- ... . � ... � `__'__.»4 �..o.o .n� . . . .. a -.- " . " "' ' ....___... . . ..._.._. . _ _ . _.. �.\ • � � �i�" �"-.��.� «.+«. � � V';t�� `�{~ H�1•OCK12 � ? �� w�s�� ..y � , ....e.m . � �' u � �7 9 � » � : ,_� � � k °. �.w � wn„ � . x..__' ._ ' j z T+ ' • .1._.-...__. , , -� � ' � - - � . �» " -' f � .� -� —. .. . �� ` � . n ; i 't�,,;fn..,.a.,ud�,w�_�..� � --;. ._.. ... � ._... �_.: ( ' ' pf �`� g.�.�..Me�� :I r.�_u�_.0_�.. 'I -;,; �;w°:r..v ��.. 1 ,O ,''�;�},� �� _ _...�...__.. r ' �z i j, � �„7;k. � � ' �r+k`. � . . .. .. . -- -� . . ` . � - ----��-� � : . . � - .., ..., ..d.. -.. � 7 . . .� N, .,,,...,....�, •f:;�, • I �_ :X:� w,�;� . " � ,� :;a„ �� , + , . • • . � , ,. : . , . � �"�t� .�__ _ _. �__ � �: � � '� ..,�=,, � _. , ( ,,, i , ., q . i �: � , .�i . � *.�- 1 � : Y �. 5 � .. <� ---- _._ . _ °- -- . ...... _ _ . ' � i ,M . .. . � � i;:.. . :i . , � �p,� � � j � � a,.o-«i_..o j_�ii �^Yio � �� i .i . �'° � t 2 '� 9�'.1 3 , � ��hw[.r nuz�Wia ,� �' ,'•�� :i �J t �� f 1 L � � ' 1 _- _��,�-� , � .. �1 �� , �:; -- a �r . . , __ ...,-,.�,� I = • ,' ' I ,� yI } -�f ! ' •'��y) n� �il . lar�.iia� � , ni�� >i� L .. i i 4_,'� ' }C •':i .. • 1 I� - � �. i�,y� : : � . w . � I � ' 1 . .,, �';.y; +; 5 li _ �. y' i��vi _ ta i�: ' �..,.� . a'. / � ; .�..n+s . . �_.. _'_"_'.� ! •w i�:ax.�;W, ��' ' s.._____ �._, ... _ � i.� : �.�/ ,� `s' .,, ,+��, • •, -"�., . i = t �,�`+r.„ ._': �L �Ka! 'w:�. �. i.`:i,......!v.`. .., q _ 1 �' . � .,. -� : . � . `t�,` . � ��''.��` a'ai�• , ll '� . , . _ „ .! _...,„ ; , -_ - _ �. � , � � -- �„ _.... --- - . ,..,- i ad,_.,,.,,,,:__ .m.„ . . ._. ._� ,> �,�_� , �. ; • _ .,.. - ..-n- - i '' - - � �=�_ .�b i I e:ru..�., `'.�� ° �� -._., r,• ....__ '._ _ t � . " c i+ '. ' _• _ � -.� 9 :a .. . ._ � aw � ' i _ , �. �'`•.�. .�. . � � �. a � _ I ' i ... _ __ _". -.- . .� ... .._._ ...___.. .L. .� ' � ;� 2 =1� g 0 . J.S• `:�` � S� i �r ][��f J�.! !�tr M �+.� � C . � .. _ . �s ..._�.. __ ._...__..._. _..._.�., S'l t I _`_.'.__..,. _ . ...._ d ;r I - ..lv:i.� 3 i own.n.iaia, '";�r, oL � }~o�.m��a xril :..�... '_" �:�: �_._ .__ '�'�_._ .. _ ,... _ ..n.'� .L�_�..r::_. .. ..,�.. . _ ._1==-� .. . .. . . . . .... ... . .... .._ " '. '—_'_ ' _ �;� cc�,cess:c:�r ��.r ,..,.�, ._�. w _.... ._,::,.�.. ...,.c�:,,.,,N � . {� .� ._ y , �i°•r. ,:, ,�;:::.�_,; ... .. ..... i -___----- __._------------------------_ ___. _— --, rNit :[xu rL�� ctwNSFt at 4 ts Iwl ]NOa�aaG �wU iH0!-psz PIAN OF SVY11�Nt++ON OF PARi pF LOT 7, CONGESSION 5 (fpRMkA4Y W TnE IOMNSNW Or YIGMEiwG. COUNfY OF ONTGM101 NOIp IN TNE CITY OF PlGKERING REGI�NAI NUFIICIPAUTY OF tlURHRM sca� � . puo ux�ervraeozat.uuriuneo •. •• � ••• uOTES - axn�n .�..�.io ...wmo i e�:rm+�o wo. �w sruun �a w� a��yo� •ruw WiYiEi �+as in.rii w� aw . i.'�,'°'rn e �• uu . � rr•`.ci�`ati� •Y� si+uwATlms MV sEllkiu�w.�8il�aw��V�i�Ya��'w� W TOTq� AREA OF SI/BOI�ISlOfI • 8.883� M. ,L 0� `KS`cE� 1�`GasE � M.�c:�:�»a :.�....�,:::�M:: .�,.�..�. �un�_.._o.r.."""iaoa � aa BtTOM00 ENTERI'HISES LWITEO t(�� 1 1 9 3> �,�.,.. r�'.N , F�= ,«.v� r.c umom; ro �� ..c a,..u,ar 5URYEYOR'S CERTlFICAiE �anrrrru ♦TMSU�tr�fnW u[cOw[cfuqwKCW4Siri+�K �YV[tY �Li.�i(� [YMi IC� txL(MJ t�tilf K� Ytl *.c rc..w.. . „nc.:.�. t u�e vrm+neeweecn or rm _r" w. r_°•w� _...:aw WtE ____�___.fOY :•�j •i )_'L.•.�:L� a.�wi �w v..�a �� THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. � � Being a By-law ta amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3037, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham in Part of Lot 7, Concession 5(Parts 1 and 2 Plan 40R-23455) in the City of Pickering. (A 25/02) WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to permit the development of nine country residential lots and three blocks for environmental conservation purposes on the subject lands, being Part of Lot 7, Concession 5(Parts 1 and 2, Plan 40R-23455); AND WHEREAS an amendment to By-law 3037, as amended, is therefore deemed necessary; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. SCHEDULEI Schedule I attached hereto with notations and references shown thereon is hereby declared to be part of this By-law. 2. AREA RESTRICTED The provisions of this By-law shall apply to those lands in Part of Lot 7, Concession 5(Parts 1 and 2, Plan 40R-23455) in the City of Pickering, designated "ER-3" and "OS-HL-EP" on Schedule I attached hereto. 3. 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. j�:.t�� -2- 4. DEFINITIONS ,�� In this By-law, (1) "Conservation" shall mean the wise use, protection and rehabilitation of natural resources according to principles that assure their highest economic, social and environmental benefits; (2) (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 Sinqle Dwellinq" shall mean a single dwelling containing one dwelling unit and uses accessory hereto; (d) "Dwellinq Detached or Detached Dwellinq" shall mean a single dwelling which is freestanding, separate, and detached from other main buildings or structures; (3) (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 buitding or structure, or part thereof as the case may be, other than a private garage, an attic, or a cellar; (4) (a) "Lot" shall mean an area of land fronting on a street which is used or intended to be used as the site of a building, or 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 Coveraqe" shall msan the percentage of lot area covered by all buildings on the lot; (c) "Lot Frontage" 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; (5) "Private Garaqe" shall mear� an enclosed or partially enclosed structure for the storage of one or more vehicles, in which structure no business or service is conducted for prof�t or otherwise; -3- ��'.: �J.� (6) "Resource Management" shall mean the preservation, protection and improvement of the natural environment through comprehensive management and maintenance, under professional direction for both the individual and society's use, both in the present and the future, and shall also mean the management, development and cultivation of timber resources to ensure the continuous production of wood or wood products, the provision of proper environmental conditions for wildlife, the protection against floods and erosion, the protection and production of water supplies and the preservation of the recreational resource; (7) (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 tot 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; (fl "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) "Flankage Side Yard Width" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a flankage side yard of a lot between the lot line adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a street, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; 5 ��,� -4- ';� �� ,� (j) "Interior Side Yard" shall mean a side yard other thar� ' e yard. ,. PROVISIONS (1) (a) Uses Permitted ("ER-3" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "ER-3" on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (i) single detached dwelling. (b) Zone Requirements ("ER-3" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "ER-3" 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) A LOT FRONTAGE (minimum): 0.4 of a hectare 30 metres B Notwithstanding Clause A above, on the lands cross-hatched on Schedule I to this By-law, the minimum lot frontage shall be 28 metres; (iii) FRONT YARD DEPTH (minimum): (iv) SIDE YARD WIDTH (minimum): 15 metres 7.5 metres (v) FLANKAGE SIDE YARD WIDTH (minimum): 7.5 metres (vi) REAR YARD DEPTH (minimum): (vii) LOT COVERAGE (maximum): (viii) BUILDING HEIGHT (maximum): (ix) DWELLING UNIT REQUIREMENTS floor area residential of 140 square metres. (x) PARKING REQUIREMENTS: A minimum two parking spaces 15 metres 20 percent 12 metres minimum gross - 5 - :�� 3 ;� : ��. . � B a private detached garage may be erected in a side yard or a front yard provided that such garage is located not less than 7.5 metres from any side lot line and not less than 15 metres from any front lot line. (xi) ACCESSORY STRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS: all accessory structures, except a detached private garage, which is not part of the main building, shall be erected in the rear yard and shall be not less than one metre from any side or rear lot line. (c) Special Regulations ("ER-3" Zone): A Despite Subsection 5.18 (c) of By-law 3037, as amended, accessory buildings may be permitted to have a maximum height of 5.0 metres. B Despite Subsection 5.(1)(b)(iv) of this By-law, where vehicular entrances to garages face a side yard, the minimum side yard on the opposite side shall be a minimum of 3.0 metres, provided that the distance between dwelling units shall be a minimum of 15.0 metres. (2) (a) Uses Permitted ("OS-HL-EP" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "OS-HL-EP" on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or block, or erect, alter, or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (i) conservation of the natural environment, soil and wildlife; and (ii) resource management (b) Zone Requirements ("OS-HL-EP" Zone) No buildings or structures shall be permitted to be erected nor any existing buildings or structures be modified or changed, nor shall the placing or removal of fill be permitted, except where buildings or structures are used for purposes of flood and erosion contro�, or resource management. 7 � `' 3 ' �... ..� MODEL HOMES : �t�� fi � - .�� .. _ Despite the provisions of Section 5.22 of By-law 3037, a maximum of two Model Homes, having a minimum of three parking spaces per Model Home, may be constructed on the lands designated "ER-3" on 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. BY-LAW By-law 3037, as amended, is hereby further amende necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as set out in Schedule I attached hereto. Definitions and specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by By-law 3037, as amended. EFFECTIVE DATE d only to the extent it applies to the area subject matters not relevant provisions of 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 . 2006. David Ryan, Mayor � Debi A. Bentley, Clerk day of / � � ' LOT 10 / / ' LOT 21 � -- / LOT 9 \ LOT 20 --- � � _ �[ � LOT 8 \ LOT 21 Q� W _ ',�v U — �/ Q. �OT 2Z LOT 7 ��_ Q�'_ - -- - \ COT 23 LOT 6 \ !�T \ / i \ ` ?v \ ---- ��Y \\ � ? \ ��\ LOr S s � �o � \ (�'C� `` Cb� 61.6� \ s �'� %� � �� OT 4 \ Q�a\ �- �� \ \ LOT 3 �_ �_ i -- �� _ LOT 2 �_ __ _. _._ L0T 1 FIFTH CONCESSI �-� CONCESSION 5 SOUTH PART LOT 7 RP 40R-17683 PART 1 1 t.f WN � J a 2" � � ' M �N I � O a 1B8.1m = � n � 7 1 C.2m .1m � Q � � E N ER-3 N 40R-23455 PART 2 Ia` 130.Om _ 56.1m `�' CONCESSION 5, PT LOT 7& B RP 40R-23455 PART 4, 5 i 164.im � 3 ER-3 a' `� 2p'ST 40R-23455 PART 1 W� Ja 38.1m N =a �c n � N O' Op m o ROAD 40M�7M OL� � N SCHEDULE I TO BY-LA PASSED THIS � DAY OF — MAYOR - DAVID RYAN r. � ' � CITY CLERK - DEBI . BENTLEY � O � m N .� �;�g� r�. .� ,.l