Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
July 13, 2009
CLtq O0 Council Meeting _ Agenda PI RI Monday, July 13, 2009 Council Chambers 7:30 pm 1) INVOCATION Mayor Ryan will call the meeting to order and lead Council in the saying of the Invocation. II) DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST III) ADOPTION OF MINUTES PAGE Council Minutes, June 15, 2009 1-21 Joint Planning & Development & Executive Committee Minutes, 22-37 July 6, 2009 IV) PRESENTATIONS V) DELEGATIONS 38 VI) CORRESPONDENCE 39-82 VII) COMMITTEE REPORTS 83-89 a) Report JT 2009-01 of the Joint Planning & Development & Executive Committee VIII) REPORTS - NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS 90-309 IX) MOTIONS AND NOTICE OF MOTIONS X) BY-LAWS 310-323 XI) OTHER BUSINESS XII) CONFIRMATION BY-LAW Accessible For information related to accessibility requirements please contact P I C V c Linda Roberts t\ G R ING Phone: 905.420.4660 extension 2928 TTY: 905.420.1739 Email: Iroberts(@citvofr)ickerina.com FOR INFORMATION ONLY • Minutes of the Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee, May 14, 2009 • Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment, May 27, 2009 0 Minutes of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee, June 23, 2009 Citq 00 Council Meeting Minutes PACKERNG Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers PRESENT: Mayor David Ryan COUNCILLORS: D. Dickerson R. Johnson B. Littley J. O'Connell D. Pickles ABSENT: B. McLean ALSO PRESENT: T. J. Quinn - Chief Administrative Officer E. Buntsma - Director, Operations & Emergency Services N. Carroll - Director, Planning & Development G. Paterson - Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer D. Wilcox - City Clerk T. Moore - Chief Building Official K. Thompson - Manager, By-law Enforcement Services D. Shields - Deputy Clerk (1) INVOCATION Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order and led Council in the saying of the Invocation. (11) DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST No disclosures of interest were noted. (III) ADOPTION OF MINUTES Resolution # 137/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Johnson 1 City Council Meeting Minutes Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM n Council Chambers In Camera Council Minutes, May 19, 2009 Council Minutes, May 19, 2009, as amended Special Council Minutes, June 1, 2009 Planning & Development Committee Minutes, June 1, 2009 In Camera Council Minutes, June 8, 2009 Special Council Minutes, June 8, 2009 Special Council Minutes - Development Charges, June 8, 2009 Executive (Budget) Minutes, May 7, 2009 Executive Committee Minutes, June 8, 2009 CARRIED (IV) DELEGATIONS 1. Shashi Bhatia Indo-Canadian Cultural Association of Durham [Refer to Corr. No. 59-09 Shashi Bhatia, Donald Igbokwe and Cecil Ramnauth of the Indo-Canadian Cultural Association of Durham appeared before Council to submit a proposal for the renaming of Esplanade Park, the garden circle and walkways within Esplanade Park. They noted that the proposal suggested that Esplanade Park be renamed the Peace Park and the garden circle be named the Lester B. Pearson circle. They also suggested that the following names of Mahatma Gandhi, Martin Luther King and Nelson Mandela be considered for the walkways. The Indo-Canadian Cultural Association of Durham noted that by renaming this area it would honour the contributions of these four great leaders and also honour the City's commitment to peace, non violence and reconciliation. A brief question and answer period ensued. Resolution #138/09 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That the rules of procedure be suspended in order to introduce a Motion with respect to Correspondence Item 59-09 requesting the endorsement of the renaming of Esplanade Park. CARRIED ON A 2/3 MAJORITY VOTE 2 Cif Council Meeting Minutes Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 1) Resolution #139/09 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor Littley That Council endorse the renaming of the Esplanade Park and refer the proposal to staff for a report on the logistics and financial considerations to the project. CARRIED LATER IN THE MEETING ON A RECORDED VOTE AS FOLLOWS YES NO Councillor Dickerson Councillor Johnson Councillor Littley Councillor O'Connell Councillor Pickles Mayor Ryan Resolution #140/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That the main motion be divided in order to deal with the endorsement separately. MOTION DEFEATED The main motion was then CARRIED ON A RECORDED VOTE. 2. Pat Dunnill Re: Rogers Farm [Refer to Corr. No. 64-091 Pat Dunnill of the Pickering Museum Village Foundation appeared before Council requesting support of the initiatives to preserve the Rogers Farm. He noted that staff had already been informed that the planned highway 407 expansion would be going through the Rogers Farm and stated that we should be looking at moving the house to another location. He noted that the Province has a report that states the historical 3 Ctrs Council Meeting Minutes Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM G Council Chambers significance of the property and felt they should stand behind their report and preserve the Rogers Farm. He also noted that someone should approach the Rogers family to see if they would contribute to the preserving of the house. Mr. Dunnill noted that he thought this would make an excellent Bi-Centennial project. 3. Raveena Ratnasingam President, Tamil Cultural and Academic Society of Durham Re: Local Involvement Regarding the Current Tamil Situation in Sri Lanka Raveena Ratnasingam, President, Tamil Cultural and Academic Society of Durham, appeared before Council to request their support in petitioning the Provincial and Federal Government for humanitarian aid in Sri Lanka. Ms. Ratnasingam also requested Council's support in assisting with fundraising efforts for the people of Sri Lanka and a grant for the use of a City facility. A brief question and answer period ensued. Resolution #141/09 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Pickles That the rules of procedure be suspended in order to introduce a Motion with respect to the Mayor sending a letter to the Provincial and Federal Governments requesting support and assistance of humanitarian aid in Sri Lanka and the City's assistance with fundraising efforts for the people of Sri Lanka. CARRIED ON A 2/3 MAJORITY VOTE Resolution #142/09 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Johnson That the City of Pickering request the Federal and Provincial Governments to further request the Sri Lanka Government to allow media and humanitarian workers access and free the people from concentration camps so they can return home and that the letter be copied to all municipalities in Ontario. 4 Cry oo Council Meeting Minutes Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 05 CARRIED ON A RECORDED VOTE AS FOLLOWS YES NO Councillor Dickerson Mayor Ryan Councillor Johnson Councillor Littley Councillor O'Connell Councillor Pickles Resolution #143/09 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Pickles That the City of Pickering assist the Tamil Cultural and Academic Society of Durham with fundraising efforts for the people of Sri Lanka and a grant for the use of a City facility. CARRIED ON A RECORDED VOTE AS FOLLOWS YES NO Councillor Dickerson Councillor Johnson Councillor Littley Councillor O'Connell Councillor Pickles Mayor Ryan 4. Chaitanya Kalevar Re: Democratic Due Diligence of Elected Representatives Chaitanya Kalevar appeared before Council requesting his power point presentation be shown to Council. He noted that his delegation was on Nuclear topics and not on Democratic Due Diligence of Elected Representatives as noted in the agenda. He stated that was his topic request for April and that he wanted to speak on Nuclear issues. 5 Citi oo Council Meeting Minutes I'~ I Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM 06 Council Chambers The City Clerk noted that Mr. Kalevar's presentation did not relate to the topic he requested to speak on which was Democratic Due Diligence of Elected Representatives and the presentation submission deadline was not met. Mayor Ryan noted that tonight he must speak on the issue noted in the agenda. (V) CORRESPONDENCE 1. CORR. 59-09 SHASHI BHATIA INDO-CANADIAN CULTURAL ASSOCIATION OF DURHAM INC. 1894 Bainbridge Drive Pickering, ON L1V 6G6 That CORR. 59-09 from Shashi Bhatia, Indo-Canadian Cultural Association of Durham Inc., requesting Council support of a proposal to rename the Esplanade Park the Peace Park and the garden circle the Lester B. Pearson circle be endorsed. CARRIED PREVIOUSLY IN THE MEETING UNDER DELEGATIONS 2. CORR. 60-09 MIKE BENDER, MANAGER CONSERVATION LANDS TORONTO AND REGION CONSERVATION AUTHORITY 5 Shoreham Drive Downsview, ON M3N 1 S4 Resolution # 144/09 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor Pickles That Councillor Littley be appointed as the Council representative in regards to CORR. 60-09 from Mike Bender, Manager, Conservation Lands, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, requesting Council appoint a Councillor and staff representative to participate on the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's Trail Guidelines Advisory Committee. CARRIED 6 Clay 00 A~, Council Meeting Minutes , PICXEFING Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers U 3. CORR. 61-09 SUE CORKE DEPUTY CITY MANAGER 311 Toronto Metro Hall, 3rd Floor 55 John Street Toronto, ON M5V 3C6 Resolution # 145/09 Moved by Councillor Littley Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That CORR. 61-09 from Sue Corke, Deputy City Manager, 311 Toronto, requesting approval from the City of Pickering for the 311 Call Routing Agreement between the City of Toronto and the City of Pickering, which arranges for certain Bell Canada wire centre areas to be shared by Toronto and the neighbouring municipalities be approved. CARRIED 4. CORR. 62-09 CHERYL TENNISCO, COMMITTEE CLERK REGION OF DURHAM 605 Rossland Road East Whitby, ON L1 N 6A3 Resolution # 146/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Littley That CORR. 62-09 from Cheryl Tennisco, Committee Clerk, Region of Durham advising that at a meeting of the Durham Region Transit Executive Committee held on April 29, 2009 and May 13, 2009, the Council adopted a recommendation with respect to representation on the new Metrolinx Board be received for information. CARRIED 7 Citqo~ A,, Council Meeting Minutes I'l PICKERING Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM 8 Council Chambers 5. CORR. 63-09 J.R. POWELL, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER CENTRAL LAKE ONTARIO CONSERVATION 100 Whiting Avenue Oshawa, ON L1 H 3T3 Resolution # 147/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Littley That CORR. 63-09 from J.R. Powell, Chief Administrative Officer, Central Lake Ontario Conservation, submitting their 2009 budget as approved at a meeting held May 20, 2009 be received for information. CARRIED 6. CORR. 64-09 LINDA ROBERTS COMMITTEE COORDINATOR HERITAGE PICKERING ADVISORY COMMITTEE Resolution # 148/09 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Littley That CORR. 64-09 from Linda Roberts, Committee Coordinator on behalf of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee seeking Council endorsement with respect to pursuing the opportunity to preserve the buildings municipally located at 3805 Salem Road (Rogers Farm) with the Ministry of Transportation be endorsed. REFERRED LATER IN THE MEETING Resolution # 149/09 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That CORR. 64-09 from Linda Roberts, Committee Coordinator on behalf of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee seeking Council endorsement with respect to 8 Cicy o0 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 0 9 pursuing the opportunity to preserve the buildings municipally located at 3805 Salem Road with the Ministry of Transportation be referred to staff for further consideration. CARRIED 7. CORR. 65-09 RHONDA LAWSON PICKERING MUSEUM VILLAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE Resolution # 150/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Littley That CORR. 65-09 from Rhonda Lawson, Member, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee seeking Council endorsement with respect to the nomination of Laura Drake for the Cultural Heritage Award, under the Heritage Community Recognition Program be endorsed. CARRIED 8. CORR. 66-09 LINDA ROBERTS COMMITTEE COORDINATOR HERITAGE PICKERING ADVISORY COMMITTEE Resolution # 151/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Littley That CORR. 66-09 from Linda Roberts, Committee Coordinator, on behalf of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee, seeking Council endorsement for the nomination of Gordon Zimmerman for the Built Heritage recognition award under the Heritage Community Recognition Program be endorsed. CARRIED (VI) COMMITTEE REPORTS a) REPORT PD 2009-07 OF THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE 9 Clay o0 Council Meeting Minutes PICKEMG Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 18-09 Zoning By-law Amendment - A 21/08 Mikalda Farms Ltd. 155 Uxbridge Pickering Townline Road (Part of Lot 34, Concession 9) City of Pickering Resolution # 152/09 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Littley 1. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 21/08 submitted by Mikalda Farms Ltd., on lands being Part of Lot 34, Concession 9, City of Pickering, to amend the zoning of the subject property to add low intensity recreational uses with accessory small-scale environmental education facilities as a permitted use on the subject property as outlined in Report PD 18-09 be approved; 2. That the amending Zoning By-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 21/08, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 18-09 be forwarded to Council for enactment, and 3. Further, that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing be requested to revise the City's Oak Ridges Moraine Conformity Zoning By-law to permit small scale environmental education facility uses within the "ORM-A-2" zone for the subject property in its approval of the Conformity By-law, as outlined in Appendix I to PD Report 18-09. CARRIED 2. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 19-09 Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-004/P Amendment 19 to the Pickering Official Plan Zoning By-law Amendment - A 24/08 SmartCentres (Calloway REIT/First Simcha) 1899 Brock Road (Part of Lot 18, Concession 1) City of Pickering A question and answer period ensued. 10 City 00 Council Meeting Minutes PICKEMG Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers A representative from SmartCentres confirmed that they would conduct a community information night regarding the site at 1899 Brock Road, Pickering. Resolution # 153/09 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Littley 1. That Report PD 19-09 of the Director of Planning & Development on Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 08-004/P, Amendment 19 to the Pickering Official Plan, be received; 2. a) That Amendment 19 to the Pickering Official Plan initiated by SmartCentres, to permit an increase to the maximum aggregate gross leasable floor area from 49,000 to 55,000 square metres as set out in Exhibit "A" to Appendix I to Report PD 19-09 be approved; b) That the Draft By-law to adopt Amendment 19 to the Pickering Official Plan to establish a maximum aggregate gross leasable floor area for the subject property of 55,000 square metres, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 19-09 be forwarded to Council for enactment; 3. That prior to the passing of the Zoning By-law to implement this application, First Simcha shall provide a security to the satisfaction of the Director, Planning & Development, sufficient to secure construction of a sidewalk enhancement plan; 4. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 24/08 submitted by SmartCentres for lands being Part of Lot 18, Concession 1, City of Pickering, to amend the zoning of the subject property to permit an increase of the maximum aggregate floor area from 49,237 square metres to 55,000 square metres and to reduce the site specific parking standard from 5.0 spaces per 100 square metres of gross leasable floor area to 4.5 spaces per 100 square metres of gross leasable floor area as outlined in Report PD 19-09 be approved; 5. That the draft by-law to amend Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 5511/99, 5692/00, 6011/02 and 6647/06 to permit 55,000 square metres maximum aggregate floor area and to establish a site specific parking standard of 4.5 spaces per 100 square metres of gross leasable floor area, as set out in Appendix II to Report PD 19-09, be forwarded to Council for enactment; and 6. Further, that the City Clerk forward a copy of Report PD 19-09 to the Region of Durham. 11 Citq O¢ Council Meeting Minutes I,~ Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 12 CARRIED ON A RECORDED VOTE AS FOLLOWS YES NO Councillor Dickerson Councillor O'Connell Councillor Johnson Councillor Littley Councillor Pickles Mayor Ryan b) REPORT EC 2009-06 OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 1. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 28-09 Tender No. T-4-2009 -_Municipal School Crossing Guard Program COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report OES 28-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding Tenders received for the administration, supply and service of the municipal school crossing guard program be received; 2. That Tender No. T-4-2009 submitted by Staffing Services in the total tendered amount of $999,553.80 (GST included) with a net project cost of $951,956.00 be approved for the period September 2009 to June 2012, subject to the annual review and extension to the contract by the Manager, Supply & Services; 3. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take ecessary action to give effect hereto. 4. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 16-09 Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information COUNCIL DECISION That Report CS 16-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information be received for information. 12 Council Meeting Minutes ~$1 PICKEWNG Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers z 5. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 18-09 2008 Pre-Audit Balances of Reserves and Reserve Funds COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report CS 18-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information; 2. That the Ontario Transit Renewal Reserve Fund be closed and the attached By- law to repeal By-law 6029/02 be enacted; 3. That the Dedicated Gas Tax Reserve Fund be closed and the attached By-law to repeal By-law 6418/04 be enacted; and, 4. That the appropriate staff of the City of Pickering be given authority to give effect thereto. 6. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 20-09 Development Charges Reserve Fund - Statement of the Treasurer for 2008 COUNCIL DECISION That Report CS 20-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer respecting the Development Charges Reserve Fund be received for information. 7. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 22-09 2009/2010 Property and Liability Insurance Renewal COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report CS 22-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the City of Pickering renew effective June 16, 2009, its property, liability and other coverages through the Frank Cowan Company for the period July 1, 2009 to June 30, 2010 inclusive on terms and conditions acceptable to the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer; 3. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, as part of the Risk Management Program, be authorized to continue the Reimbursable Deductible Program through the Insurance Adjuster and the Frank Cowan Company and 13 Citqoo Council Meeting Minutes Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM 4 Council Chambers further, that the Director be authorized to settle any claims including any adjusting and legal fees where it is in the City's interest to do so; 4. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to purchase additional insurance, make changes to deductibles and existing coverages, and alter terms and conditions as becomes desirable or necessary in order to limit potential liability exposure and to protect the assets of the City. and it's elected officials and staff; and, 5. That the appropriate officials be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect thereto. Resolution #154/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That the Report of the Executive Committee EC 2009-06, dated June 8, 2009, be adopted save and except Items 2 and 3. CARRIED 2. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 31-09 Architectural Services - Don Beer Arena Accessibility Improvements A brief discussion ensued on this matter. Resolution #155/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell 1. That Report OES 31-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding Architectural Services be received; 2. That notwithstanding the Purchasing Policy, the proposal submitted by Jurecka + Associates Architects Inc. to provide architectural services for the design of accessibility and operational improvements at the Don Beer Arena be accepted; 14 Citq eq Council Meeting Minutes PICREMG Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 3. That the total gross project cost of $105,000 and a net project cost of $100,000 including disbursements for the architectural services for the Don Beer Accessibility Improvements be approved; 4. Should the grant funding applications for this project be approved, that Jurecka + Associates Architects Inc. be engaged for the contract administration with costs to be included and funded as part of the total contract award, which will be dealt with in a subsequent tender award Report to Council; 5. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the Don Beer Arena Accessibility Improvements architectural service as follows: a) The costs of Phase I, detailed design in the amount of $100,000 plus GST to be financed by a transfer from the Don Beer Reserve as per the approved 2009 Capital Budget; b) The costs of Phase II, contract administration, in the amount of $30,400 plus GST will not be awarded until such time as grant funding for construction is confirmed; c) The Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and 6. That staff at the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto. CARRIED 3. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 14-09 Updated Sign By-law A brief discussion ensued on this matter. Resolution #156/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell 1. That Report CS 14-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 15 City O¢ Council Meeting Minutes it, ft. _000441 ki Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM 16 Council Chambers 2. That the proposed sign by-law, as amended, included as Attachment #1, providing regulations for signs erected within the City of Pickering, be enacted; and 3. Further, that the appropriate staff of the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto. REFERRED LATER IN THE MEETING (See Following Motion) Resolution #157/09 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That Report CS 14-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be referred back to staff for further investigation on regulations regarding Mobile Signs. CARRIED (VII) NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 35-09 Tender No.T-7-2009 -Tender for Tennis Court Resurfacing Project - Kinsmen & Maple Ridge Park Resolution # 158/09 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Johnson 1. That Report OES 35-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the Tennis Court Resurfacing for Kinsmen Park & Maple Ridge Park be received; 2. That Tender T-7-2009 submitted by Court Contractors Ltd. for the Tennis Court Resurfacing Project in the amount of $199,710 (GST included) be accepted; 16 Cirq Council Meeting Minutes -MYNA4 Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 1 7 3. That the total gross project cost of $210,000 (GST included) including the tender amount and other associated costs and the total net project cost of $200,000, be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) the sum of $200,000 to be funded from property taxes; 5. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and 6. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect hereto. CARRIED 2. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 36-09 Tender No.T-8-2009 - Tender for Walkway Lighting - Amberlea & Rouge Valley Parks Resolution # 159/09 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Johnson 1. That Report OES 36-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding Walkway Lighting - Amberlea & Rouge Valley Parks be received; 2. That Tender T-8-2009 submitted by Wayne Electric Co Limited for Walkway Lighting -Amberlea & Rouge Valley Parks in the amount of $145,110 (GST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $165,900 (GST included) including the tender amount and other associated costs and the total net project cost of $158,000, be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: b) the sum of $158,000 to be funded from Provincial TI Grant; 17 Citq oo Council Meeting Minutes it Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 5. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and 6. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect hereto. CARRIED 3. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 38-09 2nd Lawn Bowling Green (Phase 2) -Tender No. T-8-2008 Resolution # 160/09 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Johnson 1. That Report OES 38-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the 2nd Lawn Bowling Green (Phase 2) be received; 2. That the remaining work of the original Tender T-8-2008 be awarded to the low bidder Melfer Construction Inc. for the 2nd Lawn Bowling Green (Phase 2) in the amount of $96,328 (GST included); 3. That the total gross project cost of $105,000 and a net project cost of $100,000, including the tender amount and other associated costs be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to amend the existing PO #280455 issued to low bidder Melfer Construction Inc. to complete the remaining work for the second lawn bowling green; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take any actions necessary to give effect thereto. CARRIED 4. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 24-09 Proposed Amendment to Lottery Licensing By-law 6754/07 A brief discussion ensued on this matter. 18 City 00 Council Meeting Minutes 11 Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers Resolution # 161/09 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Johnson 1. That Report CS 24-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the enforcement of Section 6 to Lottery Licensing By-law 6754/07 be suspended for a period of two years to assist Durham Charities with fundraising opportunities; and 3. That the appropriate staff of the City of Pickering be given authority to give effect thereto. CARRIED (IX) BY-LAWS 6959/09 Being a by-law to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for the purpose of enforcing parking restrictions on private property 6960/09 Being a by-law to amend By-law 6604/05 providing for the regulating of parking and traffic on highways or parts of highways under the jurisdiction of the City of Pickering and on private and municipal property. 6961/09 Being a by-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 5511/99, 5692/00, 6011/02 and 6647/06, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, Part of Lot 18, Concession 1, Part 1, 40R-12591 and Parts 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,8 and 10, 40R-19801 in the City of Pickering (A 16/09) 6962/09 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 34, Concession 9, in the City of Pickering (A 21/08) 6963/09 Being a by-law to adopt Amendment 19 to the Official Plan for the City of Pickering (OPA 08-004/P) 19 City Council Meeting Minutes Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM 20 Council Chambers 6964/09 Being a by-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 5511/99, 5692/00, 6011/02 and 6647106 to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, being Part of Lot 18, Concession 1(40R-12591, Part 1 & 40R-19801, Parts 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 & 10), in the City of Pickering (A24/08) 6966/09 Being a by-law to repeal By-law No. 6028/02 which was for the establishment of a Reserve Fund to be known as the Ontario Transit Renewal Reserve Fund. 6967/09 Being a by-law to repeal By-law No. 6418/04 which was for the establishment of a Reserve Fund to be known as the Dedicated Gas Tax Reserve Fund. THIRD READING: Councillor Dickerson, seconded by Councillor Johnson moved that By-law Number 6959 /09 to 6967/09, save and except By-law Number 6965/09, be adopted, and the said by-law be now read a third time and passed and that the Mayor and Clerk sign the same and the seal of the Corporation be affixed thereto. CARRIED 6965/09 Being a by-law to regulate signs in the City of Pickering. REFERRED PREVIOUSLY IN THE MEETING UNDER COMMITTEE REPORTS (Report CS 14-09) (X) OTHER BUSINESS 1. The Chief Administrative Officer was requested to action the following: a) Councillor Dickerson requested that staff investigate the opportunity to introduce 3 or 4 curb cuts on the east side of St. Martins Drive. (XI) CONFIRMATION BY-LAW By-law Number # 6968/09 20 Crry Council Meeting Minutes PICKEWNG Monday, June 15, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 21 Councillor Dickerson, seconded by Councillor Littley, moved for leave to introduce a By-law of the City of Pickering to confirm those proceedings of the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering at its Regular Meeting of June 15, 2009. CARRIED (XII) ADJOURNMENT Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That the meeting be adjourned at 10:25 pm. CARRIED DATED this 15th day of June, 2009 MAYOR DAVID RYAN DEBI A. WILCOX CITY CLERK 21 citq o~ Joint Planning & Development & Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers _ Chair: Councillor Dickerson PRESENT: Mayor Ryan COUNCILLORS: D. Dickerson R.Johnson B. Littley B. McLean J. O'Connell D. Pickles ALSO PRESENT: T.J. Quinn - Chief Administrative Officer T. Melymuk - (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer E. Buntsma - Director, Operations & Emergency Services N. Carroll - Director, Planning & Development G. Paterson - Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer R. Holborn - Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering C. Rose - Manager, Policy L. Taylor - Manager, Development Review M. Gadzovski - Stormwater & Environmental Engineer S. Gaunt - Principal Planner, Policy G. McGregor - Principal Planner, Policy R. Pym - Principal Planner, Development Review D. Shields - Deputy Clerk Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor McLean That the rules of procedure be suspended in order to change the order of business whereas Item 2 being Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 17-09 of the Executive Committee Reports be placed as the first report on the agenda following delegations. CARRIED ON A 2/3 MAJORITY VOTE 1 cis 11 Joint Planning & Development PIO<IE & Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers 71 Chair: Councillor Dickerson (1) DELEGATIONS 1. Paula Jesty Deloitte & Touche LLP Re: Report CS 17-09 2008 Year End Audit Paula Jesty of Deloitte & Touche LLP appeared before Committee to submit the report on the results of their audit of the consolidated financial statements of the City of Pickering. Ms. Jesty noted that no significant weaknesses in internal controls relating to the financial reporting process were identified. She noted that management judgements and accounting estimates had been assessed against standard practice and appear to be reasonable. She also noted that the areas of audit focus were all satisfactory and no significant items needed to be brought to the Committee's attention. A brief question and answer period ensued 2. Terri Daniels New Site Development, Rogers Wireless Re: Report PD 21-09 Rogers Wireless Cell Tower Installation Terri Daniels, a representative for Rogers Wireless, New Site Development appeared before the Committee in support of Report PD 21-09. She noted that Rogers Wireless had a weak spot in their network in this area and that the tower installation would correct this problem. Ms. Daniels also noted that the tower will generally not be visible from within Whitevale. A brief question and answer period ensued. 3. Dan Remollino Ministry of Transportation Project Manager Re: 407 East Environmental Assessment & Preliminary Design Study Dan Remollino, Project Manager, Ministry of Transportation appeared before Committee to update them on the 407 East Environmental Assessment & Preliminary Design Study. He noted that the Draft Environmental Assessment report and associated reference documents were complete and available for a five week review period. He noted that there were three workshops held and these workshops gave 2 citq °0 Joint Planning & Development & Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 LI 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickerson participants throughout Durham Region representing a variety of interests the opportunity to identify community values and features, to incorporate enhanced mitigation measures and to discuss the recommended community value plan. Mr. Remollino noted that the next steps in the Environmental Assessment process would be the five week review period, the collection of comments submitted to the Project Team and meetings with stakeholders during this period to discuss comments and to provide clarification. Mr. Remollino also noted that all comments would be responded to in writing and would become part of the EA record. A detailed question and answer period ensued. 4. Michael J. McQuaid, Q.C. WeirFoulds Re: Report CAO 05-09 On Behalf of the Seaton Landowners Michael McQuaid, the representative for Seaton Landowners appeared before the Committee to make a submission regarding Report CAO 05-09. Mr. McQuaid noted that the Seaton Landowners and the City share a common goal in seeing Seaton developed to the high standards set out in the Central Pickering Development Plan but must also note that the landowners have a different view of the process to be followed for the Neighbourhood Plans. He stated that in April 2009 two of the landowners filed applications for Neighbourhood Plans and the other two landowners are working on similar applications to be filed shortly. He stated that the landowners expected continued discussions and dialogue with City staff and also offered to pay for a planning consultant to review the application. Mr. McQuaid noted that the landowners do not feel it is necessary for the City to undertake an $800,000 study over the next 8 to 12 months to process the Neighbourhood Plans. Mr. McQuaid noted that they believe they share the same goal with staff and Council in seeing the Plan built to the high level of standards that have been called for thereby securing over time the significant jobs, taxes and development charges this will bring to the City of Pickering. Mr. McQuaid requested that Council defer the report until the September meeting to allow for discussion to occur on the steps that will allow the applications for Neighbourhood Plans and plan of subdivision to be processed in a cooperative way. A detailed question and answer period ensued. 3 citq °o Joint Planning & Development & Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickerson (II) PART `B' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORTS 2. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 17-09 2008 Year End Audit RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Pickles 1. That Report CS 17-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the Audit Results Report as submitted by Deloitte & Touche LLP be received for information; and, 3. That the 2008 draft Audited Consolidated Financial Statements for the City of Pickering be forwarded to Council for approval. CARRIED Councillor McLean was not in attendance for the vote on Report CS 17-09. (III) DELEGATIONS (Continued) 5. Bryce Jordan Sernas and Associates Re: Report PD 20-09 Bryce Jordan of Sernas and Associates appeared before the Committee in support of Report PD 20-09 and stated that there were only two issues that concerned his client and requested consideration be given to revising them. Mr. Jordan noted that staff has recommended a garage setback and parking space definition of 6.Om and Mattamy is requesting 5.5m in order to provide for the planned housing product. Mr. Jordan also noted that staff have recommended the deletion of 12 lots from the Draft Plan of Subdivision and noted that there was no sufficient reason for the increase in open space and felt that this was an inefficient use of very valuable resource land. Mr. Jordan requested that Council consider adding the lots back into the plan. A detailed question and answer period ensued. 4 cis Joint Planning & Development & Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers 26 Chair: Councillor Dickerson The Committee recessed at 10:50 pm until 11:05 pm. (IV) PART `A' PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORTS 1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 20-09 Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-01 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 1/08 Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited Part Lots 17 & 18, Concession 3 City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson 1. That Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-01 submitted by Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited, to permit a plan of subdivision on lands being on Part Lots 17 & 18, Concession 3, subject to the comments of Report PD 20-09, be endorsed; 2. That the proposed conditions of draft plan of subdivision to implement Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-01 as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 20-09, be endorsed; and, 3. Further, that Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 1/08 submitted by Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited, to amend the zoning of the subject property to implement Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-01, as outlined in Appendix II to Report PD 20-09 be endorsed. CARRIED LATER IN THE MEETING (See Following Motions) Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson That Item 1 of the main motion be amended to reflect that Lots 2, 3, 24, 25, 26 and 27 be added back into the plan of subdivision. CARRIED 5 Joint Planning & Development IS & Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickerson 1 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Johnson That Item 1 of the main motion be amended to reflect that Lots 63, 64 65 and 66 be added back into the plan of subdivision. MOTION DEFEATED Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor Littley That the main motion be amended by adding the following as Item 3 and Item 3 be renumbered accordingly. That prior to Council's consideration of the implementing zoning by-law, the owner provide the City with a letter of commitment with respect to the nature and timing of the development of the mixed use block adjacent to Brock Road. CARRIED Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson That Item 1 of the main motion be amended to reflect that the garage setbacks and parking space definition be reduced from 6.Om to 5.5m. MOTION DEFEATED The main motion, as amended, was the CARRIED. 2. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 21-09 Proposed Rogers Wireless Cell Tower Installation and Land Lease Sideline 34, Between Regional Road 27 (Whitevale Road) and Highway 407 City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor McLean 6 Cit oI Joint Planning & Development s & Executive Committee PICXE Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers 2 Chair: Councillor Dickerson 1. That Report 21-09 of the Director, Planning & Development, requested by City Council through Correspondence CORR 29-09, be received; 2. That a By-law be enacted to authorize the Mayor and the Clerk to execute a Lease Agreement with Rogers Wireless ("Rogers"), substantially on the terms set out in this Report, in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor and the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer and Rogers Wireless for those lands consisting of part of the road allowance between Lots 34 and 35, Concession 5 (Sideline 34, north of Regional Road 27 (Whitevale Road)), for the purposes of installing and maintaining communications equipment; and, 3. Further, that the Director, Planning & Development be authorized to provide Industry Canada with a letter of support for this cell tower installation, on Sideline 34 between Regional Road 27 (Whitevale Road) and Highway 407, following the execution of the lease agreement. CARRIED 3. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 22-09 City Response to Seaton Natural Heritage System Management Plan and Master Trails Plan - Final Report, October 2008, prepared by Schollen & Company Inc. for Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing RECOMMENDATION Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor Littley 1. That Report PD 22-09 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the Seaton Natural Heritage System Management Plan and Master Trails Plan, Final Report (SNHSMP & MTP - the Management Plan), prepared by Schollen & Company Inc. and Associates, dated October 2008, be received; 2. That the comments contained in Report PD 22-09 on the SNHSMP & MTP be endorsed and that Council advise the Ministers of Municipal Affairs and Housing and Energy and Infrastructure that: a) in implementing the Plan; (i) no costs should be borne by existing City taxpayers for the Natural Heritage System (NHS) restoration or for the on and off-road trails in the neighbourhoods, in light of the high standards expected; 7 Joint Planning & Development PICKE & Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickerson (ii) establishment of a separate Heritage Committee for Seaton needs further review; and, (iii) since renewable energy facilities are permissible uses within the NHS, a management strategy should be identified for this purpose and be reflected in the preparation of restoration/revegetation plans for the NHS lands; b) the City supports; (i) use of the Management Plan as a guide for a sustainable Seaton NHS as the report is a comprehensive and well thought-out prescription to achieve long-term objectives for the restoration of an expanded natural heritage system, construction of a trail system in the NHS and to fulfill cultural heritage objectives in the NHS; (ii) retention of the NHS lands in public ownership over the long-term; (iii) establishment of a First Nations Interpretive Centre; and, (iv) continued City involvement in discussions and decisions on a future management structure, plans and programs for the Seaton natural heritage system, trails network and cultural heritage programs, including the role of Heritage Pickering. 3. That Council request the Ministers of Municipal Affairs and Housing and Energy and Infrastructure to expand the range of uses permissible within the NHS to include recreational uses such as parks and playfields in those lands that buffer the key natural heritage features; and, 4. Further, that a copy of Report PD 22-09 and Pickering Council's resolution on this matter be forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, Ontario Realty Corporation, the Region of Durham, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee, and the Seaton Trail Management Plan Steering Committee. CARRIED 4. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 23-09 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 7/08 S. Golvin & JMPM Holdings Inc. Part of Lot 19, Range 3 B.F.C. (Part 1, 40R-10527 and Part 1, 40R-8832) City of Pickering 8 c~ °0 Joint Planning & Development & Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers 3 0 Chair: Councillor Dickerson Mr. George Horning of Sernas Trans Tech appeared before the Committee noting his concerns in regards to an item in the draft by-law stating that "no vehicular through route providing access between Bayly Street and Dillingham Road shall be permitted". He noted that the applicant was requesting that this be removed from the by-law and dealt with during the site plan process. Mr. Horning felt that the site would not be used as a through route from one street to the next due to the configuration of the buildings and stated that by placing this statement in the by-law they would have to put a barrier up to comply with it. Mr. Horning stated that they would have no problems dealing with this issue at the site plan process. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson 1. That Report PD 23-09 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 7/08 be approved to broaden the range of permitted mixed employment uses for the subject property including offices, personal service uses, sales outlets, and various light industrial uses on lands being Part of Lot 19, Range 3 B.F.C., Part 1, 40R-10527 and Part 1, 40R- 8832; 3. That the zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 7/08, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 23-09, be forwarded to City Council for enactment; and 4. Further, that Council authorize the Chief Administrative Officer to negotiate with the owners of the subject lands (known as Part of Lot 19, Range 3 B.F.C., identified as Part 1, 40R-10527 and Part 1, 40R-8832) to acquire a portion of the property for public stormwater management purposes, and report back to Council on the general terms and conditions of a possible land purchase. CARRIED LATER IN THE MEETING (See Following Motion) Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson 9 city °0 Joint Planning & Development PIUKE & Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickerson 3 1 That Item 3 of the main motion with respect to the zoning by-law be amended to reflect the deletion of Item (2)(d)(vi) of the draft by-law. CARRIED (V) PART `B' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORTS (Continued) 1. Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 05-09 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program -Direction to Proceed with Program RECOMMENDATION Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor McLean 1. That Report CAO 05-09 of the Chief Administrative Officer regarding the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program be received; 2. That staff be directed to proceed with the issuance of a Request for Proposals to hire a qualified consulting team to undertake the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program in accordance with the Terms of Reference set out in Appendix I to this Report; 3. That Council Resolution # 210-08 of October 20, 2008, concerning the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program be rescinded; 4. That Council request financial assistance from the Province of Ontario to undertake the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program; and 5. Further, that a copy of this Report be forward to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, the Ontario Realty Corporation, the Region of Durham, the Trustee for the North Pickering Development Management Inc. and the Sernas Group on behalf of the Seaton Landowner Group. REFERRED LATER IN THE MEETING (See Following Motion) 10 Joint Planning & Development & Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickerson Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor That Report CAO 05-09 of the Chief Administrative Officer be referred to the September 21, 2009 meeting of Council. CARRIED 3. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 21-09 Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act - Adjustment to Taxes RECOMMENDATION Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor McLean 1. That Report CS 21-09 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, 2001 be approved; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. CARRIED 4. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 23-09 Tow Truck "Anti-Chasing" Amendment to Traffic & Parking By-law 6604/05 RECOMMENDATION Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor McLean 1. That Report CS 23-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 11 c`tq Joint Planning & Development PICXE & Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickerson a 3 2. That the draft Tow Truck Anti-Chasing By-law, included as Attachment 1, providing restrictions regarding tow trucks within the City of Pickering, be enacted; and, 3. That the appropriate staff of the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto. CARRIED 5. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 24-09 City's Traffic & Parking By-law No. 6604/05 -Updating Amendments RECOMMENDATION Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor McLean 1. That Report OES 24-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding proposed amendments to the City's Traffic & Parking By-law No 6604/05 be received; and 2. That the attached draft by-law be enacted to amend Sections 8, 25, 26 and 46 and Schedules 2, 4, 9 and 13 to By-law No. 6604/05. REFFERED LATER IN THE MEETING (See Following Motion) Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Johnson That Report OES 24-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services be referred to the Special Meeting of Council to be held on September 28, 2009. CARRIED 6. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 37-09 Tender for Facilities Cleaning Services - Tender No. T-3-2009 12 c`tq °o Joint Planning & Development PKKE & Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickerson RECOMMENDATION Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor McLean 1. That Report OES 37-09 from the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding Facilities Cleaning Services Ltd. be received; 2. That Tender No. T-3-2009 submitted by Arsenal Cleaning Services Ltd. for facilities cleaning services, in the amount of $115,104 plus GST for year 1 and $118,578 plus GST for year 2 be approved subject to the annual review and extension to the contract by the Manager, Supply & Services for the following facilities: Pickering Municipal Facilities Pickering Public Libraries Operations Centre Main Branch East Shore Community Centre Claremont Branch Fire Hall #5 (Administration Office) Greenwood Branch Petticoat Creek Branch Whitevale Branch 3. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. CARRIED 7. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 40-09 Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer -Haul Roads RECOMMENDATION Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor McLean 1. That Report OES 40-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer associated haul routes be received; 13 cis Joint Planning & Development -F & Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickerson 2. That the City of Pickering approves of the use of Scarborough-Pickering Townline Road, Rosebank Road, Fairport Road, Dixie Road and Third Concession Road as described in and subject to the conditions outlined in Report OES 40-09 as haul routes for the construction of the Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer; and 3. That a copy of Report OES 40-09 be sent to the Region of York and the Region of Durham. CARRIED 8. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 41-09 Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance Environmental Assessment -Status Update RECOMMENDATION Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor McLean 1. That Report OES 41-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services concerning the Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance Environmental Assessment be received for information; and 2. That Council endorse the submission of the Draft Environmental Study Report (ESR) to the Ministry of the Environment. CARRIED LATER IN THE MEETING (See Following Motion) Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor McLean That the main motion be amended by adding the following as Item 2, and Item 2 be renumbered accordingly. That both the East and West breakwater walls be proposed and built fully accessible and included as part of the preferred alternative submitted with the EA documents. CARRIED 14 citq °0 Joint Planning & Development & Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers h Chair: Councillor Dickerson The main motion, as amended was then CARRIED 9. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 42-09 Roof Replacement - Pickering Public Library and Fire Hall #2 -Tender No. T-12-2009 RECOMMENDATION Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor McLean 1. That Report OES 42-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding Roof Replacement at Pickering Public Library and Fire Hall #2 be received; 2. That Tender T-12-2009 submitted by Crawford Roofing Corporation at a cost of $214,200 (GST included) be accepted; 3. That staff be authorized to negotiate with the low bidder to undertake the additional roofing work at Petticoat Creek and Whitevale Library, at a cost not to exceed the project costing as outlined in the report; 4. That the total gross project cost of $259,350 (GST included) and a net project cost of $247,000 including the tender amount and other associated costs be approved; 5. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) the sum of $65,000, as provided for in the 2009 approved Capital Budget for Fire Services, to be financed through property taxes; b) the sum of $74,000 as provided for in the 2009 approved Capital Budget for Libraries-Central & Whitevale and Petticoat Creek Library and Community Centre, to be financed through Provincial Grants-Investing in Ontario; c) the amount of $100,000, as provided for in the 2009 approved Capital Budget for Library-Central, to be financed through Federal Gas Tax funding; 15 Joint Planning & Development FIO<JERING & Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, July 6, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers 37 Chair: Councillor Dickerson d) the additional amount of $8,000 for Petticoat Creek Library and Community Centre Roof Rehabilitation to be funded from Federal Gas Tax; e) the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary in order to affect the foregoing; and 6. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. CARRIED (V) ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 1:25 am. 16 I I 38 PICKERD July 13, 2009 DELEGATIONS 1. Lon Harnish Pickering Rotary Club Re: Pickerinq Ribfest 2. Lyn Townsend Townsend and Associates Re: Report CS 26-09 2009 Development Charges Study for the City of Pickering CL~y O~ i 39 PICKERI July 13, 2009 CORRESPONDENCE Pages 1. CORR. 67-09 Motion for Direction JIM KARYGIANNIS, MP 41-45 SCARBOROUGH-AGINCOURT 3850 Finch Avenue E., Suite 206 Scarborough, ON M1T 3T6 Letter received from Jim Karygiannis, MP, Scarborough-Agincourt, requesting Council support of a Private Member's Bill regarding an amendment to the Motor Vehicle Safety Act with respect to speed limiters. 2. CORR. 68-09 Receive for Information REGIONAL COUNCILLOR BILL MCLEAN 46-54 CITY OF PICKERING At the June 24, 2009 meeting of Regional Council, Report 2009-WR-12 of the Commissioner of Works with respect to 'Results of Clear Bags Pilot Study in the Municipality of Clarington and the City of Pickering' was approved. Councillor McLean requested that this report be presented to Council for information. (A copy of the Final Report is available in the Office of the City Clerk). 3. CORR. 69-09 Receive for Information MARISA CARPINO 55-68 SUPERVISOR, CULTURE & RECREATION CITY OF PICKERING Memo received from Marisa Carpino, Supervisor, Culture & Recreation, submitting the 2008 Annual Report on behalf of the Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee. 4. CORR. 70-09 Motion to Endorse STEPHEN REYNOLDS 69-73 DIVISION HEAD, CULTURE & RECREATION CITY OF PICKERING Memo received from Stephen Reynolds, Division Head, Culture & Recreation, on behalf of the Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee, seeking Council endorsement with respect to the de-accessioning of artifacts which no long fit within the mandate of the Pickering Museum Village. 40 5. CORR. 71-09 Motion to Endorse STEPHEN REYNOLDS 74-75 DIVISION HEAD, CULTURE & RECREATION CITY OF PICKERING Memo received from Stephen Reynolds, Division Head, Culture & Recreation, on behalf of the Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee, seeking Council endorsement with respect to expand mandated time period at Pickering Museum Village to include Pickering Township's development from 1810 to 1920. 6. CORR. 72-09 Motion to Endorse ROGER ANDERSON, REGIONAL CHAIR 76-80 REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM 605 Rossland Road East Whitby, ON L1 N 6A3 Letter received from Roger Anderson, Regional Chair, Regional Municipality of Durham, seeking Council support with respect to the continuing loss of services from local hospitals in Durham Region. 7. CORR. 73-09 Motion to Endorse DEBBIE LEROUX, CLERK 81 TOWNSHIP OF UXBRIDGE 51 Toronto Street South Box 190 Uxbridge, ON L9P 1T1 Letter received from Debbie Leroux, Clerk, Township of Uxbridge, seeking council endorsement of a resolution passed at a meeting of Council held on June 22, 2009 with respect to the preservation of the Altona Inn. 8. CORR. 74-09 Motion to Endorse PATTI BARRIE, MUNICIPAL CLERK 82 MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, ON L1 C 3A6 Letter received from Patti Barrie, Municipal Clerk, Municipality of Clarington, seeking Council endorsement with respect to a resolution passed at a meeting held on June 15, 2009 with respect to having the noxious weed known as Giant Hogweed included on the noxious weeds list. RIDING OFFICE - OTTAWA OFFICE 3850 Finch Avenue East Suite #206 231 West Block ~ , ~ Sri r House of Commons Scarborough, Ontario M1T 3T6 Ottawa, Ontario K1A OA6 Tel: 416-321-5454 HOUSE OF COMMONS Tel: 613-992-4501 Fax: 416-321-5456 CHAMBRE DES COMMUNES Fax: 613-995-1612 WWW.KARYGIANNISMP. COM- s,ULAr'iz 0: d May ~ Y 2009 ~y s _~LOUN aL 4 41. . 1 r)r cCE su A: 2 Mayor David Ryan ;C01212. X01-0 c ,~r „sir RE The City of Pickering t One The Esplanade Y,~ S11' r h 'LL Y- ` Pickering, Ontario L1 V 6K7 Dear Mayor Ryan Re: Bill C-319 An Act to anvend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (speed limiters) I am writing to seek your support for Private Member's Bill C-319 (formerly C-568), which received First Reading in the ouse o Commons on February 12, 2009. Bill C-319 will amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act to include prohibitions against the manufacture, importation, sale, lease, operation and release after repair of motor vehicles manufactured after January 1, 2010, if they are not equipped with a speed limiter that is engaged and set to a maximum speed that is not greater than 150 kilometres per hour. According to Transport Canada, 2,889 Canadians died in vehicle collisions in 2006 (latest reporting year). Transport Canada also reports that speeding was involved in close to two-thirds of these accidents. The legislation would require all vehicles manufactured after January 1, 2010 to be equipped with speed limiters so vehicles cannot travel at more than 150 kilometres per hour. First responder vehicles or other vehicles used in emergencies would be exempt. For your information, I have enclosed a copy of Bill C-319, An Act to amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (speed limiters). The press release with respect to the Bill can be viewed at http://karygiannismp.com/spip/article.php3?id article=985. Should you require additional information on this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me at 416-321- 5454, at the address above, or by email at jim @karygiannismp.com. Working together we can stop the carnage on our streets and highways. Sincerely, Jim Karygiannis Searborough-Agincourt ~ LJ t art. FILF HON. JIM KARYGIANNIS, M.P. SCARBOROUGH - AGINCOURT V4 1'~`1 42 C-319 C-319 Second Session, Fortieth Parliament, DeLIXi&me session, quarantieme legislature, 57-58 Elizabeth II, 2009 57-58 Elizabeth II, 2009 HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA CHAMBRE DES COMMUNES DU CANADA BILL C-319 PROJET DE LOI C-319 An Act to amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act (speed limiters) Loi modifiant la Loi sur la securite automobile (limiteurs de vitesse) FIRST READING, FEBRUARY 12, 2009 PREMItRE LECTURE LE 12 FEVRIER 2009 MR. KARYGIANNIS M. KARYGIANNIS 402052 4 3 SUMMARY SOMMAIRE This enactment amends the Motor Vehic/e &if rn Act to include prohibitions Le texte modifie la Loi sur /a sccurite automobile afin d'y integrer against the manufacture, importation, sale, lease, operation and release after ]'interdiction de fabriquer, d'importer, de vendre, de louer, de conduire ou de repair of motor vehicles manufactured after January 1, 2010 if they are not remette apres reparation un vehicule automobile fabrique apres le I"janvier equipped with a speed limiter that is engaged and set to a maximum speed that 2010 qui nest pas muni d'un limiteur de vitesse active et regle a une vitesse is not greater than 150 kilometres per hour. maximale ne depassant pas cent cinquante kilometres a I'heure. Also available on the Parliament of Canada Web Site at the followine address: Aussi disponible sur le site Web du Parlement du Canada a I'adresse suivante http://www.parl.gc.ca http://www.parl.gc.ca 1 4 4 2nd Session, 40th Parliament, 2e session, 40e legislature, 57-58 Elizabeth 11, 2009 57-58 Elizabeth II, 2009 HOUSE OF COMMONS OF CANADA CHAMBRE DES COMMUNES DU CANADA BILL C-319 PROJET DE LOI C-319 An Act to amend the Motor Vehicle Safety Act Lot modifiant la Loi sur la securite automobile (speed limiters) (limiteurs de vitesse) 1993, c. 16 Her Majesty, by and with the advice and Sa Majeste, sur I'avis et avec le consentement 1993, ch. 16 consent of the Senate and House of Commons du Senat et de la Chambre des communes du of Canada, enacts as follows: Canada, edicte : 1. The Motor Vehicle Safety Act is 1. La Loi sur la sicuriti automobile est amended by adding the following after 5 modifiee par adjonction, apres ('article 5, de 5. section 5: ce qui suit: Definition of 5.1 (1) In this section, "speed limiter" means 5.1 (1) Darts le present article, o limiteur de Definition do .,speed lirnite` a device mounted on a vehicle that, when vitesse » s'entend d'un dispositif integre dans "limiteur do V nesse » engaged, electronically limits the maximum un vehicule qui, lorsqu'active, limite de faeon speed at which the vehicle is driven to the 10 electronique la vitesse maximale du vehicule it 10 speed set on the device. un plafond preetabli. Restrictions rc (2) No person shall manufacture, import into (2) Il est interdit de fabriquer, d'importer, de Restrictions- manufacture, sale Canada or sell or lease to another person a vendre ou de louer un vehicule qui nest pas fabrication, impuortatioation, importation, and lease vehicle unless it is equipped with a speed limiter muni d'un limiteur de vitesse active et regle a vente et location that is engaged and set to a maximum speed that 15 une vitesse ne depassant pas cent cinquante 15 is not greater than 150 kilometres per hour. kilometres A Pheure. Duty of repairer (3) No person who repairs or maintains a (3) La personne qui repare ou entretient un Obligation du vehicle shall release the vehicle to another vehicule ne peut le remettre a un tiers que s'il reparateur person unless the vehicle is equipped with a est muni d'un limiteur de vitesse active et regle speed limiter that is engaged and set to a20 A une vitesse ne depassant pas cent cinquante 20 maximum speed that is not greater than 150 kilometres A 1'heure. kilometres per hour. Restriction on (4) No person who owns a vehicle or leases a (4) Le proprietaire ou le locataire d'un Restriction- operation vehicle from another person shall operate the vehicule ne peut conduire celui-ci ou permettre condone a~un vehicule vehicle or allow it to be operated by another25 qu'il soit conduit par un tiers que s'il est mum person unless it is equipped with a speed limiter d'un limiteur de vitesse active et regle A une 25 that is engaged and set to a maximum speed that vitesse ne depassant pas cent cinquante kilo- is not greater than 150 kilometres per hour. metres A 1'heure. Application (5) This section applies to vehicles manu- (5) Le present article s'applique aux vehicu- Application factured on or after January 1, 2010 that are not 30 les fabriques A partir du I" janvier 2010, A fire-fighting vehicles, ambulances, police vehi- 1'exception des vehicules d'urgence-notam-'30 402052 2 Molor Vehicle Safeo) (speed limiters) 57-58 ELIZ. II cles or other vehicles that are used for the ment les vehicules de lutte contre les incendies,, y~ purpose of emergency or vehicles that belong to les ambulances et les vehicules de police-et a class of vehicles that is exempted from the des vehicules appartenant a une categone de application of this section by regulation. vehicules exemptee par reglement. . on4Ay C f ~1 t L90 A` ~4f NTA Published under authority of the Speaker of the House of Commons Publie avec I'autorisation du president de la Chambre des communes Available from: Disponible aupres de: Publishing and Depository Services Les Editions et Services de depot Public Works and Government Services Canada Travaux publics et Services gouvemementaux Canada Ottawa, Ontario KIA OS5 Ottawa (Ontario) K1A OS5 Telephone: (613) 941-5995 or 1-800-635-7943 Te1ephone: (613) 941-5995 ou 1-800-635-7943 Fax: (613) 954-5779 or 1-800-565-7757 Telecopieur:(613) 954-5779 ou 1-800-565-7757 pub] ications@pwgsc.gc.ca publications@tpsgc.gc.ca http://publications.gc.ca http://publications.gc.ca Page 1 of 1 46 01 The Regional Municipality of Durham To: The Works Committee From: Commissioner of Works t Report: ZWIM --VVR-12 . I Date: June 10, 2009 SUBJECT: Results of Clear Bags Pilot Study in the Municipality of Clarington and the City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION: THAT the Works Committee recommends to Regional Council that this report be received for information, and further, the diversion and financial implications in this study be considered farther as part of the seventy percent (70°x) diversion strategy in the 2010 Waste Management Servicing and Financing Study. REPORT: Attachment No. 1: ConsuitsriWa Report • Region of Durham Clear Bag Pilot Study Final Report (provided on a CD) 1. BACKGROUND On January 23, 2008, Regional Council directed: dy 'THAT the Region of Durham agrees to continue to support an aggressive residual waste diversion and recycling program in order to achieve and/or exceed on or before December 2010, a seventy percent (70 diversion recycling rate for the entire Region and that such aggressive programs shall continue beyond 2010.° On February 27, 2008, Joint Works and Finance and Administration Committee Report 2008-J-4, entitled "The Annual Solid Waste Management Servicing and Financing Study and the Proposed 2008 Business Plans. Budgets and Related Financing", contained, among other things, recommendation 6 (ii}, which reads as folloVA, "Further, in support of increasing the Region's diversion rate to 70% by the end of 2010; develop an implementation plan, including any promotional and communication strategies, and in consultation with local 57 https://zyimage. durham.ca/Exe/tiff2png.exe/000OAI6E.PNG?Default?-i+-r+85+-g+15+%... 25/06/2009 Page 1 of 1 47 Report No.. 2009-WR-12 Page No.: 2 municipalises, that `will facilitate the commencement of a Region-wide policy requiring residents to use clear bags for garbage set out and collection, effective October 1, 2018." Staff's recommendation was tabled by Regional Council, and Regional staff was directed to further investigate the issue and report back at a later date. On June 18, 2008, Regional Council approved Works Committee Report 200 -WR-20 regarding the implementation of a three (3) month clear bag pilot study for garbage collection on one (1) route each in the City of Pickering (Pickering) and the Municipality of Clarington (Clarington). Subsequent Works Committee Reports 2008-WR-35 and 2008- R•38 discussed the objectives and communications plan for the study. The Clear Sags Pilot Study involved two (2) collection routes, consisting of 607 homes in Pickering and 774 homes in Courtice, within Clarington, ft ran for three (3) months from the week of January 12 to March 25, 2009 in Clarington and until April 9, 2009 in Pickering, Due to the difference in service levels at that time, between the Pickering and Clarington pilot areas, the Pickering data was utilized to extrapolate Region wide results. The pilot study had tyro (2) objectives,: 1 } To assess the effect of using dear bags on diversion rate. 2) To assess the effect of using dear bags on participation in the recycling and composting programs, The clear bags plot project was divided into three (3) spec phases or time periods to enable staff to collect and segregate data under differing enforcement level scenarios, as follows; • Phase One (1) - Voluntary. ResidenVai participation was voluntary and no additional direct interaction or correspondence beyond initial launch package was provided to residents, • Phase Two (2) - Voluntary with Enc-gumnement: Residential participation remained voluntary. However, non-participating homes were left door hangers to assist in educating the residents on how to comply with the program. • phase Three (3) _ Mandatory with Enforge-me- nt: Non-compliant bags of garbage placed curbside were tagged and left behind. There was no contact with waste coNection staff or residents during this period to evaluate decisions made on their part. Three (3) levels of data were collected during the clear begs pilot macro route tonnages, micro household audits and control household audits. The macro https://zyimage.durham.ca/Exe/tiff2png.exe/OOOOAI6F.PNG?Default?-i+-r+85+-g+15+%... 25/06/2009 Page 1 of 1 . 48 Report No.: 2009-WR-12 Page No.: 3 data was the most statistically significant and the most appropriate for extrapolation Region-vAde. The micro household audits provided an insight into the specific effects on each waste stream.. The control audits were available to assist in the explanation of potential unforeseen variability. In addition, a survey was sent to the participating residents to gauge the level of acceptability and obtain comments on potential issues. 2. DISCUSSION The seventy percent (70%) diversion strategy, currently under development, identifies two (2) programs to increase the capture of recyciable and organics materials from the residual waste stream: • Increasing waste diversion in the existing system Implementing new waste diversion opportunities Improving the capture rate of recyclables and organics should be achieved through increased promotion and education, improved services and enhanced compliance with diversion programs, The utilization of clear bags is a potential tool to facilitate the curbside compliance with the existing diversion programs. 21 Assessment of Clbiectives The Clear Bags Pilot Study, completed by U'isionQuest Environmental Strategies Corp., concluded that based on a comparison to the 2008 waste tonnage data, implementation of a clear bag program could increase the waste diversion rate within the Region by three percent (3%). This increased diversion represents about 4,700 tonnes of Blue Box materials and Green Sin kitchen waste. The use of clear bag did not significantly influence the level of participation in the recycling program but did increase the participation in the Green Bin kitchen waste program by an average of fourteen percent (14%) when compared to seasonal variations. The Clear Bags program could therefore be a useful too[ to further enhance residents' participation in the Green Bin kitchen waste program. The use of clear bags is a tool to facilitate curbside compliance with diversion programs undertaken by the collection contractor. The collector must therefore be able to visualty assess the contents within the clear bag and determine if there are sufficient recyctables or Green Bin kitchen waste to justify withholding collection. The observation during the collection inspections indicated that a significant amount of plastic film within the dear bags hindered the visual inspection of the clear bags.. Due to the downturn in the economy, most municipalities have observed overall waste generation rates decreasing. Therefore, due to the timing of the Char Sags Pilot Study, the tonnage and diversion rate results from this pilot may not. represent typical conditions, 54 https://zyimage.durham.ca/Exe/tiff2png.exe/000OAI6G.PNG?Default?-i+-r+85+-g+15+%... 25/06/2009 Page 1 of 1 49 Report No, 2009-WR-12 Page N©.: 4 2.2 Promotion and Education The effects of the increased promotion and education could not be separated from the results of clear bag utilization. Therefore, to implernent a Region-wide clear bag program and achieve increases in diversion and participation rates, a comparable promotion and education program would be required. An extensive public education and promotional strategy was implemented by Regional staff to ensure that all Clear Bags Pilot Study area households were well informed of the intent of the Clear Bags Pilot Study as well as standard recycling and composting information. This included several door-to-door information sessions, public information centres, multi-media advertising and roadside signage. In addition, the coliecWn staff required training to understand the intent of the curbside compliance efforts. The wide-ranging public education and promotional strategy was estimated to cost $35 per household. 13 Vo4untary versus Mandatorrt The Clear Bag's Pilot Study evaluated the diversion performance during the voluntary and mandatory phases. There were no clear advantages observed as a result of mandatory clear bags usage. 2.4 Potential Costs The attached report (Attachment No. 1) provides a preliminary assessment of potential savings based on landfill cost avoidance. Further financial analysis will accompany the 70% diversion strategy business case report. These results will be included in the 2010 Waste Management Servicing and Financing Study. Several issues were raised during the Clear Sags Pilot Study which may also impact the business case, Residents in the pilot areas that were previously not using Blue Boxes and Green Bins requested that they be given a new supply. Also, increased collector training and time on-route could trigger additional contract cuts. Considers that clear p#astrc bags sold rail are comparable in price to opaque plastic bags, the simple transition from an opaque to clear bag should result in minimal cost increases to residents. 2.5 Satisfaction Surveys A total of 1,381 surveys were circulated to all households within both pilot areas. Approximately 540 surveys were completed and returned representing a response rate of approximately 39%. A slight majority of respondents (53%) expressed support towards the use of a clear bag policy for garbage bags, izn https:Hzyimage. durham.ca/Exe/tiff2png.exe/000OAI6H. PNG?Default?-i+-r+85+-g+15+°/0... 25/06/2009 Page 1 of 1 ~l Report No.: 2009-WR-12 Page No.: 5 including a decrease in the garbage hag limit if it helped to increase waste diversion. The majority of respondents (53%) believed that they would recycle more material as a result of their participation in the Clear Bags Picot Study. 2.6 Timeframe A lead time of one (1) to two (2) years would be required to notify all stakeholders prior to the program launch. This would take into account notifying residents of the program, time for them to use their current supply of opaque bags and time for merchants to stock clear bags. Experience from other municipalities has shown that hawing an adequate supply of clear bags is a very important component to ensuring a successful roll-out. 3. CONCLUSION The prioritization of the 70% diversion strategy basest on business case principles will determine the implementation schedule for the various diversion projects. Furthermore, the implementation of dear bags should only occur following a successful plastic film diversion program. Finally, a lead time of one (1) to two (2) years would be required to notify all stakeholders and to accommodate a resident and retailer transition to clear bags prior to the program launch- A dear bag program for garbage within the Regional Municipality of Durham could increase the waste diversion rate by three percent (3%) and Green Sin kitchen waste program participation rates by fourteen percent (14%). The effects of the economic downturn and significant promotion and education conducted during this pilot could have influenced the data and analysis- The enforcement of mandatory clear bag use produced mixed results. If a clear gags program is implemented, voluntary participation could evolve into mandatory participation in the future. Implementation of the clear bags program may increase operational costs. A financial evaluation and implementation priority will be included' in the 2010 Waste Management Servicing and Financing Study. https://zyimage.durham. ca/Exe/tiff2png.exe/OOOOAI6I.PNG?Default?-i+-r+85+-g+ 15+%... 25/06/2009 Page I of 1 Report No.: 2009-WR-12 Page Flo.: 8 Pilot area participation rates reached ninety-eight percent (98%). The sur4ey resaits indicated that a slight majority c~ fifty-three percent (53%j supported the use of clear bags for garbage: Giiffor rtis, P. 9 BA Commissioner of Works Recommended for Presentation to Committee H+ M. W. Chief AdministraWe Ofter WM3/rw/em https://zyimage.durham.ca/Exe/tiff2png. exe/000OAI6J.PNG?Default?-i+-r+g 5+-g+15+%... 25/06/2009 r Minutes - Regional Council 56 - June 24, 2009 EIGHTH REPORT OF THE WORKS COMMITTEE 1. FREE DISPOSAL FOR RECHARGEABLE BATTERIES PROVIDED BY THE RECHARGEABLE BATTERY RECYCLING CORPORATION (RBRC) (2009-WR-10) RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL a) THAT the Regional Chair and Clerk be authorized, subject to review by the Regional Solicitor, to register the Regional Municipality of Durham as a Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation Collector; b) THAT Regional departments using or collecting rechargeable batteries and cellular telephones be directed to participate in the Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation recycling program under the Waste Management Branch's lead; and c) THAT all future contracts for the supply or disposal of rechargeable batteries or cellular telephones entered into by the Regional Municipality of Durham contain language requiring that all end-of- life rechargeable batteries be managed either through the Rechargeable Battery Recycling Corporation registrants or equivalent recycling programs. 2. DRAFT WASTE MANAGEMENT BY-LAW CONSULTATION PLAN (2009-WR-11) RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL a) THAT staff be directed to implement the consultation process as outlined in Report No. 2009-WR-11 of the Commissioner of Works with the area municipalities, the residents of The Regional Municipality of Durham, and other stakeholders to receive input on the development of a Regional Municipality of Durham Waste Management By-law; and b) THAT staff report back in the Fall of 2010 with a proposed Regional Municipality of Durham Waste Management By-law based on the input of the consultation process. 3. RESULTS OF THE CLEAR BAGS PILOT STUDY IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON AND THE CITY OF PICKERING (2009-WR-12) 429 5 Minutes - Regional Council -57- June 24, 2009 RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL THAT Report No. 2009-WR-12 of the Commissioner of Works be received for information, and further, that the diversion and financial implications in this study be considered further as part of the seventy percent (70%) diversion strategy in the 2010 Waste Management Servicing and Financing Study. 4. PURCHASE OF PART OF LOTS 14 AND 15, PLAN 194, 253 GIBB STREET (REGIONAL ROAD 59), IN THE CITY OF OSHAWA (2009-LT-6) RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL a) THAT the following land purchase agreement be approved: Future Gibb Street/Olive Avenue (Regional Road 59) Widening and Connection, City of Oshawa Elizabeth Ann Peacock 253 Gibb Street $159,000; City of Oshawa b) THAT additional costs estimated to be $25,000 for the demolition of the house be approved, if necessary; c) THAT financing for this land purchase be provided from the funds allocated within the 2008 and prior Roads Capital Budgets for property acquisitions for the Gibb Street/Olive Avenue (Regional Road 59) widening and connection project; and d) THAT the Regional Chair and Clerk be authorized to execute all documents associated with the agreement. 5. OFFER TO RENEW LEASE AGREEMENT WITH OSHAWA CENTRE HOLDINGS INC. FOR THE PREMISES OCCUPIED BY THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT AT 419 KING STREET WEST, IN THE CITY OF OSHAWA (2009-W-57) RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL 430 Minutes - Regional Council -67- June 24, 2009 MOVED by Councillor Trim, SECONDED by Councillor Johnson, (239) "THAT the recommendations contained in Items 1, 2 and 4 to 18 of the Eighth Report of the Works Committee be adopted." CARRIED MOVED by Councillor Trim, SECONDED by Councillor Johnson, (240) "THAT the recommendations contained in Item 3 of the Eighth Report of the Works Committee be adopted." CARRIED SIXTH REPORT OF THE JOINT COMMITTEES 1. HIGHWAY 407 EAST COMPLETION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) - PRE-SUBMISSION REVIEW OF THE DRAFT EA REPORT, FILE: E03-407-03 (2009-J-25) RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL (AS AMENDED) a) THAT Regional Council endorse the Technically Preferred Route, consisting of the Highway 407 Mainline, West Durham Link and East Durham Link in principle, as the basis for the submission of the Final EA Report to the Minister of the Environment; b) THAT the Region urges the Ministry of Transportation to commit to the construction of the entire Highway 407 Mainline, West Durham Link and East Durham Link by 2013 as one phase of construction; c) THAT the Lake Ridge Road interchange at Highway 401, and the widening of Highway 401 between Salem Road and the West Durham Link, be included in the five-year construction program for Southern Ontario highways (i.e. 2009-2013), to coordinate with the construction of the West Durham Link; d) THAT as part of the five-week Pre-Submission Review, Regional staff provide comments to the Project Team on the Draft EA Report and Preliminary Design of the Technically Preferred Route during the Council summer recess; e) THAT the Ministry of Transportation be requested to work closely with the Region and area municipalities following submission of the Final EA Report, through further design work and implementation plan development; and 440 PI CKERI MEMO To: Debi Wilcox June 29, 2009 City Clerk From: Marisa Carpino Supervisor, Culture & Recreation Copy: Chair, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Bill McLean, Regional Councillor -Ward 2 Members, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Division Head, Culture & Recreation Subject: 2008 Annual Report of the Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee A-1400-006-09 Please find attached the 2008 Annual Report, as submitted by the Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee. Please include the report on the agenda of the next appropriate Council Meeting. The 2009 Annual Work Plan is still being finalized by the Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee and is forthcoming. Thank You. :mc Attachments ORIGINAL TO: COPY TO: S i ti is CORFU. ill\r= ~ Q C ( if e_ 1 Yl' c r rvgc, "4 C Ci r7. 5E coo ~cca -C ca, c: S Z, o E m -0 oa) vC o 0_ C O O Y 's 0 J 0 O p O O 0 C C O O L O U CL CL - -C o - M: C 0 E a) C 72 (n L V O C C 0) W~ 0 cz- y~ 0 O O N 0 V1 j LS U a) N -cn Y m C p J m~ ~cOC0 iN 3 ~ CD CL ooh (D 0° !C O O O Y O~ U ~ C: 0 U) CO -r -0 0 CL ~V) O> C O=2v)U O C cm -0 N O O co O (4 C co 2 C U) 'O O) O C E C C aa))~ C~ 0) 0).= a) °o ~ ac CL a) ° o °)0 ~UU.0 0) (D aO) C7 00*0 73 0 - -0 IL d °_0 a) E 0 C a) co .r Q QN co x ' w E cu a) ° (D .0 0 c O U ~ co U E O 0 -0 o E N O V) U ~ i O O U. F c U) m tC O CC 0 to U) a)= Q y O tm i _ } a) N co 0 !a C ~ Q C ro c0 a cz > a co C Y 0 U) '0 i N 0 O U 0 O a) O C ~ Y CC O CU O) O C 0) O L 04 o a 3 O U O m Y L 0 y~ Q~ C V N O 0 O a) O CL c Co 0 co 0) Y a) C O "O O> U) C H 0 C U cC ~ U C M cd C fA -0 O LC C N V ~ ~ ~ O d ~ a) Q U > C j .N O' N c - is 7 CO ~ E > mt > t; O O i IL U) 0 d 0 U T O Rf r! 0) cp CD -j co = pa) CM . °0 3 0 E c mo z-0.3 N O O N O N - Q a) O U i p Z5 cz C c Y Q U o .C •p a) !5 t co - O m 70 O C E a) CO d QY C C 'E ~ cz N- NY N a '0 co 70 p U cC p N O c ai co 3 .E ~a oc)°'~ Y~E3ca cno•ac, co c d ma• - N c 2 a~ v ~U o cn o Q5 c`v~► -0 vpi -'O'ar- Loc~UV 3CEo ~~cc a) « = N a) aa)i Op N cC Q cu Co o U (n -C C) '0 0 } m a) t a) cC ao cB V) U 3 I lo °c~ oou o E~ 04 a) cz 3 ro N w o N N ro'o 4) O c O p p O C j O O E 'm N E E a) d O cu U) c o C O a p Q 0 U) O N° E a) p N LL V cc a) E cu wo co d j p p U c` a) N V U N a) E E E S V) O Y U ° o a F- 53 ~~-0 o70 o F- 3.5 ° ¢ ctS=~ 3 a) m M C 0 o Q w CL a) E a, o CO V o E N O N U ~ O D p LL fA C U) 4) Q O O Im 0 C.•y A O N C ~ Q > a E i O O 3 ~ 'O ~ O C c N cp ■ l0 d ~ C V O N c 0 a U d •O a. a 5 8 O O O a) L 'D cn a O O a) a) 'D O- O H O a) 2 3- y 0 p U 0 3 E rnw _0 c) - ~Y c co O U) 0_= C O a) 3 0 D) O O o a) i L O fn 0. 3 p -N - U > C 'N 0. rn -0 N p CL U fCU t Q cC U O C C- W C..Q=~c O O Nom` O a) ~ (2) H awn N O a14i 9 c~ a~ 5 o C o~w V 0 X - O C a) O a) 0- C Y U~ C CT) Cl) O c4 O ( N D)o C).O O c o (1) 0 M U c~0 C: >O O~ O ca Op N ca a) N 00 C C C L O >mEin.~¢cn7E ~'yEcco om 00(D C.-4, ~Va~ :3 a)m ~°=3 (n L) a) o z co (n >Y . a) U a) F- CL Y cu 2 N CL m N > UO E m E OC F- 3 N R r G V O M.0 w CL co U E N O to U ~ i O O O LL 4) p > O C G Q M O _0 d a N t d Q C ~ > a E Y 0 y O °f O G G N {S i' lD d Y O L V C4 O CL G d Y t9 F C O w. v Q U a) O i a 59 3 Moo o c a ~a) mo aa N~O c?cC\j aUi O O i o OU cn a cis O- a) .0 W-0 CO > 0 2 sa occcco Ea'= -0 E oa U) -4-cc ->0 ~°a~ 0) cco~ c _ ca U) 0 a) 'n a) :3 o« 0n=2mE >E:5 o2ro nscE -0 E T cv O C a E 0 3 c O OO a) c4 (DN O~ m > aa) V.~ m Ya 3U a)-5 :3 06 co coZ o n.cn a) MM o E o.Q to vQi.~ c 3.~ d.Na O O O O o E0 o ~UaE Q Q 3 MoD 60 a~ R ~v co L r c N (D 5 K N w E E (n d O a) o a`) co > ° U Z 0 O E N O N U ~ O U p o O LL w, > N C ~ ~ U L c c o E 06 ns c cu row? E ~c 7 i y o o c cC U ' rn o o c c N !0 j m U V •y to d =p U 7 _V N O Qv.Q cn =3 a d (n c cz t `a) cu ~ a o c -0)n. a) Co a o c cm m CC co a. c Ln 7"O 3 'c f-oCZ CD v Uca.U= E 0 U d 0 a o, N c (D a) ~ m Y i O N M 6 N U N ~ ~ 'O c N N o c ao aa~i '0 cn m .0-o0 cL - 'mE~E C. of o0 o c° o m ao m-_ co=.0 mow°°0aa~E a) - o'N U0 C) )a-' Q) L (~._0U) 00E a uo>on c3 csU O cc' m~ U o m- oo O~ V -0 CL E 0 U) 0 CL a- cc 5S a) F- co m cn o o <n cr ~ Wit`-aEooo°~o= gQ~ ao } ° U o cco aoi o o X V) Cs m me (7 mL ~ y E o o~ ° og 3- ° 3 ° m Eii oU aU ° d cn - C 01 (z 0) C: .6 o° O d N 0~ ca o 3 "U 2 2 m w t 6 N L a) 00- 0v3~occc~oU) -0 U) aCL occv 6~UCC •o ~ m 0 c V o CD d 0. X a, E co U o E O N U ~ O O LL. U) 'd O a M o 0 d a •N aD ~ ~ dQ > a E Y O i d O O 3 p C) O C = N <C L co d a~ o V N O a c a1 Y l4 F- a O Y V Q V O L a s. ca o V) c Q) .s .2 C: cz V) ° - cv co c c _-p _U rocU)c~o,a~ SU >~3 E v ° `o ~ ~3 ° `o c fl c= ro > `o ~ 0 :3 o A) a Y 0-0 '0 o 3: 0 op 0 C m C ._U co o2 M CDm =aai tea) ca in CU 0 Q- 70a) c'z~6o~ ooc w a V o> O 0 ni N 'Q c a) O a~i y a s a) co 3 0-- - °a 1a au ~ ~ co Ea)aDrnoEc R Fyn Y~-0 =3 ycc °m~caoco 0d0U) S°o0 a. -C LL rn -2 X 02 0 -"e ° 2•o ~a o c.o0 co Q):D M> = o N-C crj ac ° ro 0° O E c m -F~ m m o a`~i° o° o En a°io 1 ~-0 ao o -C ~ c m d O as _ 5 O a M 2 w CO U E N O N i 00 O LL + H w a ~ co LO •y Q O CL N 0 = o~ = co a E Y m L CD O U) 3 a rn o c = N m L w a O O V N O •a Y O V a L 0 L a 6 2 Q) O i 'E N 00' .2 CL -2 - ll~ p c - C p Q j V C O in O "y O o~ -2 d: CL CL V o) O a ° Q c c 0O C c c c c cC E W cc i Y co ca O U N 7 .o c` o~ C a a~• M V) a1 '.D L) D L a m co O N U N O p p c E mp a CM M o -Oro c CD C: n ° f° m o 0 0' o % ° •E E F- •N .c c: LL f E O N °d c c 2 N in a m 0 p ai E 0 N 7 O 0 '0 a) '0 0 O .c c O. O -0 O E N L N N cC 0 ° a) N N N fb s a~ D1 m V c a) cn a) ° ai E o o aa))~o° 0 c o'er ° m 0.0 0CL CL c 00 U2000CQcm c0JcnCO F-~ a~ aa. ca d ~a v O Q ~ X a d co U o E N O W i 0 p O LL VI w 'p -gyp O C C Q O O cm •N d 0. O } d N c c a > a E Y ~ L y O O> O C c N {d •L c a a~ N O U CL Y !0 H C O V a d •o a 63 C C •p 2 O C L O CO 0 0 p N (1) i O E 0 'M _C E co N U) U .C U r N C y Q O O O C) W I O 'D O .0 O CD Q. U N 'O C O In N v) CZS N W y o o v 0 m N C ~O 0U) C CO- J Co co a o co w O O)ON O p N U p 0 7 U N } N E N c O 0 0 N 0 C w c c -0 0) :01 U C O N c 7 O O C N O O m~ c mo ".S U ~o ms 3 N E= c v Q) c N.2 5 c C y 0 U° 016 o) ° U mo -b> U in in E o U • • • • • m co a; C U C d Q , Q ~a w m co U 0 E o E N O N i C p O LL 0 (D -gyp L C C Q O O N a •y l9 ~ d Q C fY = t0 a E Y ~ L O O 3 ~ •p 01 O C C N t6 •i (I d d O Yi N O a ~ Y t6 F- C O U Q .r V O O CL U 'C N m j V1 V) N 6 4 C to i j. Y O N O o m E o oa c~ o a -2 E U co 2 o a~ > E = 0)o C\j L N a~ c~~ - (D CZ :3 N 7 m t N CO S m O C U 0 o0.0 1 - O m 0 0) O -p L V) c a U -0 co 0) v va. °cE > 0000>,c .6co cm LU d y m aci ° a) O V) c .o o CO a) E.9 a~ o> wN o_q? ca 3 E o co coN E'- m - c ~L mmo a~ ~ rn - > a 0D r p 0) 0° m 0 b -t- = m co QmU. E N oc °cC: M cn wcui r- ~-0 c °E v).-aa)E>cx a> c - N Q CL co c o c m'a ° c co o(D m 01 N O b N-o c o f 70 co~oN -roo v)-~i~m NQ°c 00 0i CL _Z5 > 75 CL 0 o a) CU - CL a- CL 0 (7) 3~ am as o 0 -0 oU c-0L m.N' 3 ° Z • N • • cco 3L o d -o co m c -a o -o a> N o N U O cz E C y a) r- 00 ua moc O W E N E U V c N .O. O p oU O Y r. V a) p m p Z Q L 3 E N O N U ~ i O = p N O LL. +r ca N w ~ 'fl O O 41 O Q O O Im (D C=D y ~ h N 6 C.) U N cm C ~ a O ~ t0 IC ro L 7 > n, 65 o E Y d 0 co ' Q O O ~ d L _R C N 0 ~ O d 3 c U N O mm a d c Y O F c m C ~ C O m n U o Q iu U Q) o U~ c a O L d ~ m O i C a` 00 m U U. <n s 'C O N Rf U Q L co X N Y 0. U OU O> c 0 Q-0 cu E cu E 75 O a) co N 0 c C -C - co a) ° c ~ F- o N E~ c~°.~ aci~iaa 11 ° o CL o. w O . (n iv cn cn a W~ -0 c00 0c"U(D--c--0 g o 0 O°= a) oU -0 cca~(nc U) ca > > y a)= > U ° ° v, cs_ U 4) CL a- C a) a) 0 o U) N cn~ 0 ~:30 CYVQ °03y o i Y- U U c O ca U - aJ.- N U C - O U cz -5 cti cC M O .N m a E 3 T a) a 3~E LE°w~o ~a)E~ o 0` co E N yw :6 U) > 0 0 OO Y Y O O U O co > O° M O V V a) X30 tea) ~2U~C3nC\la.~acn cA o co o o U G N 0. CD co a) w E N E . O O (D U j O O O Z E N O 0 U O ~ N O O ) O U. fr :z w w -a E ~a co E° O rn Q aD C > -6 0 co o ca -:3 3 > -0 U Q cco Y d O N 3 ~ '8 O C U N O O c C 7 c N c6 >,'E M > co L) Y to a E ~E aa.- V N O ~W E j E V a vCO F 7 c ~c a m o ~0CO C y~a(D O 0 N= a Q a) E .E 'co o E L a) (D a 0m0o a>) oo UoCU 0~ 02~ O O p _ 0. E i ~ t h O CL o ~ m cri cc _0 70 '0 6 N ~ N O c6 a E c c O m T CL N Z U` 0 0 LL D Q 0) CD ~ R y E d O p' CL -a _ = O = LL LL LL N V1 co m cC cd ca - c ro00 000 M00 C N a) ro 00 M 00 MC 00 _ U N U N U N N E 702 -0 a) E Ca CO O = _ - _ - _ - U cn co m .S m .S o r ro o~ co co me a o may V O N N 00 c 0 co 0.0) o ~-0 o K y WE a~Ei o(E N~oa .moo c U aai a) co i cacm o °o aa)aa) 0 O CA N Cn o cr U E N U y 70 T U w co O E C O LL r o O y o y O c p i C c O O C "d N Q O LT 0 7 } Q y d 0) IL LL O y y C LL } ca U E Y Y CL IL Y 3 O co 0 o N N O c > L O C c N m L) 0 I a ? 6- R-~ E Y c N o m o 0 N O o i N ~ O -0 co o a. a aci x o in c m c O co o _0 0 -6 CC a Q) V Q. O c a)0 N a) V d Q -0O C a Q 0) Q o o f o a 6 U° O0 U c5 E 5 (D ,o a _ c 1 a) (o r! a) a co a) 6 E CL 0-0 O L O m O E c c J N 0 N c O O 0) U) U a c0 Q O cp L. L rorro ~2 ~a~Qco U a) co a) QC O XL UY to C U cn 00 a) O CD ` L N 0 0 cn c4 = N O OU N 2 a) 0 3 E 0)) O N 3 U p C d« CL O p i N co E 075 O CZ Y a) a) L a`> <n co co ° 3 3 a) 0E 00.5 °o > Ua=~3 N Q co d N d M a) co N CN c a) i p >L p (D p ao rn u N E~ 'O 0) LL-0 >C E 3 UNN H Q Ucc U 00 O co O 00 co O N O N O N N > N ` O L a) N a) E E a) E E N a) O O a Q > > > co (D a) 0 L) 0 0 ° C~ cn z 0 z z E N E O U A U L O U. N O ro ~ D CL C a) rn co co ro = c c_ c ro c ~ ~ ~ > d Y Y > Cn E Y 7 i O 7 3 E `n fo U c 0 0 O1 O c O p C N c 0 Q O a) Q) d O c d co p io O U (o Y O U N N O c .OU 0. CL Q .0 p U d E 0 a U t: ro U O 10 p CL X O c p a Q .C c 0 Q) C O a) y c N a) cr V m p = O co d E N E Q CL a) C: ca 3 ?Ym E E~ aifl ca cn ° cn > 3 U c y o ~ a~ U c c ro U C i N ro ~ U R _7 d •O. O v> > a t: ao of 68 (1) c U z o a a, Q 0 (1) 3 0~ c c o N 2 N CL cz 3co (n Q) N O Q .C O Y E CD 0) M m ac a) (C6 c U Q U 0--o co O O N y _ N 7 E O O E N o io U ~ U L O O U. y w 'O Q M E cn a> U) c rn a> c c w C > CL E o N co 7 tm p 2 C N Q. i <O C Y C V CV fti U 'a Nw a a N ao> M. a) N -0 d co U) O y U) d L a a~ c c a 0 r City O¢ Cop-p.~o - U 69 PICKERING MEMO To: Debi Wilcox June 24, 2009 City Clerk From: Stephen Reynolds - - Division Head, Culture & Recreation Copy: Chief Administrative Officer (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Director, Operations & Emergency Services Supervisor, Culture & Recreation Laura Drake, Chair, Pickering Museum Advisory Committee Subject: Request to De-Accession Artifacts at Pickering Museum Village File: A1440 tLF~ At the May 4, 2009 meeting of the Pickering Museum Advisory Committee, staff were requested to present a motion for Council endorsement with respect to the de-accessioning of the following artifacts. 8 Sewing Machines 1 Side Saddle 1 Washing Machine 1 Push Mower These artifacts no longer fit within the mandate of the Pickering Museum Village. As per the Collection Management Policy, artifacts belonging to the Pickering Museum Village may be assessed and deemed to not fit within the mandate of the Museum. After such assessment, the artifact may be recommended for de-accessioning by the Education & Collections Officer. In May 2009, the Education & Collections Officer recommended the de- accessioning of a specific list of artifacts (please see attached). The Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee approved a motion to de-accession these artifacts. Council approval is required before the disposal of these artifacts can be completed. Therefore, at this time, approval is requested of Council to de-accession the list of artifacts as recommended by City staff and approved by the Pickering Museum Advisory Committee. City staff will follow the process for disposal of these artifacts as outlined in the Collections Management Policy (attached). SR`Ig Attachments bnji" -+-0 ~GCc_~ 70 ~cxo ox oo vo rncTia ~*NO co DZ DZ~Z> zo (D OJ n vo n OJ » = (n a --4 v a VO 7 0 = o g O IV C C A G7 C = N C 1 C O C O C N: LU (D Co (D -p O (D IV (D O Q~ N O (D O N O ~.0 CD i-, C: 3 CL N co N (D ODD (O V O co Q A Yk j Sk j O (O E! R m 0- C)- CL (D a (D m m -t °c 3-i 3~ (n G' 3D CD =r (D CD CD w - 2 N 3 a cn o F(o c 0 5=r (a , ° a° o. n 0 0 CD (n cl ~3 53 "(n' m N (D 3 M3 r- w w m w m w 0 w u ° m w O w w m ° c s s 3' Q m ° f 3 s 3 A' f n m m N n CD _0 CD (D CD o cc 3'w wz 3 Xo~ o3c0~ 3,yKo g < < Q N (D .Q N' a O w ~ N a w N N y a w 27 W (D 0. C (D 0 CL C: CL m CD vu CD CD 0 :3 =3 C: :3 CD 0 _ 3: C o o 5. ° 0~ o m m ° _3 3 ° 3 N p' CA , , 3 . O 3 N. - 7 ~ , 3 W w T 3 _ ° a N 3 O w O 0 (D. :3 n Q N O w a (D a (D N a c N 3 (D ° a° ° N c :3 (a N ~7 m (D j am. N (D CD (D ~ 0 N _ w 00 °a a J ~ y v°, 'm°a N O O °O (D j f0D N to w w w L u. m w w w L I). c r O W: o' m m (~D (~D (D (D N N (p (D (D 4.. (Jf U) N (A N N N N y V/ N y Cum m c O (D ~ m m 7J m 3] a Z a Z 4 Z a Z a Z O- Z 9- Z z (D (D (D (D y O N O N O N O N 0 0 0 w 0 0 '8 CD -0 ID CD `G d Q ) 0 O y O (n O y N N N p 0 p p N p Ai p N p o O O O w w a a a a D3 D3 > 3 -0 3 D3> 3> 3 0 'a 'R O W W W W W 7 W W 3 O= O= O= O= O- 0 = 0= (D W w w w CD N Op N Op N p N 0 N 0 N `O N D D D D to v Co V (D v cD ~ (p ~ (p v ( v a o 0 0 0 0 o O` o (D w (O (D (O w (D 0 0 o c m m 0 0 0 0 ° ° ° ° a ° a 0 0 co (°D Co (o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 Cull o ~Jt i }~I a M lJ 41 t1 M ~ Me Collections Management Policy As a responsible steward of those artifacts in its possession, the Pickering Museum Village will establish procedures for, and maintain proper documentation of, the acquisition, use and de- accessioning of those artifacts. As part of that documentation, all pertinent information regarding the history of the artifacts will be recorded and preserved. Guidelines 1. The Collections Officer will be responsible for maintaining all records relating to management of the collection. The Collection Committee will review the management of the collection annually. 2. Acceptance of any artifact will be approved by the Collections Officer and/or the Collections Committee according to the parameters set out in the Collections Development Policy. 3. Once accepted into the collection, the artifact will be entered into the Collections Register, giving the date of accessioning, the artifact number, a brief description of the object and the name of the donor. 4. As part of the acquisition of any artifact, a donor form signed by the donor will be completed to establish the Museum's ownership of the object. In the case of a purchase, the purchase receipt or copy will be kept in the master file. 5. A master file will be kept for each donation or purchase. It will contain: i. The original documentation of the purchase or donation along with any notes on the provenance of the object(s). Such provenance must be capable of verification. Where such information is not verifiable, due note must be made. ii. A catalogue tracking form that is used to ensure all steps of the process are completed. iii. Any other documentation provided by the donor, such as pictures, evaluations, etc. 6. Two cataloguing systems will be maintained, one for the "core" collection and a separate inventory for the "program" collection. In order to differentiate the systems, all "core" artifacts will have a number beginning with "X" and all "program" artifacts with an "R". 7. All new acquisitions will be catalogued using the Access to Collections software provided through the Ontario Museum Association and using the Chenhall nomenclature for classification. 8. A photographic record will be kept of all new acquisitions as part of the cataloguing process. 9. Previously accessioned artifacts will also be entered into this system. Photographic records will be created as they are added into the electronic catalogue system. July 2(X)1 Updated: June 2002 l)AIMM ORS K,-dM.3006 Pkknnn, Murum Yillagnl.L:NIN)-fX)I-05 Pic4•ring Mnr.•nmlNlnxum Poli<ie!C:nikaion NI-g-, Yuli yhi 72 10.A hard copy of all catalogue records will be maintained in the storage area of the Puterbaugh Schoolhouse and the electronic records will be backed up on the City of Pickering computer server that is accessible to the Museum. 11. Catalogue numbers will be affixed to artifacts in a manner that will prevent damage to or deterioration of the object. Canadian Conservation Institute guidelines for marking different materials will be used for this process. 12. As part of the recording system, a location file will be kept for each building and storage area and cross-referenced on the catalogue entry for each artifact. 13. Loans to other recognized institutions may be approved for a set period of time providing the institution can ensure handling, storage and display will meet requirements to safeguard the artifacts. This will include proper environmental controls and security precautions for both storage and display and returning the objects as packaged by Pickering Museum Village. The borrowing institution will be responsible for the cost of packaging, shipping and adequate insurance coverage. 14. Incoming loans will be discouraged except for the purpose of a temporary exhibition or a specific research or educational project. 15. For both outgoing and incoming loans, a condition assessment, with photographic documentation, will be required by Pickering Museum Village at the time of the loan. 16. Where applicable, the Museum will follow all guidelines and maintain records required by municipal, provincial or federal statutes, such as for firearms or hazardous materials that may be held in the collection. 17. The Collections Officer will ensure that all staff and volunteers employed in the cataloguing process have been trained in the purpose and proper procedures of the system. July 2(X)1 Updated: June 2002 i X2()8 OF.;S R-,rWS-AN) Ii, krnng M-'- VilWNW-30M}(M)1-05R.krnng Mw•um\MuH;um NA,6,.K04ka6on Munagc- P,Awy.i4. Collections Management Policy - Guidelines (corit'd) 73 18. Using the Statement of Purpose and the parameters set out in the Collection Development Policy, artifacts may be assessed and deemed to not fit the mandate of the Museum.. After such assessment, the artifact may be recommended for de-accessioning by the Collections Officer. Such recommendation must be approved by the Advisory Committee and then forwarded to Council for approval. (see Disposal of Artifacts for steps to be followed once an artifact is de-accessioned.) 19. Artifacts which are of specific significance to recognizable cultural, ethnic or religious groups may be returned to such groups upon their request under specific guidelines. Such groups must be able to assure the Museum that the object is integral to the beliefs or culture of the group and that they are able to provide proper care of the object according to accepted conservation methods. Return of such objects will be approved by the Museum Advisory Committee and approved by Council. 20.A catalogue of de-accessioned artifacts will be maintained and will contain the original catalogue information, documentation of the reason(s) for de-accessioning and approval, and documentation of the disposal of the artifact. Note will be made with the original entry in the Collection Register of the date of de-accessioning. Disposal of Artifacts Once an artifact has been de-accessioned according to the Guidelines of the Collections Management Policy, the following procedure for disposal will be used.* a) The Museum will make all reasonable efforts to inform the registered donor or family (if donor is deceased) that the object is to be disposed of and that they will be given one month from the date of notice in which to reply if they desire the object returned to them. b) Following such period, other local museums will be notified of the object's availability and c) The Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Recreation's Museum Section will be given the option of including the object on the Provincial Donor's List. Providing all of these steps have been followed, the object may then be offered for sale to the public by whatever vehicle the Collection Committee sees as necessary. No member of the Collection Committee, the Museum Advisory Committee or the Museum staff will be allowed to purchase the object. *If however, an artifact is in a total state of disrepair as determined by a professional conservator, then the artifact may be destroyed. 1. The Museum will comply with all municipal, provincial and federal guidelines regarding Guidelines July 2(N)l Updated: June 2002 0A2WM ORS R-11dA6-30W Nckering Muvnin Village\ti-;NIRU-IN)I-(!S Fi,k.•nng Mu.•.nm\.4lnscum Polici.•.1('alkuion MunaEmnwni Yolicy.Nr City o~ ICI DICKERING MEMO 74 To: Debi Wilcox July 6, 2009 City Clerk From: Stephen Reynolds Division Head, Culture & Recreation Copy: Chief Administrative Officer (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Director, Operations & Emergency Services Supervisor, Culture & Recreation Laura Drake, Chair, Pickering Museum Advisory Committee Subject: Request to Expand Mandated Time Period at Pickering Museum Village File: A1440 At the May 14, 2009 meeting of the Pickering Museum Advisory Committee, staff were requested to present a motion for Council endorsement with respect to expanding the museum's mandated time period to include Pickering Township's development from 1810 to 1920. Currently, the museum's mandated time period spans 1830 to 1910. Katrina Pyke, Education & Collections Officer has recommended the expansion of this mandated time period. The Pickering Museum Village is the community's only museum and it already cares for artifacts outside of its mandate. These pre-history artifacts and artifacts that pre-date 1830 are valuable pieces of our community's material culture that should not be denied preservation or conservation. As the community ages and matures, so too should the museum's time period of collection and interpretation. The First World War is no longer within the collective public's memory, and is therefore a part of our community's history that should be preserved. Certainly, Pickering Township sent soldiers to support England's involvement. WWI is a significant part of the mandatory Grade 10 history curriculum, as is the aftermath of the war. The museum's mandate should expand so the museum's compliment of Education Programs can include this important time period. As Pickering's Bicentennial approaches, the museum will be an integral part of the community's celebrations. The mandated time period should not exclude 1811 and thereby preclude the Pickering Museum Village from the collection, preservation and interpretation of the inception of Pickering Township dated March 4, 1811. ,t The Pickering Museum Advisory Committee approved a motion to expand this mandated time period. Therefore, at this time, approval is requested of Council to expand the museum's mandated time period to include Pickering. Township's development from 1810 to 1920 as recommended by City staff and approved by the Pickering Museum Advisory Committee. n SR:mc July 6, 2009 Page 2 Request to Expand Mandated Time Period at Pickering Museum Village 7 C oR(~ . June 15, 2009 The Honourab altos McGuinty, Premier Legislative ilding The Regional Queen' ark Municipality of Durham Tor o, Ontario A 1A1 Office of the Regional Chair 605 ROSSLAND ROAD E. Dear Premier- PO BOX 623 WHITBY ON L1N 6A3 CANADA As directed by Durham Regional Council, I am writing to express our 905-668-7711 alarm at the continuing loss of services from local hospitals in Durham 1-800-372-1102 Region. The between the services required for our and Fax:905-668-1567 gap growing Email: roger.anderson@ aging population and the services available continues to widen. region.durham.on.ca Under the direction of the Central East LHIN, it appears our local www.region.durham.on.ca hospital service capacity is being whittled away, one specialty at a time. Roger M. Anderson Regional Chair These reductions may help the hospital corporations meet Provincial financial targets. However, the savings are achieved by externalizing costs onto vulnerable patients, their families, ambulance services, other health care providers and municipalities. In a region growing as quickly as Durham, the LHINs and the Province. should be expanding health services to meet the needs of population forecast in the Growth Plan. Instead, the CE LHIN is trying to catch up to existing demand at overtaxed facilities. They are playing a shell game with inadequate resources, cutting and consolidating, trying to put the best face on a bad situation. But it's an illusion. Ongoing contraction of services has been our experience in Durham. The most obvious example is the Lakeridge Whitby Hospital. This - --facility, located in a town of over 100,000 people, went from full -bW _ ___services to more limited service, to removal of the family health clinic, then closure as a result of a fire two years ago. Although the fire _-w.._- amage has been repaired, the doors remain closed. Farber this year, Ccurcil asked the Rouge Valley Hospita! Corporation _ and the CE LHIN to appear at Council and explain their decision to move move nine mental health beds from the Ajax-Pickering site to Centenary Hospital. The Durham community vigorously OR i '~04 131 . -P protested this "consolidation" which came not long after an earlier fight excellence for our Communities M d 100% Post Consumer 1 of 4 77 to retain pediatric care at the Ajax-Pickering location. There was a similar a battle to retain services at the Lakeridge Health Port Perry site. However if is a planned change to the Lakeridge Bowmanville site that prompts this letter. The Bowmanville Hospital has already lost its maternity ward to the Lakeridge Oshawa site. The most recent community protest involves the proposed removal of 24 hour internal medicine specialty services from the Lakeridge Bowmanville Hospital site as of July 1, 2009. Recently, a delegation of Bowmanville's ER doctors appeared at Regional Council to inform us that this change will severely impair the ability of the Bowmanville Hospital to delivery emergency medical care. Reducing the scope of care available at the Bowmanville ER will .require transfers of severely ill patients to other hospitals, placing additional demands, costs and risks on the Region's ambulance operations. If removal of the internal medicine capacity is a precursor to changing the status of the Bowmanville ER to that of an urgent care operation, it would no longer be an acute care facility. This was an early step in the demise of the Whitby Hospital. Without acute care status, ambulances would completely bypass the Bowmanville facility, resulting in longer travel times and higher costs to the Region's Emergency Medical Service. The attached resolution passed by Council on June 3rd speaks to this threat to the internist service at Bowmanville, but as I have outlined, this is just part of a broader concern. The pattern of service reductions at the local level in favour of consolidating at the larger hospitals has become very familiar, so you can understand our fears about the future. As we see it in Durham Region, there are four key problems. The first is the fundamental under-resourcing of hospitals in the 905 region, both in terms of capital and operating costs. It is urgent that the Province implement a funding solution that recognizes the rapid growth in our communities and funds our hospitals accordingly. The second is the massive geography of the Central East LHIN that illogically links distant communities with very different characteristics and needs. The fallacy of the L1-11 System is that it allows for "local" planning of the health system. Considering an area that stretches from Haliburton to Scarborough to be "local" is a delusion. This approach does not reflect the focus for other health services that a hospital 2 of 4 f + provides to its immediate community or the value that the community derives. This leads to the third issue: the inappropriate LHIN boundaries. Inclusion of parts of Scarborough in the CE LHIN is completely illogical and has the effect of skewing service delivery patterns. Scarborough is part of Toronto and should not be part of the CE LHIN. It is not geographically or jurisdictionally related to neighbouring Durham and has even less connection to the rest of the LHIN region. While Durham residents may have to access specialized services in Scarborough, Scarborough residents are not coming to Durham for care. They access the wealth of nearby, specialized services in Toronto. The fourth issue is lack of accountability to the local community for decisions on relocation of hospital services. Much of the funding for hospital expansion and equipment has been raised by the community, so it is not surprising that our citizens are demanding "say for pay". Because of threats to local services, Durham Council has reconsidered its commitments to hospital capital funding. Council has made a special effort to establish regular communications with the LHIN and hospital boards in the past few months. Recently, Council passed motions requesting that the hospitals include Regional representatives on their Boards. Both hospital corporations rejected this proposal. The accountability problem does not stop there. The Durham community also feels there is little accountability from the Province. For example, when asked about the future of the Whitby site, the LHIN tells us it is in the hands of the Province and the Province directs.us to the LHIN. This type of response damages credibility and erodes public faith in both organizations. In Durham, we place a high value on our hospitals. We value the services they provide; we appreciate the dedication of the staff and administration; we understand they are facing the difficult job of improving care with limited resources. Regional Council fully supported development of the Regional Cancer Centre with a donation of $10 million. We are grateful to have it in place and caring for patients closer to home. The community has proven it is willing to fundraise and fight for our hospitals. As a growing region, we cannot afford to watch needed services at our local hospitals die "by a thousand cuts". 3 of 4 79 No Ontario community is more aware of the current economic pressures facing your government than Durham Region. Even so, we implore you and your cabinet colleagues to ensure that health services and treatment in Durham's local hospitals will be enhanced, not reduced or withdrawn, and that the hospital funding formula will be revised to address the growth in Durham. Yours truly, Roger Anderson Regional Chair Attachment c: The Honourable David Caplan, Minister of Health and Long-term Care The Honourable George Smitherman, Minister of Energy and Infrastructure Mr. Wayne Arthurs, MPP (Pickering/Scarborough East) Ms. Christine Elliott, MPP (Whitby/Oshawa) Mr. John O'Toole, MPP (Durham) Mr. Jerry Ouellette, MPP (Oshawa) Mr. Rick Johnson,MPP (Haliburton-Kawartha Lakes-Brock) Mr. Joe Dickson, MPP (Ajax/Pickering) Ms. J. Munro, MPP (York-Simcoe) Mr. L. Rinaldi, MPP (North umberland-Quinte West) Mr. K. Empey, CEO, Lakeridge Health Corporation Mr. Foster Loucks, Chair, Central East LHIN Mr. M. de Rond, Clerk, Town of Ajax Mr. T. Gettinby, Clerk, Township of Brock Ms. P. Barrie, Clerk, Municipality of Clarington Ms. S. Kranc, Clerk, City of Oshawa Ms. D. Wilcox, Clerk, City of Pickerinq~ Ms. K. Coates, Clerk, Township of Scugog Ms. D. Leroux, Clerk, Township of Uxbridge Mr. P. Jones, Clerk, Town of Whitby Ms. P. Madill, Regional Clerk R. - Commissioner A 1 Dr. R. Kyle, and rvAledical OfFft. icer of Health 4 of 4 80 Excerpt from the Minutes of June 3, 2009 of Regional Council MOVED by Councillor Abernethy, SECONDED by Councillor Trim, (194) "WHEREAS the Government of Ontario has acknowledged the growing funding gaps for hospital services in high growth communities within the Province; AND WHEREAS with the Ontario Government's welcomed announcement of two new nuclear reactors and upgrades at Darlington NGS, the rapid past years' growth will continue and become even greater; AND WHEREAS there is great fear that the Lakeridge Health Bowmanville Hospital will become a first aid station only in the future, losing its ability to provide acute care to Clarington residents; AND WHEREAS the Lakeridge Health Oshawa Hospital will then become the health centre for all citizens of Clarington. AND WHEREAS Lakeridge Health Bowmanville has already lost its maternity ward to Oshawa; AND WHEREAS the Council of.the Region of Durham, the general public, doctors and staff at Lakeridge Bowmanville are greatly concerned as to the future services and treatment that will be available at Lakeridge Health Bowmanville; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of the Regional Municipality of Durham plead with the Provincial Government, the LHIN's, Lakeridge Health and the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care to ensure that services and treatment will be enhanced and not reduced nor withdrawn from the Bowmanville site; and THAT this resolution and a letter from the Regional Chair requesting support be forwarded to the Premier of Ontario, Minister of Health and Long Term Care; Minister of Energy and Infrastructure; Chairpersons of the LHINs; Lakeridge Health Bowmanville; John O'Toole, MPP for Durham; Wayne Arthurs, MPP, Pickering-Scarborough East; Joe Dickson, MPP, Ajax-Pickering; Christine Elliot, MPP, Whitby-Oshawa; Julia Munro, MPP, York-Simcoe; Jerry Ouellette, MPP, Oshawa; Louis Rinaldi, MPP, Northumberland-Quinte West; and all the 8 area municipalities for the Region of Durham." CARRIED - In* The Corporation of the Town Hall 51 Toronto Street South Township P.O. Box 190 1 Uxbridge, ON L9P 1T1 o Telephone (905) 852-918t Facsimile (905) 852-9674 Uxbric e web www.town.uxbridge.on.ea In The Regional Munieipalky of Durham June 22"d, 2009 City of Pickering 1 The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario L1V 6K7 Attention: Debi A. Wilcox Clerk- RE: SUPPORT FOR THE PRESERVATION OF THE ALTONA INN TOWNSHIP FILE NO. GP-204.1.9.2 Please be advised that during the regular meeting of Council on June 22nd, 2009 the following motion was carried; THAT Council for the Township of Uxbridge support the actions being taken by the Heritage Uxbridge Committee to preserve and protect the Altona Inn; AND THAT Council forward a letter to Transport Canada lobbying for protection of the Inn from demolition and requesting that the allotted funding by Transport Canada for the demolition of the Inn be re-directed for the immediate restoration of the Inn roof; AND THAT Council accept the completed Heritage evaluations of the Inn and initiate the designation of the inn under the Ontario Heritage Act; AND THAT Council request letters of support from York Region, Whitchurch-Stouffville, Markham, Pickering, area MP's and MPP's as well as Parks Canada for the protection and preservation of the Inn." trust you will find the above to be satisfactory. TO: Yours truly, v_ -.r. _ ,.a........... Debbie Leroux Clerk /IjrMa r • arm n ~ ~ . ~--e ergizing Ontario June 18, 2009 The Honourable Leona Dombrowsky Minister of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs 1 Stone Road West Guelph ON N1G 4Y2 Dear Honourable Madam: RE: GIANT HOGWEED FILE NO.: EOO.GE At a meeting held on June 15, 2009, the Council of the Municipality of Clarington passed the following resolutions #GPA-427-09: 'WHEREAS Giant Hogweed is a dangerous and noxious weed; WHEREAS the inclusion of Giant Hogweed on the noxious weeds list will allow municipalities to better control this weed; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLOVED THAT the Municipality of Clarington request the Minister of Agriculture Food and Rural Affairs to add Giant Hogweed to the noxious weeds list as soon as possible; and THAT this motion be forwarded to Durham Area Municipalities and John O'Toole, MPP." Yours truly, w Patti Barrie, --WO Municipal Clerk K •~'Cti~;~~~~~'~ h PB*mea T . f C: Durham Area Municipalities John O'Toole, MPP I CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 C*,q 8 3 AL Aa, ICI i July 13, 2009 PICKERIN COMMITTEE REPORTS a) REPORT JT 2009-01 OF THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE PAGES PART `A' PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORTS 1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 20-09 1-74 Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-01 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 1/08 Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited Part Lots 17 & 18, Concession 3 City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION 1. That Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-01 submitted by Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited, to permit a plan of subdivision on lands being on Part Lots 17 & 18, Concession 3, and subject to the comments of Report PD 20-09, as amended, reflecting the addition of Lots 2, 3, 24, 25, 26 and 27 be endorsed; 2. That the proposed conditions of draft plan of subdivision to implement Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-01 as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 20-09, be endorsed; 3. That prior to Council's consideration of the implementing zoning by-law, the owner provide the City with a letter of commitment with respect to the nature and timing of the development of the mixed use block adjacent to Brock Road; and 4. Further, that Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 1/08 submitted by Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited, to amend the zoning of the subject property to implement Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2008-01, as outlined in Appendix II to Report PD 20-09 be endorsed. 2. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 21-09 75-89 Proposed Rogers Wireless Cell Tower Installation and Land Lease Sideline 34, Between Regional Road 27 (Whitevale Road) and Highway 407 City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION 4 1. That Report 21-09 of the Director, Planning & Development, requested by City Council through Correspondence CORR 29-09, be received; 2. That a By-law be enacted to authorize the Mayor and the Clerk to execute a Lease Agreement with Rogers Wireless ("Rogers"), substantially on the terms set out in this Report, in a form satisfactory to the City Solicitor and the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer and Rogers Wireless for those lands consisting of part of the road allowance between Lots 34 and 35, Concession 5 (Sideline 34, north of Regional Road 27 (Whitevale Road)), for the purposes of installing and maintaining communications equipment; and, 3. Further, that the Director, Planning & Development be authorized to provide Industry Canada with a letter of support for this cell tower installation, on Sideline 34 between Regional Road 27 (Whitevale Road) and Highway 407, following the execution of the lease agreement. 3. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 22-09 90-111 City Response to Seaton Natural Heritage System Management Plan and Master Trails Plan - Final Report, October 2008, prepared by Schollen & Company Inc. for Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 22-09 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the Seaton Natural Heritage System Management Plan and Master Trails Plan, Final Report (SNHSMP & MTP - the Management Plan), prepared by Schollen & Company Inc. and Associates, dated October 2008, be received; 2. That the comments contained in Report PD 22-09 on the SNHSMP & MTP be endorsed and that Council advise the Ministers of Municipal Affairs and Housing and Energy and Infrastructure that: a) in implementing the' Plan; (i) no costs should be borne by existing City taxpayers for the Natural Heritage System (NHS) restoration or for the on and off-road trails in the neighbourhoods, in light of the high standards expected; (ii) establishment of a separate Heritage Committee for Seaton needs further review; and, (iii) since renewable energy facilities are permissible uses within the NHS, a management strategy should be identified for this purpose and be reflected in the preparation of restoration/revegetation plans for the NHS lands; b) the City supports; (i) use of the Management Plan as a guide for a sustainable Seaton NHS as the report is a comprehensive and well thought-out prescription to ~i achieve long-term objectives for the restoration of an expanded natural heritage system, construction of a trail system in the NHS and to fulfill cultural heritage objectives in the NHS; (ii) retention of the NHS lands in public ownership over the long-term; (iii) establishment of a First Nations Interpretive Centre; and, (iv) continued City involvement in discussions and decisions on a future management structure, plans and programs for the Seaton natural heritage system, trails network and cultural heritage programs, including the role of Heritage Pickering. 3. That Council request the Ministers of Municipal Affairs and Housing and Energy and Infrastructure to expand the range of uses permissible within the NHS to include recreational uses such as parks and playfields in those lands that buffer the key natural heritage features; and, 4. Further, that a copy of Report PD 22-09 and Pickering Council's resolution on this matter be forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, Ontario Realty Corporation, the Region of Durham, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee, and the Seaton Trail Management Plan Steering Committee. 4. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 23-09 112-160 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 7/08 S. Golvin & JMPM Holdings Inc. Part of Lot 19, Range 3 B.F.C. (Part 1, 40R-10527 and Part 1, 40R-8832) City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 23-09 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 7/08 be approved to broaden the range of permitted mixed employment uses for the subject property including offices, personal service uses, sales outlets, and various light industrial uses on lands being Part of Lot 19, Range 3 B.F.C., Part 1, 40R-10527 and Part 1, 40R-8832; 3. That the zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 7/08, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 23-09, as amended reflecting- the deletion of Item (2)(d)(vi) of the draft by-law, be forwarded to City Council for enactment; and 4. Further, that Council authorize the Chief Administrative Officer to negotiate with the owners of the subject lands (known as Part of Lot 19, Range 3 B.F.C., identified as Part 1, 40R-10527 and Part 1, 40R-8832) to acquire a 86 portion of the property for public stormwater management purposes, and report back to Council on the general terms and conditions of a possible land purchase. PART `B' EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 17-09 198-260 2008 Year End Audit RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report CS 17-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the Audit Results Report as submitted by Deloitte & Touche LLP be received for information; and, 3. That the 2008 draft Audited Consolidated Financial Statements for the City of Pickering be forwarded to Council for approval. 2. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 21-09 261-263 Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act - Adjustment to Taxes RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report CS 21-09 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, 2001 be approved; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto. 3. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 23-09 264-267 Tow Truck "Anti-Chasing" Amendment to Traffic & Parking By-law 6604/05 RECOMMENDATION Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor McLean 1. That Report CS 23-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 87 2. That the draft Tow Truck Anti-Chasing By-law, included as Attachment 1, providing restrictions regarding tow trucks within the City of Pickering, be enacted; and, 3. That the appropriate staff of the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto. 4. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 37-09 278-285 Tender for Facilities Cleaning Services - Tender No. T-3-2009 RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 37-09 from the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding Facilities Cleaning Services Ltd. be received; 2. That Tender No. T-3-2009 submitted by Arsenal Cleaning Services Ltd. for facilities cleaning services, in the amount of $115,104 plus GST for year 1 and $118,578 plus GST for year 2 be approved subject to the annual review and extension to the contract by the Manager, Supply & Services for the following facilities: Pickering Municipal Facilities Pickering Public Libraries Operations Centre Main Branch East Shore Community Centre Claremont Branch Fire Hall #5 (Administration Office) Greenwood Branch Petticoat Creek Branch Whitevale Branch 3. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. 5. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 40-09 286-293 Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer -Haul Roads RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 40-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer associated haul routes be received; 2. That the City of Pickering approves of the use of Scarborough-Pickering Townline Road, Rosebank Road, Fairport Road, Dixie Road and Third Concession Road as described in and subject to the conditions outlined in Report OES 40-09 as haul routes for the construction of the Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer; and 3. That a copy of Report OES 40-09 be sent to the Region of York and the Region of Durham. 6. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 41-09 294-298 Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance Environmental Assessment -Status Update RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 41-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services concerning the Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance Environmental Assessment be received for information; 2. That both the East and West breakwater walls be proposed and built fully accessible and included as part of the preferred alternative submitted with the EA documents; and 3. That Council endorse the submission of the Draft Environmental Study Report (ESR) to the Ministry of the Environment. 7. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 42-09 299-307 Roof Replacement - Pickering Public Library and Fire Hall #2 -Tender No. T-12-2009 RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 42-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding Roof Replacement at Pickering Public Library and Fire Hall #2 be received; 2. That Tender T-12-2009 submitted by Crawford Roofing Corporation at a cost of $214,200 (GST included) be accepted; 3. That staff be authorized to negotiate with the low bidder to undertake the additional roofing work at Petticoat Creek and Whitevale Library, at a cost not to exceed the project costing as outlined in the report; 4. That the total gross project cost of $259,350 (GST included) and a net project cost of $247,000 including the tender amount and other associated costs be approved; 5. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) the sum of $65,000, as provided for in the 2009 approved Capital Budget for Fire Services, to be financed through property taxes; b) the sum of $74,000 as provided for in the 2009 approved Capital Budget for Libraries-Central & Whitevale and Petticoat Creek Library and Community Centre, to be financed through Provincial Grants- Investing in Ontario; c) the amount of $100,000, as provided for in the 2009 approved Capital Budget for Library-Central, to be financed through Federal Gas Tax funding; d) the additional amount of $8,000 for Petticoat Creek Library and Community Centre Roof Rehabilitation to be funded from Federal Gas Tax; e) the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary in order to affect the foregoing; and 6. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. 90 July 13, 2009 NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS PAGES 1. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 26-09 95-190 2009 Development Charges Study for the City of Pickerinq RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report CS 26-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the Development Charges Background Study dated May 22, 2009 as amended July 6, 2009 prepared by Watson and Associates Economists Ltd. as required under Section 10(1) of the Development Charges Act, 1997 and this report be approved; 3. That the Residential Development Charges for the unit types as included in Table 1 below be approved to be imposed on a uniform basis effective August 1, 2009: TABLE 1 CITY OF PICKERING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES Per Residential Dwelling Unit Effective August 1, 2009 APARTMENTS SINGLE & ALL TWO ONE SEMI- OTHER BEDROOM BEDROOM SERVICE DETACHED DWELLING & LARGER & SMALLER UNITS Development - related 87 62 47 35 Studies Fire Protection 259 186 140 103 Transportation - Roads & Related 4,516 3,241 2,445 1,793 Operations 278 200 150 110 Stormwater 1,365 980 739 542 Management Parks & Recreation - Parkland Dev. & 424 304 229 168 Trails 2,249 1,614 1,217 893 Recreation Facilities Library 516 370 279 205 TOTAL 9,694 6,957 5,246 3,849 191 4. That the Non-Residential (Commercial, Industrial and Institutional) Development Charge remain at $30.78 per square metre ($2.86 per square foot) effective August 1, 2009 to June 30, 2010 and effective July 1, 2010 at the rate of $31.97 per square metre ($2.97 per square foot). This represents the charge for roads and related services only; 5. That the proposed capital programs contained in the Background Study be indicative of Council's intention to ensure that the studies and capital expenditures required to meet the increase in need for services related to the forecasted development will be met, as required under Paragraph 3 of subsection 5(1) of the Development Charges Act, 1997; INDEXING 6. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be directed that residential and non-residential Development Charges may be indexed annually on July 1 each year by applying the annual change in the Statistics Canada Quarterly "Construction Price Statistics" to March 31 of each year, unless otherwise approved by Council; EXEMPTIONS 7. That all exemptions and exceptions be as required under the Development Charges Act, 1997 and as defined in the proposed By-law; TRANSITION PROVISION 8. That any bona fide and complete residential permit applications received prior to August 1, 2009 and non-residential permit applications received prior to July 1, 2010 will be subject to the development charge rates that prevail prior to this effective date; ADMINISTRATION 9. That the City continue the Reserve established for the City's share (ie. the non-development charge portion) of the costs of services included in the Development Charges Study and that contributions be included in the Annual Current Budget for consideration by Council; 10. That the originally proposed By-law has been modified since the public meeting on June 8, 2009, and Council confirms that no further public meeting under the Development Charges Act, 1997 (S.12) is necessary as a result; 11. That the Clerk of the City of Pickering be instructed to undertake the By-law passage notification provisions under the Development Charges Act, 1997 and Ontario Regulation 82198; 12. That the By-law attached to this report be read three times and approved at this meeting of Council; and, 13. That the appropriate staff of the City of Pickering be authorized to give effect thereto. 9 2 2. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 14-09 191-289 Updated Sign By-law At the June 15, 2009 meeting of Council the matter of Report CS 14-09 was referred back to staff for further investigation on regulations regarding Mobile Signs. [Refer to the attached memorandum dated June 29, 2009 from the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to the City Solicitor with respect to this matter] RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report CS 14-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the proposed sign by-law, included as Attachment #1, providing regulations for signs erected within the City of Pickering, be enacted; and 3. Further, that the appropriate staff of the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto. 3. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 34-09 290-300 Re: Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two - Tender T-10-2009 for Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES-34-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two be received; 2. That Tender T-10-2009 submitted by Montgomery MacEwen Contracting for Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two at a cost of $868,333.66 (GST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $1,071,000 (GST included) including the tender amount and other associated costs and the total net project cost of $1,020,000 be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) that the sum of $680,000 be financed by the issue of debentures by The Regional Municipality of Durham over a period not to exceed ten (10) years, at a rate to be determined; b) that the sum of $190,000 be funded from the Development Charges Reserve Fund; c) that the sum of $150,000 be funded from the Third Party Contribution Reserve Fund; a d) that the annual repayment charges in the amount of approximately $84,880 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2010, continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid, and any financing cost to be paid out of the Current Budget; e) the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has updated the City's 2009 Annual Repayment Limit and certified that this loan and the repayment thereof falls within the City's Annual Repayment Limit (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 is not required prior to City Council's authorization; f) undertake the financing of this project or portions thereof that cannot be accommodated through the foregoing through internal loans, Infrastructure Ontario - OSIFA Loan Program, or a financial institution offering long term financing under similar terms and conditions; g) to make any changes, adjustments, and revisions to amounts, terms, conditions or any other actions necessary in order to effect the above directions of Council; h) the Treasurer is authorized to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; 5. That the draft by-law attached to this report be enacted; and 6. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. 4. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 43-09 301-309 Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton DumpTruck -Tender No. T-14-2009 RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 43-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck be received; 2. That Tender No.T-14-2009, as submitted by Scarborough Truck Centre Inc. for the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow and Wing, and Electronic Salt Metering, in the amount of $166,071.00 (PST and GST extra) be accepted; 3. That the total gross purchase cost of $187,660.23 and a net purchase cost of $179,356.68 be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows; a) the sum of $179,000 be financed by the issue of debentures through the Regional Municipality of Durham for a period not exceeding five (5) years, at a rate to be determined; b) that the balance of $356.68 plus financing costs be funded from 2009 Current Funds; c) that the financing and repayment charges in the amount of approximately $40,200 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2010 and continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid; d) that the Director, Corporate Services and Treasurer has certified that this loan and the repayment thereof falls within the City's debt and financial obligations approved annual repayment limit for debt and other financial obligations for 2009 as established by the Province for municipalities in Ontario; e) to undertake the financing of this project or portions thereof that cannot be accommodated through the foregoing through internal loans, the Ontario Strategic Infrastructure Financing Authority (OSIFA) - Loan Program or a financial institution offering long term financing under similar terms and conditions; f) that the Treasurer be authorized to make any changes, adjustments, and revisions to amounts, terms, conditions or take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and 5. That the draft by-law attached to this report be enacted; and 6. That the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. City REPORT TO COUNCIL PI TKERI Report Number: CS 26-09 Date: July 13,;2009 9 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: 2009 Development Charges Study for the City of Pickering Recommendations: 1. That Report CS 26-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the Development Charges Background Study dated May 22, 2009 as amended July 6, 2009 prepared by Watson and Associates Economists Ltd. as required under Section 10(1) of the Development Charges Act, 1997 and this report be approved; 3. That the Residential Development Charges for the unit types as included in Table 1 below be approved to be imposed on a uniform basis effective August 1, 2009: TABLE 1 CITY OF PICKERING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES Per Residential Dwelling Unit Effective August 1, 2009 APARTMENTS SINGLE & ALL OTHER TWO ONE SEMI- DWELLING BEDROOM BEDROOM SERVICE DETACHED UNITS & LARGER & SMALLER Development - related Studies 87 62 47 35 Fire Protection 259 186 140 103 Transportation - Roads & Related 4,516 3,241 2,445 1,793 Operations 278 200 150 110 Stormwater Management 1,365 980 739 542 Parks & Recreation - Parkland Dev. & Trails 424 304 229 168 Recreation Facilities 2,249 1,614 1,217 893 Library 516 370 279 205 TOTAL 9,694 6,957 5,246 3,849 Report CS 26-09 Date: July 13, 2009 2009 Development Charges Study for the City of Pickering Page 2 4. That the Non-Residential (Commercial, Industrial and Institutional) Development Charge remain at $30.78 per square metre ($2.86 per square foot) effective August 1, 2009 to June 30, 2010 and effective July 1, 2010 at the rate of $31.97 per square metre ($2.97 per square foot). This represents the charge for roads and related services only; 5. That the proposed capital programs contained in the Background Study be indicative of Council's intention to ensure that the studies and capital expenditures required to meet the increase in need for services related to the forecasted development will be met, as required under Paragraph 3 of subsection 5(1) of the Development Charges Act, 1997; INDEXING 6. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be directed that residential and non-residential Development Charges may be indexed annually on July 1 each year by applying the annual change in the Statistics Canada Quarterly "Construction Price Statistics" to March 31 of each year, unless otherwise approved by Council; EXEMPTIONS 7. That all exemptions and exceptions be as required under the Development Charges Act, 1997 and as defined in the proposed By-law; TRANSITION PROVISION 8. That any bona fide and complete residential permit applications received prior to August 1, 2009 and non-residential permit applications received prior to July 1, 2010 will be subject to the development charge rates that prevail prior to this effective date; ADMINISTRATION 9. That the City continue the Reserve established for the City's share (ie. the non- development charge portion) of the costs of services included in the Development Charges Study and that contributions be included in the Annual Current Budget for consideration by Council; 10. That the originally proposed By-law has been modified since the public meeting on June 8, 2009, and Council confirms that no further public meeting under the Development Charges Act, 1997 (S.12) is necessary as a result; 11. That the Clerk of the City of Pickering be instructed to undertake the By-law passage notification provisions under the Development Charges Act, 1997 and Ontario Regulation 82198; 12. That the By-law attached to this report be read three times and approved at this meeting of Council; and, Report CS 26-09 Date: July 13, 2009 2009 Development Charges Study for the City of Pickering Page 3 97 13. That the appropriate staff of the City of Pickering be authorized to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: As required under the Development Charges Act, 1997a complete review of development forecasts, servicing needs, financial implications and financing requirements has been undertaken by the consultants: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., and staff of the City of Pickering. This has resulted in the identification of significant capital expenditures required for future development as contained in the Council approved Official Plan for the City of Pickering. Financing for these projects will come from Development Charges for the development related portion and the tax levy, or other sources of revenue as may be available, for the portions attributable to existing development or for increases in the level of service. In summary, all categories comprising the total Residential Single Family Unit Development Charge have decreased, with the exception of stormwater management, operations and roads, resulting in an overall decrease in the total Charge of $287, as opposed to an approximate $900 increase as proposed in the first Draft of the Study. This reduction is primarily due to changes in benefits attributed beyond the 5 year Study period for Roads and Fire - Aerial and an average 3% reduction in gross costs under City Roads, Structures and Sidewalks. One exception to the reductions is the stormwater management category under which $60.6 million in new projects to be undertaken over the next 10 years have been identified. The majority of the cost for these works will fall on the tax bill as the major beneficiary is the existing community. The other is for an Operations Centre which was not included in the previous Study. There is also a relatively minor increase in the roads and related category. Pickering's non-residential Development Charge for retail development is the second lowest in the GTA and the lowest in Durham Region. For the non retail sector only Clarington is marginally lower and Pickering is the 5th lowest out of 13 municipalities surveyed in the GTA. Recognizing that even a small increase in the total non-residential charge will have to be absorbed in difficult economic times, it is proposed that this increase be postponed to July 1, 2010 when the annual indexing is undertaken. The revised Development Charges stipulated in Recommendation 3 of this report will become effective for all Residential building permits issued on or after August 1, 2009. However, in accordance with the City's past practices, a transition period will be applied to non-residential permit applications to July 1, 2010 before the increase takes effect. Accordingly, any bona-fide and complete permit application received prior to the effective dates of the new rates, which could, given sufficient time and resources, be issued by the City, will be subject to the present Development Charges. This practice is essential for the orderly review and issuance of building permits during the development charge transition period. Provision for this has been included in the By-law. Report CS 26-09 Date: July 13, 2009 2009 Development Charges Study for the City of Pickering Page 4 It is important to note that the Chief Administrative Officer, the Directors and staff of all Departments providing services for the new development and for which charges will apply, have been involved in this Study and concur with this report and its Recommendations. In addition the By-law maintains the form of the previous By-law. Financial Implications: Approval of the Recommendations contained in this Report, together with the information contained in the Background Study should provide for the provision of services and the financing thereof as will be required for new development. The home building community, and presumably the new homeowner, will receive a total benefit of $737 on each new single and semi-detached home. The reduction in the total Residential Single Detached Unit Development Charge includes or takes into consideration indexing of 4.5% which would have taken place on July 1, 2009 had this not been the year of the Study. Thus, rather than increasing the total Development Charges 4.5%, or almost $450, it is being reduced by approximately 3% or $287. The non-residential charge, which also includes commercial, industrial and institutional is proposed to increase to the full rate effective July 1, 2010 in conjunction with the annual indexing to recognize the current economic climate. From 1999 to today the charge has been significantly discounted than the amount justified through the Study, as approved by Council. In fact, the City only charges for roads and related costs. Future studies will have to consider fire, stormwater and other related services. Capital costs included in the Study total (all figures) approximately $303 million of which $52 million is recoverable from Development Charges over the Study period. A further $11 million will be recovered from future development. The balance of $240 million will have to be recovered from property taxes or other sources of revenue. In summary, 20% will eventually be recovered from Development Charges with the remaining 80% recovered from future years property taxes or other sources of revenue. In many municipalities these percentages are reversed. However, in Pickering, the relatively low levels of development over the last decade together with only minimum essential additions to the capital infrastructure over the last 20 years contribute to the level of service upon which new development charges can be based. Raising this level of service through the tax levy takes years as has been the cse in growing communities of similar size in the GTA. In addition, many works necessitated by low development require approximately the same dollar expenditure as those necessitated by a higher level of development. As a result a much larger share of any works must fall by the existing community as well as that resulting from new development. The imposition of these costs, in addition to the typical inflationary pressures, in the annual current budget may not be sustainable especially when added to the typical need or desire for other capital projects and maintenance costs. Report CS 26-09 Date: July 13, 2009 2009 Development Charges Study for the City of Pickering Page,5 09 Considering the foregoing, taken together with the eventual need for a Seaton Development Charge Study, it is anticipated that an extensive City wide Development Charge and Financial Impact Studies will be essential. Sustainability Implications: The capital undertakings contained in the Study are critical to sustain new development in Pickering. However, they also impose significant financial obligations to undertake these works over the next few years. The costs of financing the City's share of these works will fall upon existing and future residents and businesses. Financial sustainability is critical and will require careful consideration in future Current and Capital Budgets. Background: Refer to the Development Charges Background Study, May 22, 2009 as amended July 6, 2009, for complete details of all the calculations of the Development Charges. MEETING WITH DEVELOPMENT INDUSTRY Over the course of the Study several discussions via telephone, email and in person were held with members of the Building Industry and Land Development Association (BILD), Durham Home Builders Association, Mattamy Group and consultants: Planning Solutions, IBI Group, Altus Group, Sernas Associates and Townsend and Associates. In addition to the input received at the June 8, 2009 public meeting, further questions and submissions have been received from these parties. These discussions have been beneficial both to the City and above parties as we each gained a better understanding of concerns and matters of interest. While we did not come to agreement on all matters, we feel the groups gained a better understanding of the City's Study, the calculation of the Development Charges. I think it is fair to'say that the homebuilders community should be satisfied with the immediate single unit residential charge decrease and the minor increase in the commercial/industrial charge. They also raised some questions regarding our development charge reserve funds, cost and benefit issues related to roads, and population per unit. Stormwater projects have received considerable attention. All of this led us to re-examine some of our assumptions, which resulted in lower Development Charges being recommended to Council. As a result of the input received at the public meeting and subsequent correspondence, Watson & Associates has produced an Addendum to their May 22, 2009 Study, Attachment 3, which captures any changes resulting from the foregoing. In addition, response to the correspondence received at and after the June 8, 2009 public meeting is included as Attachment 4. Report CS 26-09 Date: July 13, 2009 2009 Development Charges Study for the City of Pickering Page 6 100 This revised Study and Recommendations will meet the general spirit of many of the requests. Furthermore, the overall reduction in the proposed charge will be approximately $1,200 for single and sem- detached units, from that presented at the June 8, 2009 public meeting of Council on this subject. Stormwater Management One of the more significant components of the 2009 Study is stormwater management (SWM). In the 2004 Study, for residential development, the cost was $302 per detached unit or 3% of the total. It is now $1,365 per unit or 14% of the total. Stormwater management has become more significant in the City for all the obvious environmental and engineering reasons. A full discussion can be found starting on page B-13 of the Study. While it is good that SWM is becoming a major "service" of the City and a larger component of the DC, the vast majority of the costs will fall on the property tax bill. This is due to the significant benefit the existing population will receive from these works and due to the lesser amount of such work in the past. The development charge can only recover the level of service over the past 10 years, not increase the level. Future studies will be based on an increasing level of service, assuming the works are undertaken, and therefore a lesser portion of the new works will be attributable to the existing population. Some $60.6 million of works have been identified in the Study to be undertaken over the next 10 years. Of this amount only $5.1 million or 8.4% is recoverable from residential Development Charges. The non- residential sector is not being charged for this component ($2.1 million). Therefore, the balance of $55.5 million must be recovered from property taxes. The issuance of debt will be required with the resultant debt charges adding between 1 and 2 percent per year to the tax levy, for the 10 year period. Concern was received regarding charging a City wide uniform Development Charge while also requiring site specific works to be undertaken and paid for by the developer. Much consideration has been given to this and as previously mentioned, discussion commences on page B-13 of the Study. If someone wishes to develop an area that requires stormwater management facilities specific to that area then they should pay for it in addition to the City wide DC for city-wide works. The projects included in the Study are those affecting all of Pickering, not site specific works. It is felt that those works that only benefit a particular development or specific areas of development, Duffin Heights for example, should be paid for by the developers in addition to the City wide charge for City wide benefiting works. The development of the stormwater management program is similar to the approach that other municipalities in the GTA have taken (ie. Burlington, Brampton, Toronto etc.). This is becoming a common approach as municipalities deal with the lack of stormwater controls that occurred in the past. Report CS 26-09 Date: July 13, 2009 2009 Development Charges Study for the City of Pickering Page 7 The non-residential charge for stormwater management, if applied to this sector, would be 8 cents per square metre (90 cents per square foot). It is not recommended to be applied to this sector, even though it contributes to stormwater management works just as the residential sector does. As a result non-residential development in Duffin Heights will be contributing to the cost of the specific works (pond) for that area only and will not be paying a development charge for stormwater management. Greenwood Area "Whitebelt" The area generally referred to as the Greenwood Area Whitebelt is located northeast of . Greenwood roughly in the Highways 7 and future 407/Kinsale area. The Region of Durham recently passed its Provincial Growth Plan Implementation Amendment (Regional Official Plan Amendment 128) which included significant "whitebelt" lands in the proposed expanded urban boundary to accommodate growth to 2031. The Province has indicated some concerns with this amendment and plans to hold discussions with the Region. Regardless, development of these lands is not foreseen within the 10 year time frame for the Study and no City services for this area are included in the Study. It is anticipated Seaton will develop first. As a result, the treatment of these lands in the current Study is no different than that in previous studies. Any building permits issued in this area will be subject to the same DCs as in any other urban or rural area in Pickering. DEVELOPMENT CHARGES - COMPARISON OF PICKERING PROPOSED RATES WITH OTHER DURHAM MUNICIPALITIES Refer to Appendix E in the Study for a comparison of Development Charges in other municipalities. It can be seen that as of April 1, 2009 Pickering's residential charges were among the lowest of the survey group as were our industrial/commercial charges. NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES In adopting the Recommendations of the 1999 Development Charges Report, Council provided for the introduction of a non-residential (commercial and industrial) development charge. It was established at a rate of $11.00 per square metre ($1.02 per square foot) which was less than half of the amount determined to be justified under the Study. It did however equal the amount of "levy room" provided by withdrawal of Pickering Hydro from the calculation under new legislation governing hydro utilities and their successor companies. Therefore, the introduction of this new non-residential charge did not increase the total collected by the City on each building permit but redirected this portion to City services. The 2004 Study as amended identified a potential non-residential development charge of $35.41 per square metre ($3.29 per square foot). This rate was a 172 percent increase Report CS 26-09 Date: July 13, 2009 2009 Development Charges Study for the City of Pickering Page 8 from the inflation indexing adjusted $13.04 per square metre ($1.21 per square foot) rate. It was considered that a charge of this magnitude had the potential to adversely affect non-residential development in the City, especially when taken together with the increased Regional charge. The City wished to stay competitive and encourage non- residential growth but still have this sector contribute financially to the main hard services they require. In order to not shift all of the burden to property taxes, a charge of $23.79 per square metre ($2.21 per square foot), was approved in 2004 for roads and related services only. Under the 2009 Study, stormwater management has become a significant component as previously noted. However, to assist in encouraging environmentally friendly and energy efficient buildings this potential addition to the DC is not being charged to the non- residential sectors. The calculated charge is 90 cents per square foot for this component. To encourage construction in this sector the benefit of excluding stormwater management will continue. Furthermore,.the small increase in the non-residential charge will not come into effect until July 1, 2010 in conjunction with the annual indexing. The 2009 Study maintained the previously approved concept of charging this sector for roads and related services only and not for all the other components charged to the residential sector. As a result, as roads are one of the components experiencing an increase, albeit relatively small, it is recommended that this charge be increased from the current $2.86 per square foot of floor space to $2.97, an increase of 11 cents. While relatively insignificant in dollar terms it does represent a 4% increase, however, the charge remains much lower than in many other municipalities. By charging only on the roads and related category, this places Pickering's charge at the low end of the scale of Durham and other GTA municipalities. TAX I M PACT All projects included in the Study are prompted by the need to service new development. This need may be more in the newer developing, less serviced areas or less in the older areas of the City. The more a project benefits new development the more of the costs' that can be recovered via Development Charges. It is the projects in the older, more developed parts of the City that produce the most significant impacts on the tax levy as, in many instances, much of the financing must come from the tax levy. On the other hand, the size and number of projects in the newer areas produces a significant tax impact in total. Capital costs included in the Study total (all figures) approximately $303 million of which $52 million is recoverable from Development Charges over the Study period. A further $11 million will be recovered from future development. The balance of $240 million will have to be recovered from property taxes or other sources of revenue. Careful planning and management of the City's finances will be required. Long range financial planning and management must be a priority of Council and staff. Previous reports to Council including annual budget reports and the Development Charges Study reports discussed this topic. Report CS 26-09 Date: July 13, 2009 2009 Development Charges Study for the City of Pickering Page 9 103 SEATON The 2009 Study excludes the Seaton area as the planning work is not complete. Basically this means that "Seaton specific" services are excluded, as are any population and employment growth forecasts and their resultant demands on "non Seaton specific" services. Financial impact and Development Charge studies will be undertaken at a later date prior to development taking place. CAPITAL LEVY A Capital Levy will. have to be considered by Council at the earliest possible date as was suggested in the 2004 Study. This levy will be required to pay for the increasing debt charges on debt issued for the City's share of the Development Charge Program as funding from current revenues will not be sufficient. A Capital Levy of 1 percent, or $400,000 for example, cumulative each year will fund an annual debt increase of approximately $3 million at current interest rates. More may very well be required. The budgeting of all capital expenditures and their financing will require careful consideration and planning by Council. GENERAL Recommendation 9 provides for the continuance of the Reserve established under the 1999 Background Study for the non-development charge portion, on which contributions continue to be made, mainly from the tax levy. The objective is that funds will be accumulated, desirably on an annual basis, to be available to pay the non-development charge share of the costs (City's share) at the time the project is approved by Council. This should help avoid undue upward pressure on the tax levy that can occur with uneven expenditure requirements. Recommendations 10 through 13 are more or less housekeeping approvals. It is the intention to undertake an overview of the Study, the Development Charges and all sources of financing each year in conjunction with the preparation of the annual budgets. A complete, intensive Development Charge Study will be undertaken no later than five years hence. Attachments: 1. Proposed By-law regarding Development Charges 2. Comparison of Current vs. Proposed Development Charges for City of Pickering 3. Addendum to the City of Pickering May 22, 2009 Development Charge Background Study dated July 6, 2009 4. Response to Questions Raised at and After the June 8, 2009 Public Meeting dated July 7, 2009 Report CS 26-09 Date: July 13, 2009 2009 Development Charges Study for the City of Pickering Page 10 i -~--nT 4 Prepared By: Approved / Endorsed By: Gillis A. Paterson Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer GAP/vw Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Thomas . Q nn, R ; CMM Chief Admin' trative Officer :'.TTACHMENT#_.I ._.TO REPORT THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. 0 5- Being a By-law regarding Development Charges WHEREAS, pursuant to subsection 2(1) of the Development Charges Act, 1997 (the Act), the council of a municipality may by by-law impose development charges against land to pay for increased capital costs required due to increased needs for servicing arising from development of the area to which the By-law applies; and WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering approved the City of Pickering Development Charge Background Study, dated May 22, 2009, as amended, prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.; AND WHEREAS the Council has made the Background Study and proposed Development Charges By-law available to the public at least two weeks prior to the public meeting and has given notice in accordance with Section 12 of the Act of its development charges proposal and a public meeting was held on June 8, 2009; AND WHEREAS the Council has heard all persons who applied to be heard in objection to, or in support of, the proposed Development Charge By-law at such public meeting, and provided a subsequent period for written communications to be made; AND WHEREAS the Council in adopting the Development Charge Background Study, as amended, on July 13, 2009 directed that development charges be imposed on land under development or redevelopment within the geographical limits of the municipality as hereinafter provided. NOW THEREFORE the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: PART APPLICATION 1. (1) Subject to subsection (2), this By-law applies to all lands except for the lands commonly referred to as "Seaton lands" in the City of Pickering, as shown on the map attached to this By-law as Appendix "A" whether or not the land or use is exempt from taxation under Section 3 of the Assessment Act. (2) This By-law shall not apply to land that is owned by and used for the purposes of, (a) a board of education as defined under subsection 1(1) of the Education Act (b) any municipality or local board thereof; CORP0223-07/01 BY-LAW NO Page 2 ? 0 6 (c) the development of a non-residential farm building used for bona fide agricultural purposes; (d) a building or structure that is used in connection with a place of worship and is exempt from taxation under the Assessment Act as a result; (e) development where, by comparison with the land at any time within ten years previous to the imposition of the charge: (i) no additional dwelling units are being created; or (ii) no additional non-residential gross floor area is being added; or . (f) nursing homes and hospitals. (3) An owner who has obtained a demolition permit and demolished an existing dwelling unit or a non-residential building in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code Act shall not be subject to the development charge under subsection (1) with respect to the development being replaced, provided that the building permit for the replacement residential units or non-residential area is issued not more than 10 years after the date of demolition and provided that any dwelling units or additional non residential floor area created in excess of what was demolished shall be subject to the development charge calculated under Section 6 and 11, respectively. 2. (1) Subject to subsection (2), development charges shall apply, and shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with the provisions of this By- law, in respect of land to be developed for residential use, non-residential use, or both, where the development requires, (a) the passing of a zoning by-law or of an amendment to a zoning by- law under Section 34 of the Planning Act, (b) the approval of a minor variance under Section 45 of the Planning Act (c) a conveyance of land to which a by-law passed under subsection 50(7) of the Planning Act, applies; (d) the approval of a plan of subdivision under Section 51 of the Planning Act; (e) a consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act; BY-LAW NO Page 3 0 '7 (f) the approval of a description under Section 50 of the Condominium Act, or (g) the issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, in relation to a building or structure. (2) Subsection (1) shall not apply in respect of: (a) local services, related to a plan of subdivision or within the area to which the plan relates, to be installed or paid for by the owner as a condition of approval under Section 51 of the Planning Act, (b) local services to be installed or paid for by the owner as a condition of approval under Section 53 of the Planning Act. (3) Subsection (1) shall not apply with respect to only bona fide and complete permit applications received prior to the effective dates of the development charge rates as specified in Sections 6 and 11. 3. (1) Where two or more of the actions described in subsection 2(1) are required before land to which a development charge applies can be developed, only one development charge shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with the provisions of this By-law. (2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), more than one development charge by- law may apply to the same area and if two or more of the actions described in subsection 2(1) occur at different times, and if the subsequent action has the effect of increasing the need for services as designated in Sections 5 and 10, an additional development charge shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with the provisions of this By-law. PART II RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES 4. In this Part, (a) "apartment building" means a residential building, or the residential portion of a mixed-use building, other than a triplex, semi-detached duplex, semi- detached triplex, townhouse or stacked townhouse, consisting of more than 3 dwelling units, which dwelling units -have a common entrance to grade; (b) "apartment" means a dwelling unit in an apartment building; BY-LAW NO. Page 4 10 (c) "bedroom" means any room used, or designed or intended for use, as sleeping quarters; (d) "development charge" means residential development charge; (e) "dwelling unit" means a room or suite of rooms used, or designed or intended for use by one person or persons living together, in which culinary and sanitary facilities are provided for the exclusive use of such person or persons; (f) "garden suite" means a one-unit detached, temporary residential structure containing bathroom and kitchen facilities that is ancillary to an existing residential structure and that is designed to be portable; (g) "grade" means the average level of finished ground adjoining a dwelling at all exterior walls; (h) "gross floor area" means the total floor area, measured between the outside of exterior walls or between the outside of exterior walls and the centre line of party walls dividing the building from another building, of all floors above the average level of finished ground adjoining the building at its exterior walls; (i) "hospital" means land; buildings or structures used, or designed or intended for use as defined in the Public Hospitals Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.40 as amended, (j) "nursing home" means a building owned and operated on a non-profit basis but excluding any building or part of a building which is comprised of dwelling units; (k) "semi-detached dwelling" means one of a pair of dwelling units attached together horizontally above or below grade or both above and below grade; (1) "single-attached dwelling" means one of a group of not less than three adjacent dwelling units attached together horizontally by above grade common walls; (m) "single-detached dwelling" means a single dwelling unit which is free- standing, separate and detached from any other building or structure. BY-LAW NO Page 5 1 nc) 5. Development charges against land to be developed for residential use shall be based upon the following designated services provided by the City, with each charge apportioned for reserve fund purposes, in accordance with the percentages shown: (a) development-related capital studies (0.9%); (b) fire stations and equipment and services related thereto (2.7%); (c) storm drainage and management works and equipment and services related thereto (14.1 (d) transportation including operations and equipment, roads, sidewalks, streetlights, traffic signals and services related thereto (49.4%); (e) parkland development and trail development and equipment and services related thereto (4.4%); (f) major indoor recreational facilities and equipment and services related thereto (23.2%); (g) libraries and furnishings and (non-computer) equipment and services related thereto, including circulating and non-circulating materials generally provided to library users by public libraries (5.3%). 6. Subject to the provisions of this Part, development charges against land to be developed for residential use shall be calculated, paid and collected at the following rates per residential unit: TABLE 1 EFFECTIVE Au ust 1, 2009 TYPE OF DWELLING UNIT CHARGE PER UNIT Single-detached dwelling, or semi-detached $9,694 dwelling Apartment dwelling, two or more bedrooms $5,246 Apartment dwelling, less than two bedrooms (inclusive of senior citizen apartment units) $3,849 All other dwelling units $6,957 7. (1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), Section 6 shall not apply in respect of a renovation, addition or installation which involves the creation of: BY-LAW NO Page 6 (a) one or two additional dwelling units in an existing single-detached dwelling; (b) an additional dwelling unit in any other existing residential building; or (c) garden suites. (2) Notwithstanding clause (1)(a) of this Section, development charges shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with Section 6 where the total gross floor area of the additional unit or units is greater than the total gross floor area of the existing dwelling unit. (3) Notwithstanding clause (1)(b) of this Section, development charges shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with Section 6 where the additional unit has a gross floor area greater than, (a) in the case of a semi-detached dwelling or single attached dwelling, the gross floor area of the dwelling unit already in the building; or (b) in the case of any other residential building, the gross floor area of the smallest dwelling unit contained in the residential building. 8. Where non-residential floor area is to be converted to residential space, a charge shall be paid for any new residential units created, less the amount of the charge which would be payable if the existing non-residential space being converted were being constructed. PART III NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES 9. In this Part, (a) "development charge" means non-residential development charge; (b) "grade" means the average level of finished ground adjoining a building at all exterior walls; (c) "existing industrial building" means a building used for or in connection with: (i) manufacturing, producing, processing, storing or distributing something; (ii) research or development in connection with manufacturing, producing or processing something; BY-LAW NO Page 7 (iii) retail sales by a manufacturer, producer or processor of something they manufactured, produced or processed, if the retail sales are at the site where the manufacturing, production or processing takes place; or (iv) office or administrative purposes, if they are: (1) carried out with respect to manufacturing, producing, processing, storage or distributing or something, and (2) in or attached to the building or structure used for that manufacturing, producing, processing, storage or distribution; (d) "gross floor area" means the total floor area, measured between the outside of exterior walls or between the outside of exterior walls and the centre line of party walls dividing the building from another building, of all floors above the average level of finished ground adjoining the building at its exterior walls; (e) "non-residential" means designed, adapted or used for any purpose other than a dwelling or dwellings, or accessory uses or spaces to a dwelling or dwellings; (f) "total floor area" means the sum total of the areas of the floor whether above or below grade, measured between the exterior faces of the exterior walls of the building or structure or from the centre line of a common wall separating two uses; and (i) includes the area of mezzanine as defined in the Ontario Building Code; and (ii) excludes those areas used exclusively as mechanical areas or for parking garages or structures. 10. Development charges against land to be developed for non-residential use shall be based upon the following designated services provided by the City, with each charge apportioned for reserve fund purposes, in accordance with the percentages shown: (a) development-related capital studies (0%); (b) fire stations and equipment and services related thereto (0%); (c) storm drainage and management works and equipment and services related thereto (0%); BY-LAW NO Page 8 7 (d) transportation including operations and equipment (0%); roads, sidewalks, streetlights, traffic signals and services related thereto (100%); (e) parkland development and trail development and equipment and services related thereto (0%); (f) major indoor recreational facilities and equipment and services related thereto (0%); and (g) libraries and furnishings and (non-computer) equipment and services related thereto, including circulating and non-circulating materials generally provided to library users by public libraries (0%). 11. (1) Subject to the provisions of this Part, development charges against land to be developed for non-residential use shall be calculated, paid and collected at the following rates: (a) $30.78 per square metre ($2.86 per sq. ft.) of total floor area, between August 1, 2009 and June 30, 2010. (b) $31.97 per square metre ($2.97 per sq. ft.) of total floor area, effective July 1, 2010. (2) If a development includes the enlargement of the gross floor area of an existing industrial building, the amount of the development charge that is payable in respect of the enlargement will be determined as follows: (a) if the gross floor area is enlarged by 50 percent or less, the amount of the development charge in respect of the enlargement is zero; and (b) if the gross floor area is enlarged by more than 50 percent, the amount of the development charge in respect of the enlargement is the amount of the development charge that would otherwise be payable multiplied by the fraction determined as follows: (i) determine the amount by which the enlargement in gross floor area exceeds 50 percent of the gross floor area lawfully constructed at the time of building permit application; and (ii) divide the amount determined under paragraph (i) by the amount of the enlargement. (c) for the purposes of calculating the floor area of the existing industrial building, floor area created by a previous enlargement shall not be included. BY-LAW NO Page 9 12. Where residential floor area is to be converted to non-residential floor area, no development charge shall be paid. PART IV ADMINISTRATION 13. Development charges against land to be developed for residential uses, non- residential uses, or both, shall be calculated, paid and collected as follows: (a) development charges against that portion of the land to be developed for residential use shall be calculated, paid and collected on a per dwelling unit of residential use basis in accordance with Part II of this By-law and in the case of a mixed-use building or structure, upon the residential uses in the mixed use buildings or structures, according to the type of residential use; (b) development charges against that portion of the land to be developed for non-residential use shall be calculated, paid and collected on a gross floor area of non-residential use basis in accordance with Part I I I of this By-law and in the case of a mixed-use building or structure, upon the non- residential uses in the mixed-use building or structure. 14. (1) Development charges shall be payable in full on the date that the building permit is issued in relation to a building or structure on land to which a development charge applies. (2) No building permits shall be issued by the City for the construction of any building or structure on land to which a development charge applies until the applicable development charge has been paid in full to the City. (3) Where an owner has paid to the City, prior to the enactment of this By-law, in relation to a building or structure on land to which a development charge applies, (a) a charge against development pursuant to an obligation to do so in a subdivision agreement, condominium agreement, development agreement or other agreement with the City, (b) a fee as a condition of obtaining a consent to create a lot; or (c) a lot levy pursuant to By-law 3322/89, and the building permit for that building or structure has not been issued prior to the enactment of this By-law, the owner shall be credited with the amount so paid, up to the amount of the development charge payable, as BY-LAW NO Page 10 part of the development charge payable hereunder when the building permit is issued. 15. (1) Monies received from payment of development charges shall be maintained in separate reserve funds, and shall be used only to meet the capital costs for which the development charge was levied under this By- law. (2) Council directs the Treasurer to divide the reserve funds created hereunder into the separate sub-accounts in accordance with the services and percentages set out in Sections 5 and 10, to which the development charge payments shall be credited in accordance with the amounts shown, plus interest earned thereon. (3) The amounts contained in the reserve funds established under this Section shall be invested, with any income received credited to the development charge reserve funds in relation to which the investment income applies. 16. (1) The development charges referred to in Sections 6 and 11 may be adjusted annually, without amendment to this By-law, as of July 1 each year, in accordance with the change in the index for the most recently available annual period ending March 31 for the Statistics Canada Quarterly, Construction Price Statistics, Catalogue Number 62-007. (2) The indexed development charges rates effective July 1 each year shall not apply to permit applications received prior to the July 1 effective date, provided: (i) the permit application is complete in terms of the applicant's submission requirements set out in the building code and the City's Building By-law; (ii) applicable law approvals prescribed in the building code have been obtained or applied for; and (iii) the building permit or a conditional building permit is issued for all or part of the building on or before September 1 of that year. 17. Development charges are payable by cash or certified cheque at the rates in effect at the time of payment upon issuance of the building permit(s) or as otherwise may be approved by Council. 18. Council may consider allowing a person to perform work that relates to a service to which this By-law relates and if it agrees shall give the person a credit towards a development charge otherwise payable in exchange for the related work. BY-LAW NO Page 11 19. This By-law shall be administered by the Corporate Services Department and applied by the Chief Building Official. 20. This By-law shall come into force and effect at 12:01 am on August 1, 2009 for a term not to exceed five years from the date of its enactment, unless it is repealed at an earlier date. 21. By-law No. 6349/04 shall be repealed as of the date this By-law comes into force. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 13th day of July, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk Appendix "A" TOWNSHIP OF UXBRIDGE uiuwo[ t t t i ! ~ SAM t BAL i CLAREMONT t 0 t 1 ; t t O WWI Z ou 0 2 GREENWOOD o xg 3 E Z AT Z ~ $ t 9 LAN IN 0 C4 00 _ I I t OODa MAP 2 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATIONS FOR ; ANTICIPATED RESIDENTIAL GROWTH Development Charges By-Law within a oundarytof the City of Pick erin exclusive of the Sea on Lands a ,j d- Ttq t AW 4 INFORMATION CURRENT AS OF MAY 1. 2009. ur are w s~....w~......we...= r arr~°W.e°..--.....r ATTACHMENT # - . TO REPORT # G 1 17 FTevised (ii) N LD d N V7 L ~ r i ~ r r r r r ~ ~ ~ C ~ L O U N Q U LL p C7 ~ ti U c r i N r r r r r N m E LL E N CL 0 to 4) L p co m n- C Q r r N N V d m U U co co 00 4) Lo cn r r O- N r r N O V- C D U ~p c V m0) (D -I-- Lo c"'o °r° N (M co rn °c O + N ch N N CD a C13 N N Q d r C\ O 9 p U = f E 750 fl, U Q .2 0 co 00 to 0) 0 N W 0 y N c O co co dM (n M r co CMA co N Q. > n.. N~ V r N O7 ~ O .G a a~ o ~ fA Q M E .d V d 7 U C C O N f0 N U N ~ J a rn o N a~ N N O U N c m 0 U ~ O (D a) z ui Elf W E j c C N 7 O 0 4m CL °a N _1 vOi ns d fA Q Q a?i o o- C13 re O d p LL f~ cq o a -j - a c O (U. i ATTACHMENT #,-TO REPORT #9-.26 o Watson & Associates ECONOMISTS LTD. j { r ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF PICKERING MAY 22, 2009 DEVELOPMENT CHARGE BACKGROUND STUDY f i DRAFT f c I i 4304 Village Centre Court Mississauga, Ontario Canada L4Z 152 Phone: (905)272-3600 Fax: (905)272-3602 JULY 6, 2009 e-mail: info@watson-econ.ca s Planning for growth CONTENTS Page 1. INTRODUCTION 1-1 2. RESPONSES TO CONSULTATION ISSUES 2-1 3. PAGES MODIFIED IN THE MAY 22, 2009 BACKGROUND STUDY 3-1 APPENDICES A WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT CHARGE CONSULTATION PROCESS A-1 B REVISED 2009 DEVELOPMENT CHARGE BY-LAW FOR THE CITY OF PICKERING B-1 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H. IPickeringl2009 DCldc background study-ADDENDUM.doc 1 1 210 1. INTRODUCTION Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. HlPickedng12009 DCldc background study-ADDENDUM. doc 1-1 1. INTRODUCTION 1 L 1 1.1 The City communicated with representatives of the development industry with respect to its proposed development charge policy in May, 2009. The Background Study was released May 22 and the statutory public meeting was held on June 8. 1.2 Written communications were received from six different sources during June (Appendix A). Follow-up discussions occurred in a number of cases. The suggested modifications to the DC calculation and related policy were reviewed. A number of changes were made to the Roads and Related and Fire development charges in order to reflect calculation assumptions that were judged to be more suitable. These changes are outlined in Section 2 of this Addendum. They appear in Section 3 in the form of the pages in the May 22, 2009 Background Study that were modified as a result. 1.3 These changes result in a decrease in the proposed charges, as follows: Current City May 22, 2009 June 6, 2009 Development Type Charge Background Addendum Study Per Dwelling Unit • Single/Semi Detached $9,981 $10,889 $9,694 • Apartment 1 BR & Bachelor 3,715 4,324 3,849 • Apartment 2 BR+ 5,670 5,893 5,246 • Other Dwelling Units 8,104 7,815 6,957 Per Sq.Ft. GFA • Non-residential 2.86 3.68 2.97 1.4 The June 6, 2009 proposed residential charges have declined by 11% from the May 22, 2009 calculations. The non-residential charge has declined by a greater amount (19.3%), based on the particular projects for which calculation assumptions were modified. 1.5 The June 6, 2009 proposed residential charges, in comparison with the current City charges, have declined in all cases other than for one bedroom and bachelor apartments, where a 3.6% increase is involved. This difference and the variation in the magnitude of the change per unit type, relates to different average occupancy statistics, which represent the fundamental measure of service requirement. In 2004, these occupancy statistics were based on the 2001 Census, whereas in 2009 they are based on the 2006 Census and have changed as a result. 1.6 The June 6, 2009 non-residential charge is $0.11/sq.ft. higher than the existing charge and the by-law in Appendix B proposes that this increase be deferred until July 1, 2010. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H. Pickering12009 DC{dc background study-ADDENDUM.doc 122 2. RESPONSES TO CONSULTATION ISSUES Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H.-Mckering12009 DCldc background studyADDENDUM_doc f__~ 2. RESPONSES TO CONSULTATION ISSUES The following responses are being made to the development charge calculation questions raised as part of the May/June consultation process. The questions to which they relate are excerpted in Appendix A. 1. Submission by the IBI Group, dated June 8, 2009 Issue #1 - Seaton has been excluded from the Growth Forecast for the reasons given on page 1 of the presentation made on June 8, 2009, namely that: • "The Background Study is applicable to the City of Pickering, exclusive of the Seaton lands, which will subsequently to subject to a separate development charge by-law, or a revised City-wide by-law. This can occur as such time as planning for Seaton is advanced to the point where the anticipated development and associated capital servicing requirements have been sufficiently clarified." Issue #2 - The anticipated growth for the 10-year period 2009-2019 reflects City Planning's assessment of the development potential involved and the rate at which it is expected to occur, including consideration of the current recessionary economic conditions. The average annual pace of development is 500 units/year, which is beyond the 425 units/year forecast in 2004 for the 20-year period. Issue #3 - The replacement cost of Recreation Facilities has been indexed from the TSH cost analysis conducted in 2004, as footnoted on page B-30, with $34/sq.ft. provision for land costs has been added as per common DC replacement cost practice. The cost of trail development has increased significantly as a result of indexing and making appropriate provision for the cost of bridge works, which adds considerably to the cost/km, particularly given that the linear trail measurement was refined and substantially reduced subsequent to 2004. Issue #4 - The cost of the Kingston St. Fire Station and the Finch Ave. Fire Station have increased significantly as a result of DC indexing, the provision of a $34/sq.ft. land cost allowance and the use of Firehall No. 5 as the replacement cost base. Issue #5 - The per unit costs for the pumper, rescue and support vehicles have increased significantly from the 2004 Study as a result of indexing and to adequately reflect the specialized equipment that is required. Issue #6 - The increase in the operations centre replacement cost is as a result of indexing plus the inclusion of a land cost allowance and eligible equipment not included in 2004. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:lPickering12009 DCldc background study-ADDENDUM.doc I1~ I III I,Yr~ IIUIIi10iY1~ 1 L 4 2-2 Issue #7 - The roads shown in orange are, in fact, not new but have simply been renumbered and differently identified. The only new project is Town Centre West. Issue #8 - A number of modifications in deductions have been made for various roads. Please see Table 2-1. Issue #9 - This question is also addressed via Table 2-1. Issue #10 - The benefit to existing (BTE) deductions for projects BR-11, RP-14, BR-14 and BR- 15 have been altered in order to reflect the fact that: • future growth will have access to 407 via RP-14; • an increase in BTE from 50% to 75% in the case of BR-15. While BTE was maintained at 75% for BR-14; • BR-11 was increased from 5% to 10%. BTE percentages typically remain constant for road projects as part of following through on the original DC funding plan. Issue #11 - Fire costs associated with Seaton have been deducted in the form of post period benefit as noted on Table 2-1. (None applicable to roads.) Issue #12 -With respect to the aerial, the deduction has been significantly revised, as per Table 1. Issue #13 - The new $50 million recreational complex is not part of the DC calculation. The Duffin Heights Community Facility is expected to be approx. 220,000-230,000 sq.ft. Its cost per sq.ft. is below the replacement cost average because of the large indoor soccer facility that is involved. 2. Altus Group, June 8, 2009 and June 18 Comments 2.1 Roads - As indicated, a number of projects have been eliminated that were part of the 2004 DC Study. 2.2 A decision has been made to reduce the inflation index that was applied to a number of the Roads and Related project costs, in order to better reflect inflation during the interval. This served to reduce gross project costs. 2.3 A decision has also been made to make post period capacity cost deductions for several additional major projects (see Table 1). Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:lPickering12009 DCldc background study-ADDENDUM.doc 2-31 2 5 2.4 The City's local service policy for stormwater management is set out on page B-13 of the Background Study. Where prospective development specifically requires stormwater management facilities, it is required to put such facilities in place or, in some instances of infill, to make a cash-in-lieu payment. The works included in the development charge program are over and above the foregoing, in order to provide broad environmental benefit to the City. Such costs are appropriately shared between existing, 10-year and long-term development, all of whom contribute to the problem (via the cumulative effect of inadequate volume controls) and share in the benefits of the works. 2.5 The 30% post period capacity deduction for Krosno Creek does not relate to Seaton. 3. Wayne Clarke Questions !June 8, 2009 Verbal and June 30, 2009 email a) Basis for increased cost of fire rescue vehicle - please see response to IBI Issue #5. b) The proposed pumper/rescue vehicle at $775,000 is marginally lower than the $800,000 replacement cost. Several of the fire vehicle replacement costs have been adjusted to be more accurate. C) The Claremont Public Library was replacement valued by TSH at $300/sq.ft. in 2004 and indexed to 2009. d) The Petticoat Creek Library Addition was over-deducted in 2004 for BTE at 50%. The revised 10% deduction is valid given that the coverage is only for a small addition, largely required to accommodate a larger collection and common area required by the expanding community of residential library users. Existing development benefits from the existing facility which provides adequate services, but will be negatively impacted until the additional space and collections are in place. Also, the DC program only equips the City to maintain the existing service level and, in that sense, provides no benefit to existing development; however, the addition will provide improved access benefits to some existing users, which have been recognized. 4. June 19, 2009 Sernas Associates Submission a) Detailed background was requested for the City's entire roads program in terms of capital costs and road lengths. This information was provided by the City in late June. b) The City's approach to stormwater project funding was summarized above in para 2.4 of the Altus Group responses. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H.VickeringTO09 DCldc background study-ADDENDUM. doc 1 2 E 2-4 5. June 23,2009 BILD Submission a) BILD strongly recommended the City consider the comments of the individual member companies involved and their consultants and give serious consideration to decreasing the proposed DC, while attributing no negative impacts to the infrastructure program. The City has made a number of modifications to its DC calculation which have resulted in a tangible net decrease to the proposed charge, in comparison with the May 22, 2009 calculation. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H. Pickering12009 DCldc background study-ADDENDUM .doc TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF MODIFICATIONS MADE TO THE CITY OF PICKERING MAY 227 2009 DC CALCULATION 1. Roads May 22/09 Revised July 6/09 BTE PPC BTE PPC Pr_ oiect RP-14 50% - 50% 25% DH-1 10% - 10% 25% DH-2 10% - 10% 25% BR-1 75% - 50% 25% BR-2 50% - 50% 25% 2. A cost reduction was made to the 2009 gross costs for a number of projects, (overall average gross cost reduction was 3%) 3. Sidewalk & Streetlight Cost Adjustments May 22/09 Revised Cost Pr_ oiect Cost BR-5 163,800 231,000 RO-6 180,000 211,050 130-8 131,300 184,600 A-4 276,000 264,000 4. Fire BTE PPC BTE PPG Aerial 5% - 5% 50% (Seaton) Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H.-Ockeringl2ow 00dc background study-ADDENDUM.doc I Y -~IIIII ~ I~~YYrl.r.r X28 3. PAGES MODIFIED IN THE MAY 229 2009 BACKGROUND STUDY ~rIrW~1~~1■ IY. ■YI II■ Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. HVickering12009 DC1dc background study-ADDENDUM.doc Revised (ii) 1 r) 9 Z N to Q) C CD r i r r r r 7 c O (U ~ O U CD Q CO b9 N U 'a 0 U O c r i N r r r r r ~ ~ (4 cli w Ej= U 0) N a) 00 C"i n c Q r r 00 r r C v a a~ N n C m U 2!, U M w r Cfl I~ Q W U) t- M OD c v r O N v u N C d C cu r v ~ CL) L .C ) ti r O (D LO 00 v CA O v o = 4) oo LO T- V V _ C CV to ce) N ~ N In ( C M cc 1:3 a) F-- C d N c4 = Vj tot). ~cU CO Y O ~ g co r Q W o d ~ a co M rn o N Lo m °m m 00 Z ~ 41 O. > a~ c N r It v m LO m w 0) a o d n- .Q D t_ v Ci Cf 0 r r" N 01 F- 0 U Z!, ca °o t~3 EA a) N N L (b ~ N Q t0 E O O U a U C c O a) (n (a m a) ~C7 E _N 0) W ~ N u~ E ca o c N W E C p p N CL (`p N J En m Vl N Q O U L CL O D lL 0. [q O 0. OG 0. ) df c 0 0 0 ( 0 C L o 0 0 0 to Lf) 0 N N N N N N N N Revised (IIE) A 0 130 _ N d m co co co 0 n co M N 00 n n M W C> 0 N to N N O? O m V W f0 N er O N m ti' bA V K fO0 M O V N N SSrv N z ^ O N U) V) f9 0 ch C1 ar ui in v~ ~ N 2 m ~ n n n n n rn o~ m n n n a c d 0) OD co 0 W) Q o m v IR (Oq cl v O Cl h a°1) m of to 00 to 01) V m oC 0 00 V co (A N ~ a N a0O- O Y) co tri w 00 49 a N) rn in N is ua V~l •p N r- Q N Q It O N M N ` N Lf) N co O C IL M O ( M OOj C11 t- t7 ,fl d9 co M Z; M Vf (A O Z' ~ m 00 aO~ N 0 n O O t+/ n O M N 00 O) (0 N N N H vi w in O ~ 0 r 0 0 rn N O d N N 00 M V w ~N N r CL ct w vi QW z to O_ WE Z " 7 q to OA N W V r Q 7 p N J R 13D LL. Q O W C u 7a _ a O V N ~ e eo} 0 0 o e o e o 0 0 a+ N M M n 7 0. F, tl! W E Lo co V y0 OMNi M M N w co 0 g tn 01 w m n n N an0 V O N n O co m 0) 0 C (a N O 'D V It (R to lA m 49 (fl 4! a 0 co co CL co S N V ~~pf O lV Q V •P O N (D M V) y V dt N cl (R YI >y •Z n vi vi cn J ID 0 M V N W N M M O O O kn ( co p O a) b O O M M O V O R lh O CD (V (G O N n O N N (n U M O N Oni M O Cl! M O N W) O M O ri cn (p co (7 N O M Vi N GA to 0 FA N r0i C9 ~ O O a' N O .NY y n a N a' N J U cm d d d y } C m 0 N E ° a M CL a N co C m p N U N 0 O 03 > a N CO Q 3 V ~ ~ ~ v d J w m v m `o d o a a d ca U Cf) F in 'u. a g J O 6) N M v w (o ti 00 w O Revised (v) TABLE ES-3 131 CITY OF PICKERING 2009 CITY-WIDE DEVELOPMENT CHARGE CALCULATION Development Type Existing Charge Calculated Charge Residential (Per Dwelling Unit) Single/Semi Detached $ 9,981 $ 9,694 Apt. One Bedroom & Smaller 3,715 $ 3,849 Apt. Two Bedroom and Larger 5,670 $ 5,246 Other Dwelling Units 8,104 $ 6,957 Non-Residential Development per sq.ft. (gross floor area) $ 2.86 $ 2.97 Proposed non-residential charge only includes Roads & Related services, Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:1Pickering12009 DC1Pickering DC 2009 June 26 Revised B-7 V 1L' (D N V1 01`0 1ri OCDi M P Cp M O N (00 M O~ p ID m (~j M (Y (O N ^ O(v Oj M1j O M N 1 3z m - 8 m OD m n fD ~ N OI m Ih P 01 W V p 0') pOpD " N N t+1 P O O Iq (OV 7 O aYYYa' A N N P O p N 00 N t0 M" " N M~ h` O ~ N a U 41 c Q 9 o p o o ~QO+ l0 p O O CI a Oy z E ~M~pp ' to, ~j ONi O$° V 6 Q P O 10 8 8 p D') o M V= U O H N O b F n N 0 O I~ N ~O N O M YI O o0.1, V O" W 9 ~~Op P M O M co ,p O fM fV W p mW 1~ lV ~fi N " (V T _M m N Z> N COD M tf1 N W N w M (~1 C N O^ ems- m N O"i N- M P M U cV ma a ~zm U N }yy~ O N g c Q v Q ~ Q❑ C d Q d a ~ cv a~` rn n N 2 N M In Cl! y ~ ~ O O J 0 Y N H N aU mC Y .H,. p Op o ~p P ~p ~p h• ~O t+i N 1~`QJ M h Q~ M M co y w 0~1 1W~ M ~N,~ N INO N O N th .P- N ~j N tM0 M N CMO (V 0) fff~~~ V J 'c Q o m c . e2 a4 ~g e`4 a a a° 3E bE 0 34 3 y~ 3E yC `e yy 0 v g 0 0 0 0ee b b 0 g c 0 0 0 0 0 O q o c ZD 0 0 C W Vi O ti C" O G C G O O G O O O O O W N t0 N N 0 10 wn " N N N ~m w A ~ff77 10 1~ 1~ f~ i~ 1~ 1~ n P f~ N N N I~ I~ h h w Z W 4'0 Wmgg~~OO420~pgsp~pppppppsp$gicyyNpp0 g o C-4 w N N-• N v V O N M 04 V N N O N rN- O V O M . lV t0 N G U co F- y O U y, w W m U It a $ yL m y Z 88838$$0 1D ~y G Y`Cp y g O O O 1y 0p O O O ~ O O d y G `Gq~' g ayOp U O C E E X C: C CC Y .Q Q 15~~ Om` r CpC O p~ C Y cc p R W W . r r '5Q O W WW 5>~ OTC .G (D N a a ay ,@ c g g° c c~ , m m 3 2 fi y q e4 ~t (A T T - > 7 > > > > M 0 0 0 0 0 N O CS O N 0 z N fV C N "uZ O 12 IA C G w w m V ~ ~ O qy1 p m IOp N Y H U m w m 0.0 $ W $ 8 € - 8U m m OQ' v Ea b4~ c v - r. Sc Z° 3 h E€ Z~ ~i o m m a y C7 a a m H o a x o € W 92m 'cam m c w `o W m o 0 0 7 w U U m m g> :3 gi c'S w o A °m E b g c E c S ° N$ E N a~~ E 0°C' o mm3 ^~~Q rc E ~ E .c pn b v g O fD 00 a Y 5~F 'C - o > , w ~ a o _o ~Fmy, - 0 O C Q S m&a y a 0 0 L' w N m c w___ O 5 w -6 45 m m t o o ~ 1. J c$ y °m $ 3$ m w o" R m m m m ~ N N~ rc o S~ 0 w w a ro of 3 3~ `1 an d o a m m qx € B€ ~ o _`o o e ? 0, x a `c` qc o a < M •V _o n€ 8 v7 D: LL Vf tip o w S ~3 > 3' P :E i -2 LL c U U y y c c U U o U F a a c U~ V w m 9 a Z 2 g g= `S F 4a4 m 2m a o~ m 3> F> z z v z O O O LL a 6> a € z a m z O p N CL O~ N N r" M q v) (ft Ir oo M { M " f4 tz N N N O O N OD m m m O O O O O p D O D 4=' K 1U- U U F F F j j O O o d m 8 rn n°~~ a~ m M ~ .n ~ a m rn N c~ o R ~ N ymj O m f~ ~ O N N O ~(~pOp N O] ~ N [O fA O 10 ^ O o .5 Revised B-8 U a. 10 N ~N-. m~ b N) N~~ N N M~ N~° Q'~ N N .My M . d a M 133 N M - pp M ~Np (Ny OI U1 m O1 7 b o N M (NO O V O1 t4 h N< pQp~~ (V o O (0. T V n O [M 01) M N M O d N V 0 Y N (My O O Q' N O M N D! M N ^ f l M C p qj O N A U c co t- 28 0) E 0 to 0; z Ol y Q +X OD N O a 0 M O r~ 6i v r M ~n n Q V a r l~~ 'P N Q• Z co U ro ~ m0scOQ~ o t'J N N ~ ~ ~ (71 O d O ~ .y~ U ~ ~ ~ 8 g o a ~ o. a G Q I~ e~ M h gj z d U lV r N N V N +c . 0 y 1 ~ O b o 0 o U a Z ^O ~ O (~i N N ~S (O n ~ g ~ 1•. '(i ~ ~ togt, itp.MOf° ~v m W N f0 tN+7 f7 N (o a r r° W n M N ko R 4~ N (V N C1 U J c U C s` b p p n°nnng no u°~b ~io nO no NO C'~vggO o O O O O nF°n~ n°n~ S M 8 'It U U W 0 C; 1-: 9 n Q t0 h N N OnD tD .rte- 00 fD t") O W _ N f+i fV M I r 0 U h O U W N Q ~n S~ ~ ~ Tn w w ` N B 70 Q ~ g~~~ ~ c 4 c c c Y `a W m m m~ tC0 y y m m m~ N N N 3~ N N N N N N 1~1 N N~ M cat L" th M 7 ~ V C ~ d y Y py d d N Q a d O a ~ P~ S T N f~ C U U ~Zj 01 O N a' F~. 2 f/7 _ Y R' Q t°n10 $ ° ° ~ c g V$EaQv mE E A d a o~~ rn~~ ~ d Q~ 3 a~~ U o c 'c Q v m o wo p d y o k o° m m L W G ~y N d T m~ o O 7i N fi V o d N~~ N aC LL d d '!J 0. 'c a Cp u. ~ to nC v r m m all 0 "U V U. o~ B. 0Cy} U U y€ N Q IX a .L d > LL .c 0. U U U N m T T ME 6 12 z o N V) ~n ro o n rn o C9 7 0. O N `1 0. 0. N N P N O' 0 -0 N fS K Of K K 0. 0. fr FU- lU- p W. m Revised B-9 13 C m N h o to lp m O N h 0 0 H7 O h N M O m u 'v. m PV 2 N kq V O N Z! O N W n ONi n p T r n R N M L O f` O M M N of O N w N ci 0 Ih M oci C M N N N M Q 1(7 N M N N Q N N M N^ N n N^ n p U Co ~ z o m o m m y N C p` 0 O tppo N M~ (pp~pp ti N tN NOI n 9 0 n n n OD N U d d, m ~ N~ Q O `f ~ f~ OD p Of N N h N N N N N yj O 'G f.. N O CV 0 O (V tp m tri O w W O tU r O n U N N N Q N N N N Q M f~ tD 1~ N 1. t~ b N N O R C N X c U 91 Z G G>I M IP N N .p.. W Opt aN0 N N Q T mp N O y ~ Y tda•p2 C ¢o 0 C d ~ t+5 a, h ~ ~ ~ t~ {D Y1 ~ O+ ~ GO OI ~ OD N W N V 01 N m 6 E 0 p~ ~p ( ~ cp eepp pp lJ! Q 0 U U ~ ~ C, It N N (7 N ~ ~ ^ C6 m ai ~ r h- W S Z a UJ w U H N ~ p n U K V •O v a M a v w p ~ J :2. 32 m a 'T w L L W W T L rj r L rj L v » C O CJ! m Y R v w V $ Y U W o N rn G m m v 03bro ad.°o a~C m' E _ n Q o m j _ ~ cj 0. m _ d o> U U z o N N R Oi i O O N V Q Q O O O C yWy C F O N C , r p~ 9 J CC m Z W W LL O b 0 m •••J tbp 2 ('~oJ S x CY m O S O O O C O O .o b $ O ~O o 0 0 o a0 ° 5 .vl ~s 9 m m p o.' g m -W 0 c N U U d d?$ m 3 3 d d o~ LLl 9 ti3~ Ti a yo cc~o ~3mm yfj rs~° L° to l-G o r y a X b b b b 9 m u k t~ • U YU U tl~ UI L L m G yy N tll L L Y Y N C7 0 Q/ OO O O C C C C O` O Ol Ol OI QI it V Q UO Q C .L UJ N m m m m Y tl LL co a ;Z-2 2 Y Y Y Y LL Gil m m 3 p h N j 6 tj? OD N co U H; N v O O O D !Y 6161, O. Z m m m m Q O Revised B-10 m y N O N E I~ N V: m M M N Ql M M W N N p m V b fM 1~ m .V- .K- QOpp M .7- M C p N M Cn M N M N A p r U c 3n Z O O ~ O p (p F N N C~ n° N OD m h m N M O ~A tp O U1 Ip N aWD mW~ o (J OI o~ Q Q OO r Q cl C9 n N "I cr) U v M ^ MN [~q N M N r n° [h M OMi M M N N n N Cl) D ~ ~ M C m ~ Y m c U C C4 N t, in Z N T p V OI O1 N N N Si m W N V r O V V V a ° O O Q M N h M P O O 00 C O b O1 z • m v a ~$~5> co aS mgw N~8 zi5~ .9 HN~g P m t u y> v n Q O 7 .M- N '07 V ~M.. OD 0V VO <I ct V) ' 'C N O C O d ° alt R Q L) (D N~~`Pvom'i~~~'m~ 0 w H a ? o w m w o w U) 0 U N o U y a r~ N (Q ~ N N r ~ N N h OI C L W O V D 9 .Q O D V V y N W N t N L N „ N rX y, N y N N^ N Z C71 ~Np pL a~ N Lp Lp rj d~ N' N Q~ c8i 3 G d ~ m€ C C VM C ONn NN C ~ W CI c 0 o a g 7 w B= Y N Z o 0 0 m QE o S cq o: :2 302 O 3 a' do ? r E m m '~4 o o E E c^ Q¢ V U m 8 Y m 'm W m m m m S x z z J N u 0 0 p Z K K o m p O p 0 K _ r > E E c ~ e > UL LL LL U. r~ S a C m m m m c v Q d a d 8 y £ O N V (4 r rN b m 7 p O O U G AX mBya:>>>>>>€>aarcoBc N N Y v _mo ofi 0aaaaQaaa ~ W o a !n N to m V a u iL if if iL EL CL ¢ Q ¢ J ucpi ° m P, c? d Z a s to m m S J J J J J d' x 2 {C R m a 'T 7 1 0. (L DL M a. (L o M N O In P4 0 N Revised B-23 ~ M O N W a N r M U N 3(o 0 QI C b d Z O L C Z p > M OD a) O O m n n v v, ~ 't3 g (Ij 0) Cl) U) 0) C11 Go ~r U O d N M M N C ix U (U ~S c ~i g U) 0 E N~ o O g U~ M = zl$zo v7 > o g i y~ o C w tS CO * 0 0. f9 U N U O m In m L N 0 ~ U a '.0 N T, 2 a3i o z E j, O ° 4 h a di U o -j y a (D 9 0 w ¢7] ~ ~ Se Se U V a to to to ui p o m j o tp o m m' W 45 C N N O N (u U O m O o tG a Z V W O M M N ^ y ' 0- 0 w 7Y o U ~ O o0 0 0 o to C. cli n OD C; 0O a w d °ry Cl) O N U o~ v Z N ~ H 117 U7 C 7n m ~ ~ O7 7 O co O W 1.-. _ Cb a r r `0 N `o ? 00 0 0 Z 00 0 0 O n0in h0 N l3 L.U U U W C r m N G E C M O O O U V w O r tD C Q N D a c O O t1 N N N M o O w ~ r N W M U tL C nIn R w QNO Q m U `O o 2 q d ~ a y 0 Q d m E a V o w p7 M ~ d p N N to m m 3 a s U U a U ~ V ~ N ~ ~ m ~ ep Q a+a~ ~m 0T .fl c m r d d m ~i _d 'o d co U U N 04 y O N d W N N d m 7 O U 6 7L> m x v ° mod, a 13 0 7~i7 5¢a`C'I cia` ILz U a F-- 1C': if S D ~d a`z TABLE C-1 Revised C-2 City of Pickering DEVELOPMENT CHARGE CALCULATION 7 Municipal-wide Services l 2009 $ DC Eligible Cost 2C Eligible Cost SERVICE Residential Non-Residential SDU per s.f. 1.0 Studies 516,525 210,975 Studies DC Reserve Fund 20{ 0,583) (81.92$ 1 Studies Sub-total 315,942 129,047 87 0.06 2.0 City Roads, Structures & Sidewalks 18,211,093 7,438,334 3.0 Sidewalks and Streetlights on Regional Roads 3,561,342 1,454,633 4.0 Traffic Signals 1,603,469 654,938 Roads & Related DC Reserve Fund (6,885.814) (2,812,515) Roads & Related Sub-total 16,490,090 6,735,390 4,516 2.97 5.0 Storm Water Management 5,189,581 2,119,688 SWM DC Reserve Fund 19f 6.639) (80,317 SWM Sub-total 4,992,942 2,039,371 1,365 0.90 6.0 Fire 945,609 386,235 259 0.17 7.0 Parks Development 1,548,908 81,521 424 0.04 8.0 Major Indoor Recreation Facilities 8,213,458 432,287 2,249 0.19 9.0 Libraries 1,883,950 99,155 516 0.04 10.0 Operations 1,014,249 414,271 278 0.18 TOTAL $35,405,148 $10,317,277 $9,694 $4.55 DC ELIGIBLE CAPITAL COST $35,405,148 $10,317,277 10 r. Gross Population / GFA Growths .ft. 12,418 2,267,300 Cost Per Capita / Non-Residential GFA (sq.ft.) $2,851.12 $4,55 By Residential Unit Type D.D.U Single and Semi-Detached 3.40 $9,694 Apartments 2 Bedroom + 1.84 $5,246 Apartments Bach. & 1 Bdrm 1.35 $3,849 Other Multiples 2.44 $6,957 Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. Pickering DC 2009 June 26.xls Revised C-3 c~ 3 ~3 N a C) 0 0 to ~ o 0 0 0 0 o a o ~ °o t0 N ~ U U 619, 61> ~Co o rn rn ° ° r a ° o _ O co O O N O O O O O tT " Y U N 13L E LL 2 Z U U U c 0) -00 (D a Oo c O N ~ N N C Y (D (D U o :3 2 n c O o) r ~ t- M 0000 .OQ ~ r O N e^ N Y C _ O ca a - C L (D CD > U EH 69. m L (6 C 0~0 - 0 LO (0 ~ N d v- 0) U N M N c# N O -CU N 7+ r N O C d E U EH Efl E Q C ~E Q~ CL C U 00 00 V V Y O M LO O rn 0 0 00 M d 00 (9 G3 > N C N v v_ M LO M (Q O) 2 .C3 d Qf a_ V7 C14 c o O © c N Z' O cA y9 0 a .L c0 D C1 w a E O E 0 c 3 a) rn cu N U ~ ~ Z7 N O ~ ~ U O N ~ O ~ ~ f0 C p ~ O co N J C) N N N Q O U > N N U N I- N N 0 U a O d Q C O U) Y N 139 APPENDIX A WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT CHARGE CONSULTATION PROCESS • JUNE 8, 2009 LETTER FROM ALTUS GROUP TO MATTAMY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION • SUPPORTING MATERIALS TO JUNE 8, 2009 PRESENTATION MADE BY IBI • JUNE 18, 2009 LETTER FROM ALTUS GROUP TO LYN TOWNSEND • JUNE 19, 2009 LETTER FROM SERNAS ASSOCIATES TO TOWNSEND AND ASSOCIATES • JUNE 23, 2009 LETTER FROM BILD TO GIL PATERSON • JUNE 30, 2009 EMAIL FROM DURHAM HOMEBUILDERS ASSOCIATION TO GIL PATERSON • JULY 2, 2009 LETTER FROM TOWNSEND AND ASSOCIATES/SERNAS TO GIL PATERSON • JUNE 24, 2009 EMAIL FROM PLANNING SOLUTIONS TO GIL PATERSON Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:IPickeringT009 DCldc background study-ADDENDUM.doc A-1 140 A ir)rleperident-Real Estate Intelfigerice AltusGrw'1_l3_ June S, 2009 Memorandum to: Rodger B. Miller, Mattamy Development Corporation From: Jeannette Gillezeau, Senior Director Altus Group Economic Consulting Subject: Pickering Development Charges Our Pile: P- 4230 1 have reviewed the City of Pickering 2009 Development Charge Background Study, which was prepared by Watson & Associates and is dated May 22, 2009. My preliminary comments are outlined below. Proposed Change in DC Rates Y Table ES-] on page (ii) shows the proposed changes in DC rates by service. The total DC for a single detached house would increase by 9 percent and the commercial DC would increase by 29 percent. The increase in the DC rates is entirely due to roads, storm water management and operations. Therefore, my comments are focused on these services. Roads The capital program for roads and related works appears to be very similar to the capital program in the 2004 DC background study. The 2004 road program was based on the Transportation Study Report prepared by iTrans. Research, Valuation u /advisory I Cost Consulting I Realty Tax Consulting I Geomatics I Economic Consulting 1580 Kingston Road, 'Toronto, ON IMM 1S2 Canada T 416.699.56,15 P 416.699.2252 A-2 141 Pickering DC June 8, 2009 Page 2 Most of the projects are exactly the same and the allocation to "benefit to existing development" is the same for most projects. There are a few new projects (e.g. oversizing of collector roads in Duffin Heights) and a few of the projects in the 2004 DC study appear to have been eliminated (e.g. Notion Road/Squires Beach - Hwy 401 Overpass, Dixie Road Overpass - CPR Tracks). > The cost of most of the road and related projects has increased by roughly 40 percent since 2004. A major exception appears to be the structure planned for Valley Farm / Tillings bridge - Canatsekiagon - which is up from $9.6 million in 2004 to $1.0 million in 2009 (a 4 percent increase). The primary factor driving tip the road DC appears to be the time period used to calculate the DC. In the 2004 DC study, the time period went to 2024. In the 2009 DC study, the time period for the calculation of the road DC is 2018. While the City is permitted to use a ten year time horizon for roads under the DC Act, I would have expected to see a shorter road program in the 2009 DC and/or a larger share of costs allocated to "post period capacity". Schedule 5 on pages A-1.3 to A-15 shows projected residential growth by neighbourhood and period in Pickering, excluding Seaton. A total of 1,617 units are projected for the 2019 to 2023 period. Roughly half of the 2019 to 2023 residential growth is projected in the Duffin Heights neighbourhood. It may be useful to examine the road program to see whether all of the road improvements required for Duffin Heights are included in the capital program (pages B-7 to 8-11). If the roads are all in the program, and no share is allocated to "post period capacity", it will help support the position that the road costs should continue to be spread over growth to 2024. If the road DC were calculated by spreading the residential costs over 6,282 dwelling units (rather than 4,665 units), the residential road DC would be roughly 26 percent lower than the proposal in the background study ($4,143 per unit rather than $5,594 per twit). The new road DC would be lower than the existing road DC. A-3 142 Pickering DC June s, 2009 Page 3 Storm Water Management The 2004 DC background study provided for annual spending of $150,000 on unspecified storm water management projects. The 2009 DC background study includes an extensive list of storm water management works on page B-17, all of which appear to be located in the south end of the City (and generally south of Highway 401). On page B-15, under New Stormwater Management facilities, the report says the new SWM facilities included in the report "consist of infill development" and "Stormwater facilities associated with large development blocks are not a part of the City's development charges and will be the responsibility of the developers group to fund." y It appears that the proposed DC assumes that developers in large development blocks will pay directly for all of their own SWM facilities and they will be required to help pay for SWM facilities for infill development in the south end of the City through DCs. This is inherently unfair. Either everyone's SWM facilities should be included in the DC (including all SWM facilities for Duffin Heights) or the City should implement an area specific DC for SWM facilities in. the south end which will be levied on infill development in the south end. Some of the storm water projects do not appear to be growth-related including the erosion control improvements for Amberlea, Pine and Krosno creeks, the oil/grit separators/water quality and source control and subsidy. Will Mattamy's development in Duffin Heights be required to meet a storm water standard that will maintain or reduce the existing level of downstream erosion? Will Mattamy install oil/grit separators, etc. for its development in Duffin Heights? All of the storm water projects related to Krosno Creek show 30 percent "post period capacity". You may wish to ask the City for confirmation that the 30 percent relates to future intensification in the Town Centre area and not Seaton. A-4 143 Pickering DC June 2009 Page 4 Operations The 2004 DC did not include the operations centre or related vehicles and equipment. Pickering is planning to construct a new operations centre, of which roughly 2 percent is to be funded from DCs under the 2009 DC by-law. Park and Recreation The capital program for parkland development includes a $20 million, 70 hectare community/district park at Brougham of which roughly 6 percent is included in the 2009 DC (page B-29). The capital program for recreation facilities includes a $40 million recreation centre for Duffin Heights. Approximately 20 percent of the cost is included in the 2009 DC. Y Both of these projects are to be oversized for future development. A-5 144 N O O N O O O O O N o C? O 00 O O O O O 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 69 W9 69 5A EA w EA 69 69 N .>O i4 A ~ O N ~ h b O G 40 .G U V ~ ^ 69 6N'9 G W 4 00 A Q. (1 o U t3 ;Z v n o h YE a~ 4) M 00 00 0 Z7 cy0 V'1 V1 O', ~o n M OI to) (41 C> C> i. s. 1. 69 PA EA CA 'a w y 69 69 69 V ".y r. Q v ti V O t lr V1 ^ pp 00 `n Cf~ ^t O h O rl ti 41 rn ~3 'n. In (A C%n en 64, 00 ~2 CO 3 VU ~f-S~69 ui~ o al of O U N y n 5 CO • N L ti O~ d N ~ u a.IIi 04 t\ b tl~n ~b ~ o. b ~ a ~ CO r" 0\ \0 t- N 1.10 O y .M,' to a f A bA 0 7a '=f O V C-q V9 GA Cd •1•+ y V 03 u C rA d O U ni "C Cts O L w. D O e~i c's U y o A U y 0 id ni C,' iv y O ~ rn fs5 ~ ~ ~ bo H a o "'r 4.•i O C to ~ ~ o N ~ ~ N a, o y cc 3 s "`•n 00 O ro p o y n c`^ rOn O A-6 145 0 W _ a -O 0 o-n10 v 000 ~nOO r`I ti~a~ 'T r•l h'M d U S O! O ~D O M 09 k~ h M M a0 co 00 b C t~ N 10 " 00 F .Q N fl M N - r`} : •U' V' M 00 00 lc~ ry ~O U 00 - 0^ y vi V h 7 N a" = rl r l+ O p m C, v d p f -L rn M crj. Q, ~ N N rA O ~ O ~ N N O J O w so a. f. O V' V1 00 O o O pp c`1 n 0l\ O~ p p p p Q `b ti• 00 M V ;n 0 0 O+ er ~D N O O O O O N hl b M - rl ~1 00 - M "i C 0ell 1 ~ 00 O Ili m p 1+ O O\ 7 N 00 h rry (y N 0 0 Ili h N O a O O O p vl n ht N G L N - N Q 0S { r ~ 7. 0O d p O. O Q\ rn N O O N N O~ C R ?a Q. °o U .n V U U O y N Q ~ 4 4 Q ys.+ N O 3 tir.1 Ord as T C S O O ..Q.. ell N o V h 02 ~n 5 y ~ o~ w o V ~,g S y ~nl' n ai o o x _ im C a t3 t3 tM 13 3 - 'n t3 a+ 7 i 'C U 8 Q ..y G O i y r_ X l" H >r N C1 c =0 q O 3 N 1 L3 L C : L? O c3 q b R i7 DY 7 O cz~ O N M O L' N C 'OF N G~C Y N? 3 N F U Q' 00 "Cl ~ o` a v ~ A cG ~ y o d b c F ra, w 3t i c o c o c°° v om C: A-7 1 46 s s c s .c 5 5 5 0 0 0 0 _o v V V V G ~ C C C fA N y O O O O O y y y aaa W W W W W ,ca i~ iv 0 0 0 0 0 -lz lC CV CC fV •v, U 00. 00. 00. 00. 00 T ❑ . c6 A Ord v v It r- :0 0 0 0 0 0 0 •O _C C_ : N CV N N N E E E p 0 0 0 0 0 O C-4 C-4. O O N N 0. 0L a y o 0 0 0 0 0 0 kn W) C d• N N VI N N N N N N C O z a o o a o oZ9 o 0 10 r00 00 IDOON (~N W ~ E E E E E~~~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~ N r3 OL ML CL a CL aaa o wwwww•~ a- c ~c 1c c c 0 0 0 0 0 ~ c°i W CA (A O ~ ~ 0 3 0; 0: (1i 21 O 0 0 0 0 0 _ (U a a. a. a. a ~ ~ o A o ON c_,0,0 cu m Q~ E C C 000 0^ vii G. 0 0 0 0 0 0 C O' ,II N N N N N O C 60 M N w Q N N 0 O~ 4\ "Ly '0 'O O A 0 0 0 0 0 Ian w L [ y N N N N N N 0. 0. 0. 0 0 0 0 0 0 ON a, C~ m N N N N N bA Q , 0 R. N cj 34 z o V Q C'. y o o 0 0 y v1 Vl h 71 ON ON o aQi <j) CL L3, y~, c C7 ~ • c6 C/1 y ~ ~ y A 0 O N ~v' 0 O v M Z W A: z u ca . Z u ON M O is 0 ~O O LO) m 00 .Q h Vt "C OI cV y .SC V L C7 ,w C~ ~ O L O O L .a F U C4 pi wx~o~a A-8 147 a, $ O O O O O C. O O O O O 0 0 0 > 00 O N (V \0 10 O 00 "1 C. C•1 ~o 00 ry C 00 'T 41 Z\ M 00 N rl~ O M v1 Op f. a0 N M M l~ 7 l~ cf N N N 7 t! C M O M t` W r+1 0 O M 00 O lO O~ M M J` 00 't O r n N CL - N O N •O N y,~ ~ U Z i" y 0 0 0 0 0 o L. t`1 O M fl N M N 40. 00 N 00 e) V N M rn C y r ~ v C ai w 00 In m 00 In N O L-q r- In In l/j N V) N CA U `O CA w > " w 3 U ti CLi Q N O t-- rrl00 $ 00 0000 V Li N C/! to ~ CAI t/1 c~ N C6 Li .rvi o 0 o e o 0 o e o o o o 'y Wy R It h a, 00 00 00 00 O 00 h ~O V1 N > V n 10 M M M M M V M 07 N N 00 y M M M M M 10 6/ y V N C. k• .C ~ L L L L V -7 ~ V u ` C` 4 Q Q Q Q .Y. N` V_1 11 d d y O n M 0 h b n1 b a O M N d ~C N b n n ~ b ^i OG a V M M t, CIO Go V. w~:saw~ O v~.■ U' M (A p 1^ n h H 1 M Va• a O H t,1 M 00 n~ h O O N a M M ^t ~ y v9 t.) toq Q N i O O O ~ y o ' ono ° x =°•n o 1w O 4:u ( U° 2. C U o°o_ U ' c ria u 3 a F w k ti G ; V v1 > ~n ¢ aG w Cn ~ ~ O a N 04 C~ Mry H ~M hu h V d N C. p V 06 .S I-S 03 ria OI y y U r.+ p M M M N n vJ• V' u •b 40 Itt. 06 ;Z~ d > Cd O ~ u CA A o= U d o +°n CA x G Qp c o k U~ •s. u O o 8 ¢ . ~ CCU O = . ~ ni V y u o o a+ o Q•t L,' O u p G 4 F .U j ci i6 ro O C C y H lu N .y er w O c2 r ie a ,o ti .n o o G U F ° 0 0 o N7 y e-0 Cn> E-0 4 "e 7_UCa4v1Q sue, m w° w 4 a cm Ctl O w i i eVi C N W A P a p 4 Q V C H F+ U 0.1 U iz U. D. U. a 04 0 O O O 1-+ A-9 148 . 4 c0 r ~ eves ovo nl C 0 0~ O~ ^1 O 7~^ O o 7 n h ~ O nl - L v O v, ~ a w b - ~ ~ ~ O O O O M n r M M C b o a o u g 2'i 8 0 o g u N N N N N ypi G O O O O O O O C O O O O V 4L. :p ~ h h h A C O C O h h O y N O ~ ~ O V N V~ PI GO 7 N M M h N V N N N N N N N N N x N N ~j N N N N wY. L; L V d YO. is 6' V ~ V! ~ O O b 0 0 0 0 0 tl A G y N N y g o 0 0 0 0 0 0$ g ~ 1r O O h O O h 0 vt O N O O p V U N b O N p M a~ h O y~ ~ p tl w~ ~ O N N N N N N N N N N y p L N N V O~ N N N r O R V O V N .v N ~ w W '7 N ~ W Eli N V V N V 9 o a _ w i h U is ~ o ~ ~ u o S V CL p ` V y e4 O y u ~ q G~ w V ,a •L ~ In Y u L ~ 61 C N ZC O f w~' Y L p- ~ y ~i V y V C OA ,..1•n 3 O ii C a r u C1 O h- 7 J a u u in c3 ¢ r a3. ate. x c- V r J on 4= y A-1 a i49 00 eves ~ e 7 Y 7 O M M )tq~' M M M L 4 e p pp p 8 S 8 8 N O O Q O S O O O O O O O S O O O O y 7 G O ~ ni O ni nt ~n ni ni p O ~ O O O_ O_ yl t~l h _O 7 O_ 8 _O oo O O_ O P C o N N N N N N N 10 N N H N N N N N ~i N N N N °O 7 n n g g g g 1`r. oa a a ni ~n c - ' r w co ~ ~ w a y~ N N N N h N N a ~ ¢ N N > O R N V N [ V N N y 7D ~~~rr > ~ i. iC V N N , y N O U C 'O .V > w e, a C Vt u ? c~ co 3 u ~ '0 L q i W ~ i V G ~ M S1 U A Li 1 ~ ~ b j L' c "g v ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ y Y u wo 17 a 3¢ u @ u u ' i' o a` + c in 04 as A o ° F s g g w c c _c `e R V u O y v u 'p r' U V 2 CJ d a c 5 S i :L a. o. R Q G m A-11 150 M` a W a y e a ee e o e d '1' 't a{ R N Y R rl ~ L M M M M gyp' ~ M M M N 5 ~ :n e e ~ d f~ 8 V rl rl N N N [a'1 4 N N f M (`I y Vl ih N N N fn VI Vl H A N VI N G CT tL P 5 ~ O N Q00 y G 'A G H N N N •V V d O u pp pp. - ~ pp ~ n h N P T GO y y .n N N N M N N W yp L A V. N L p O y 4 'T b y 0 O~ 'O H g T 'O H~ r O~ H N G~ H CI d ro ~ CI V N N E N Q C;yl N C N~ ai N y ~ N Cn A x ~ ^ T V V ht 4 ~ V R V ~ v ry V ~ ~ U R A o ~ is ~ o V ~ o C ;n - L d!-4 z Y C C, o ~ u X14 uO °in u oinu"L v 'o qo •O $ v C u C w Z 4 OD L R b0 L OD L^ U u 4 G w u m W Q v g C 0 u g 0, CD SO o e o 0 c 3 H` °u° `o a1~` N F 3?> o o °o a< o ~ ~ ~ ~ N t0 0 ❑ ~ F o a o ~ ro 'T' ~ o ~ 13n ~ rUsbU m 6 < -u mU -j m x -UCAu 0 r o . a A-12 3 3 v' 33 m o a r. y N N 1 5 o N oo N - _ 0 o v _ _ Cam. v ~ a a d v a s - a H~•nr~a3•S S" =z:~'; .S'c'•r 3'.n'0cea 0. J p N~ N P N~ L V JT O - a V O~ 1~ - P - M ~ O N N N ~ n 0~ O Q pp 0 a° z N r. 3'e "ef .2E 4,E; .z Y : v ~3l4: Yze c < v. ~rvn - - a $ a s~ A P, say <aA~~ - S $ ° a o on.EC a°-fin 9 s ~ ~ s.s°sss r g ° P3 Q Q3 9 ' :N t 1 ' ; .y 2 n i' 'd 3 :1 a n G K au8iji.. 8 ~~~x6 SrcaOC s 2 ,F7 3 V '8'ay~ QS 3 .3{ y, .g g y yt t g o t 2.0 mmmi~~3 t g o o o u b n n. 2 - '3 .pion ern ~rm53 9W Wa ra-ss Vu c3 ~ I Z. ?H o r. r. R ~ ~ ro ~ ~ dr. y a a ,x o at. $ Swx X53. i ° y 'G y ' 8 .3 i yg K :N N c o 3 •s c .g 0 f cry 9 's u C1 .0 ~ 3 ~ ~ 'C C G 4 ~ U ~ C ~ ~ 'r K MR ~i ~ 4 4 j 'R F F .8 f~3 E i3 o~ ~G Te. e. Orin=~O .11 7 USCOCNe. A'~"a'f-tom!-za. en u~ ?=UmU mm. nJ0~:;.•:'~~ ^SS~ at ~tJCiU CiCi{JU;r 00 A A A AA AODAxr~~~F!-'-~ r. f-~ A-13 ~ pp P o ~ arf. V ` b ~ _ ~ b l l~ J 152 _ i' a o .v S', V y n, Wit Y , ~ tlM1 - n a` ~ S z r. ' O Y O O Y ~ T C I, F v~ 3 " M :;s 8 i Y 12 ~t - _ rM a a ~ ~ ~ 3 rz b y L 4° Fn I I o ~Z.~ 121 1 p t F~~, O Qg, xx 7~( ~ P y~ L ~ - d oa O V~1 ~ y~ - ~ N_ y r r~ no: 14 43, "Q T YJ 'S7 G ed 6 i + i v $ ~ o` ~ s•° ? a i ^ c ~ r~ ~ of ~ ~y >~t . + r~ 4~i1 C S ' ~ ~ K y ^ K ~ ~ ~ fQ7I lid Y y qr ~ u'n r c r6 2S a o`e E ~~b u'.? i u'. sl y J F~ o a'G # ~..si L ~ I o '-ti U r O O z w' t O r r- a' V V .Z n. uc ~ay~ o~ ' F J g Ci i O O r[ z :c z' a sV-. F 5 N S ~.m 'm ~ c •-t~~ ;O. A-14 1 53 ° gay - - R ~ V V ;E x o 3 x A• x 8 3 $ x$$ 3 H j O Y.n h~ O O ~ !Y' ~ J ri ~ O» ~ 3 0 e - Y IM1 C O O Y rI 1. A y V A O L u• ~ 4 r.° .C Y QQ ~ •~X., X ~ ~ ~ ~ ' v a ~j r ci .c ~ 'r7t` ~ w o. r vY ry v - - r C~r.1 g ~ •O a H d C d G~ x ya a .a „ ;E ;E ; ~ ; 1 r- 'LS ' o tC _ h a° c Y O F T Y P~ N N M,~i ~ j F_?Y ~r ~_--r• V' Y- V W L' x - c u to V O y U O u yoy, c e a+ e°~ c E ~ ~ a E a $ .L' O V _ - p _ C ~ O M AN" 3 R o O v ~ 5< ti y s u u - 0 t U r .e ve u1JU~Uo`2jU3 O, y -81 eo i e , q u ug ug ugg u u ug ,x u $ : O ~ ^.d' ~ Z ;C S sC 1 2 :C 1 < b tR 2 n. < O ii 2 ¢ s ~ O t°n .r 'H`' p •p C ! r' F? G NO ~f. r rri Y. 7 Y T n r t x M1 'li T C T N y i-Vm'• a`c;r 3 d d n"S d m ~u°~'~:3de33Sd .yr A-15 154 P H °n. h cv g o $ w 0 0 ~ en v V u U a O CI pp A~ O_ w 8 8 ~ bA y O •f a ct y v ri ^ b ed?t ,o; ~ o r' ...t x d O r.. N o p o a s' ri ri RS d rti .y e• e w ri Q W w m ~ U y y 0 r c 8 ~ f 1' u r' - .C W r.+ 4.. ~ o O aq K r~ o O u y O Li S n d o O n ri - .ri Ni V ~ O rn bn a y. a sCD ~ ~ o o ~ o y a a A G `o a d U to C 'C `e v p e c a O v, O N > a g ~ ~O a. c o y W co u W a % ? N N v c a ~ x ° N +'p.+ w ~ K i^Ups J i % U .~C H A-16 O. a 'D ..o .c ,p .o ~a t°+ °r 1 5 5p ~ u a fl cl r! ~i fl e 0 0 ~ O V .e d ~ V o P N O O a [ T 0 rl a e~ .o ~e \o :e ~s p\ e D O~ \ °Q \e ~e .o a a a P C P P a a P P P a a a O' a N- a P ~ a O~ q n M P» Off, b •+i O R ~ p ~•1 ~ ~O b .xt O _ ?l+ r fl f p . ~ Oa O •C O N y vP~i .b0 ~ c V CI ~ ~ h r O ~ ~ R V d o » vi .E .e pp .p a o o \e vE gi ~9 e n 1~ n 0 0 .n n 0 h t~ P a_ W 1•" O CI N n .o n r a ~ r. r_n » N M r » "ha ~ rob9,0 On v .O n fl ~ h ~ N `T K b 9 ti M fl O ~ R R WQ K a a W O O r, m a a Ifl» a~o~r a•o- a a p a n tea;" %oa•~ri a w r n~fnl• ~ c vai n ~ v $ Oar r iv r.o nO f! ~ O O ~ ~ V `t 4 ~ y a eo $ e Q S ~ on °n gm g °o ."9 $ o ooq$o• rloa tl a h~ ~ h O N _ P nl A O~ Y ~ r tl ~ fl ~ CI - R O O O tl O Sri fl s O p N P P O N .p 4 b N V' fl d • ^ h K N .A .n H o M M ~.r.. H N N a C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 O O O O O O C CI 1 fl Cl CI ! 1 1 fl CI fl M 1 ..e 0 0 0 O O S S S O 0 000 0 0 22S i 1 fl CI f! CI 1 f1 9 4 O~ i O O O u a t' a 3 n' 'x a ~ Q o ~ o ~ o t •vv o c °wps i U 7 a - ~ ..S ~ in Oi u e 9 = O c `3_ w ~ e d~ Ka v O r y av O L ti r c o$ o o_ c ~ ~ ~ !n o ar OZ " C " e F r Fo~e~nn aaw AE 6 3n~ A-17 4 o e u P U ~ U p v V u o 3. ~i G $V ~ M ~w u Y N a Q OU y P P H Q L t~ Q U O P P c Vl ~ N rt O. a a s a $ o i~ s o rl o N ~r ..w 0 M M t. m ~ o N yt p N M_ W j Q K $p N O U $ 'O N O Q re o .h o r M N ~ L LI CI ~ ~ r v ~d z a o 0 0 0 0 q O 'V C5 Y Q g Q ~ ~ 2p5 25 2p5 y L ~ O O $ V .'7 O I ao 0o Go .u N Q y a s ~ "Q u N o o ° y' ~ d N o clan a s O U V u 78 V O ~ R c, o z =i :a O 0 °I v y Q Q ~ A 00 b0 •o o ro o X IL p C L V "q ffi o o 'Ir ° ar D N co x" c u v I. .0 U F A-18 Y ~ o 0 e ~ry P T u _ o? m m o ~ o w s~ _ - r 'c x~ s 'O. U h c E ao~ 99 O N C V N F _ N ~ ~ ~ N o 6 V A r a = - i E v o U~ ~ Y T H .C o V L• - ~ _b ~ NL J 00 L = Q ~ v C DD d Y a o y ~ o A ~ tx V ~ ~ ,g ~ U qu ~ S v q ~ ~ 3 V i~ e_ Y n o ~ :J :l byy e o e± ~ m n o v V A • C c n 1 ~ A-19 f y °a ei~ ~o •o ~o ~ °~~'N~ ~ V N rl r y a'n v b ~ O O t u V u R .e $ o 4 x ° b o P P U ~ °1 P P Q 'Y ~ P ~T P P OP ^ P P P ~ s e~ e e •o ~ o .,s S ~ ~ nN N•A 'n ~ANin P P P P P P P P P a '.Rin ri~no a'noe ~i n 46 v ° O R Cit~C D 11 Pin 1. V x o ~ o arc v rl ~ R h O i oe $ e e= e e O N ~ .n°: ~Pn W m ~ N 0 0$ O n o o~ ~ p • O .O ? 1~ m ~T C1 ~T R b b tZ ~1' N G t~ N eI V': rl P N V W g ~ P h oa N P H M r' 1»a.J O C R K T S T R V O P P P CI rl a` L Y vl A R OA O 4- O w 9 ~ s 8` ~=SS ~ag~ M ¢ ~ = r r. c Q ro ~ ' 25 r°`N' ~ P P rl A ~ M R P rn r•' M M 4~ VJ .Y> y e 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ o 0 0 F y N ~ ~7 S$o~ a' o~~•-R~ vi O D O O 4 tl R ~ b C `a b O 5 -G u o V f1. a o ~1 0 ~ s ~ r . ~ Le S ~1 ~ 3 U a a_ .3 ~ o= ~ rl ~O 6~ C ,O ~ ~ U ~ N O, A V N w y s A-20 ve 159 e e ee~e eee 1, CI 4- ~ ~j rr VJ 7 G~ h V a rr N F v co e R ~C7 7 ve a: c a o g N N V ; N G\ r\ A ,U "FC',C, as a~ gh~nh°m`~'° gn ~ M N rl M rr ri ~ ~ h ? vl v1 tA. r• 'f ~ V x fA ~ M 00 h p N - N h h V y a v d g as c~a 3 y v e e v e v e n g ooo,noovr,n,n S8 N - N h h F h N Vl a d O O N 0 0 ~/1 0 0 p r o O v0•+ S 6 :a7 ~ O O y, o d o o d p 'n h P O /y1 ~ O N N W p (9 y m ~ m. y _,s p pp pppppp ~~11 P O O O O 0 0 0 P O O O O O O O O O C vi v1 O O Vi y~ .n OO C ~/t 'V ~l h ~n t~ N O O F P G~ V N - rr Y M N R a v ° C $ p { O y~ O O C 0 N 'n ~ G O rl O O rOj G O O N ~ p 7pO p O O N r! ~ O NV rl ~ N O O O ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 o N nr u N ~ ~ ~ N j O O LO ca ro b V V M+ U ,y 'ci a 3 O G Vj 'fl a o 3 u t~ .~y ~ °o^~ N c m :n v Q c° a ^ a y Ce Q rr. ~ ~ .v. 70 -0 ~ N N OA y0 0 uan ,o .rs w N v v 13 A d S+ S N N ^r ! V J x ~ c~ a NS =v m ~ ~K ro°i o V a 1O Z. > a s Q. S o o 0 m o a a o$ u c i, v F~ V W V J -=D SOU Ha ws,. Q Q 160 APPENDIX A WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT CHARGE CONSULTATION PROCESS • JUNE 8, 2009 LETTER FROM ALTUS GROUP TO MATTAMY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION • SUPPORTING MATERIALS TO JUNE 8, 2009 PRESENTATION MADE BY IBI • JUNE 18, 2009 LETTER FROM ALTUS GROUP TO LYN TOWNSEND • JUNE 19, 2009 LETTER FROM SERNAS ASSOCIATES TO TOWNSEND AND ASSOCIATES • JUNE 23, 2009 LETTER FROM BILD TO GIL PATERSON • JUNE 24, 2009 EMAIL FROM PLANNING SOLUTIONS TO GIL PATERSON • JUNE 30, 2009 EMAIL FROM DURHAM HOMEBUILDERS ASSOCIATION TO GIL PATERSON • JULY 2, 2009 LETTER FROM TOWNSEND AND ASSOCIATES/SERNAS TO GIL PATERSON Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:IPickering12009 DCldc background study-ADDENDUM.doc A-21 161 Independent Real Estate hitelligerice Altus Grou p June 18, 2009 Memorandum to: Lyn Townsend From: Jeannette Gillezeau, Senior Director Altus Group Economic Consulting Subject: Pickering Development Charges Our File: P- 4230 I have reviewed the City of Pickering 2009 Development Charge Background Study, which was prepared by Watson & Associates and is dated May 22, 2009. We have a number of concerns regarding the calculation of the proposed development charges. Roads The capital program for roads and related works appears to be very similar to the capital program in the 2004 DC background study, which was based on the Transportation Study Report prepared by iTrans. Most of the projects are exactly the same and the allocation to "benefit to existing development" is the same for most projects. There are a few new projects (e.g. oversizing of collector roads in Duffin Heights) and a few of the projects in the 2004 DC study appear to have been eliminated (e.g. Notion Road/Squires Beach - Hwy 401 Overpass, Dixie Road Overpass - CPR Tracks). The primary factor driving up the road DC appears to be the time period used to calculate the DC. In the 2004 DC study, the time period went to 2024. In the 2009 DC study, the time period for the calculation of the road DC is 2018. While the City is permitted to use a ten- year time horizon for roads under the DC Act, we would have expected to see a shorter road program in the 2009 DC and/or a larger share of costs allocated to "post period capacity" given that this is essentially the same road program as in 2004. Research, Valuation & Advisory ' Cost Consulting 1 Realty Tax Consulting I Geomatics I Economic Consulting 1580 Kingston Road, Toronto, ON MIN 1S2 Canada T 416.699,S645 F 416.699.2252 :atu .c)i'ot.ip.Ciint A-22 162 Pickering DC June 18, 2009 Page 2 ➢ Schedule 5 on pages A-13 to A-15 shows projected residential growth by neighbourhood and period in Pickering, excluding Seaton. A total of 1,617 units are projected for the 2019 to 2023 period, with roughly half of the 2019 to 2023 residential growth projected to be in the Duffin Heights neighbourhood. All of the road improvements required for Duffin Heights appear to be included in the capital program with no allowance for post period benefit. Therefore, the road costs should continue to be spread over growth to the year 2024, as in the 2004 background study. The road DC should be calculated by spreading the residential costs over 6,282 dwelling units (rather than 4,665 units). Storm Water Management i~ The 2004 DC background study provided for annual spending of $150,000 on unspecified storm water management projects. The 2009 DC background study includes an extensive list of storm water management works on page B-17, all of which appear to be located in the south end of the City (and generally south of Highway 401) and in the Frenchmans Bay watershed. On page B-15, under New Stormwater Management Facilities, the study says the new SWM facilities included in the report "consist of infill development" and "Stormwater facilities associated with large development blocks are not a part of the City's development charges and will be the responsibility of the developers group to fund." It appears the proposed storm water DC assumes that developers in large development blocks will pay directly for all of their own SWM facilities and that they will also be required to help pay for SWM facilities for the infill and intensification development in the Frenchmans Bay watershed through the proposed stormwater DC. This is inherently unfair. The City should implement an area-specific DC for SWM facilities for infill and intensification in the Frenchmans Bay watershed and exclude development in large development blocks from the storm water DC. P: \ 42085 1 4 230 \ tvporI Wrrrto - Pickering VC- (Our fife - P-4230)DOC 1 rf?c_ 1 63 A-23 ea eru" 110 Scotia Court T-905.686.6402 Unit 41 F-905-432-7877 Whitby, ON sernes.com Lt N 8y7 June 19, 2009 Townsend and Associates 10-1525 Cornwall Road Oakville, Ontario L6J 0B2 Attention: Ms. Lynda Townsend Dear Ms. Townsend: Re. Review of the City of Pickering Municipal Engineering Services 2009 Development Charge Background Study Land Development Planning Our Project No. 04565 Development Management As requested, we have completed a review of the City of Pickering 2009 Water Resources Management Development Charge Background Study dated May 22, 2009 and provide the Acoustical Engineering following comments regarding Section B-1 (Roads and Related) and Section Geomorphic & Environmental Sciences B-2 (Stormwater Management). Transportation Planning Section B-1 (Roads and Related) As per our discussions we have requested the detailed background for the entire roads program from the City of Pickering. There appears to be some inconsistencies related to road lengths and capital costs for the oversizing of the Collector Roads east of Brock Road that warrants a more detailed review. Once the detailed calculations and assumptions are received, we will review and provide further comment. Section B-2 (Stormwater Management) The capital program for the Stormwater Management projects is based on the implementation of the City's. Frenchman's Bay Stormwater Management Master Plan. Development outside of the Frenchman's Bay watershed will not affect the need for the Stormwater management projects included in the Development Charge Background Study. As noted within Section B-2.4 of the Background Study, "stormwater facilities associated with large development blocks are not part of the City's development charges and will be the responsibility of the developers group to fund" As the Duffin Heights Secondary Plan is outside the Frenchman's Bay watershed and it will have to pay for its own stormwater management facilities, it should not be subject to the stormwater management component of the proposed development charge. An area specific development charge for infill and intensification within the Frenchman's Bay watershed would be a more reasonable and equitable way to finance the proposed stormwater management projects. A drawing showing the limits of the watershed is attached for reference. ...2/ A-24 ;y 1 6 4 0 Townsend and Associates Ms. Lynda Townsend June 19, 2009 Page 2 If you have any questions or wish to discuss the above further, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours truly, SERNAS ASSOCIATES Aaron Christie, P.Eng. Associate, Project Manager AC/br Attch. cc: Mattamy Homes Limited, Attn: Mr. R. Miller, Mr. A. Wisson Sernas Associates, Attn: Mr. M. Favit Z« A-25 w~4t uet naa: asst r 1 6 5 W Z 1 ~ ~i ccCC oW r T y cwc wul 3: hd 2 Q %'C app a 13 REC LL. A-26 1 6 6 June 23, 2009 Mr. Gil A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Corporate Services Department City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario L1V 6K7 RE: Proposed City of Pickering Development Charges Background Study and By-law The Building Industry and Land Development Association is in receipt of the above noted City of Pickering Development Charges Background Study, and would like to submit the following comments for your consideration as you proceed through the process to approve a new development charges by-law. Although it is encouraging to see that the City of Pickering is proposing a decrease in its rate related to "other dwelling units", as an interested and affected stakeholder BILD remains concerned about the proposed development charges rate increases, which reach as high as 16% for some residential unit types and almost 30% for categories related to non-residential development. BILD understands that individual member companies have retained expert advice of consultants who are in the process of reviewing the background material associated to the proposed charge. BILD has reviewed the various industry submissions and shares their concerns. BILD strongly recommends that the City consider the comments submitted by these groups, and trusts that additional dialogue will take place regarding these items. BILD also urges the City to give serious consideration to decreasing the proposed development charge, while attributing no negative impacts to the infrastructure program. In light of the current economic circumstances, it should come as no surprise that developers and builders are questioning any and all cost increases, not only of governments but of their suppliers, trades and service companies. In that context, the notion of any increase in development charges simply does not acid up. BILD members have expressed concern with the proposed increase, especially since it comes at a time where the building and development industry requires assistance and not more costs. In these current 20 Upjohn Rd. Suite 100 North Yok ON N13B 2U9 Tel: 4163913445 1 m4163912118 ,umi.bildgtd.ca A-27 i67 B Y ;nrr~rrrn;sc:r, ~,r;~s economic times, BILD urges staff to show leadership and to seize this opportunity to lower any levies associated to development. As matters now stand, the industry is battling to shed inventory at a time when housing sales have plummeted due to widespread economic uncertainty. We are facing a credit crunch which is threatening perfectly viable projects and we are also concerned with the prospect of contracted buyers failing to close on their units. In short, we are in uncharted waters and would therefore support any efforts which would assist in stimulating increased building and land development activity. To underscore the gravity of the current situation, it should be noted that sales of new homes in the City of Pickering have significantly declined since last year, reaching a year high of 22 total sales in April 2008 to a total of only 6 in April 2009. 'T'otal high-rise sales in April of2008 reached 10, noting that there were NO high-rise sales for April 2009. This decline will be directly reflected in reduced employment, investment and spin-off economic benefits as suppliers, trades and service companies are being impacted as harshly as lane{ developers and home builders are. BILD urges the City to work with the industry in taking responsibility to assist with job creation. A thorough consideration of the impacts of the proposed development charges would be a positive first step. The building and land development industry is a fundamental cornerstone to the econorny and a significant job creator. Increases in development charges would do no good to assist in stimulating job creation. Reduced costs will help to kick-start projects that would otherwise be on hold and would assist in securing badly needed financing and ultimately allow for more affordable home pricing. We trust that you will take our comments under advisement as the City proceeds through a review of its development charges by-law. Sincerely, Paula j. Tenuta, MCIP, RPP Director, Municipal Government Relations cc. John Koke, BILD Durharn Chapter Chair Donna Donaldson, Durham Region Home Builders' Association 20 Upiolin Rd. Suite 100 North York, ON iM3B M Tel: 4163913445 Fax:4163912118 www.bildgtata A-28 168 From: Wayne Clarke To: Paterson, Gil Sent: Tue Jun 30 16:43:43 2009 Subject: DC By-Law 2009 I know this is two weeks before the new By-Law is adopted by Council July 13th. however I was juggling yours as well as Oshawa, Scugog 8, Brock Twnshp's at the same time. The points I highlighted @ the Public mtg. are as follows. Pge. B-11 Traffic Lights @ Altona Rd. 8s Pinegrove (2005-09) study listed a reduction of $62,500 under (Grants, Subsidies , 8, Dev. Contributions) In the current study , same Intersection (2009-13) this figure is not listed ? Pge. B-22 The 2004 study lists 2 Rescue Vehicles @$400,000 replacement value each.The Proposed Study lists 1 Rescue Vehicle @ $1,200,000 for replacement value. We question the substantial increase. Pge. B-22 Shows 2 Pumper/ Rescue vehicles from 1999 to 08 with a 2008 value @ $800,000 each , however pge B23 lists an additional vehicle purchase in 2010 @ a price of $775,000 $25,000 less than current value , which figure is correct ? Pge. B-37 The 2004 Study lists an expansion to Petticoat Creek Branch in (2006-08) The eligible total cost was reduced by 50% or $134,758 as Benefit to Existing / UEC. This same expansion is listed for2011 however only 10% is listed as Benefit to Existing. Could we have an explanation for the decrease. Our Association realizes the above queries will have little or no affect on the final quantum , nonetheless clarification is justified in our opinion. Wayne Clarke Co- Chair Legislative Affairs Durham HomeBuilders Assoc. A-29 PLEASE n TowREFERTt TOWNSEND AND ASSOCIATES Ly Lyn Townsend {Ext. . 222) 69 BARRISTERS AND SOLICITORS Email: lyn.townsend c@itownsend.ca Assistant: Kate King (Ext. 221) LYNDA J. TOWNSEND PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION E-mail, kate.king@ltownsend.ca July 2, 2009 City of Pickering 1 The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario L1 V 6K7 Attention: Mr. Gil Paterson, Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Dear Sir: Re: 2009 Development Charge By-law On behalf of the Mattamy Group of Companies for whom we act, we are enclosing herewith a letter from Sernas Associates which provides detailed comments on the project cost calculations. We ask that this information be considered in your ongoing review of the background study. We would also appreciate it if a meeting could be scheduled as soon as possible to review the issues raised by our clients. We look forward to further dialogue before the matter returns to Council on July 13, 2009-07-02 Yours truly, TOWNSEND AND ASSOCIATES Lynda J. Townsend Encls. 1 cc Rodger Miller SUITE 10, 1525 CORNWALL. ROAD, OAKVILLE, ONTARIO L6J 0132 PHONE: {905) 829 8600 • FACSIMILE: (905) 829 2035 • E•MAIL7 mail a I.townsend.ca era r®s, 1 (1 110 Scotia Court T •905.866.6402 Unit 41 F-905-432-7877 Whitby, ON sernas.corn LIN SY7 June 30, 2009 Townsend and Associates 10-1525 Cornwall Road Oakville, Ontario L6J OB2 Attention: Ms. Lynda Townsend Dear Ms. Townsend: Re. Review of the City of Pickering Detailed Project Cost Calculations Municipal Engineering Services 2009 Development Charge Background Study Land Development Planning Our Proiect No. 04565 Development Management As requested, we have completed a review of the detailed project cost Water Resources Management calculations that show some additional background information related to the Acoustical Engineering costs included in the City of Pickering 2009 Development Charge Background Goomorphic & Environmental Sciences Study. Transportation Planning With respect to the Duffin Heights development area, we can confirm that the section of William Jackson from Brock Road going east and then north beyond the hydra corridor is missing from the back ground study. The missing section is approx. 625m as 425m has been captured in item DH-10. We believe the code for this oversizing component is DH-9. The city should have this segment added to the background study. With respect to item DH-15 which is the sidewalk, street lights and median on Brock Road between Rossland and Old Taunton the calculations show a length of 3100m with a cost of $345/m. The road length for this segment is 1550m, therefore the City should confirm that the length and unit rate used are representative of the boulevard length and not the road length. (i.e one side vs. two sides) Below is a list of projects that we question the value / benefit to future development that is expected with the construction of each project. We request that the City provide additional detail regarding this matter. Code Description Cost Allocated to Timing Dev~ment R-3 To nevale Reconstruction 781,550 25% 2014 R-4a Oakwood Drive Reconstruction 923,650 25% 2018 R-4b Oakwood Drive Reconstruction 459,250 25% 2018 R-5 Rougemount Drive 1,837,000 25% 2014 Reconstruction /2 A-31 1 171 - Townsend and Associates Ms. Lynda Townsend June 30, 2009 Page 2 Code Description Cost Allocated to Timing Development RU-3 Sideline 4 Rural Reconstruction 870,000 25% 2009 south of H 7 RU-4 Audle Road south of Hwy 7 1,768,800 25% 2012 _ RU-6 Sideline 14 Reconstruction 1,768,800 25% 2012 related to 407 overpass TC-25 Street 'Al'- Oversizin_g__ _ 127,350 75% _ 2010 TC-26 Street 'A2' - Full Construction 229,425 75% 2012 TC-27 Pinecreek Culvert 2,467,500 75% 2015 TC-28 Street 'AT Oversizin 332,525 75% 2012 TC-29 Street 'A4' - Full Construction 120,750 75% 2015 Combined these projects add $4,560,425 to the costs benefiting new development. We also recommend that the City confirm the method of calculating the oversizing share for the collector roads. Our understanding is that they will be reimbursing the developer that constructs the collector road for all additional costs over and above the typical costs related to constructing the 8.5m wide local road. These costs include the additional width for the full pavement structure, the additional depths of granulars and asphalt over the 8.5m width, the sidewalk on the second side of the road, additional width of boulevard sodding, traffic medians, lane marking and line painting, etc. If you have any questions or wish to discuss the above further, please do not hesitate to contact me. Yours truly, SERNAS ASSO IATES Aaron Christie, P.En . Principal, Project Manager AC/br Attch. cc: Mattamy Homes Limited, Attn: Mr. R. Miller, Mr. A. Wisson Sernas Associates, Attn: Mr. M. Favit 172 APPENDIX B REVISED 2009 DEVELOPMENT CHARGE BY-LAW FOR THE CITY OF PICKERING (APPLICABLE TO THE CITY, EXCLUSIVE OF THE SEATON LANDS WHICH WILL SUBSEQUENTLY BE SUBJECT TO A SEPARATE DEVELOPMENT CHARGE BY-LAW) Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. HlPickering12009 DCldc background study-ADDENDUM.doc 111111 11I B-1 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING ' 73 BY-LAW NO. Being a By-law regarding Development Charges WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of Section 2(1) of the Development Charges Act, 1997 (the Act), the council of a municipality may by By-law impose development charges against land to pay for increased capital costs required due to increased needs for servicing arising from development of the area to which the By-law applies; and WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering, approved the City of Pickering Development Charge Background Study, dated , May 22, 2009, as amended, prepared by Watson & Associates Economists Ltd.; AND WHEREAS the Council has made the Background Study and proposed Development Charges By-law available to the public at least two weeks prior to the public meeting and has given Notice in accordance with Section 12 of the Development Charges Act, 1997 of its development charges proposal and a public meeting was held on June 8, 2009; AND WHEREAS the Council has heard all persons who applied to be heard in objection to, or in support of, the proposed Development Charge By-law proposal at such public meeting, and provided a subsequent period for written communications to be made; AND WHEREAS the Council in adopting the Development Charge Background Study on July 13, 2009 directed that development charges be imposed on land under development or redevelopment within the geographical limits of the municipality as hereinafter provided. NOW THEREFORE the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: PART 1 APPLICATION 1. (1) Subject to subsection (2), this By-law applies to all lands except for the lands commonly referred to as "Seaton lands" in the City of Pickering, as shown on the map attached to this By-law as Appendix "A" whether or not the land or use is exempt from taxation under Section 3 of the Assessment Act. (2) This By-law shall not apply to land that is owned by and used for the purposes of, (a) a board of education as defined under subsection 1(1) of the Education Act (b) any municipality or local board thereof; (c) the development of a non-residential farm building used for bona fide agricultural purposes; Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H.IPickedng=09 DCtdc background study-ADDENDUM. doc 1 7 4 B-2 (d) a building or structure that is used in connection with a place of worship and is exempt from taxation under the Assessment Act as a result; (e) development where, by comparison with the land at any time within ten years previous to the imposition of the charge: (i) no additional dwelling units are being created; (ii) no additional non-residential gross floor area is being added. (f) nursing homes and hospitals. (3) An owner who has obtained a demolition permit and demolished existing dwelling units or non-residential area in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code Act shall not be subject to the development charge under subsection (1) with respect to the development being replaced, provided that the building permit for the replacement residential units or non-residential area is issued not more than 10 years after the date of demolition and provided that any dwelling units or additional non residential floor area created in excess of what was demolished shall be subject to the development charge calculated under Section 6 and 11, respectively. 2. (1) Subject to subsection (2), development charges shall apply, and shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with the provisions of this By-law, in respect of land to be developed for residential use, non-residential use, or both, where the development requires, (a) the passing of a zoning By-law or of an amendment to a zoning By-law under Section 34 of the Planning Act; (b) the approval of a minor variance under Section 45 of the Planning Act, (c) a conveyance of land to which a By-law passed under subsection 50(7) of the Planning Act, applies; (d) the approval of a plan of subdivision under Section 51 of the Planning Act, (e) a consent under Section 53 of the Planning Act, (f) the approval of a description under Section 50 of the Condominium Act, or (g) the issuing of a permit under the Building Code Act, in relation to a building or structure. (2) Subsection (1) shall not apply in respect of: (a) local services, related to a plan of subdivision or within the area to which the plan relates, to be installed or paid for by the owner as a condition of approval under Section 51 of the Planning Act, (b) local services to be installed or paid for by the owner as a condition of approval under Section 53 of the Planning Act. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H.Ockering12009 DOdc background study-ADDENDUM.doc B-3 1 7 5 (3) Subsection (1) shall not apply with respect to only bona fide and complete permit applications received prior to the effective dates of the development charge rates as specified in Sections 6 and 11. 3. (1) Where two or more of the actions described in subsection 2(1) are required before land to which a development charge applies can be developed, only one development charge shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with the provisions of this By-law. (2) Notwithstanding subsection (1) above, more than one development charge By- law may apply to the same area and if two or more of the actions described in subsection 2(1) occur at different times, and.if the subsequent action has the effect of increasing the need for services as designated in Sections 5 and 10, an additional development charge shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with the provisions of this By-law. PART II RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES 4. In this part, (a) "apartment building" means a residential building, or the residential portion of a mixed-use building, other than a triplex, semi-detached duplex, semi-detached triplex, townhouse or stacked townhouse, consisting of more than 3 dwelling units, which dwelling units have a common entrance to grade; (b) "apartment" means a dwelling unit in an apartment building; (c) "bedroom" means any room used, or designed or intended for use, as sleeping quarters; (d) "development charge" means residential development charge; (e) "dwelling unit" means a room or suite of rooms used, or designed or intended for use by one person or persons living together, in which culinary and sanitary facilities are provided for the exclusive use of such person or persons; (f) "garden suite" means a one-unit detached, temporary residential structure containing bathroom and kitchen facilities that is ancillary to an existing residential structure and that is designed to be portable; (g) "grade" means the average level of finished ground adjoining a dwelling at all exterior walls; (h) "gross floor area" means the total floor area, measured between the outside of exterior walls or between the outside of exterior walls and the centre line of party walls dividing the building from another building, of all floors above the average level of finished ground adjoining the building at its exterior walls. 0) "semi-detached dwelling" means one of a pair of dwelling units attached together horizontally above or below grade or both above and below grade; Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H.Vickering=09 DC1dc background study-ADDENDUM_doc 176 B-4 (j) "single-attached dwelling" means one of a group of not less than three adjacent dwelling units attached together horizontally by above grade common walls; (k) "single-detached dwelling" means a single dwelling unit which is free-standing, separate and detached from any other building or structure. (1) "nursing home" means a building owned and operated on a non-profit basis but excluding any building or part of a building which is comprised of dwelling units. (m) "hospital" means land, buildings or structures used, or designed or intended for use as defined in the Public Hospitals Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.40 as amended;. 5. Development charges against land to be developed for residential use shall be based upon the following designated services provided by the City, with each charge apportioned for reserve fund purposes, in accordance with the percentages shown: (a) development-related capital studies (0.9%); (b) fire stations and equipment and services related thereto (2.7%); (c) storm drainage and management works and equipment and services related thereto (14.1 (d) transportation, operations and equipment, including roads, sidewalks, streetlights, traffic signals and services related thereto (49.4%); (e) parkland development and trail development and equipment and services related thereto (4.4%); (f) major indoor recreational facilities and equipment and services related thereto (23.2%); (g) libraries and furnishings and (non-computer) equipment and services related thereto, including circulating and non-circulating materials generally provided to library users by public libraries (5.3%). 6. Subject to the provisions of this Part and this By-law, development charges against land to be developed for residential use shall be calculated, paid and collected at the following rates per residential unit: Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H.- Pickering12009 DCldc background study-ADDENDUM. doc IYII Y 1 B-5 1I TABLE 1(A) EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1, 2009 TYPE OF DWELLING UNIT CHARGE PER UNIT Single-detached dwelling, or semi-detached dwelling $9,694 Apartment dwelling, two or more bedrooms $5,246 Apartment dwelling, less than two bedrooms (inclusive of senior citizen apartment units) $3,849 All other dwelling units $6,957 7. (1) Subject to subsections (2) and (3), Section 6 shall not apply in respect of a renovation, addition or installation which involves the creation of: (a) one or two additional dwelling units in an existing single-detached dwelling; or (b) an additional dwelling unit in any other existing residential building; (c) garden suites. (2) Notwithstanding clause (1)(a) of this Section, development charges shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with Section 6 where the total gross floor area of the additional unit or units is greater than the total gross floor area of the existing dwelling unit. (3) Notwithstanding clause (1)(b) of this Section, development charges shall be calculated, paid and collected in accordance with Section 6 where the additional unit has a gross floor area greater than, (a) in the case of a semi-detached dwelling or single attached dwelling, the gross floor area of the dwelling unit already in the building; (b) in the case of any other residential building, the gross floor area of the smallest dwelling unit contained in the residential building. 8. Where non-residential floor area is to be converted to residential space, a charge shall be paid for any new residential units created, less the amount of the charge which would be payable if the existing non-residential space being converted were being constructed. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. HAPickering12009 DC1dc background study-ADDENDUM. doc 1 7 B-6 PART III NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES 9. In this part, (a) "development charge" means non-residential development charge; (b) "grade" means the average level of finished ground adjoining a building at all exterior walls; (c) "existing industrial building" means a building used for or in connection with: (i) manufacturing, producing, processing, storing or distributing something, (ii) research or development in connection with manufacturing , producing or processing something, (iii) retail sales by a manufacturer, producer or processor of something they manufactured, produced or processed, if the retail sales are at the site where the manufacturing, production or processing takes place, (iv) office or administrative purposes, if they are: (1) carried out with respect to manufacturing, producing, processing, storage or distributing or something, and (2) in or attached to the building or structure used for that manufacturing, producing, processing, storage or distribution. (d) "gross floor area" means the total floor area, measured between the outside of exterior walls or between the outside of exterior walls and the centre line of party walls dividing the building from another building, of all floors above the average level of finished ground adjoining the building at its exterior walls. (e) "non-residential" means designed, adapted or used for any purpose other than a dwelling or dwellings, or accessory uses or spaces to a dwelling or dwellings. (f) "total floor area" means the sum total of the areas of the floor whether above or below grade, measured between the exterior faces of the exterior walls of the building or structure or from the centre line of a common wall separating two uses; and (i) includes the area of mezzanine as defined in the Ontario Building Code; and (ii) excludes those areas used exclusively as mechanical areas or for parking garages or structures. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:lPickering42009 DCtdc background study-A DDENDUM. doc _ i_ -r..._. _.ri unr i ■uuuin~ -i rw irr 7 9 B-7 10. Development charges against land to be developed for non-residential use shall be based upon the following designated services provided by the City, with each charge apportioned for reserve fund purposes, in accordance with the percentages shown: (a) development-related capital studies (0%); (b) fire stations and equipment and services related thereto (0%); (c) storm drainage and management works and equipment and services related thereto (0%); (d) transportation, operations and equipment, including roads, sidewalks, streetlights, traffic signals and services related thereto (100°/x); (e) parkland development and trail development and equipment and services related thereto (0%); (f) major indoor recreational facilities and equipment and services related thereto (0%); and (g) libraries and furnishings and (non-computer) equipment and services related thereto, including circulating and non-circulating materials generally provided to library users by public libraries (0%). 11. (1) Subject to the provisions of this Part and this By-law, development charges against land to be developed for non-residential use shall be calculated, paid and collected at the following rate: (a) $30.78 per square metre ($2.86 per sq.ft.) of total floor area, between September 1, 2009 and August 31, 2010. (b) $31.97 per square metre ($2.97 per sq. ft.) of total floor area, effective September 1, 2010. (2) If a development includes the enlargement of the gross floor area of an existing industrial building, the amount of the development charge that is payable in respect of the enlargement will be determined as follows: (a) if the gross floor area is enlarged by 50 percent or less, the amount of the development charge in respect of the enlargement is zero; and (b) if the gross floor area is enlarged by more than 50 percent, the amount of the development charge in respect of the enlargement is the amount of the development charge that would otherwise be payable multiplied by the fraction determined as follows: (i) determine the amount by which the enlargement in gross floor area exceeds 50 percent of the gross floor area lawfully constructed at the time of building permit application; and (ii) divide the amount determined under paragraph 1 by the amount of the enlargement. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:IPickering=09 DCldc background study-ADDENDUM.doc 1 80 B-$ (c) for the purposes of calculating the floor area of the existing industrial building, floor area created by a previous enlargement shall not be included. 12. Where residential floor space is to be converted to non-residential space, no development charge shall be paid. PART IV ADMINISTRATION 13. Development charges against land to be developed for residential uses, non-residential uses, or both, shall be calculated, paid and collected as follows: (a) development charges against that portion of the land to be developed for residential use shall be calculated, paid and collected on a per dwelling unit of residential use basis in accordance with Part If of this By-law and in the case of a mixed-use building or structure, upon the residential uses in the mixed use buildings or structures, according to the type of residential use; (b) development charges against that portion of the land to be developed for non- residential use shall be calculated, paid and collected on a gross floor area of non-residential use basis in accordance with Part III of this By-law and in the case of a mixed-use building or structure, upon the non-residential uses in the mixed-use building or structure. 14. (1) Development charges shall be payable in full on the date that the building permit is issued in relation to a building or structure on land to which a development charge applies. (2) No building permits shall be issued by the City for the construction of any building or structure on land to which a development charge applies until the applicable development charge has been paid in full to the City. (3) Where an owner has paid to the City, prior to the enactment of this By-law, in relation to a building or structure on land to which a development charge applies, (a) a charge against development pursuant to an obligation to do so in a Subdivision Agreement, Condominium Agreement, Development Agreement or other agreement with the City, (b) a fee as a condition of obtaining a consent to create a lot; or (c) a lot levy pursuant to By-law 3322/89, and the building permit for that building or structure has not been issued prior to the enactment of this By-law, the owner shall be credited with the amount so paid, up to the amount of the development charge payable, as part of the development charge payable hereunder when the building permit is issued. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. N:IPickedngt2009 DCldc background study-ADDENDUM. doc 1~1 B-9 15. (1) Monies received from payment of development charges shall be maintained in separate reserve funds, and shall be used only to meet the capital costs for which the development charge was levied under this By-law. (2) Council directs the Municipal Treasurer to divide the reserve funds created hereunder into the separate sub-accounts in accordance with the services and percentages set out in Sections 5 and 10, to which the development charge payments shall be credited in accordance with the amounts shown, plus interest earned thereon. (3) The amounts contained in the reserve funds established under this Section shall be invested, with any income received credited to the development charge reserve funds in relation to which the investment income applies. 16. (1) The development charges referred to in Sections 6 and 11 may be adjusted annually, without amendment to this By-law, as of July 1 each year, in accordance with the change in the index for the most recently available annual period ending March 31 for the Statistics Canada Quarterly, Construction Price Statistics, Catalogue Number 62-007. (2) The indexed development charges rates effective July 1 each year shall not apply to permit applications received prior to the July 1 effective date, provided: (i) the permit application is complete in terms of the applicant's submission requirements set out in the building code and the City's building by-law; (ii) applicable law approvals prescribed in the building code have been obtained or applied for, and (iii) the building permit or a conditional building permit is issued for all or part of the building on or before September 1 of that year. 17. Development Charges for the City of Pickering are payable by cash or certified cheque at the rates in effect at the time of payment upon issuance of the building permit(s) or as otherwise may be approved by Council. 18. Council may consider allowing a person to perform work that relates to a service to which the Development Charge By-law relates and if it agrees shall give the person a credit towards a development charge otherwise payable in exchange for the related work. 19. This By-law shall be administered by the Corporate Services Department and applied by the Chief Building Official. 20. This By-law shall come into force and effect at 12:01 am on September 1, 2009 for a term not to exceed five years from the date of its enactment, unless it is repealed at an earlier date. 21. By-law No. 6349/04 shall be repealed as of the date this By-law comes into force. Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H:lPickedng12009 DCtdc background study-ADDE'NDUM.doc 1 8 2 B-10 BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 13th day of July, 2009. Original signed Mayor Original signed Clerk Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H. Pickering12009 DOdc background study-ADDENDUM.doc B-11 1 8 3 low.SHIP QP U ORIOOE A t i t {Q ~ t t t o t CURIM P t 3C s .AM 15........ 0 t t t LAL t ww A r ° Y O z h 04 14 i APPENDIX "A" SEATON LANDS q _c Dwdlopment Cgill c i ti Q7faL{i~l/® %j, c, n e n ids o.. xxuw uA~ b c ° ntFCw: rr a € i !NFORMATION OURREN-Y AS OF MAY t. 2009. ett. j .,.I. rr~ Watson & Associates Economists Ltd. H. Pickering12009 DCldc background study-ADDENDUM.doc Pickering Civic Complex Call 00 One The Es lanade r 184 p 11, ATTACHMENT #__1_TO REPORT #f2-~ 6 ' Pickering' Ontario 11 Canada L1V 6K7 I - I Direct Access 905.420.4660 P I C T i1~[~r T T ~wfL-I 1.111\VI T Toll Free 1.866.683.2760 cityofpickering.com CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Department 905.420.4634 North Pickering 905.683.2760 Facsimile 905.420.5313 corpserv@city.pickering. on. ca July 7, 2009 Lynda J. Townsend Townsend and Associates Barrister and Solicitors Suite 10, 1525 Cornwall Road Oakville, ON L6L OB2 Subject: 2009 City of Pickering Development Charges By-law - Responses to Questions Raised File: F-7000 Below please find responses to the questions raised by the building communities: 1. Altus Group Preliminary Comments dated June 8, 2009 1.1 Roads - As indicated, a number of projects have been eliminated that were part of the 2004 DC Study. 1.2 A cost reduction was made to the 2009 gross costs for a number of projects for the Roads & Related-City Roads, Structures and Sidewalks, (overall average gross cost reduction was 3%) in order to better reflect inflation during the interval. 1.3 A decision has also been made to acknowledge post period capacity for several major Roads projects. See Table 1 below: Table 1 Project May 22/09 Revised June 26/09 BTE PPC BTE PPC RP-14 50% 0 50% 25% DH-1 10% 0 10% 25% DH-2 10% 0 10% 25% BR-1 75% 0 50% 25% BR-2 50% 0 50% 25% 2009 City of Pickering Development Charges By-law - Responses July 7, 2009 to Questions Raised 185 File: F-7000 Page 2 1.4 The City's local service policy for stormwater management is set out on page B-13 of the Background Study. Where prospective development specifically requires stormwater management facilities, it is required to put such facilities in place or, in some instances of infill, to make a cash-in-lieu payment. The works included in the development charge program are over and above the foregoing, in order to provide broad environmental benefit to the City. Such costs are appropriately shared between existing, 10-year and long-term development, all of whom contribute to the problem (via the cumulative effect of inadequate volume controls) and share in the benefits of the works. 1.5 The 30% post period capacity deduction for Krosno Creek does not relate to Seaton. 2. Submission by the IBI Group dated June 8, 2009 Issue #1 - Seaton has been excluded from the Growth Forecast for the reasons given on page 1 of the presentation made on June 8, 2009, namely that: "The Background Study is applicable to the City of Pickering, exclusive of the Seaton lands, which will subsequently to subject to a separate development charge by-law, or a revised City-wide by-law. This can occur as such time as planning for Seaton is advanced to the point where the anticipated development and associated capital servicing requirements have been sufficiently clarified." Issue #2 - The anticipated growth for the 10-year period 2009-2019 reflects City Planning's assessment of the development potential involved and the rate at which it is expected to occur, including consideration of the current recessionary economic conditions. The average annual pace of development is 500 units/year, which is beyond the 425 units/year forecast in 2004 for the 20-year period. Issue #3 - The replacement cost of Recreation Facilities has been indexed from the TSH cost analysis conducted in 2004, as footnoted on page B-30, with $34/sq.ft. provision for land costs added as per common DC replacement cost practice. The cost of trail development has increased significantly as a result of indexing and making appropriate provision for the cost of bridge works, which adds considerably to the cost/km, particularly given that the trail measurement was refined and substantially reduced subsequent to 2004. 2009 City of Pickering Development Charges By-law - Responses July 7, 2009 to Questions Raised File: F-7000 Page 3 186 Issue #4 - The cost of the Kingston St. Fire Station and the Finch Ave. Fire Station have increased significantly as a result of DC indexing, the provision of a $34/sq.ft. land cost allowance and the use of Firehall No. 5 as the replacement cost base. Issue #5 - The per unit costs for the pumper, rescue and support vehicles has increased significantly from the 2004 Study as a result of indexing and to reflect the fact that the replacement units are larger and contain more specialized equipment, including hydraulics. However, it could be asserted that this represents a service level increase and, as a result, the 2004 costs plus 33% indexing will be used instead (thereby somewhat reducing the service level cap and the Fire component of the charge). Issue #6 - The increase in. the operations centre replacement cost is as a result of indexing plus the inclusion of a land cost allowance and equipment not included in 2004. Issue #7 - The roads shown in orange are, in fact, not new but have simply been renumbered and differently identified. The only new project is Town Centre West area. Issues #8 - A number of modifications in deductions have been made for various roads. Please see Table 1. Issue #9 - This question is also addressed via Table 1. Table 1 Project May 22/09 Revised June 26/09 BTE PPC BTE PPC RP-14 50% 0 50% 25% DH-1 10% 0 10% 25% DH-2 10% 0 10% 25% BR-1 75% 0 50% 25% Issue #10 - The benefit to existing deductions for projects BR-11, RP-14, BR-14 and BR-15 have been altered in order to reflect the fact that: • future growth will have access to 407 via RP-14; • an increase in BTE from 50% to 75% in the case of BR-15. While BTE was maintained at 75% for BR-14; • BR-11 was increased from 5% to 10%. BTE percentages typically remain constant for road projects as part of following through on the original DC funding plan. 2009 City of Pickering Development Charges By-law - Responses July 7, 2009 to Questions Raised File: F-7000 Page 4 1~7 Issue #11 - Costs associated with Seaton have been deducted in the form of post period benefit as noted on Table 1. (None applicable to roads.) Issue #12 - With respect to the aerial, the deduction has been significantly revised to reflect BTE of 5% and post period capacity of 50%. Issue #13 - The new $50 million recreational complex is not part of the DC calculation. The Duffin Heights Community Facility is expected to be approximately 220,000 sq.ft. Its cost per sq.ft. is below replacement average because of the large indoor soccer facility that is involved. 3. Durham Home Builders' Association Verbal Questions dated June 8, 2009 and June 30. 2009 email a) Basis for increased cost of fire rescue vehicle: The per unit costs for the pumper, rescue and support vehicles has increased significantly from the 2004 Study as a result of indexing and to reflect the fact that the replacement units are larger and contain more specialized equipment, including hydraulics. However, it could be asserted that this represents a service level increase and, as a result, the 2004 costs plus 33% indexing will be used instead (thereby somewhat reducing the service level cap and the Fire component of the charge). b) The proposed pumper/rescue vehicle at $775,000 is marginally lower than the $800,000 replacement cost. Several of the fire vehicle replacement costs are being adjusted. c) The Claremont Public Library was replacement valued by TSH at $300/sq.ft. in 2004 and indexed to 2009 with $34/sq.ft. provision for land costs added as per common DC replacement cost practice. d) The Petticoat Creek Library Addition was over-deducted in 2004 for BTE at 50%. The revised 10% deduction is valid given that the coverage is only for an addition. Existing development benefits from the base facility. Also, the DC program only equips the City to maintain the existing service level and, in that sense, provides no benefit to existing development; however, the addition will provide improved access benefits to some existing users, which have been recognized. 2009 City of Pickering Development Charges By-law - Responses July 7, 2009 to Questions Raised File: F-7000 Page 5 4) Sernas Group forwarded by Townsend and Associates dated June 19, 2009 a) Section B-1 (Roads and Related) Detailed background was requested for the City's entire roads program in terms of capital costs and road lengths. This information was provided by the City in late June. b) Section B-2 (Stormwater Management) The City's local service policy for stormwater management is set out on page B- 13 of the Background Study. Where prospective development specifically requires stormwater management facilities, it is required to put such facilities in place or, in some instances of infill, to make a cash-in-lieu payment. The works included in the development charge program are over and above the foregoing, in order to provide broad environmental benefit to the City. Such costs are appropriately shared between existing, 10-year and long-term development, all of whom contribute to the problem (via the cumulative effect of inadequate volume controls) and share in the benefits of the works. The storm drainage works included in DC's will not mean that any development within the southern Pickering or Frenchman's Bay watershed will not have to do any SWM controls. Everyone will still be expected to do SWM for their specific site etc. We should focus on that the Duffin Heights storm water management ponds are local services required just for that particular subdivision as other municipalities have done. 5) Letter from Townsend and Associates dated July 2, 2009 1. DH-9 The 2004 DC By-Law identified William Jackson Drive as Project DH-16. The 2008 Capital Budget - Develop me nt. Projects (DC- FUNDED) approved a portion of that project ($230,000.00). The remaining portion was included in the 2009 DC By-law as project number DH -10 - 425m oversizing @ 628.00/m. The portion approved in 2008 Budget cannot be included in the 2009 Study. 2. DHA 5 The detailed breakdown did not indicate works on both sides of the street. This will be revised, although it does not alter the project cost or the DC Study. The revised wording will also expand on the median (this is for landscaping within the median) this cost although identified as part of the project for 2009 City of Pickering Development Charges By-law - Responses July 7, 2009 to Questions Raised File: F-7000 Page 6 conformity during budget approval, becomes a City cost that exceeds the normal boulevard costs. 3. R-3, R-4a, R-4b and R-5 and contained within the Rosebank neighbourhood, south of Hwy. 401 west of Whites Road. These projects were identified in the initial DC By-law due to the anticipated growth, related to future development areas, rear lot development, infill and severances within this area. Although the area's explanation to-date has been slower than expected the development potential still exists and these roads will need to be upgraded to accommodate the growth. The DC portion is 25% recognizing the benefit to existing. Some costs identified by Sernas have been revised in the DC Study. RU-3 Sideline #4 has an adjacent estate residential subdivision under development and the potential for two future draft plans. These developments warrant the need to upgrade Sideline # 4; again the DC portion is 25%. RU-4 This project will require upgrading due to growth in south Pickering and Ajax, that require access to Hwy. # 7 and in future Hwy. 407; again DC portion is 25%. RU-6 This project will require upgrading as it will be one of the few remaining north/south connections following the extension of Hwy. 407 which will eliminate other existing N/S connections. The additional use is also related to growth in south Pickering and again the DC portion is 25%. TC-25 to TC-29 These projects are within the Town Centre area identified as a Downtown Growth Centre. The proposed collector road and culvert works will be required in order to accommodate this growth which would not otherwise be required. The DC portion was set at only 75% acknowledging that existing development surrounding the area would have some benefit. 2009 City of Pickering Development Charges By-law - Responses July 7, 2009 to Questions Raised File: F-7000 Page 7 19 4. Oversizinq The calculation for oversizing initially covered the additional cost from the City's standard local road - 8.5m/9.75m pavement on a 20m ROW to collector/ type C arterial (22 to 27m ROW). The Duffin Heights Neighbourhood, with the recent ESP has defined a local road to be 8.5m pavement on a 17m R.O.W. and the collector as 11.0m pavement on a 22m ROW. The oversizing cost sharing will be confirmed as detailed engineering and costs are submitted and will include additional asphalt and granular base exceeding the 8.5m width, as well as additional boulevard costs, line painting and ancillary traffic control related to the collector road. We will review additional cost for multi-use trail should it exceed normal sidewalk cost, but the ESP local road already indicates sidewalk on both sides of the street. Should there be additional street lighting or revised road cross-section due to environmental concerns they will also be addressed in the oversizing cost. 5. Summary The concerns expressed in the June 30, 2009 letter have been addressed as noted above. We do not propose any change to the Development Charge Study. Yours truly Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services and Treasurer GAP:ck Copy: Altus Group, 1580 Kingston Road, Toronto, ON M1 N 1S2 IBI Group, 230 Richmond St. West, 5th Floor, Toronto, ON M5V 1 V6 Sernas Associates, 110 Scotia Court, Unit 41, Whitby, ON L1 N 8Y7 Mattamy Development Corp, 30 Centurian Dr., Ste. 100, Markham, ON L3R 8B8 Durham Home Builders' Association, King Street Postal Outlet, P.O. Box 26064, 206 King Street East, Oshawa, ON L1 H 1 CO Watson & Associates Economists Ltd., 4304 Village Centre Court, Mississauga, ON L4Z 1S2 CLtq D~ 1 91 PICKERI MEMO To: Gillis Paterson June 29, 2009 Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer CITY 0 From: Andrew C. Allison PICKERID City Solicitor JUN 2 9 2009 Copy: Chief Building Official CORPORATESERVICES Manager, By-law Enforcement Services Subject: Report CS 14-09 - Updated Sign By-law Resolution 156/09 - Referral to Staff for Further Investigation of Portable Sign Regulations We have reconsidered available regulatory options for portable signs in response to Council's referral of this part of the final by-law. After further considered review, we recommend Council adopt the portable sign provisions originally contained in your Report to Executive Committee, CS 14-09. The portable sign provisions recommended by staff in CS 14-09 represent a careful balance of the City's goal of providing reasonable opportunity for any business owner to erect special temporary signage for a special event, while at the same time exercising some fair and consistent controls to reduce the visual clutter these signs create. The portable sign provisions were also designed to support continuing modest sign fees for business owners, to be readily understood and followed by users, and to be efficient to administer and enforce. Allowing a single business owner to install a portable sign on a number of occasions (amendment made by Executive Committee on June 8/09), may result in some business owners having more opportunities to erect portable signs simply because they carry on business in a building that has fewer tenants. For example, a commercial tenant in a 3 unit building could potentially erect 4 portable signs every year while a competing commercial tenant in a 12 unit building might only be able to erect 1 portable sign simply because it was a tenant in a larger building. The result would be discriminatory. In our opinion, the portable sign regulations as originally drafted represent an appropriate middle ground between the City's competing goals and avoid this potential discriminatory impact. Administratively, more complex or repetitive permission arrangements will probably result in more temporary signage and may also require greater enforcement initiatives and associated fees applied by the City if they are to be effective in practice. In our opinion, the portable sign regulations as originally drafted will not generate the need for additional administrative support. It is important to recognize that portable signs are only one means of signage that business owners will have access to. The proposed by-law imposes no restrictions on temporary business information being incorporated into permanent ground signs by means of manually replaceable sign faces or messaging, electronic messaging, or video displays in permitted areas. The 1 92 proposed sign control strategy is to encourage owners to begin consolidating most tenant signage needs into a single properly designed permanent ground sign, rather than favouring the installation of individual portable signage. We therefore recommend that Council approve the recommendations contained in Report CS 14-09 as amended by Executive Committee on June 8, 2009, with the exception of the amendment that added a new subsection 41(8), which read as follows: 41(8) Notwithstanding section 38, a maximum of 4 licences for portable signs may be issued concerning an individual business or service in any calendar year provided at least 30 days have elapsed since the expiry of the last portable sign licence and the sign has been removed. In our opinion, this amendment would not achieve the appropriate balance of objectives and would potentially have unintended discriminatory impacts. If Council wants the sign by-law to incorporate more liberal provisions for portable signs than recommended by staff, the following option could be considered: 41(8) Notwithstanding section 38, a maximum of 2 licences for portable signs may be issued concerning an individual business or service in any calendar year provided at least 60 days have elapsed since the expiry of the first licence and the sign has been removed. 41(9) An individual business or service is ineligible for a second portable sign licence in the same calendar year if the sign installed under the first portable sign licence is not maintained in accordance with this by-law or the terms of the first portable sign licence were not complied with. If Council wants the sign by-law to incorporate more restrictions for portable signs on multi-tenant properties, the following option could be considered: 41(10) A maximum of 6 portable sign licences may be issued for a single property in any calendar year. Andrew C. Allison City Solicitor ACA: kb/ks June 29, 2009 Page 2 Report CS 14-09 - Updated Sign By-law REPORT TO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE PICKERING Resolution No. 156109 Report Number: CS 14-09 Dated June 15, 2009 Date: June 8, ?q09 93 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: Updated Sign By-law Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 14-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the proposed sign by-law, included as Attachment #1, providing regulations for signs erected within the City of Pickering, be enacted; and 3. Further, that the appropriate staff of the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: On December 15, 2008, Council passed Resolution 262/08 authorizing staff to solicit input from industry stakeholders and the public regarding the proposed sign by-law. Resolution 262/08 also directed that, upon completion of that consultation process, staff provide Council with a recommended final sign by-law. After conducting the consultation process with industry stakeholders, commercial and industrial property owners and residents, staff have prepared a final draft by-law which establishes new sign regulations which meet the objectives set out in the by-law. The final by-law includes amendments considered appropriate as a result of comments received. Financial Implications: Sign fees have been adjusted to reflect the anticipated costs of sign administration and enforcement. Additional fees are applied to variance applications to offset the cost of this review process. An annual licence fee for billboards is prescribed to assist in funding the City's overall sign regulation obligations. The City is not expected to realize any significant additional revenue as a result of the fees set out in this by-law. Sustainability Implications: The proposed sign by-law reduces the permitted amount of portable signs and temporary signage such as election signs, reducing the consumption of resources for this purpose. Restrictions in these types of signage may be recognized by the community as an environmentally sensitive City initiative, in support of a more sustainable culture. A reduction in the existing signage clutter will improve the City's public spaces and may attract more pedestrian activity and economic investment. Report CS 14-09 Date: June 8, 2009 Subject: Updated Sign By-law Page 2 194 1.0 Background: In accordance with Council Resolution 262/08, a consultation outreach was conducted. That consultation process consisted of the following: • On January 30, 2009, 44 industry stakeholders and persons who had previously expressed an interest were sent letters with a copy of the proposed sign by-law attached. Each recipient was asked to review the proposed sign by-law and to provide comments. 579 commercial and industrial property owners were sent notification by mail of the proposed sign by-law and directed to the City's website or the Clerk's department to obtain a copy. All letters and notifications included information respecting an upcoming Open House relating to the proposed sign by-law, which was to be held on March 26, 2009. • Follow-up notices respecting of the proposed sign by-law Open House appeared on the City's website and on the Community Page of the News Advertiser on March 4th, 11th and 25th, 2009. At the Open House on March 26, 2009, sign by-law Highlight Summary Information Boards were displayed summarizing the key provisions contained in the draft by-law (see Attachment #2). Five people attended the Open House. Immediately following the Open House, the proposed sign by-law and a PDF version of the "Highlight Summary" were placed on the City's website. This notice provided any interested party another opportunity to submit comments respecting the proposed sign by-law until April 17, 2009. Written comments were received from 2 residents, 7 business owners and 4 sign companies (see Attachments #3 to #15). See Attachment #16 for a summary of the public/industry comments and staff's conclusions based on those comments. In addition to the review done by industry stakeholders, commercial and/or industrial property owners, the public and Council (see Attachment #17) the proposed sign by-law has been reviewed extensively by Planning & Development, Municipal Law Enforcement Services and the City Solicitor. As the consultation process is now complete and comments from all interested parties have been considered, staff is recommending that the attached sign by-law be enacted. Report CS 14-09. Date: June 8, 2009 Subject: Updated Sign By-law Page 3 Attachments: 1. Draft Sign By-Law (dated May 14, 2009) 2. Sign By-law Highlight Summary 3. Email from Carlisle Miller, Resident 4. Letter from Rod Mason, Resident 5. Letter from Jean Roy, Canadian Petroleum Products Institute 6. Email from Paul Avis, Beauty-Full Spa & Weight Loss Treatment Centre Inc. 7. Email from Teena, Manager, Tropix Restaurant 8. Letter from Aaron Wisson, Mattamy Development Corporation 9. Letter from Lou lacvino, Go Transit 10. Email from Allen Smoskowitz, Steele Valley Developments 11. Email from Jerry Mauldin, Director, Operations, Ultimate Canadian Cheer & Dance 12. Email from Laurrie and Brian, Active Mobile Signs 13. Email from David Stuckless, Magnet Signs 14. Letter from Isabella Cerelli, Permitting Supervisor, PRIDE Signs Limited 15. Letter from Stephen McGregor, National Director, Real Estate, CBS Outdoor 16. Public/Industry Comment Summary 17. Council's Comments (December 8, 2008) 18. Sign By-law Amendment Summary 19. Report to Executive Committee CS 53-08 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: 4t 0_1'~ 5 cv_- a" _a~' - L Z~L' C"t Kim er Thompson, CPSO, CMMI Debi Wilcox, CMO, CMMIII Manager, By-law Enforcement Services City Clerk _5? L Tim koa~, OAA Gillis Paterson Chief Building Official Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Copy: (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council s f Thomas inn, R MR, CMM III Chief Administrative Officer ATTACH / 0 C".S Draft May 14, 2009 196 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING ft BY-LAW NO. /09 Dh I- VT A by-law to regulate signs in the City of Pickering. WHEREAS pursuant to paragraph 7 of subsection 11(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001 a lower-tier municipality may pass by-laws respecting signs; AND WHEREAS signs are necessary to advertise or identify services, businesses, locations and provide other information; AND WHEREAS, if not effectively regulated, signs may create a nuisance, affect public safety and detract from the character of the community. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering enacts as follows: PART I - INTERPRETATION Objectives 1. This by-law shall be applied and interpreted in a manner consistent with the following objectives: • Reasonable means should be available to the public to erect signs on property in order to identify facilities, businesses and services located thereon. • Signs should not create any distraction or safety hazard for pedestrians or motorists, or create any other danger to the public. • Signs should not create any adverse impacts on adjacent public or private property. • Signs should not detrimentally alter the physical appearance and architecture of any building. • Signs should not create unnecessary visual clutter due to their size, number or location. • Temporary signs should be strictly regulated in order to limit the visual impact on the built environment and the consumption of resources. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 2 Definitions 1 0 7 2. In this by-law, "area", as it relates to a sign, means the area of the sign facing in one direction; "applicant" means an owner, or any person authorized by an owner, who applies for a permit, licence or variance; "banner" means a temporary sign of lightweight fabric, plastic or similar material; "billboard" means a sign that is fastened, posted, painted or projected in such a manner as to permit its periodic replacement and that advertises goods, products or services that are not available at the location of the sign or that directs a person to a location different from where the sign is located; "boulevard" means all parts of a highway except the roadway, shoulder and sidewalk; "Chief Building Official" means the City's Chief Building Official or a designate; "City" means The Corporation of the City of Pickering or the geographical area of Pickering, as the context requires; "City Clerk" means the Clerk of the City or a designate; "erect" includes display, attach, affix, post, alter, construct, place, locate, install, relocate and maintain, and cause or permit to be displayed, attached, affixed, posted, altered, constructed, placed, located, installed, relocated and maintained; "first storey" has the same meaning as in the building code; "height", as it relates to a sign, means the vertical distance from the ground to the highest point of the sign; "heritage conservation district" means a heritage conservation district designated under the Ontario Heritage Act; "heritage property" means property that has been designated under the Ontario Heritage Act to be of cultural heritage value or interest or a property on the City's registry of properties that the City believes to be of cultural heritage value or interest; "highway" has the same meaning as in subsection 1(1) of the Highway Traffic Act and includes unopened and unassumed road allowances; "inflatable sign" means a temporary sign filled by air or other gas that is either designed to be airborne or tethered to the ground, a vehicle, a roof or any other structure and includes balloons; Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 3 19 3licence" means a sign licence required by this by-law; "low density residential zoning" means zoning for a single detached dwelling, semi-detached dwelling, duplex, triplex, fourplex, townhouse, mobile home, or any other residential facility housing 6 or fewer residents; "official sign" means any sign erected by, or under the direction of, a government agency and includes signs designating hospitals, schools, libraries, community centres, arenas or other public government uses and signs required under the Planning Act by the municipality to inform the public of proposed changes on the property; "owner" means the person identified in the most recent tax roll as the owner of a property or a lessee, tenant, mortgagee in possession or any other person who has care and control of a property; "permit" means a sign permit required by this by-law; "person" includes a corporation and the heirs, executors, administrators or other legal representatives of a person to whom the context can apply according to law; "portable sign" means any temporary sign readily moveable from place to place including signs commonly referred to as a-frame, t-frame, sandwich boards, signs fixed to a trailer and any type of device used or capable of being used for advertising purposes; "private property" does not include the side of a fence located on a property boundary which faces public property; "property" means a parcel of land, with or without a building or structure, that is a legal lot of record; "Region" means The Regional Municipality of Durham; "setback" means the distance between a property line and the closest portion of a sign; "sign" means any device, notice or visual medium including its structure and other component parts that is used, or is capable of being used, to attract attention to a specific subject matter for identification or advertising purposes; "Special Sign District" means a Special Sign District identified in Schedule "B"; "variance" means a variance required by this by-law; and "zone" means a land use zone prescribed in the City's zoning by-laws. i Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 4 References to Legislation 199 3. In this by-law, reference to any Act, regulation or by-law is reference to that Act, regulation or by-law as it is amended or re-enacted from time to time. Word Usage 4. This by-law shall be read with all changes in gender or number as the context may require. 5. A grammatical variation of a word or expression defined has a corresponding meaning. Schedules 6. Schedule "A" (Fees), Schedules "B1" through "139" (Special Sign Districts), and Schedule "C" (Billboard District) are attached to and form part of this by-law. 7. Unless otherwise specified, references in this by-law to Parts, sections and Schedules are to Parts, sections and Schedules in this by-law. Conflicts 8. If a provision of this by-law conflicts with a provision of any applicable Act, regulation or by-law, the provision that establishes the higher or more restrictive standard to protect the health, safety and welfare of the general public shall prevail. 9. Where an industrial building contains commercial uses that are permitted in an industrial category of the City's zoning by-laws, the sign requirements for a commercial zone shall apply. Measurements 10. All dimensions in this by-law are in millimetres (mm), centimetres (cm), metres (m), hectares (ha) or square metres (m2) and all plans, specifications, documents and other information submitted with any application under this by-law shall use such dimensions. Severability 11. Each section of this by-law is an independent section, and the holding of any section or part of any section of this by-law to be void or ineffective for any reason shall not be deemed to affect the validity of any other section or parts of sections of this by-law. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 5 HOC? PART II - PERMITS Definitions 12. In this Part, "development sign" means a temporary sign that advertises a proposed development, but does not include a construction site information sign (section 55), a development sales office sign (section 57), or a development sales sign (section 58); "frontage" means the length of the property line of any one lot parallel to and along each legally accessible public highway; "ground sign" means a sign located on a structural base in or on the ground, but not part of a building, and includes a pylon sign; "high density residential zoning" means zoning for a residential building other than low density residential zoning; and "wall sign" means a sign attached to a building wall and includes a canopy sign and a sign that projects from a wall. Required Permits 13. No person shall erect any ground sign, wall sign, development sign or a billboard without a permit. 14. Notwithstanding section 13, any ground sign, wall sign or development sign lawfully erected prior to the passing of this by-law shall not require a permit provided such sign has continuously remained in its location and has not been substantially altered. 15. Notwithstanding section 13, any billboard lawfully erected prior to the passing of this by-law shall not require a permit provided such billboard has continuously remained in its location, has not been substantially altered and the owner of the billboard has obtained a licence. Permit Applications 16. A permit application shall be made by the owner of the property on which the sign is to be erected or an authorized representative of the owner. 17. The Chief Building Official shall be responsible for administration of all permits. 18. All permit applications shall be filed with the Chief Building Official using the City's prescribed form. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 6 19. Every permit application shall, 2 0 1 (a) identify and describe in detail the proposed sign and all other signs existing on the property at the time of the application; (b) describe the property on which the proposed sign is to be erected by legal description and municipal address or by other equivalent description that will readily identify the property; (c) state the name, address, telephone numbers and facsimile numbers of the applicant and any persons designing or erecting the sign; (d) be accompanied by plans, specifications, documents and other information describing the construction, dimensions, materials and specific location of the proposed sign in sufficient detail to permit the Chief Building Official to determine whether the sign will comply with this by-law, the building code, an approved site plan, heritage conservation district guidelines, or any other applicable law; (e) be accompanied by the applicable fee(s) set out in Schedule "A"; (f) include, where the applicant is not the owner of the property, an authorization for making the application from the owner; and (g) be signed by the applicant who shall certify the accuracy and truth of the contents of the application. 20. If required by the Chief Building Official, all plans and specifications covering the erection of a sign and supporting framework that are submitted as part of a permit application shall be certified by a Professional Engineer as to the structural adequacy of the sign. Special Sign Districts 21. In addition to the requirements of sections 19 and 20, every permit application for a sign in a Special Sign District shall be accompanied by scale drawings clearly showing, (a) the proposed sign materials, letter fonts and colours; (b) the proposed means of any sign illumination; and (c) in the case of a wall sign, an accurate building elevation drawing showing the size of the sign and a cross-section of the sign showing the proposed method of affixing the sign to the building. 202 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 7 Heritage Properties 22. (1) A permit for a sign in a heritage conservation district shall not be issued unless the sign conforms to the applicable heritage conservation district guidelines adopted by the City. (2) A permit for a sign on heritage property shall not be issued unless the applicant has met all additional requirements under the Ontario Heritage Act. Ground Signs 23. (1) Ground signs shall comply with the following restrictions: Zone Max Height Max Area Max Number Min. Setback Low Density Residential Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Open Space System - Natural Areas High Density Residential 2 m 4 m2 1 3 m Institutional Commercial or industrial (less than 4 m 10 m2 1 per street 3 m 30 m frontage) frontage Commercial or industrial (30 m 6 m 18 m2 1 per street 3 m frontage or more) frontage All Other Zones 3 m 6 m2 1 per street 3 m frontage (2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), no ground sign exceeding 1.5 m2 in area or 1.5 m in height shall be erected in a Special Sign District. (3) Every ground sign shall contain the municipal address number in numerals that are a minimum height of 15 cm. (4) Every ground sign shall be located on the property to which the sign relates. (5) Subject to subsection (6), a maximum of 1 ground sign shall be permitted for each street frontage on any one property. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 8, 2- 0 3 (6) A second ground sign shall be permitted on a property in a commercial or industrial zone where the property fronts onto 1 street only, the street frontage is not less than 200 m, and the ground signs are not located within 100 m of each other. Wall Signs 24. (1) Wall signs shall comply with the following restrictions: Zone Max Area Max Number High Density Residential 4 m2 2 Institutional All Other Zones 15% of building face area 1 per owner/tenant per frontage (2) Notwithstanding subsection (1), no wall sign exceeding 1.5 m2 in area shall be erected in a Special Sign District. (3) Except as permitted by section 51 (address signs) and section 65 (home based business signs), no wall sign shall be erected in a low density residential zone. (4) A wall sign shall be located on the building face used to calculate the maximum sign area. (5) In a commercial or industrial building containing multiple tenancies, the applicable building face area for a wall sign respecting an individual tenancy shall be measured only to the limits of the tenancy demising walls adjacent to the wall on which the sign is located. (6) No wall sign shall be erected on a high density residential building other than a sign displaying the building identification, corporate logo or similar content. (7) No wall sign shall be erected on any building that contains more than 1 storey above grade other than the first storey, the second storey, and highest story of such building. (8) No wall sign shall be erected on the second storey other than a projecting sign where the sign face is perpendicular to the building face. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 9 204 (9) A wall sign erected on the highest storey of a building that is more than 2 storeys above grade shall only contain the building identification, corporate logo or similar content and shall not exceed 6 m in area. (10) A maximum of 1 wall sign may be erected on each wall face of the highest storey of a building that is more than 2 storeys above grade. Development Signs 25. (1) Development signs shall not be permitted in areas zoned "Open Space System - Natural Areas". In all other zones, development signs not exceeding 6.0 m in height and with a setback of at least 3 m shall be permitted. (2) A maximum of 1 development sign having an area not 'exceeding 20 m2 may be erected on each street frontage on any single development site. (3) A maximum of 2 additional development signs having an area not exceeding 10 m2 may be erected on any vacant property outside of the development site. (4) No more than 3 development signs shall be erected in relation to any single development project. (5) A development sign shall be removed no later than 30 days after the completion of sales related to the development, or 24 months after the date the permit is issued, whichever occurs earlier. Billboards 26. (1) No billboard shall exceed an area of 20 m2. (2) No billboard shall exceed a height of 10 m. (3) No billboard shall be erected on a roof. (4) No billboard shall be located within 250 m of any other billboard. (5) Billboards shall not be permitted in any location other than within the Billboard District shown in Schedule "C. Permit Issuance 27. The Chief Building Official may approve or refuse any permit application, and may impose any conditions upon an approval as he or she determines to be appropriate. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 10 205 28. The Chief Building Official shall refuse to issue a permit if the proposed sign does not comply with this by-law, the building code, an approved site plan, heritage conservation district guidelines, or any other applicable law. Revocation of Permit 29. The Chief Building Official may revoke a permit under any of the following circumstances: (a) the permit has been issued in error; (b) the sign for which the permit was issued is erected in contravention of any provision in Part V, the building code, an approved site plan, heritage conservation district guidelines, or any other applicable law; (c) the permit has been issued as the result of false, mistaken, incorrect, or misleading statements, information or undertakings on the application or on any submitted documents that formed the basis of the issuance; (d) the business or other subject matter to which the sign relates ceases to exist; (e) the permit holder requests that the permit be revoked; or (f) 6 months have elapsed following the date of permit issuance and the sign authorized by the permit has not been erected. PART III - LICENCES Required Licences 30. No person shall erect any portable sign, banner, inflatable sign, sidewalk sign or billboard without a licence. Licence Applications 31. A licence application shall be made by an owner of the property on which the sign is to be erected or an authorized representative of the owner. 32. The City Clerk shall be responsible for administration of all licences. 33. All licence applications shall be filed with the City Clerk using the City's prescribed form. 34. A separate licence application is required for every sign. 35. Every licence application shall be accompanied by details of the size and location of the proposed sign and the applicable fee(s) set out in Schedule "A". Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 11 -36. Where a licence application is for a portable sign for an individual business in a building containing multiple tenants, the application must include written permission from the owner or the owner's authorized representative consenting to the placement of the portable sign. General Licence Requirements 37. All licences shall expire on the date indicated on the licence. 38. A maximum of 1 licence may be issued concerning any individual business or service in any calendar year. 39. A maximum of 1 licence may be issued for a single property at any one time, irrespective of the number of business tenancies located on the property. 40. No licence shall be issued on any heritage property. Portable Signs 41. (1) Portable signs shall comply with the following restrictions: Zone Max Height Max Area Max Number Min. Setback Residential Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Open Space System - Natural Areas Other Zones 2 m 4 m2 1 3 m (2) Every portable sign shall be located on the property to which the sign relates. (3) In the case of corner lots, no portable sign shall be located less than 15 m from the inside curb at the point of intersection of the 2 streets. (4) Portable signs may be illuminated but shall not incorporate any moving parts, flashing lights or fluorescent materials. (5) Lettering used on a portable sign shall not be greater than 0.2 m in height. (6) No portable sign shall be capable of being connected to a power supply without written Electrical Safety Authority approval. (7) A licence for a portable sign shall be valid for a period of not more than 30 days, after which the sign shall be immediately removed. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 12 7 Banner and Inflatable Sign Restrictions 42. (1) Banners and inflatable signs shall comply with the following restrictions: Zone Max Height Max Area Max Number Min. Setback Residential Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Prohibited Open Space System - Natural Areas All Other Zones 6.0 m 10 mz 1 3 m (2) Every banner or inflatable sign shall be located on the property to which the sign relates. (3) A banner or inflatable sign shall be securely affixed to the exterior wall or roof of a building, or to the ground. (4) A licence for a banner or inflatable sign shall be valid for a period of not more than 14 days, after which the sign shall be immediately removed. Sidewalk Signs 43. (1) In this section, "sidewalk sign" means a freestanding temporary sign not affixed to the ground advertising a business and installed immediately in front of the business on private property or on the sidewalk. (2) Sidewalk signs shall not exceed a height of 1.0 m or a width of 0.6 m. (3) Sidewalk signs shall not be permitted in any location other than within a Special Sign District. (4) A sidewalk sign shall be installed immediately in front of the business to which it pertains, and shall only be erected during the hours of operation of the business. (5) A sidewalk sign may be located on a public sidewalk provided a minimum of 1.5 m of unobstructed sidewalk space is maintained. (6) A maximum of 1 licence for a sidewalk sign may be issued to an owner. (7) A licence for a sidewalk sign shall be valid for a period of 1 year. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 13 B~i Iboards 44. (1) No licence shall be issued for a new billboard unless a permit has been issued for such billboard. (2) A licence for a billboard shall be valid for a period of 1 year. Licence Issuance 45. The City Clerk may approve or refuse any licence application, and may impose any conditions upon an approval as he or she determines to be appropriate. 46. The City Clerk shall refuse to issue a licence if the proposed sign does not comply with this by-law, the building code, an approved site plan, heritage conservation district guidelines, or any other applicable law. Revocation of Licence 47. The City Clerk may revoke a licence under any of the following circumstances: (a) the licence has been issued in error; (b) the sign for which the licence was issued is erected in contravention of any provision in Part V, the building code, an approved site plan, heritage conservation district guidelines, or any other applicable law; (c) the licence has been issued as the result of false, mistaken, incorrect, or misleading statements, information or undertakings on the application or on any submitted documents that formed the basis of the issuance; (d) the business or other subject matter to which the sign relates ceases to exist; or (e) the licence holder requests that the licence be revoked. PART IV - SIGNS EXEMPT FROM PERMITS AND LICENCES Permitted Signs 48. Signs described in this Part shall be permitted without a permit or licence provided all restrictions in this by-law applicable to the signs have been complied with. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 14 209 Community Event Signs 49. (1) In this section, "community event sign" means a temporary sign that advertises a public event organized for a non-profit, civic, cultural, religious or recreational purpose. (2) No person shall erect a community event sign closer than 100 m to another community event sign advertising the same community event. (3) No person shall erect a community event sign more than 14 days prior to the event. (4) No person shall erect a community event sign at any location other than entirely on private property or on a boulevard. (5) No person shall permit a community event sign to remain erected after the day of the event. Filming Location Signs 50. (1) No person shall erect a filming location sign unless the person has received a filming permit from the City. (2) No person shall erect a filming location sign that is more than 1.0 m2 in area. (3) No person shall erect a filming location sign other than at a location that is approved in a filming permit. (4) No person shall erect a filming location sign at any location other than entirely on private property or on a boulevard. (5) No person shall erect a filming location sign other than while the film is in production. Garage Sale Signs 51. (1) No person shall erect a garage sale sign that is more than 1.0 m2 in area. (2) No person shall erect a garage sale sign at any location other than entirely on private property or on a boulevard. (3) No person shall erect a garage sale sign more than 3 days prior to the day of the sale. (4) No person shall permit a garage sale sign to remain erected after the day of the sale. 210 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 15 Open House Signs 52. (1) No person shall erect a sign that advertises the location of an open house that is more than 1.0 m2 in area. (2) No person shall erect an open house sign at any location other than entirely on private property or on a boulevard. (3) No person shall erect a sign that advertises the location of an open house at a time other than while the house is open for public inspection. Real Estate Signs 53. (1) In this section, "real estate sign" means a temporary non-illuminated sign erected to advertise that land, a building or portion of a building is offered for sale or rent. (2) No person shall erect a real estate sign that is more than 1.0 m2 in area in a residential or open space zone, or more than 2.5 m2 in area in any other zone. (3) No person shall erect a real estate sign at any location other than entirely on private property. (4) No person shall erect more than 1 real estate sign on any single property. (5) Notwithstanding subsection (4), 2 real estate signs may be erected on separate street frontages if the property is at least 0.5 ha in size. Address Signs 54. (1) In this section, "address sign" means a sign that depicts the personal or building identification and street address of the property on which the sign is located. (2) No person shall erect an address sign in a low density residential zone that is more than 0.2 m2 in area. (3) No person shall erect an address sign in any area that is zoned for uses other than low density residential that is more than 0.4 m2 in area. (4) No person shall erect an address sign at any location other than entirely on private property. (5) No person shall erect an address sign that contains promotional or advertising content. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 16 21 1 (6) This section shall not apply to any address sign lawfully erected prior to the passing of this by-law provided such sign has continuously remained in its location and has not been substantially altered. Construction Site Information Signs 55. (1) No person shall erect a construction site information sign unless the person has either entered into a site plan agreement with the City or the City has issued a building permit or a topsoil and fill permit for the construction. (2) No person shall erect a construction site information sign except on a temporary fence or other physical barrier around a construction site. (3) No person shall erect a construction site information sign more than 30 days prior to construction commencing. (4) No person shall permit a construction site information sign to remain erected 30 days after the construction has been completed or discontinued. Model Home Signs 56. (1) No person shall erect a model home sign that is more than 2.0 m2 in area. (2) No person shall erect a model home sign at any location other than on a lot containing the model home. Development Sales Office Signs 57. (1) In this section, "development sales office sign" means a sign erected on a temporary sales office where new homes and other developments are marketed to the public. (2) No person shall erect a development sales office sign except on or immediately surrounding a temporary sales office. (3) No person shall erect a development sales office sign except where it has been shown on permit application documents and authorized by the City through issuance of a building permit. 21 2 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 17 Development Sales Signs 58. (1) In this section, "development sales sign" means a sign directing people to a temporary sales office where new homes and other residential developments are marketed to the public. (2) No person shall erect a development sales sign that is more than 1.5 m2 in area. (3) No person shall erect a development sales sign at any location other than entirely on private property or on a boulevard. (4) No person shall erect a development sales sign within 500 metres of any other development sales sign being used to direct attention to the same temporary sales office. (5) No person shall permit a development sales sign to remain erected in its original location, or within 500 metres of its original location, for a total of more than 72 hours (excluding statutory holidays) during any consecutive 7-day period. Directional Signs 59. (1) In this section, "directional sign" means a sign that is intended solely for public information, safety or convenience in directing persons or traffic. (2) No person shall erect a directional sign that is more than 1.5 m2 in area. (3) No person shall erect a directional sign at any location other than entirely on private property. (4) No person shall erect a directional sign unless the sign has no promotional or advertising content. (5) This section shall not apply to any directional sign lawfully erected prior to the passing of this by-law provided such sign has continuously remained in its location and has not been substantially altered. Directory Signs 60. (1) In this section, "directory sign" means a sign for a building containing multiple occupancies. (2) No person shall erect a directory sign that is more than 1 m2 in area. (3) No person shall erect a directory sign at any location other than entirely on private property. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 182 (4) No person shall erect more than 1 directory sign at each access point from a highway to the building. (5) This section shall not apply to any directory sign lawfully erected prior to the passing of this by-law provided such sign has continuously remained in its location and has not been substantially altered. Menu Boards 61. (1) In this section, "menu board" means a sign erected as part of a drive- through facility and used to display and order products and services available at the drive-through business. (2) No person shall erect a menu board that is more than 4 m2 in area. (3) No person shall erect a menu board at any location other than entirely on private property. (4) No person shall erect more than 1 menu board on any single property. (5) This section shall not apply to any menu board lawfully erected prior to the passing of this by-law provided such menu board has continuously remained in its location and has not been substantially altered. Farm Signs 62. (1) In this section, "farm sign" means a sign advertising the sale of farm produce grown or produced on the property where the sign is located. (2) No person shall erect a farm sign that is more than 1.5 m2 in area. (3) No person shall erect a farm sign at any location other than entirely on private property. (4) No person shall erect more than 1 farm sign on a single property. Election Signs 63. (1) In this section, "election sign" means a sign promoting the election of a candidate in a federal, provincial or municipal election, including an election to a local board or commission, a sign that is intended to influence individuals to vote for or against any candidate or any question or by-law submitted to electors under section 8 of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996, but does not include a wall sign associated with a candidate's headquarters. (2) No person shall erect an election sign that is more than 1.5 m2 in area. 21 4 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 19 (3) No person shall erect an election sign at any location other than entirely on private property or on a Regional road in accordance with the Region's sign by-law. (4) No person shall erect a sign for a federal or provincial election prior to the day the writ of election is issued. (5) No person shall erect a sign for a municipal election until 25 days in advance of the last polling day for the election. (6) No person shall permit an election sign to remain erected more than 3 days after the last polling day for the election. (7) No person shall erect more than 1 election sign per candidate on a single property. (8) No person shall erect an election sign within 25 m of the property line of a designated municipal election polling station. Flags 64. (1) No person shall erect a flag unless the flag has no promotional or advertising content. (2) No person shall erect a flag that is more than 2.0 m2 in area. (3) No person shall erect a flag at any location other than entirely on private property. (4) No person shall erect more than 3 flags on a single property. Interior Signs 65. (1) In this section, "interior sign" means a sign in the interior of a building that is intended to be seen outside of the building and includes a window sign. (2) No person shall erect an interior sign unless it is erected in a window on the first storey of a building zoned for office, commercial or industrial uses. (3) No person shall erect an interior sign that exceeds 20% of the total window area on the first storey of the building. Home Improvement Signs 66. (1) In this section, "home improvement sign" means a sign advertising or promoting landscaping, home repairs or home renovations. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 20 1 5 (2) No person shall erect a home improvement sign that is more than 1.0 m2 in area. (3) No person shall erect a home improvement sign at any location other than entirely on private property where the home improvement is being undertaken. (4) No person shall erect a home improvement sign more than 2 days prior to the commencement of the home improvement project. (5) No person shall permit a home improvement sign to remain erected for a total of more than 90 days. No Trespassing Signs 67. (1) No person shall erect a "No Trespassing" sign that is more than 0.3 m2 in area. (2) No person shall erect a "No Trespassing" sign at any location other than entirely on private property. Home Based Business Signs 68. (1) No person shall erect a home based business sign unless a home based business licence has been issued by the City. (2) No person shall erect a home based business sign that is more than 0.2 m2 in area. (3) No person shall erect a home based business sign in any location other than entirely on private property in a low density residential zone. (4) No person shall erect a home based business sign unless no other sign is erected on the property. (5) No person shall erect a home based business sign that is internally illuminated. Posters 69. (1) In this section, "fixture" means any structure that the City permits to be located within a boulevard including a utility box, newspaper vending box, bench, transit shelter, telephone box, telephone booth, transformer box or vault, telephone pole, hydro pole, streetlight, stoplight pole, recycling waste module, mailbox, tree and street sign; and X16 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 21, "poster" means a printed notice conveying information intended to be displayed for a temporary period of time and includes a bill, handbill, leaflet and placard. (2) No person shall erect a poster on a fixture. (3) No person shall erect a poster on a motor vehicle. Gas Station Canopies 70. (1) No person shall erect a sign at a gas station other than a sign that is located completely within the fueling area under a canopy. (2) No person shall erect a sign permitted under subsection (1) that is more than 1.0 m2 in area. (3) No person shall erect a sign on a gas station canopy that contains anything other than corporate identification of the owner or operator of the gas station. PART V - GENERAL RESTRICTIONS Restrictions Applicable to All Signs 71. No person shall erect any sign, (a) that does not comply with any provision of this by-law; (b) that does not comply with any condition of a permit, licence or variance; (c) that advertises a use not permitted by the zoning by-law applicable to the property on which the sign is located; (d) without a permit if a permit is required; (e) without a licence if a licence is required; (f) on or over, or partly on or over, public property or any part of a highway without the City's approval unless the sign is expressly permitted by this by-law to be erected on a sidewalk or a boulevard; (g) on or over, or partly on or over a driveway; (h) within 3 m of a driveway at the streetline;. (i) within 15 m of a traffic light; Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 22 2 1 7 Q) on a walkway or other means of egress on private property unless there is a minimum of 1.5 m of unobstructed footpath space between the sign and the nearest structure; (k) that projects less than 2.4 m above the walking surface of a pedestrian walkway; (1) that pertains to a past event or purpose that no longer applies; (m) that is structurally faulty, has broken, displaced or missing parts, is crookedly displayed, contains lettering that is no longer fully legible, or is otherwise not maintained properly; (n) on a roof or projecting in whole or in part above the roof, eaves or parapet of a building; (o) in a location that obstructs the view of any pedestrian or motorist so as to cause an unsafe condition; (p) that interferes with, or obstructs the view of, an authorized traffic sign, traffic signal or official sign; (q) located within a visibility triangle formed by the intersection of the street line and a driveway line, or the projections thereof and a straight line connecting 6 m from their point of intersection; (r) that obstructs, or is located in, a required parking space; (s) that has more than 2 sign faces; or (t) that is obscene or in bad taste. 72. No person shall erect, paint, mark or inscribe any sign containing any promotional or advertising content, (a) on pavement; (b) on the exterior wall of a building except as permitted by the City's Anti- Graffiti By-law; (c) on a utility pole, tree, stone or other natural object; or (d) on a vehicle or on a trailer that is parked or located for the primary purpose of sign display. 21 8 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 23 c Electronic Message Displays 73. No person shall erect any sign with electronic message displays, (a) in a Special Sign District; (b) in an area zoned for residential uses; or (c) within 200 metres of an area zoned for residential uses if the display is readily visible from an area zoned for residential uses. Boulevards 74. Where signs are permitted by this by-law to be erected on a boulevard, no such sign shall be erected closer than 1.0 m from the curb of the road or, where there is no curb, closer than within 2.0 m of the travelled portion of the highway. Vacant Properties 75. No person shall erect any sign, other than a development sign, community event sign, filming location sign, real estate sign, farm sign, election sign or "No Trespassing" sign on vacant property. Special Sign Districts 76: (1) No development sign, portable sign, banner, inflatable sign or an internally illuminated sign other than an open/closed sign no more than 0.2 m2 in area shall be erected in a Special Sign District. (2) Subsection (1) does not apply to community event signs. PART VI - VARIANCES Definition 77. In this Part, "Director" means the City's Director of Planning & Development or a designate. Variance Applications 78. An application for a variance from one or more of the requirements in this by-law shall be made by an owner of the property on which the sign is to be erected or an authorized representative of the owner. 79. A variance shall not be required in relation to the structure or other component parts of any sign if such structure or component parts have been specifically identified and described in approved site plan documents. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 24 219 80. A variance application shall be filed with the Director using the City's prescribed form. 81. Every variance application shall include all of the information required to be submitted in relation to a permit application under section 17 and section 19 (if applicable) and shall also include written reasons why the provisions of this by- law cannot be complied with. 82. Prior to making a determination on any variance application, the application details shall be brought to the attention of the City's Site Plan Advisory Committee. 83. The Director shall notify the applicant prior to the meeting of the City's Site Plan Advisory Committee to provide the applicant an opportunity to appear before the Committee to make representations respecting the application. 84. When commenting on a variance, the City's Site Plan Committee shall be acting under the authority given to it under this by-law and not under the Planning Act. 85. If the applicant does not attend the City's Site Plan Advisory Committee meeting at the appointed time, the Committee may proceed in the absence of the applicant and the applicant shall not be entitled to any further notice dealing with the application. 86. In considering a variance application, the Director shall have regard for, (a) the provisions of any applicable site plan agreement; (b) special circumstances or conditions applying to the property, building or use referred to in the application; (c) whether strict application of the provisions of this by-law in the context of the special circumstances applying to the property, building or use, would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary and unusual hardship for the applicant that are inconsistent with the objectives of this by-law; (d) whether such special circumstances or conditions are pre-existing and not created by the owner or applicant; (e) whether the proposed sign will detrimentally alter the character of the area; and (f) whether the general intent and purpose of this by-law is maintained. 87. The Director may approve or refuse any variance application, and may impose any conditions upon an approval as he or she determines to be appropriate. 220 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 25 PART VII - EXEMPTIONS 88. This by-law shall apply to all existing and proposed signs in the City other than, (a) official signs; (b) signs on private property that are less than 0.2 m2 in area provided they do not contain any promotional or advertising content; and (c) shelter advertising or any advertising on street furniture and fixtures approved by the City or the Region. 89. This by-law does not apply to any changes to a sign face if, (a) the sign has been previously approved; (b) there is no change in sign area, shape, construction or design; and (c) the sign is not located within a Special Sign District. PART VIII - ENFORCEMENT Definition 90. In this Part, "officer" means a municipal law enforcement officer appointed by the City to enforce municipal by-laws. Inspections 91. An officer may, at any reasonable time, enter upon any property for the purpose of carrying out an inspection to determine whether or not the provisions of this by-law have been complied with. 92. No person shall prevent, hinder or interfere or attempt to prevent, hinder or interfere with an inspection undertaken by an officer. Order to Comply 93. (1) Where an officer is satisfied that there has been a contravention of any provision of this by-law, the officer may issue an order requiring the owner of the property on which the contravention has occurred or the person who erected the sign to do work to correct the contravention, including removal of the sign. (2) An order shall set out, (a) reasonable particulars of the contravention; Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 26 221 (b) the location of the property; (c) the general nature of the work required to be done to correct the contravention; and (d) the date by which the work must be done. (3) An order may be served by, (a) personally delivering it to the owner; (b) sending it by registered mail to the owner at the address of the owner shown on the last revised assessment roll for the property or the last known address of the owner; or (c) sending it by registered mail to the owner at the last known address of the owner. (4) If the address of an owner is unknown or the City is unable to effect service on an owner in accordance with subsection (3), a placard setting out the terms of the order may be placed in a conspicuous place on or near the owner's property. (5) Service of an order under this section shall be deemed to have been effected on the date that it is delivered personally, 3 days after it was mailed, or the date that it is posted on the property, as the case may be. 94. No person shall fail to comply with an order issued under this by-law. Remedial Action 95. (1) Where an order has been issued respecting any sign and compliance has not been achieved by the date specified in the order, the City may cause the work set out in the order to be done. (2) The City may recover all costs of doing any work undertaken pursuant to subsection (1), together with an administration charge equal to 25% of such costs, from the owner by adding the costs to the tax roll and collecting them in the same manner as property taxes. Removal of Signs 96. (1) Where a sign is erected on, over, partly on, or partly over, property owned by or under the jurisdiction of the City, such sign may be removed immediately by the City without notice or compensation. (2) A sign removed by the City shall be stored for a period of not more than 30 days, during which time they may be redeemed by the person who 2%2 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 27 erected the sign upon payment of the applicable fee set out in Schedule "A" (3) Signs not redeemed by the person who erected the sign within 30 days of removal by the City shall be disposed of by the City without notice or compensation. Liens 97. All costs incurred by the City for the removal, care and storage of a sign that was erected in contravention of this by-law are a lien upon the sign that may be enforced by the City under the Repair and Storage Liens Act. Offences and Penalties 98. Every person who contravenes any provision of this by-law is guilty of an offence and upon conviction is liable to a fine pursuant to the provisions of the Provincial Offences Act. 99. No person shall make a false or intentionally misleading recital of fact, statement or representation in any application or other document required by this by-law. PART IX - GENERAL Other Applicable Laws 100. The applicant shall be responsible for obtaining, the approval from any other government authority having jurisdiction over the installation of a proposed sign. Short Title 101. This by-law maybe referred to as the "Sign By-law". Repeal 102. By-law No. 2439/87, as amended, is repealed. 223 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 28 Effective Date 103. This by-law comes into effect on the date of its passing. By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this day of June, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 29 ~224 SCHEDULE "A" FEES SIGN TYPE FEE Ground Sign $250 Wall Sign $150 Development Sign $250 Portable Sign $50 Banner and Inflatable Sign $50 Sidewalk Sign $100 Billboard $500 Additional fee for any sign installed prior to permit issuance $250 Additional fee for any sign installed prior to licence issuance $50 Redemption Fee - Election Signs $25 Redemption Fee - all signs less than 2 m2 $25 Redemption Fee - all other signs $50 Sign Variance - Ground Sign, Wall Sign or Development Sign $500 Sign Variance All Other Signs $100 Fees are per sign and are not refundable. 2 2 5 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 30 SCHEDULE "B" - SPECIAL SIGN DISTRICTS Schedule "B1" Liverpool Road Waterfront District Schedule "B2" Whitevale District Schedule "BY Greenwood District Schedule "134" Cherrywood District Schedule "135" Green River District Schedule "136" Claremont District Schedule "137" Brougham District Schedule "B8" Kinsale District Schedule "139" Balsam District 2 2 6 SCHEDULE B1 LIVERPOOL ROAD WATERFRONT DISTRICT COMMERCE ST EET OMMERCE STREET ~ I IF W ~ i 0 I I I I I I I 1 F-- __T__7 - r_ In I 1 I I I I I I I I I i Q - OADVIEW STREET Q , z 1 I I I I I I I I I I I ~ J z ter]., w I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Q -i ~'~-f a -T I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I I I I ANN ND STREET I I I I I 1 I I I I I I ^ ` I I 1 ~ I I J I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ ~ I I ' rJ I I I I I I I I rL- F-__i I I I I i I I I I I II I I I I I 1 I I _ I 1 I I I I I I I I I I r - WHARF STREET 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' I I 1 l l l l l l l l - I I I 1 I I I ~ 1 1111111 _ ~~1111111 1 ~T~T I ' 1111 i ll l _ I L L.LL 1 1 1 1 - 1111 _ - I 1111 I FRENCHMAN'S - - - ~TJ d BAY c 1 W I ~ I ~ J I II 11 t_ I I 11 ~1 ' 11 II ♦ 1 I I ~ I V LAKE ONTARIO N SCHEDULE B1 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 SCHEDULE B2 WHITEVALE DISTRICT 227 , I I I I i I 1 I ~ I I I I I I I I I I 1 I f I I I t~ ~ I 1 I I I I t I ~ I I I I I I WEST ~GF T I 1 I I I I I I 1 ST - - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 I I ~I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I 1 1 I I 11 I 11 I 1 I I I I I I I I WHITEVALE ROAD I 1 I I I I 1 1 1 I 1 ~I I I I 1-I I I I II I 1 I I I I I 11-I I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 I of I II I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I - - - - - - - - - - - - - og A ITEV E I I I I 1 I I I \ I I I I ~ \ I I ~ a \ I I I \ 1 I I \ I I I \ I I v 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I 1 I I 1 I I \ I 1 I N SCHEDULE B2 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 SCHEDULE B3 22 8 GREENWOOD DISTRICT I I - I - I I , I I L- I I I - ( ~T, i 1 I I I I 1 I i 1 I I I - ----1 1 I r- ( _ 1 T TTT1 I I f I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I I I mn I I x _J ' I 1 I 11 II I'~ I I I I III I I I L___- 1 I I - L+-L J J - J-__'~ I I 1 r I 1 i i -t---- I i I I I r----- _ GREENWOOD) 11 ; II 1 II f ~ I I I I I I ' I I 1 It ~ I I I I ~4~ 1 1 ' I- J I I ' I I I I 1 I ' I I 1 I _ I I 1 1 1 I ~ I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I I 1-- I I 1 1 I 1 I 1 I I L I I I I 1 I I ' 1 I 1 - I 1 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I 1 ~ I 1 I I 1 -T--T--'I 1 I I 1 N SCHEDULE B3 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 SCHEDULE B4 229 CHERRYWOOD DISTRICT I I I I I I I I I I o I - Q 0 ry I I I 1 I F77 v z I I Q I I I I I m I I w I I I I I I I --I I u I 1 I _ _ - - i 0 I I I I I I I I I I I CONCESSION ROAD THIRD I , I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I -l I I I I I I 1 I Q I I I I I I I I Q , I I i I 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I --------CHERRYWOOD m w V) 0 ry T N SCHEDULE B4 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 2 3 0 SCHEDULE B5 GREEN RIVER DISTRICT t. 1 I Q. I 1 1 I I I I 1 I I I I 1 1 ~ I I 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I 1 ~1 1 1 /ice 1 I 1 ; I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I \ I I I\ \ I I I I I \ I I I \ I I \ I I I I ~ 1 I I = I ~ I I I i 1 I I I I I o ; 11 I ~ I \ I I Q ~ I 1 Z \ I I w I I j ~ I I I o a I I I N 1 I I ❑ i ~ I I Q I 1 I I I I I I HIGHWAY 7 I ~ I I I I I I 1 I I I I I ; I L______ I I I I I I I I ~J I I ~ I ~1 I I ~ 1 I 1 1 1 I I (L, I I I I I Lr' i ' - - ' RE l~jt{LJJ {1JJ' 1 I --------1 RIVE 1 1 I I I 1 - I 1 n - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 1 I 1 I T _________-_J~ I II I 1 I - I 1 I J(' 1 1 4❑~ PY MGM 07\ SCHEDULE B5 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 SCHEDULE B6 2 31 CLAREMONT DISTRICT II 1 I I II I I II 1 I ~ a.rw II I I II I - I I I ~ II I I II I 1 II I II I II I I II 1 II 1 I II I II 1 I 1 II 11 II I _ II I II 1 I II I 1 II I I II I 1 I I 1 I I I I I II i VT - II 1 - II i I I II 1 II I I , ~ 1 II I 1 I I I I I I r~- y I I 1 II I I r _ __JI II I I I 1 i- I II It 11 F I I I I \ i \ 11 ' II -n.- - \ \ 111 1 __________J -"1 a. . ,\111 III i 1 1 r i i - -1 I~i r I ~ ' I ~ 1~ I I I r, - I i r-- I 1 I /r Th ® 76 11 I I I II II I I 1 + I I I I I I II I I II ~ I ~ I 1 I 11 1 ' I 11 - 1 I I _100 \ CLAREMONT ~ I I I I I ' ' ( ~ i l l l l l l l l l I I I I F- - I I I 1 II I ----'T---- - I I I I I L_TS 1 I III 1 ~ 1 1 II - - I II ' = I I II ' 1~ - I I II I I I ' II 1 _ I II 1 I I II 1 ,I ~ 1 ~ I I I 11 , I I I I I , I I I , II ~ I i I I /V SCHEDULE B6 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 2 3 2 SCHEDULE B7 BROUGHAM DISTRICT I I I ~ I 1 I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I 1 1 ~ - I I I 1 I , 1 I 1 1 I I I ; O I I I pQ I I ~ I I I I I I I I I I I 1 o I I _ ¢ 1 1 I I I I _ I I - - I I I I I y I I U _ I I m I I BR VGHAM I--- m I - I r- Jr 1 TISHA ROAD j I I r I I I I I I I I I -'rI I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I r~ I I I HIGHWAY 7 HIGHWAY 7 I r LPRING ]ST I E-- Z LC- I r,LTT . - I I __i I I I I I rL I--~ I ORCHARD HEIGHTSZ ---j- RI E Z ---1 - 1 I I I I I I I m _ JOH 1 I I I I 1 _ ~ ~ STR T 1 ~ \ I - I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - N SCHEDULE 67 TO BY=LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 SCHEDULE B8 KINSALE DISTRICT 23 3 I I I I - ~ 1 1 r-' I i i______________- ~ , I I I I I ~ I I / I I I I I 1 I I I 1 ~ - I 1 I ~ I I I. 1 I 1 I I I , I r-J ' 1 I I I , 0 I I I 1 Q _ I 1--- O----- 1 I I ~ I I r--~ I I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I ~ I I ~ ~ I 1 ~ I I I ~ I I I I J I I I I I ; KIN$ALE I I I I I I I ~ I I I T I ~ ~ IL I I I I - - 1 I I w ~ 1 I J 1 i I N I Z I I 1 I ~ I Y I I I 1 I I I 1 I I 1 I , I I ~ - - I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ II I HIGHWAY 7 HIGHWAY 7 I 1 I 1 I I i I L_J I III I I 1 , I 1 I I 1 1 I ~ I I I I ~ I I I I 1 ~ O I I 'I w 1 I ~ I r I ~ I I I I a 1 1 ii 1 I N SCHEDULE B8 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 SCHEDULE B9 2 3 4 BALSAM DISTRICT I I I , I I , I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I ~ I 1 , I 1 ~ I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I W I I I z I I I I I I I I I 1 Li p I I I I I I (n ; ; I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I REGIONAL ROAD NO. 5 I I I I I I , I I I , I I I , I I I , I 1 I I BALSAM I 1 I ~ I I W 1 J ~ W I p I Cn I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I N SCHEDULE B9 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 E3CIG~C~7 ~JOO G~J~OO b I I I _ I i ,I I I I I ~ I o I -i► o i I I i I s3rnos awx 1 \ i 4 ~ I 1 1 \ I 1 \ \ \ \ I U_ \ I 11 1 I I ~ - -J-- U 1 I y - ~ I I I I I I I ~ I ~ -o W - 1 I I, I 1 I I , ~ I Q t-T + i- € o I l~ I I I T ~ c_ ~ I I I-- CTl ~ ~ N W < Cl. I T i l~'i: ~ 1 I I o LL J Um 1\ ~ 1 ~ ~ s 1 J ' ~ ~ I I f- i I ~ G O U / ~I 1 I I I I ~ c '-1 ` j W 1 ~ aoalaaoo n-- b U ~ oaaAl+ _ _ T W F- _ I i I~ ~ 0 LL I 1 a,w ~ O 1 L__s 11 = Q Q U D I -1 ♦3„YA OMtl u1M5 a\ _ I s I r - 1 I 11111 _ J 1 1\ - J 1 ` FHT \I ` _ I T '-,Lt , I 1 I I 11 ~ 1 I ~ I r 1 I I----` `I y ~ I I t- i I ~ 2 3 6 CITY OBJ • Reasonable means should be available to the public to erect signs on property in order to identify facilities, businesses and services located thereon. mt • Signs should not create any distraction or safety hazard for - - , , pedestrians or motorists, or create any other danger to the public. 1,, • Signs should not create any adverse impacts on adjacent public or private property. Signs should not detrimentally alter the physical appearance and rc architecture of any building. Signs should not create unnecessary visual clutter due to their size, - - number or location. r • Temporary signs should be strictly limited in order to limit the visual impact on the built environment and the consumption of resources. ~m s i' ~ +a B HIGHLIGHTS OF PICKERING'S PROPOSED NEW SIGN REGULATION Pickering's proposed new sign by-law has been developed in support Commercial pylon signs are subject to new height restrictions of the City's sustainability and urban design objectives Election signs are prohibited on City road allowances, and are The by-law establishes generic rules for the location, quantity and restricted to one per candidate per lot. maximum size of all new signs. In order to promote better quality design of signage, any proposed sign that is properly incorporated in The by-law includes a comprehensive listing of exempt signs, which a building design and approved as part of site plan approval may be installed without any approvals, and prohibited signs documents is exempt from compliance with the sign by-law Variances may be applied for to obtain relief from any by-law Permanent signs and development related signs will be restriction. Variances will be administered by Planning & administered through a permit and inspection process by the City's Development according to the City's existing site plan approval Planning & Development Department process. A set of clear criteria for evaluating variance applications is established in the by-law. The final decision on a variance will rest Temporary and portable signs will be administered through a with the Director, Planning & Development, with Site Plan Advisory licensing process by Municipal By-law Enforcement Services Committee participation Portable signs are subject to more restrictions. One Portable sign Fees apply to all permits and licences, and are set according to may be installed by a business for a maximum of 30 days, once per administration costs. More substantial fees are applied to variance year applications, and where a sign is erected prior to approval owing to the additional administration and enforcement costs associated with Commercial Billboards are detrimental to the rural area and most these cases urban areas and are prohibited in the new by-law. A prescribed area along Bayly St. will permit a limited number of billboards. Existing Special Sign Districts have been established in smaller billboard operators must pay an annual licence fee and maintain them communities and a heritage conservation area. More restrictive in good condition at all times to retain any existing billboards. The requirements are generally applied in these districts, however there annual licence fee for billboards is currently being determined are opportunities for additional special signage, such as sidewalk sandwich boards }}i k'~ 4 PROHIBITED SIGNS - 2 3 7 The by-law prohibits signs: • that do not comply with the by-law or any condition of the permit, license or variance • that advertise a use not permitted by the zoning by-law applicable to the property where the sign is located • on or over, or partly on or over a driveway or public property or any part of a highway without the City's _ approval AILL'WAy • closer than 1.0m from the curb of the road or, where there is no curb, within 2.Om of the travelled portion of t~ -3 tm x ~c' the highway , nn 5 a • within 3.Om of a driveway at the streetline • within 15.Om of a traffic light • in a location that obstruct the view of any pedestrian or motorist so as to cause an unsafe condition • that interfere with, or obstruct the view of, an authorized traffic sign, traffic signal or official sign • located within a visibility triangle formed by the intersection of the street line and a driveway line, or the projections thereof and a straight line connecting 6 m from their point of intersection • that obstruct a required parking space 1 on a walkway or other means of egress on private property unless there is a minimum of 1.5m of unobstructed footpath space between the sign and the nearest structure r • that project less than 2.4m above the walking surface of a pedestrian walkway' • that pertain to an event/purpose that no longer applies mss: • that are not properly maintained • on a roof or projecting the roof, eaves or parapet of a building • that have more than 2 sign faces that are obscene or in bad taste • that are painted, marked or inscribed on pavement, on the exterior wall of a building (except as permitted by the City's Anti-Graffiti By-law) • on a utility pole, tree, stone or other natural object I I • on a vehicle or trailer that is parked or located for the primary purpose of sign display • electronic message displays in a Special Sign District or in an area zoned for residential uses or within 200 metres of an area zoned for residential uses if the display is readily visible from an area zoned for f .i residential uses. t a c. 238 GROUND SIGNS Ground signs include commercial pylon signs PlCORE c 6 N Y R ':3(15 1315 • Prohibited in low density residential and open space/natural areas h _New Flinval • 1 ground sign for each street frontage on any 1 property is permitted as follows: f OM AA~JHYIE>I r, nsv~r • High Density ResidentiaOnstitutional, maximum height 2.0m, maximum area pk'-is ' Sm reS - " q 4.Om2_ • Commercial or industrial (less than 30 m frontage), maximum height 4.0m, maximum area 10.0m2 • Commercial orindustrial (30 m frontage or more), maximum height 6.0m, i maximum area 18.Om2 • All otherzones, maximum height 3.0m, maximum area 6.Om2d • Special Sign District, maximum height 1.5m, maximum area 1.5m2 • A second ground sign is permitted on a property in a commercial or industrial zone where the street frontage is not less than 200m and the ground signs are not located within 100m of each other. • Must be erected on the property to which the sign relates • Must contain the municipal address number in numerals 15 cm high. WALL SIGNS Wall signs include canopies and projecting signs • Maximum area of: • 4.Om2 in high density residential and/or Institutional zones ttt~~~---~~c • 15% of building face area in all other zones a k 1.5m2 in Special Sign District - • Must be located on the building face used to calculate the maximum sign area • Must be located on the building or tenancy to which the sign relates J No wall sign may be erected in a low density residential zone, except an address sign or home based business sign µ - • In a building containing multiple tenancies, the building face area for an individual tenancy is measured to the limits of the tenancy t , No wall sign shall be erected on: i • a high density residential building other than a sign displaying the building identification, corporate logo or similar content • any building that contains more than 1 storey above grade other than the first storey, the second storey, and highest story of such building • the second storey other than a projecting sign where the sign face is perpendicular to the building face Maximum 1 wall sign maybe erected on the highest storey of a building that is more than 2 storeys above grade and shall only contain the building identification, corporate logo or similar content and shall not exceed 6.0 m2 in area DEVELOPMENT SIGNS • Prohibited in areas zoned open space system/natural areas 1 • Maximum 6.Om in height A • Maximum 1 sign not exceeding 20,Om2 per street frontage on any single development site • Maximum 2 additional signs not exceeding 10.Om2 on any vacant property outside of the development site { • Maximum 3 development signs per development project • Removed 30 days after completion of sales or 24 months after it is erected, whichever occurs earlier r- c i% r ~ •ri PORTABLE SIGNS / 2 3 9 • Prohibited in residential and open space/natural areas • Maximum size of 4.Om2 • Must be erected on the property to which the sign relates j r • In the case of corner lots, no portable sign shall be located less than 15 m from the inside curb at the point of intersection of the 2 streets • Portable signs may be illuminated but shall not incorporate any moving parts, flashing lights or fluorescent materials. Must have written Electrical Safety Authority approval • Lettering used on a portable sign shall not be greater than 0.2m in height • Maximum 30 days only • Only 1 per business - per year l • Not permitted on heritage property BILLBOARDS ' t A sign that is fastened, posted, painted or projected in such a manner as to permit its periodic replacement and that advertises goods, products or services that are not available at the location of the sign or that directs a person to a location different from where the sign is located Billboards are not permitted: on a roof ews within 250m of any other billboard • in any location other than within the Billboard District shown in Schedule "C" to the Sign By-law • Maximum area 20.Om2 and maximum height of 10.Om • Billboards lawfully erected and in use prior to the passing of the by-law are permitted provided the owner of the billboard obtains an annual licence BANNERS AND INFLATABLES Must be located on the property to which the sign relates • Prohibited in residential and open space/natural areas • Maximum size of 10.0m2 • Maximum 14 days only • Not permitted on heritage properties t SIDEWALK SIGNS y A freestanding temporary sign not affixed to the ground advertising a business and installed immediately in front of the business on private property or on the sidewalk ww~ acK • Maximum height of 1.0m and width of 0.6m u""~ • Permitted in Special Sign Districts only • Can be displayed immediately in front of the business only during the hours of operation • A minimum of 1.5m of unobstructed sidewalk space must be maintained • Maximum of 1 annual licence per owner, valid for a period of 1 year i tI to COMMUNITY VENTS SIGNS - REAL ESTATE SIGNS _ DEVELOPMENT ALES OFFICE SIGNS A temporary sign that advertises a public event organized for a non- A temporary non -illuminated sign used to advertise That land. a A sign erected r xto a temporary sales office where new homes r rocs or recreational f and other daveopmenls are maM1:elerJ to the public rri civic, cultural, e p tigpurpose bu Iding or portion of a tw iding 5 being o9ered for ale a rant • Must not he closer Riar 100m to another community event sign Maximum size of 1 ors Must be temporadisplayed on or immediately surrouncing a adverUsirrg the same community avers Must be displayed entirely on private property ry sales offce Side must be shown on permit appp%:atlon documents and. Can be displayed 14 days prior to the event and must be 1 sign per properly. unless property is on a corner, then 2 authorized by the City through Issuanco of a building pemut romrved the day after the event may to ore,c'ed unseparate street frontages if the property prior to being erected is at least 0.5 ha in she. FILMING LOi:ATION SIGNS DIREGOONAL SIGNS GARAGE SALE SIG'NS • Requires filming permit from the City A sign that is intended solely for public information, safety or Maximum size of 1.0m2 convenience in directing persons or traffic • Maximum size of Lori Maximum size of 1.5,2 Must be displayed entirely on private property or on a boulevard no more than 3 days prior to the sale • Displayed on private property or boulevard at location Must be erected entirely on private property approved by City only while the film is in production • Must be removed the day after the sale • Must not contain promotional or advertising content DEVEL OFMENT SALES SIGNS_ CONSTRUCTION SITE INFORMATION SIGNS ADDRESS SIGNS Asgn drecbng people to a temporary sales offnce whore new A Site Plan Agreement, building permit cr topsoil and fill A son that dop',Ls the persenal or buildlrgg identification and horses and other residentia developments are marketed to the pennit is required prior to orect.ng a conswcton site street address of Rie property on wthrch the sign is located puhFc informaton sign Maximum size of 0.2m2 in low density residental zone • Maximum sizo of 1 .5mz Must bo dsplayed on terporary ferr„mg or other physical banner around a corutruonon silo Maximum size of 14- in ortier areas Must be oreeted entirofy on private property or boulevard • Can be sinuoud 30 days prior io construction arxl must be Must be erected entirely on privalo proporry Cannot bo displayed vnttun 500 mefro5 of any other removed wahin 30 dats lollowing compration or development sales sign being used to c4rect adonlion to this disocntinualion of construction Cannot contain promotonal or advertising content same temporary sales office Cannot no, erected for more than 72 hours texcludng statutory holdays) dur'urg any consecutive 7-day period - - -i-- - -------------J OPEN MOUSE SIGNS MODEL HOME SIGNS DIRELTOAY SIGNS • Maximum size of 1.0ri Maximum size of 2.Om2 A sign for a building containing multiple occupancies • Must be displayed entirely on private property or on a Must be erected entirely on private property and only while Maximum size of 1.om2 boulevard only while the house is open for public inspection model home is open for public inspection and sales purpose • Must be erected entirely on private property • 1 directory sign permitted at each access point from a highway to the building MENU BOARDS - FARMSIGNS - WTERIOR SIGNS A sign ereetrad as part of a drive Inmugh facility imei used to display' A sign advertising the sale of farm produce grown or produced on A sign in the interior of a building that is iraunde'd to be seen and order products and services availablo at Rio drive -through tho proporty where the sgn Is kwahnd oulsde of the bd~lding. irx-.ludes a window sgn busmoss • Maxlnwm size of 1.5n= Must be displayerl rr a - dow on Iha first storey of a • Maximum size of 4.On.= building zoned for oNKe, commarcial or Industrial uses onl: • Must bo orectod omireiy on private profwrly "isl be located enoroly on private property Sign cannot exeo[w1 20", of the size of each w rdow 1 sg7n per property sect on cr panol in etiw h it a ere: ted FLAGS ELECTION SIGNS HOME IMPROVEMENT SIGNS • Only flags bearing the crest, emblem or insignia of any Maximum size of 1.5rl A sign advertising or promoting landscaping, home repairs or corporation, federal, provincial and municipal government home renovations. Must be erected entirely on private property or on a Regional agency, or religious, charitable or fraternal organization Road in accordance with Region's sign by-law. Not Maximum size of 1.0m2 permitted permitted on City roads or property • Maximum size of 2.Om2 • • Must be entirely private property where the home Can be displayed: improvement is being g undertaken • Must be entirely on private property Federal or Provincial election prior to the day the writ of Can be displayed 2 days prior to the commencement of the election is issued home improvement project and shall remain for no longer 3 flags per single property permitted Municipal election 25 days in advance of the last polling day than a maximum of 0 days for the election. • Must be removed 2 days after the last polling day for the election • 1 election siqn per candidate on a single property NO TRESPASSING SIGNS HOME BASED BUSINESS SIGNS POSTERS I • Nttaximurn sve of 0 .am2 Home basrJ Lushest oar- must be obtained prier to A printed nonce conveying fnformobon Inlorniod tc b-, displayed signage being efectec for a temporary period of tirre and Includes a bill, handbill, Ieaffe( • Must be erected entirely on privato property Maximum size of 0.2rns anc placard • Must be located ontlroiy cn privalo proporiy in a low density May riot be placed on a utility box, newspaper vending box, residential zone bench, transM shelter, letephono box, telephone booth, transformer box or vauh, telephone pole, hydra pole, No other sign may kw era led on the property streetlight, stoplight pore, recycling wasto m rd,.le, mailbox, tree. st No intemally illuminated sign pormittect roe[ sign or not on a vahk;lo ADDITIONAL EXEMPTIONS • signs located within the fueling areas of gas stations • official signs • signs on private property that are less than 0.2m2 in area provided they do not contain any promotional or advertising content • shelter advertising or any advertising on street furniture and fixtures approved by the City or the Region xJ 4~. 241 Special Sign Districts have been established in smaller communities and the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District. Some additional requirements are proposed to apply to these areas, including: • More detailed information is required on sign application documents, in order to confirm that the proposed sign will be appropriate to the local community architecture • A permit is required for any changes to an existing sign face • Ground signs are limited to 1.5m in height and 1.5m2 in area I • Wall signs are limited to 1.5m2 in area .R IKt 0 11Hjl.f G. • Electronic message displays, portable signs, banners or inflatable signs are not permitted • Internally illuminated signs are not permitted I • Community event signs of any type are permitted: • Sidewalk signs for local businesses are permitted • In the W hitevale Heritage Conservation District, signs must conform to the District Guidelines, and meet all requirements of the Ontario Heritage Act UMRPOIY MW WATERFRONT OBTRICT WHITEVALE DISTRICT (MENVMD DISTRICT - - ,rte I f IM, i i - T CHERRMM/OOD DISTRICT GREEN RIVER DISTRICT CLAREMONT DISTRICT - OOD _ _ BROUGHAM DISTRICT KINSALE DISTRICT BALSAM DISTRICT 1 1 - { BALSAM TI - S AMA 2 4.2 -PERMANENT SIGN PERMITS TEMPORARY SIGN LICENCES - Application Requirements: • Separate licence is required for every sign • Licence Application shall be accompanied by details of size, location and fee • Identify and describe in detail the proposed sign and all other signs existing on the property • For an individual business in a building containing multiple tenants, • Identify the legal description and municipal address or other equivalent description that will the application must include written permission from the owner or the readily identify the property to which the sign is being erected owner's authorized representative consenting to the placement of the • Name, address, telephone and facsimile numbers of the applicant and the persons designing portable sign or erecting the sign • Expires on date indicated on the licence • Plans, specifications, documents and other information describing the construction, dimensions, materials and specific location of the proposed sign • Maximum of 1 licence per business or service per year • Applicable fee payment • Maximum of 1 licence per property at any one time, irrespective of the number of business tenancies located on the property • Where the applicant is not the owner of the property, an authorization for making the application from the owner • No licence may be issued on any heritage property • Proposed sign must comply with the by-law, the building code an approved site plan, any • A proposed temporary sign must comply with this by-law, the building applicable heritage district guidelines and any other applicable laws code, an approved site plan, heritage conservation district guidelines, or any other applicable law Additional Requirements for Special Sign Districts • Other conditions may be imposed at the issuance of a temporary licence • Conform to the applicable heritage conservation district guidelines designation and the Ontario Heritage Act • Scale drawings clearly showing, • the proposed sign materials, letter fonts and colours • the proposed means of any sign illumination • in the case of a wall sign, an accurate building elevation and the proposed method of affixing the sign to the building VARIANCES FEES Ground Sign $250 • A variance may be applied for to obtain relief from any sign by-law requirement. Wall Sign $150 • A variance application must be filed with the Director,. Planning & Development Development Sign $250 • Must include reasons why the provisions of the by-law cannot be complied with Portable Sign $50 • Applicant may appear before Site Plan Committee to make representations respecting the application Banner and Inflatable Sign $50 • Approval of the variance will be based on, Sidewalk Sign $100 • Conformity with the applicable site plan agreement Billboard $500 • special circumstances or conditions applying to the property, building or use referred to in the application Additional fee for any sign installed prior to permit issuance $250 • whether strict application of the by-law in the context of the special circumstances Additional fee for any sign installed prior to licence issuance $50 applying to the property, building or use, would result in practical difficulties or unnecessary and unusual hardship for the applicant Redemption Fee - Election Signs $25 • whether such special circumstances or conditions are pre-existing and not created by Redemption Fee - all signs less than 2 m2 $25 the owner or applicant Redemption Fee - all other signs $50 • whether the proposed sign will detrimentally alter the character of the area; and Sign Variance -Ground Sign, Wall Sign or Development Sign $500 • whether the general intent and purpose of this by-law is maintained Sign Variance-All Other Signs $100 • The Director may approve or refuse any variance application, and may impose any conditions upon an approval Bye, Denise [ATTACNWC3 . TO REPORT /,4 - o q From: Carlisle Miller [carlisle88@gmail.com] 243 Sent: February 3, 2009 11:01 AM To: Bye, Denise Subject: Proposed Sign By-Law Denise Bye, Hello Ms. Bye, I am an owner here in section B 1 (A.K.A Liverpool road) and this proposed by-law seems to hinder rather than improve the signage situation, by that I mean ...there seems to be a real situation as pertaining to signage in pickering. Living on the south end of wharf street I know there are a few small businesses trying to make a go of it, while being taxed heavily by the city. Now I know that it's the norm for businesses to be taxed and for these people they're also being taxed for the property as well if there owners. I thougt when this development was allowed to happen that this would become pickering shining point, which it has become. but underneath the amounts of businesses that have come and gone around here are disturbing. I frequent these business trying to do my part to support my fellow pickering neighbours and the businesses that reside in Pickering, But I am one person of few and from what I see the city has bigger fish to fry rather than make a more complicated by-law for something as simple as a "Sign". A 39 page document.. this is excessive and also hinders the situation in Pickering. We here in pickering have a unique area and very few have what we've got here, it's one of the only places i know of where a person can walk from Pickering downtown (I use th term lightly) core and walk 30 minutes to go fishing.... (how we got a Home Depot in our downtown core I will never figure out, I don't see Lowe's or Rona in the middle of Toronto). But the signage that I and thousands of others should see is signage promoting our area, Our shining area, Our waterfront, with it's store's, restaurants, boadwalk, pathways Extremely huge parks with art pieces by local artists, Our Enormus Pinwheel (The windturbine) apparently the biggest in north america, our industrial areas which contain the company that gave this planet eyes in space to watch the universe (Hubble)..There are no signs of any shape, size, that is attached to a structure, t-framed, bannered, Billboarded, Portable or otherwise. My point her is a simple one...there no need to change the by-law pertaining to signage. I work along side former mayor Mel Lastman during his tenure in North York and I can never remember any persons making a complaint or request about signage unless it was going to take a permit to erect or remove, We have the chance to continue to be the city just outside toronto that still can provide a home and opportuntity for anyone wanting to settle here, but we won't have that if we keep mucking up the works and concentrating on matters that don't need to be re-structured. On my end of liverpool road during the summer the city erected signs for parking and snow removal ( do these sign fall under the new by-law..not according the the new proposal, then new signs would hav eto be made and then paid for by the city..a waste of money), the parking situation is a mess because someone on the planning and development department didn't notice or never worked on this type of environment to see that parking down here is inadequate, the grading of the construction for he buildings down her were made incorrectly and never adjusted by the company or the city inspectors- makes you wonder which one wasn't doing there job..., we have 2 new restaurants, and one restarant doesn't even have a handicap signage or parking for handicapp patrons, but insist that parking for hanicapp is across the street in a unleveled bumpy , rocky gravel parking lot, now if I had to attempt to walk with walk supports and had to walk to that restaurant and fellA would loook to start some kind of legal action towards the establishment and the city for not following provincial by-laws and allowing this to be completed or operational. So here we have another issue of signage..or lack there of... On a side note..your by-law officers need to go back to training on parking enforcement procedures..I have witnessed these gentlement tagging vehicles without proper procedure, they're not even chalking he tires to see if vehicles have moved during ther duration of being parked, one officer seems to think it's ok throwing the ticket onto the vehicles, Someone should remind him that the officer has to take the ticket and make contact with the vehicle to legally deliver the tickets but that is another matter. i 2 4.4 ets try to have the signage that's needed to promote our city and our area rather than become more of a hinderance, let try to have these family's stay and help develop this area and city, before they decide that Pickering is not worth it and leave to return to the city. WE already loose alot of money because the younger people buy, eat, entertain and spend most of there money in Toronto, then finally move to Toronto makng their population grow and keep ther economy growing while we shrink, i would hate to see tumbleweeds rolling down the streets here in Pickering 8 years ffrom now. Other areas such as Niagara on the Lake, Stouffville and Forks of Port Credit have all benefited from supporting there areas of interest... Pickering has more resources, population, and diversity...So why are we doing nothing....? Don't change this by-law. z . ATTACHME & k TO REPORTS cs iµ -09 45 A-A - zev tYL4 .~LCa~i ~la,e,cc~,/ ~./i- ~~~t +~_•~nl _ _ _ . ,~w ~-a~c: if it I l,C-.~.~~.~ _ .vlLL¢~- ,C~~t2 .~~e,LC-ec.ei.~-~-Fi ~c~✓ v✓~ ~v,`~E.~-~w~iy~~?--~a~C-O ; .~GWf ...~G~sc-~c-~e-C/ mil- s`-.~k<vo~~ ~~-u.~-x/✓~-?~C~ 246, z' , _ _-41 - , - - - _ 11 112 U - - - - - - - - ?4? - ,r 03 D a~--c/ I~v ~0---_ - 0 0 ev, - 249 C - assn f Q r _3 x.z r~ _f r. t 4 ' t Lf~,r.rk'Y ti 2t'd.9r -4',~..• a_~a, _ 'sl' w~. ~ J FO LEASE PAD~o - 9059390000 ~ ~ a e o r I 250 BaS111 1111 `t. WWWAAMAN n~ 3 fJ 4.1 a r~ ~ v n:n r .'n NAM 2 51 cnnadtan Institut Potrolsuan conodisn ATTACHMENT # `5 00( Products dos prodults = institute ptirollors I_Y s- April 17, 2009 Mr. Tim Moore By E-mail to: tmoore(a city. pickering.on.ca Chief Building Official City of Pickering Pickering Civic Complex One-the-Esplanade Pickering, Ontario L1V 6K7 Re: Pickering Proposed Sign By-law Tim, Many thanks for hosting the March 26 h meeting and for providing Wes Robbins from Petro- Canada and I the opportunity to discuss the proposed sign by-law. This letter is intended to reiterate some of the points included in our February 12, 2009 letter and to provide for your consideration additional feedback comments regarding the specific signage needs at service stations and also specific comments to some sections of the proposed sign by-law. The majority of service stations in operation within the City of Pickering are owned by the CPPI member companies. A similar situation exists within major cities across Ontario and Canada. The brand and image standards of the CPPI member service stations have been developed with a care for consistent image, uncluttered look and ease of recognition by the traveling motorist. General Service Station Conditions: A service station primary focus is to provide customers with fuel for motor vehicles. Service stations are typically located adjacent to street comers where a significant amount of vehicular traffic exists. A refueling purchase decision is often not so much a planned decision but an impulse decision based on the two key factors of fuel price and site convenience/ease of access. This purchase decision is usually made while the motorist is driving and therefore sufficient visibility of the service station pylon sign and canopy from a distance is required to allow for sufficient reaction time by the motorist. In order to improve the one stop convenience factor, modern service stations may also include many other convenience products and services such as bank machines, convenience store products, fast food, carwash, etc. As many of the retail activities at a service station site are conducted outdoor (sale of gasoline and other associated products and/or services) as opposed to inside a typical retail business establishment, there is a need for service stations to have on site outdoor communication signs 20 Adelaide Street East, Suite 901 Toronto, ON MSC 2T6 I T. 416.492.5677 F. 416.492-2514 Website www.cppl.ca 252 of various types in order to appropriately communicate the various products and services available to the motorist customer while this customer is on the premises. In a more typical retail establishment many of these signs would normally be contained within inside a building. The service station signage needs should therefore be addressed in that unique context and we hope that the new sign by-law will recognize this special condition. Section 21 (1): Ground Signs (Illuminated Pylon) The service station pylon sign is one of the first signage element visible to the traveling motorist. It provides for the first set of information such as the brand, the fuel price and the availability of the main ancillary products/services such as carwash, convenience products, fast food, etc. It should be noted that gasoline is the only retail product commonly used by consumers where the price is so predominantly displayed along the property line and is visible from a distance. In order to allow for sufficient reaction/decision time by the traveling customer, the pylon sign needs therefore to be clearly visible from a distance on each of the roads adjacent to the service station. Each CPPI member company has its own set of standards when it comes to illuminated pylon signs and these vary amongst members in height between 7.Om to 7.5m. Section 21 (1) indicates a proposed maximum height for ground signs to be 6.0m. This is significantly less than the typical smallest standard sign being used by our member companies. We therefore recommend a maximum height of 7.5m. (Refer to attached standard sign drawings for Esso, Petro-Canada, Shell and Sunoco) Section 38 (1), (7): Portable Signs (Non-illuminated Ground Signs) In addition to the illuminated pylon sign, there is an ongoing need to communicate to the traveling motorist some other more seasonal and/or promotional services available on the site. These signs located near the street property line may include items such as windshield washer fluid in the winter or special bulk convenience product in the summer such as pop, water, etc. One such ground sign should be visible from each street but as these signs include ancillary products these signs can be smaller in height and area. The service station industry presently uses some of these signs which vary in sizes between 1.5m to 2.2m in height and between 1.5sq.m to 2.0sq.m of display area per face. The size of these signs is actually very similar to the signage used on the bus shelters and/or garbage containers placed along sidewalks on public property. As long as the computed area of these non-illuminated ground signs in addition to the illuminated pylon sign area still falls within the total allowable signage area per street frontage (For example18sq.m X 2 faces = 36sq.m), a maximum of one of these sign per street frontage should be allowed with a maximum height of 2.2m and a maximum display area of 2.Osq.m per face. In order to provide some discipline as to the location and the tidiness of these signs they should be properly constructed on permanent foundations or placed on a dedicated leveled pad. In such cases the maximum period of 30 days should not apply. 20 Adelaide Street East, Suite 901 Toronto, ON M5C 2T6 I T. 416.492.5677 F.,416.492-2514 Website www.cppi.ca -2- 1; 1 L 1 ,115 ~ ~ _ y i. Q"' fj r t :Fx newly a Example of Shelf non-illuminated ground sign per g p street frontage in addition to the illuminated pylon ground sign (Dimensions 2.2m H, 1.3m W, display area 2.Osq.m per face) „OS 47 67 3T 071 N f - UPPER PWDT PM 101„m C/W I I hTWCr-"AL FRAME,STEEL I I FIRS FASTENED TO DOOR F7?AME. i I / AFEO II II 47mm PREFINI5HEU WHITE SEE HDiE S FOO TyINGED FRAME DOOR (2R o 5mm X 47-) BELOW I I 14A~GH INTERNAL STEEL &RACL:f m I I 971 MICE SPANING 51RuCTURAL FR ME LEGS. TYPICAL OF 2 I I I 2~, M DEN DODR SWING A INC DOOR To OPEN 1 TD A MAXIMUM OF 10r , nv. TOP a: DDTTGM SEENNOTE 2 O 290 _ 11 I L_-__- ___-_-1 0 0 OUTLWE OF METAL DOOR FRAME Lowat PIVOT P04 Example of service station non-illuminated ground sign used by: Esso, Petro-Canada and Sunoco (display area 1.5sq.m per face) 20 Adelaide Street East, Suite 901 Toronto, ON M5C 2T6 I T. 416.492.5677 F. 416.492-2514 Wehsite www.cppi.ca -3- 254 ~ Y. ,t ~ I ~ z Ara x 1 a 1 'j Shield your shine Get a Luxury Wash with Shjr,eGtkird PLUS, r a..l fm j Y s Example of service station non-illuminated ground sign used by: Esso, Petro-Canada and Sunoco (display area 1.5sq.m per face) all Y f Ml 4 2 LIGHT'S EA&T av 'x w Ipdt N i "14 ON HwyCOlL1S2 CENTRE (405) 427•2665 FREE ESTIMATES ROgp PICKERINO z. y ~✓'C Yoh Example of Pickering bus shelter signs and garbage container signs which are of similar sizes to service station non-illuminated ground signs 20 Adelaide Street East, Suite 901 Toronto, ON M5C 2T6 I T. 416.492.5677 F. 416.492-2514 Websile www.cppi.ca -4- 255 Section 58 (4): Menu Boards This section indicates that no person shall erect more than 1 menu board on any single property. Many of the modern service stations may include one or two menu boards for the restaurant and one menu board for the carwash. Under such scenario there is therefore a need to revise the maximum from 1 to 3 menu boards per property Section 67 (n) Sign projecting above the roof This section indicates that a building sign cannot project above the roof or parapet of a building. This would likely negate the possibility for a Petro-Canada kiosk and/or canopy sign to have the tip of the maple leaf logo project above the roof as the present national corporate image standard requires. A Same situation could potentially exist with an Esso "On the Run" store sign, a Sunoco or Ultramar canopy sign, etc. Gasoline pump island canopy fascia need to allow sufficient space to occasionally display corporate logo which may extend above the uppermost point of the canopy by no more than 1m. (See following Petro-Canada canopy icon burst drawing) INTERNALLY S.LUMR:ATED WHITE FORMED --1 ACRYTTC BURST (FACE & RETURNS) WITH LXXX 'PETRO CANAO.' WOTDMARN a REOUIRED IN 2 LOCATIONS + , f ; FINISHtD GRADE TOP OF ISLA140 © CANOPY ICON BURST (2 KOD) SCALE: (NIS) 20 Adelaide Street East, Suite 901 Toronto, ON MSC 2T6 I T. 416.492.6677 F. 416.492-2614 Website www.cppi.ca -5- 256 Similar issues arise with wall signs on buildings with peaked or sloped roofs. It would only be possible in the case of sloped roofs if the roof line is deemed to be the apex of the roof. Alternatively the by-law could stipulate that a wall sign cannot project more than 0.5m above the roof line. Service stations also have the unique characteristic of being exclusively "at grade" operations with single storey buildings which creates limits as to the possible height of wall signs. (See following Esso carwash and store building drawings) .mil Rd I ~ I ~s a s I KN -,.J•Y I • v • "yls I r TN Tw l~'N N•1 ° ✓ ~ a may. _o - o po • O~x,q• . ....,1'.'~-•Jxn r lnss /.01 0q0L`~ °h.1 , bdN ay Ims' Car VY h °Op'?8 °0i fs kw lewo M. wxu a, t sp •1 ~ .d ~,j. ~4 ~ f 1 i X ~ .~.IY yq1 v p , Z1 ~ 0. Esso Carwash 1S1 W .xx. xN. Nrp Nn .Nita yy. yl LOT PW I NpN 'nK' ,e fj.V1 1 N J l •o n ~.R \ - \ \ \ \ \ y 4. ([3yArRY1 S 1 Iitq 71 r. \ N \ 'A'e.LN 'Writ n~1 •N •1T •11 h)' Esso Store 20 Adelaide Street East, Suite 901 Toronto, ON M5C 2T6 I T. 416.492.5677 F. 416.492.2514 Website www.cppl.ca -6 257 Under the current proposed sign by-law, many new service station project developments would have to go through an extensive sign variance application process as the existing sign by-law may not always reflect modern times. Such variance applications usually result in municipal approvals but at the expense of time and resources on the part of the applicants and the City. If we collectively take the opportunity to properly address the needs of the service station industry within the current proposed new sign by-law, the result will be consistent and orderly signage at service stations. This activity will also contribute at significantly reducing the amount of sign variance applications which would otherwise be required in the future. The above comments illustrate the opportunity to better address the various signage needs for service stations within the proposed new sign by-law and we are happy to provide assistance. We will be pleased to review and comment further on a revised draft sign by-law if and when such document becomes available. Sincerely, Ut r Jean Roy P.Eng. CPPI Ontario Division cc. Tyler Barnett, City of Pickering, tbarnett cityofpickering.com Wes Robbins, Petro-Canada, WRobbins(a Petro-canada.ca 20 Adelaide Street East, Suite 901 Toronto, ON M5C 2T6 I T. 416.492.5677 F. 416.492-2514 Website www.cppi.ca -7- F<«' Canadian Inatitut Patroieum Canadian 4 ~cf Products des prodults kL' institute p6troliars February 12, 2009 Ms. Denise Bye By E-mail to: dbye(acityofr)ickerina.com Project Coordinator, Sign By-law City of Pickering Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario L1V 6K7 Re: Pickering Proposed Sign By-law Ms. Bye, S4-vice !5h,147 This note is in response to the recent City of Pickering Notice regarding a proposed new sign by-law which will replace the existing sign by-law, passed in 1987. I am writing this letter on behalf of the Canadian Petroleum Products Institute (CPPI), Ontario Division regarding the above topic. CPPI represents more than fifty percent of the retail petroleum operators in the province of Ontario and its member companies include Shell, Petro-. Canada, Suncor, Imperial Oil and Ultramar. The majority of automobile service stations within the City of Pickering are owned by CPPI member companies. While CPPI members are competitors in the market place, the member companies work together under the CPPI umbrella on various issues which may be common to the industry. Since its creation in 1989, CPPI has represented the views of its membership on business, environmental, zoning, traffic access, parking requirements, tanker truck circulation and health and safety issues. CPPI has a genuine interest in ensuring that its member stations have facility design standards in place which ensure that their retail petroleum services are safe and, viable while meeting the customer needs and also being compatible with the needs of the community. We commend the City of Pickering for its initiative on updating its sign by-law. We appreciate the opportunity you have given us to provide input into the new sign by-law. As many of the retail activities at a service station site are conducted outdoor (sale of gasoline and other associated products, menu boards for carwash and/or fast food drive throughs) as opposed to inside a typical retail business establishment, there is a need for service stations to have outdoor communication signs of various types in order to appropriately communicate the products and services to the motorist customer. In a more typical retail establishment many of these signs would be contained within inside the store. I would like to bring to your attention that the signage needs of the retail petroleum industry are somewhat different from typical other retail establishments and the service station signage needs should be addressed in that contest. 20 Adelaide Street East, Suite 901 Toronto, ON M5C 2T6 I T. 416.492.5677 F. 416.492-2514 Website www.cppi.ca 259 The following are just a few examples to illustrate this point: • Most modern service station sites have a weather canopy to protect the motorist and these canopies need to display the corporate brand logo. Section 12 of the current draft sign by-law includes canopy signs as wall signs to have a maximum of 15% of the building face area. The canopy is similar to a building where the walls have been removed to allow vehicular traffic flow. Therefore in such a case the building face area should be defined as the area contained between the ground level and the roof line. • The current preliminary by-law section 67 (n) is that a building sign cannot project abov the roof. This would likely negate the possibility for a Petro-Canada kiosk and/or canopy sign to have the tip of the maple leaf logo project above the roof as the present national corporate image standard requires. • Same situation could potentially exist with an Esso "On the Run" store sign, a Sunoco or Ultramar canopy sign, etc. • Section 21 (1) indicated the maximum height for ground signs to be 6m. This is significantly less than the typical standard signs being used by our member companies which vary in height from 7.Om to 7.5m. It is interesting to notice that the City of Toronto is also presently in the process of updating its sign by-law and has adopted 8.Om as the maximum height for ground signs in Toronto. • Section 58 (4) indicated that no person shall erect more than 1 menu board on any single property. Many of the modern service stations may include one or two menu boards for the restaurant and one menu board for the carwash. Under such scenario l/ there is therefore a need to revise the maximum from 1 to 3 menu boards per property. The above illustrate the opportunity to better address the service station various signage needs within the proposed new sign by-law. If we collectively take the opportunity to properly address the needs of the service station industry within the proposed new sign by-law, this will contribute at significantly reducing the amount of sign variances which would otherwise be required in the future. We will be pleased to have an opportunity at your convenience to discuss this topic in more details and provide some assistance as appropriate on behalf of our member companies. Sincerely, 6? Jean Roy P.Eng. CPPI Ontario Division Tel: 416-222-5991 cc. Dave Weaver, Petro-Canada, weaver(a-)petro-canada.ca 20 Adelaide Street East, Suite 901 Toronto, ON M5C 2T6 T. 416.492.5677 F. 416.492-2514 Website www.cppi.ca I -2- Bye, Denise L 6 0 1ATTACHMElff#=TO REPORT# From: Paul Avis [paul.avis@rogers.com] Sent: April 17, 2009 10:31 AM To: ^MayorWe_b_EmaTr, info@dougdickerson.ca; Littley, Bonnie, Councillor; McLean, Bill, Councillor; Johnson, Rick, Councillor; O'Connell, Jennifer, Councillor; Pickles, David, Councillor; Dickerson, Doug, Councillor Cc: 'Active Mobile Signs'; info@hy-tea.com; Bye, Denise Subject: RE: proposed bylaw changes - submission deadline April 17, 2009 Dear City Councillors, Re: Signing By Laws G My business, Beauty-Full Spa is located on Liverpool Road south of the 401. While there is a lot of traffic passing by, this location is not a destination for shoppers generally speaking due to its small size. Regardless, it is a profitable business that has contributed to the City of Pickering through taxes and community services. An important reason my business has survived in this location is due to the mobile sign in front of my establishment. It generates 30% of the business's income. That means it also generates 30% of the taxes I pay that pays your wages among other things. I do understand these signs can be unsightly, but they work better at their intended purpose than any other form of advertising for my business. In no way am I asking for special treatment. What I am asking for is a level playing field that applies to all businesses. For example, in my little business, if I want to put out a little "A" Frame Sign I need a permit for $50/month. Whereas, the Realtor pays no such cost. Why are Real Estate Agents exempted from permit fees for "For Sale Signs" in front of houses or open house signs, often right next the sidewalk, often located on city own property? I would understand the exemption if this was their only means to advertise, however, they use all same the methods that I have in my advertising arsenal including print, premiums, radio, television, referrals, etc yet get an exemption on A frames. That is not fair to anyone outside the real estate sector. It's my opinion that it's time this lucrative businesses have their exemption removed as the Pickering tax payer is being cheated out of hundred's of thousands of dollars in monthly permit fees. On another point it clearly states in the By-law that Roof Signs are not permitted, however, they can be approved via the Planning Departments Site Plan. Therefore, it really isn't a level playing field at all, and these latest revisions to the Sign By-laws are just another attack on the rest of the small business sector. Please explain how I will be able to replace approximately 30% of my monthly revenue, created from my mobile sign which your new by-law will terminate? If I am only able to display this sign one month out of 12, can I proportionately reduce my tax remittance to offset the revenue loss? We have tried numerous methods of advertising, and what has proven most successful after referrals and the internet is the mobile sign in front of our business on Liverpool Road. i 261 Just in Mobile Sign rentals, at $50/month in permit fees, the City must be generating a large sum of cash. How does the City intend on replacing this revenue stream? I am not sure why the new sign By-law is required; however, it must be business friendly. . At present, from my perspective as both a businessman and a taxpayer, the sign by law is anti- business at the worst possible time. Please take another look at this with a view to helping business grow instead of putting more impediments in our way. Yours truly Regards, Paul Paul Avis Nutrition & Wellness Specialist Beauty-Full Spa & Weight Loss Treatment Centre Inc. 931 Liverpool Rd (South of Bayly) Pickering ON Canada L1 W 1S7 Tel. 905-420-0020 Email info(a)-beautyfullspa.ca www.beautyfullspa.ca Open Tuesday to Friday 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Open Saturday 9:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Closed Sunday & Monday. 2 2 6 2. ATTACHMENT #_2 TO REPORT # 14 " 0c Bye , Denise From: TROPIX RESTAURANT [tropixrestaurant@rogers.com] Sent: April 17, 2009 6:01 PM To: Bye, Denise Subject: Temp Sign By-Law Changes Hi There, I just received an e-mail from our sign company about by-law changes, what is the reasoning behind this? For us, being a new business, we rely on our sign enormously! Business is extremely slow at the moment so we have created lots great specials to help increase business which we put on our sign, if our sign is to be removed, I think it will hurt our business alot! Teena, Manager 1 MATTAMY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 2 h 3 JAffACHMENT#__S_T0 REPORT# S s /4-09 April 16, 2009 Pickering Civic Complex RECEIVED Attn: Ms. Denise Bye One The Esplanade APR 2 ? 2009 Pickering, ON CITY OF PICKERING l_1 V 6K7 PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Dear Ms. Bye: Re: Proposed Sign By-law Comments City of Pickering We are writing to provide our comments on the City of Pickering's proposed Sign By-law that was provided to us for review. As both a developer and a home builder, the details of this document will impact how we are able to market our homes and contribute to the growth of your City. Accordingly, we have the following comments that we would like you to consider prior to implementing the by-law as drafted: • Definitions: "low density residential zoning" - To eliminate some confusion on what this term would pertain to, we suggest starting the definition with "means an individual property and occupied by a homeowner that is zoned for a single detached dwelling...." • Section 23.1 - To provide clarity, please define where the 3.Om setback is measured from. (ie. Right of Way, building?) • Section 23.4 - We have serious concerns with the limitation of using only 3 development signs throughout the entire City to advertise our development of over 2,500 homes. We recommend that this be increased to something more reasonable like 8 to 10, considering the number of major access routes into and through the City. • Section 23.5 - Although we can appreciate the City's desire to have a mechanism to enforce the removal of old signage, the maximum time limit of 24 months represents a problem for large developments such as Duffin Heights or Seaton, where the time frame for development and home sales is greater than T (90>I 829-Z4Z4 I' t9oit bz9-zooz _;6o iti2IStoi itt:<t.e. ~)at<%,utr, O,,f~,<to 1 6u ,%t) MATTAMY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 2a4 10 years. We suggest that the wording be revised to read "whichever occurs later". • Section 52.1 - We suggest that reference to a "subdivision agreement" be added to this clause. • Section 53.3 - We would request clarification in this clause that makes it clear that the model home sign does not need to be removed when the model homes are closed outside of business hours, as these signs are usually installed in the ground and are not intended to be removed until the model homes are sold. • Section 55 - Upon review, it is unclear as to what constitutes at "development sales sign". Does this apply only to A-frame type temporary signs or any sign "directing people to a temporary sales office where new homes and other residential developments are marketed to the public"? We would suggest that a more thorough definition of this sign be included within the definitions section of the by-law, to make it clear to the public what type of signs are subject to this 72 hour restriction. We appreciate the opportunity to be involved in this process and ask that you give these suggestions serious consideration prior to implementing the proposed by-law. Lastly, please add my name to your circulation list for this matter and other City wide by-law matters. Also, you may remove Mr. Dave Madeira, as he is no longer with our company. Please note that our mailing address has changed to 2360 Bristol Circle, Oakville, Ontario L6H 6M5. Yours truly, MATTAMY/DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Aaron Wissonn PROJECT MANAGER TTACHMENT #-1 TO RgPQffJ Q r CC[ [5J A ite 600 Transit Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5J 2W3 265 i I ? 20 rue Bay, bureau 600 Toronto (Ontario) Canada M5J 2W3 Phone: (416) 869-3600 ext. 5342 Fax: (416) 869-1469 April 14, 2009 Email: Lou.lacovino@gotransit.com Ms. Denise Bye City of Pickering Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L IV 6K7 Dear Ms. Bye: Subject: Proposed Sign By-Law The Greater Toronto Transit Authority is a land owner in the City of Pickering and is landlord for CBS Outdoor Canada, which operates third party signs on GTTA property at Bayly Street and Liverpool Road. These signs provide useful income for the GTTA. The subject land falls outside the Permitted Billboard Area, as provided for in Schedule C of the proposed by-law. We would ask that the lands be included in the Permitted Billboard Area. Further, and as the signs may remain non-conforming notwithstanding that they be part of a Permitted Billboard Area, we would ask that sections 41 through 43, remove any reference to the licensing of non-conforming signs. The Municipal Act, which provides authority for the proposed by-law, allows for the regulation of signage, but does not allow for the regulation of legal non-conforming signage. Finally, as the set back requirements under the by-law would very probably preclude new signs from being built on our property, we would appreciate that the by-law provide for the installation of trivision signs at existing locations. These signs are of no greater size than the existing signs on our property; they do however allow for increased revenue for ourselves and our tenant, and given that the by-law effectively limits new locations from being installed, such signs would provide some opportunity for growth. We ask that the following, or a like clause, be inserted in section 41: "A billboard, including a non-conforming billboard, may include trivision faces of no greater size than permitted herein". Sincerely, Lou Iacovino Manager, Realty Services c: CBS Outdoor Canada (416) 869-3600 www.gotransit.com Bye, Denise 266 ATTACHMENT.0 o To RPPORT# cs! - 09 From: Allen Smoskowitz [asmoskowitz@rogers.com] Sent: March 17, 2009 4:18 PM To: Bye, Denise Subject: Proposed Sign By-Law Denise, Thank you for forwarding a copy of the proposed sign by-law. We have reviewed the proposed by-law and wish to forward our comments as follows: Page 15 - Section 50(2) The proposed signage area of 1.0 sq.m. is far to small for real estate leasing signage on the larger commercial sites in the City. This should be increased to 2.5 sq. m.; Page 19 - Section 62(3) This should be reworded to allow interior signage which does not exceed more than 20% of the total window area of the premises, rather than 20% of the size of each window section or panel in which it is erected; and, PAge 21 - Section 68(a) The wording in this section would appear to prohibit the painting of handicap markings on pavement surfaces, which is presently part of the City's handicap parking signage requirements. I appreciate receiving the City's comments on the above. I can be reached at: Allen Smoskowitz, P.Eng Steele Valley Developments Limited 2104 Highway 7, Unit 28 Concord, Ontario L4K 2S9 Tel: 416-736-6880 Thank you. 1 Bye, Denise [AT:A:MEWT # I -r u IEFORT _C5 4 - 0~1 From: Jerry Mauldin [ferry@ultimatecheer.ca] 267 Sent: April 16, 2009 5:58 PM To: Bye, Denise Subject: signs I would like to inform you that we are against the proposed change in the neon street sign rental. Our business uses our sign on a regular basis and would not be happy with the 1 month a year rule. Thank you, Jerry Mauldin Director of Operations Ultimate Canadian Cheer and Dance www.ultimatecheer.ca pH 905-839-8822 ext 223 OII~Mlllll~lgllllllll~d~T a _L 1 268 ATTACHMENT # a TO REPORT # ye, peAlse From: Active Mobile Signs [activemobilesigns@rogers.com] Sent: April 16, 2009 4:45 PM To: Bye, Denise Subject: sign by-law changes Denise Bye My name is Laurrie Leader owner of the sign company Active Mobile Signs. I have reviewed the proposed sign by-law once again and realized that I miss interpreted part of it. As indicated on page 11 (7) A license for a portable sign shall be valid for a period of not more than 30 days, after which the sign shall be immediately removed. Portable signs pertains to me and therefore took that as the proposal I did not see anywhere on this page stating only one permit will be issued for any business per calendar year. It was on the web site today I seen once again under Portable Signs (pertaining to me) Only 1 per business-per year! I spoke with Amanda Smith and she did clarify to me that it was indeed that any business are only allowed to apply for a permit once throughout the year. I also understand that there needs to be some regulations to the number of signs however this is our business and after speaking to my customers which I might add have used our company for well over 5 years limiting them to the use of a sign for only 1 mouth/year is very unreasonable. I have heard it over and over that this form of advertising has been very effective and is very affordable way of advertising. I also have several business that are on single lots and this would drastically impact their business. On the other hand I do agree to the number per lot to a certain extent. If the lot is small then 2 or more is not appropriate looks messy and can be a visual disturbance, however if you have a large frontage this should be the guide line for number of, also taking in to consideration of the owner of the properties allowance. Personally I feel that more effortshould be put on making sure the signs themselves are maintained creating less of of a visual disturbance and eye sore. We at Active Signs take pride in the fact that our signs always look appealing, neat and organized. What we see and have heard that it's the signs out there that are un kept, poor matching of colors and even not set up property displaying the board itself crooked that are the problem. I don't agree at all with the new proposed by-law for limiting the businesses to only one month per year, and hope that this can be reconsidered in order to keep those small businesses in business along with mine. On behalf of Active Mobile Signs and all my 10 present customers please reconsider this proposal!!! Thanks you Laurrie and Brian of ACTIVE MOBILE SIGNS 1 54ATTACHMENT# TO REPO=#--L- From: 1 4 - -Bye, Denise David Stuckless [dlstuckless@live.com] 269 Sent: April 13, 2009 11:14 AM To: Bye, Denise Subject: Sign Bylaw Changes Denise I attended the Public Meeting and expressed my concerns regarding the proposed bylaw changes. Here is my view/concerns about the changes. 1.) No one that i am involved with received a copy of the proposed changes. (Ford, Volvo, Mitsubishi, Toyota, Mr. Lube, Revival Times Church, YMCA, Coventry Lane Automible etc. ) 2.) Do not agree with restricting the owners of their own properties. They are not preventing other business from displaying a sign and they depend on the sign to get their message to the street. If we are concerned with small business displaying signs to close together them place a distance requirement on placement. 3.) Think there should be a restriction on how many signs there are on a property (ex. one per street front) but do not agree with 30 days per year. (min.should be of 120 days per year) There are a lot of special events that take place throughout the year that require a sign. 4.) Feel that if a plaza does not have a sign displayed and a tenant requires a sign, then they should be able to display one. Feel that in time of ressession it is not a good idea to restrict the owners of small business when it comes to advertising. It is a better idea to find ways to help small businesses stay in business and grow. A study in the US showed that road side signs increase small business profits by 5%. For a business that have gross earnings of 50,000. per month, proposal to remove 2500.00 from the earnings. 2500 x 12 = 30,000.00 per year. Pickering economy. As in the example above, how many small business use roadside signs throughout the year? Approx. 5000 business in Pickering. Pickering economy will be reduced by 5000 x 30,000 = 1.5 million per year. These numbers are based on studies do in other provinces throughout Canada and the US. Thank you for your time... David Internet Explorer 8 makes surfing easier. Get it now! IrEMW ATTACHMENT #_L L~ i L h U: i c- < 270 280 HOLIDAY INN DRIVE, CAMBRIDGE, ONiARlO, CANADA N3C 1 Z4 I D I S TEL: 519.220.0505 FAX: 519.220.0606 WWW PRIDESIGNS.COM L 0 M I T E March 30, 2009 RECEWED Ms. Denise Bye City of Pickering MAR 3 1 2009 Pickering Civic Complex CITY G,F DICKERING One The Esplanade BUILDING SBCTIO{V Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Dear Denise: RE: City of Pickering Sign Bylaw On behalf of Pride Signs, I would like to take this opportunity first to thank you for inviting us to participate in this review. We hope the information we are providing will be beneficial in completing your review and ask that if you have any questions or even if you would like to tour our facility, please don't hesitate to contact me. • What are the signage trends today: o Types of Signs: ■ Pylon Sign ■ Channel Letters ■ Channel Letters & Fascia Combo ■ Fascia Signs ■ Reverse Channel Letters or Logo ■ Exposed neon ■ Directional Signs ■ Awning Signs • Routered Substrate ■ Wall Signs (snap frames, non-illuminated panels etc.) ■ Projecting Banner (Main face perpendicular to the mounting surface) ■ Banner • Vacuum Formed Faces or Letters • Ground Sign _ ■ Sand Blasted Substrate (typically cedar signs) • Menu Board ■ Electronic Message Boards / Video Boards o Scale of Signs & Number of Signs: ■ Depends solely on the tenant and what signage requirements they have. ■ Corporation type businesses generally have more signs and have certain signage standards that must be attained to. ■ The biggest consideration to size of sign is the readability of the type or image. It is important to consider the speed of traffic and distance of viewing to have a sign that can be read safely. Small signage that cannot be read properly have a direct correlation to accidents not large easily read signage. ti 7 2! 1 _60 HOLIDAY INN DRIVE, CAMBRIDGE, ONTARIO, CANADA NK 1Z4 RI D ,Gs TEL 519.220.0505 FAX: 519.220.0606 WWW.PRIDESIGNS.COM LI JAI TED • What are the emerging signage trends in the near future? o Energy efficiency dictates the current and future trends with Led's and more efficient T8 lamps providing 10 year light packages with reduced servicing requirements. Due to LED illumination request sign boxes will have smaller depth profiles. Push through fascia type sign boxes and channel letters will remain popular but there also seems to be an emerging popularity in secondary illumination onto layered substrates ( ie. Intecel PW ) with digitally printed media applied to them. o Digital graphics will become more prevalent with the greater availability of higher quality digital printers. We may even start to see more graphic change outs and seasonal type signage in the exterior market place. There is also a trend to life style window or murals without advertising copy. o More distinct formed and shaped signs to stand out from the competition are becoming more popular. o Electronic Message Centres (EMC's) to replace standard reader boards, with a trend to full colour and Video capabilities. • What types of signage are becoming obsolete? o Exposed neon and neon illuminated channel letters. Due to the hours of manufacturing, maintenance / longevity and energy consumption neon/argon filled glass tubes is now considered an item of the past. o Interchangeable message boards (Read-O-Graphs) are being replaced with Electronic Message Centres (EMC's) & Video Boards, as they offer low energy and are maintenance free. • Typical Costs for Signs: ■ Pylon Sign - $10,000 - $75,000 ■ Channel Letters - $2,000 - $12,000 • Channel Letters & Fascia Combo - $$2,000 - $12,000 ■ Fascia Signs - $3,000 - $10,000 ■ Reverse Channel Letters or Logo - $3,000 - $7,000 ■ Directional Signs - $1,000 ■ Awning Signs - $1,000 - $10,000 ■ Routered Substrate - $300 - $2,000 • Wall Signs (snap frames, non-illuminated panels etc.) - $150 - $1,000 ■ Projecting Banner (Main face perpendicular to the mounting surface) - $1,000 - $4,000 • Banner - $500 - $1,000 ■ Vacuum Formed Faces or Letters - $350 - $2,000 ■ Ground Sign - $1,000 - $8,000. ■ Sand Blasted Substrate (typically cedar signs) - $200 - $1,000 ■ Menu Board - $2,000 - $6,000 ■ Electronic Message Boards / Video Boards - $20,000 - $250,000 • Our experience with other municipal sign by-law amendments or variance processes: o Generally, the process time is somewhat shorter. The first meeting is more informal and it can be used as a negotiation period and gives the client a chance to reiterate why they cannot comply or why they feel the specific sign is required. o We have had issues where a client's site plans and building elevations with signage have been approved at the building permit stage and the client commits to the capitol cost only to find out the signage package is greatly reduced. Based on this signage restriction the decision to 272 280 HOLIDAY INN DRIVE, CAMBRIDGE, ONTARIO, CANADA N3C 1 Z4 I va")VIGNS TEL 519 220.0505 FAX: 519 220.0606 WWWPRIDESIGNS,COM L11 build at the site is no longer optimal and the ability to generate the anticipated business is severely restricted. o Most sign bylaws do not take into account readability or conspicuity and reduce the chance of a new business being successful in their municipality. The SBA (Small Business Association) in the US believes signage is so important to a new business being successful they have dedicated over 45 pages to signage and electronic message centres at their site (www.sba.gov/smallbusinessplanner/start/pickalocation/signage/safelegal.html). I will also include some information that you may find helpful from the Ontario Sign Association and the International Sign Association (www.si gns.org). In particular to the draft bylaw that was sent for our review, my comments are as follows: • For Wall Signs - Maximum Area - 15% of building face area & maximum number is 1 per owner/tenant per frontage. - Needs to be clearer, does 15% allow for additional signs or does it cap out at 1 per frontage? Also, 15% seems very inadequate, depending on the unit frontage. Currently, the bylaw allows 25%. That is a good allotment, if City is adamant to reduce, maybe reduce to 20%. One sign per tenant is unreasonable, especially for bigger companies that also advertise store services as part of their sign branding / package. Should you have any questions or require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. Regards, o Isabella Cerelli Permitting Supervisor $CBS 273 .ATTACHMENT # 5 TO REPORT # OUTDOOR The City of Pickering RECEIVED Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade APR 2 1 2009 Pickering Ont. CITY OF DICKERING PLANNING AND L I V 6K7 DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ATTENTION: DENISE DYE Re: Proposed Sign By-Law Dear Ms. Dye, We wish to voice our concern with two aspects of the proposed new By-Law. Generally speaking, sign by-laws, and even those of recent vintage, permit third party advertising signs in areas of a commercial or industrial flavor. In our view, the City of Pickering's proposed new by-law would take such a restriction to unjustifiable level by further limiting such signs to a "Permitted Bllboard Area", as laid out in the By-Law's Schedule C. That area represents a minute fraction of the commercial and industrial area of the City of Pickering. Additionally, the setbacks provided for in section 41 of the proposed by-law would have the effect of making new locations in the Area impossible to find. We ask that the City review this provision. Of equal concern are the licensing provisions in the proposed By-Law. Section 43 provides that a license will not be granted for a sign unless it conforms. Presumably, a sign which is not located within the Permitted Billboard Area would not conform and might, therefore, not be granted a license. This provision is offensive to the Municipal Act, which is the legislative authority for the proposed By-Law. Section 99 of the Act provides that the City cannot regulate non- conforming signs. Accordingly, we ask that the subject licensing provision be struck from the proposed By-Law. We look forward to hearing from you. Yours truly, Stephen c egor National ire tor, Real Estate April 20 2009 377 HORNER AVE., TORONTO, ONTARIO M8W IZ6 • (416) 255-1392 • FAX: (416) 255-2063 • cbsoutdoor.ca n ~a5-WEII I iF luwu (D 274 a~ ~ (1). z a~ Z I (D om. m m cl) 2) O cn 00 0 > z N ( = 0 ° O < c o 0) C > 0 CD z W -n 3 v n D 3 O z o G) o fn) -9 cc 0 3 a s W ~03 m CD m z> c m Oro n CD m CO CD ~Cm co ai Tm c'-u O~ z0.T CD CO CD n = `Q m O 3 cr c CD Sli O C 0) CD CD CD -n 0 0 -0 CD CD CD 3 CD 3 CD =3I° ~ 0 v Q) 3 3 - 3m CD a~`~~ c Q'oX. ID CQ 0 C O CD CD CD p O O- cn _ O iv 3 U) o -1. w ~ o o Q o c~' cn. c m o C) C7 Cn N O O oo(a o o(o ° m o rn~ s~ m N O ° ~ O N sv cQ' ` -4 6 ~ o N can _3=- CD 3~ x ° CD m 0 0 -L m m ~ ~ _ Cn O Z R1 _ I Ca BCD 63 Q (~D CD c~ v N CD 5 0 o C: CC M CD ' cn n O =r CD C w m 3 0 CD CD C o -0 a) ::r( n. 1 CO j 5 Q O CD CD O (D O O N O O D z z z z o O o O ~ ~ s n N v v v .-r ~ Cfl > CD CD CD TI O O O zs zs m n O 0 0 0 m 0 0 0 Z v D D D CCD CD CN a Q -I O z CD r- WCAZW L 0 CD W O 0-, B C CD U) 0) C A D C O C W O cn C o M. 3 CL 0 CL ~ p ~cn c~0 CD CD ~ cn -a' Q° v o3Cn CD rt X7 3. W 0 0 w C7 Qo CD CD C CL vii 3 CD. 0 O O 0 C O~ 0 C cr CD 'Q CD Cp' Cn O O cn • • • • • • • • ~ p v 0 Oo N n cn p- ~ 0o w sll cn cn v n Uj t3" N O O O ~ < fD `G (Q O U) CD O =r,< O CD (p' Cp' C2 O = a O O ` fir z O' Q O Q3cQ O CD O N U) 0 v c cn a) O. cn CD U) -a c5 - U) 0 3 v CD ::9 (n CD 0~ X O O v 3 CD -0 %-a 5 CD -I- U) cn CD O CD .o Q. 3 CC] 3 cQ rt O CD 5' (a ~QC~3 vo ~3Q3 cn rnm ~3 (n CD U) = Cn O C CD O 0 C) O Q rt CD ~ O 3 cn S CD O rt SU CD 0 - s Cl) CD CD _r CD C a Q C N CD CO CD CD Cr 0 CD C: 3 o Q)-a 5LA n 0 :3 CL (n U) w ' ca v CL 3 v o p- CD " - m =3 0 r-* 0 CD r* CD O CD :3 Q CD u) M j =3 U) O cn w = ~ cC cl) w cEcQ cn o cn (1) ~ m 00 3 - Cr X C O -h rt CD y, 0 0 o v co o ~ ~ c~ ca COQ v c~ CD CD CD ~ 3 CD 0 0 0 -pa ~ o n U). a :3 0 -v -a m Q -a O O o @ o N cn U) ~ CD a a a a) C 0~ o a) D G) r ~ 0 2) 0" CD CD ~ 0o c a o 0mo~ ou~ " o v va C) C 3~ o 0< D CD CA ;::w 0 C) cn v (-D O O < CL ' o F O N "a 7 a 3 n cn CD .-h CD a (D T ~7 00 p O -1 (D 3 CD a' Q < 0 CD CD a- m cn m CD ~ a o -a o cn rn cQ C ~ a cn . . . C/) 0 w co ~ cn O N ~ 0 ::r N 0 a- a) O O n O a 's m C CCD O O "a CD O CD Q;~ o o 3~ M v c c 3 O~ o CD3 v CDD=" ccnm3 CL 0 0Q CL0mD° v-X 3mcCDn~ o -0 o 0 c CL 0~ -a =3 0 5 -0 cCDD M (n c 3' CD o _ ::r r.0) o c" O " 0 m :3,O CD 3 cD ~3 3 *•a- Ncn con ~ " CD 3-0 ~3 ~W 3 ' S(D 3 CD . CnCD 3 L7D CD aoa :v- CD ° cn~ CL cc CD CD< O° cn Q 'BCD pCDin CD ::r CD ET w w cc tv 3 (n 3:.~ v~n'CD.~o ~ccnn v CD 0) " m off, 0- 0 ° v Cr ~ << 3 0 CD 00 CD 0 ~ C cn v =3 =3 0 w ~ cn CD = ° v ? CD 3 O Q" N CL 5 Q v "a N CD cn ~ O = w a 0-1 (n (a r vOi CD c n ° (0 3 N 0 Q cQ ::r < co ° - m w ° CD cQ' Q" cn U) cn N Cr C) 3 0 CD o' (n cn 'a Fn' ° CD m CD 0 =r a n CD ° CD N U) I z D D D < z 00 0o z 0 (a cc w n (D D CD n n = m CD CD ~ = =r 00 CD ca 00 ou CC) CD -a CD CD v 14. a' a" r+ o o g n o CD CD O v v N a- w 3 3 3 ~ CD w < ~ = a a a v Q CL o CD CD CD a 0 Q a- c -°a -0 O CD O O Q Q Q - L ' 7-- m zCn Dr cn CD O v c G) 1'o~ 53m c~Q Z fD v (D m CD (D CD o~oo~ Ica n cnc o O CD c.0 cr a 3 C/) 0 CD 0 C: CD =3 T (1) CD O rot ~ r- -O = cn M D c O ~c/D~ (D cn - Q) Z 14-1 CL (a ca a- 0 CD U) U) cn 1 0 0 0 cr _-I O v v 6 s Q CD m U O 00 O 0 0 -0 0~ CD C/) Z '0 0 3: 0 (D Z O M (C) cn ~ 0 0 3~ cn v O C/) -0 0 O 0 6 O cQ cn O~ O Q- -O CD = CD c0 ° ~ m ° cQ' n -0 cam' C' c 3 v m ~ M a rn v 3 m n 0 0 y °o a- n ~cu ~ m 3° CD :3 CD cr N N 3 °:0 m U) cr 3 CD (0 ~N 0 T.CD c Cr o v0 CD o~Q ~N m03ocnO =3a~,o 0=3 0m n Q o n p to (Q c~ ai O O (D cn CD -p cn -O O 0 cn (Q cn O a ca• O a ~ v N3 ~c~nm~ c O 3 cn~ CL. 0 33vc cn=o I CD CD 0 n C7 CD Ln cn =r CD CD O. 0 cn ~ O -v -p v O a 3 v O~ c v N _ 7 m cr o- CDo 0c°nc0i= CD °~'~fD =Na cr 0 c0 O N 3 0- CAD Q O ~ O (Op M c a (D c w cc CD 0 CD Cn NO ::r 0 CD m 0 00 2: j N ° CD O CD CO ~ p co N cn O (D O CD 3 3 -I O O O O O cn CL `G cn n' O v fD CL O CD CD N CD o O O O O ~ ~ 7' w :3 : N CD CD CD O O O O I 1 1 1 C~ Cw cw C~ C C C O O O O O O O O (D CD CD CD CL a a a 2 7 A AC # -7 HE ORE# 3 m CD = G) CD CD v O m m cn 3 0 X 0 0 co ~ 00 M ;V r > M z < 0 Q m 0 r a~ n -n o 3 v' CD c~ a : O C 0-0 CD Z cQ v v cam' Z n o F r+ Cn C ~D =r cn -0 CD CL 0. CD 0 CD = r• v Cl) O & o ° co T c i 0 N n Cl) (D CD p o o ' CD 0 3 0°o m o. r, 0 CD • CD -0 3 z Ca CO) M (1) v' o Q_ Z N < cQ' Q Q Ch CD c cQ CO) '0 Q. O 0 3 5-0 3 T v N• Xm CD -7 v Cn• O -i 0~ n c (D O O m x Cc -oh r Cn CL (D (a CA CCDD CD " O O =..a =r CD 'Q & a' O n cn' = cn C CD D D (D N N ~ C7 D O @ CD `G ?I 7' fNn , r -a' • + `G ` w (a cn (D M Cn (a 0 in to In I =r a-) CD W CD a O fD SU N ty X CD CD O CD CD CD O O . CD =r cn (D :3 Q_ O CD _ O M a) • ;I- CCD O 3 CD O 3 (n iU C) n 0 -1. cn =r (a CD N O CD Cr O O N ~ =r ~p M O' cn, CCDD =3 O -4(a O O -n ic O < CD = O . M O CD cn o w N "a CD a CA O 3 p 3 cn to z cn Z7 Q v m 3 5 cm `G CD =r CD -0 0 r, CD co cn ;:w 3 cn CD M Er =r =r M CD (D O (Q CD n 0 o C(n ) CD (D C D 27 Q N o N O O co 0 N n N N (Q' 3 a - I O O 'N-+ = a) w =r Cn CD cn :F O N C-ri Q O Cn' Q. a N v O n 0 o O _C Q. Z Q 3 r+ O r r? (p CD :3 O S C) N O CD O O ~ cn O Q. O N M -0 0 n 0 0 °c 0 °c 3 0 n_ 3 n 0 0 O v Cn CD 0 CD a: 0 CD CD w (7 O :3 r_ CD a m m co O m v CD ~ cQ 0 0 CD : :3 N cn v ~ co cn CD -0 0 p ::r a- cn -0 O CD Cp D 0 X 0 CD 0 O CD < c o 3 3 m Cn CD sv Q Co cn cp CD C 3 :M3 CD O CD a 3 -0 0 CD -0 3 v Q" CCD CD CD E -4. "a CD CT :3 X 0 0 0- CD O. , O. O O fn O C O ,-r C :3 N C.' N CD Q C C S (p 7 C Q Q 0 10 rr O N Q CD CL ;:w CD -0 cn O N 3 O cj CD 3 CD a Q Q. ~ W O Sy CD O 0 n 2) O• CD CD a:) w :3 " CL Q. T. Q CD ::r M O CD Cn CD . r CO ~ - O CD 53 CD O Q CD Cn (n C7 cr cn x n C CD 3 W CD 0 N c N Q CD O cn CD 'O CD W CD CD - 3 C - N ca .p s2 < 1 :3 `G :3 _r CD CD cc C CA CL :3 CD 3 (O O O 27 CD p :3 CD :'Z c) O O `tsQ.cr O Ca CD fD O Qcn O O - CD CL W :3 -3 :3 3 ~ v CD N W 5' CL 3 0 W O O -0 Cn "a CAD O = CD SU N < :3 n, cQ' N w :3 O CL O CD 3 p h 0 a' CD a -h c7' - h C =r CD CD v CD a 3 O: W 3 CD :3 C CO 0 CD o -I- Q. CD CD CD O O 0 -0 w `G CD n Q : O O D O r~r O O :3 3 :3 ~ =r 7 U3 CD O N C cn j CD 0 0 0 230 0 0 :3 :3 n n s o 0 O n D O O ° O O O CD CD a) m 0 cQ o (D CD cD m C/) (n m N* C -4 O ( Q CD 0 NQ Q:3 CD Q wQ cDO0 O O m N Q- -O < T.ch ?x Q-c 0 T.'a CO :3 5. (D c 3 N (Q cn~ m acc CD ~O (D c cn (D _O 0 -n s ~ O (Q n O O CD 7 (D c N Q (n CD 3 & -a a I-#- w CD CD CD cn -@- a ,r %Z, CD :3 ? (Q v CD 0 N ~ LU N (D ~~m ~cx-n' n~~cocaiQ-~0° ~mo(CD 07 r=r O v O~ CD O N< O O W (D c 3 (D O cr N Q (Q n (D a (D 3 (D co EP 3 :3 O <O O -0 U3 ~ N (CD O :3 Cc Cc 0. Q IC-1. (D 'O - O -I. O Q N< cn N (D O Q' 3 N fl+ O (D ::r O 3 o v CD CD °m3~ cc3gw c3(DCDCD 3m-a0 N(n0 M Q N (p O C O S O Q. O. O (D O < O O 330m3 0 ~vo~a oc~3? mv~ ~c< 0 co ° Q (D -O CD C ? n (D N cc O = Q. (i 3 ° ° v, (n - CD m o CD CD 0 ~ (D -O (D c (n Dom c m m (On Q Q. a ~ -a v O 3 (D CD 4 0 ~ •(Q a a:3'< cn W Q N ~ =.°-aEm~ "c°m a~+cr .C vNm cc0X°3r~ 5Q-~~ 3 m°`~m°~o c o ::r CD W. CD 0) ~ ' cn' ~ a s :3 CD O cn -ti W W v ~ u ATTACHMENT #--11-10 P RT 5 14 0 o v j y 0 CD ~D -0 LT L7 2T CD 3 CD M CD rl. -n -1 0 0 0 ~v30m y-Oo co 00 3 ca o :3 :3 E o o m (n = D o m - v v v :C:D:l C- Q O. _ mo - - - 0 m ;:v N 0 0 =r 0 =r m cn 3 , n CD - cn =r n a Q- O O Q- 3 (p - 3 a 3 0 0 3 C CD c0 O O (D v CO cn ?O QC O D O ~0~o03 C o o ~~c03(n < ° h CD =r o v v cn CD (D cn No OmQ=C v, cu CL O cQ' cn cn N v CD 0 3 0 3 o o cn =r 71 0 v - -0 CD a 0 ° fn' m 3 cQ' N Z CD (nom O v 0 0 CD - =3 aCD°3~ oo ° C* (n ~ N Q Oi~(~n~ 3N < D (D n -0 CD CD 0 0 =3 _0 CD `n-0 = T N 3 (n 0 D (n 0 CD =C CD W (7 0- m N co N ~ ^ X Z 0) Cr (D A > W (D 0 • • < .C cri -N (A) m m O - O m O o 0 0 o a Q. D 'a 0 0Cf) - m o Q' o o a Z CD - 0 cr u a- a- O y 1 0 (CD (3D CD -0 - 3 rf. 0 < o a•m 0 o a o 0 0 0 m o cn C L ~ =r cn go 3 C (n CD H =3 :3 0 0 N lb cn 0- -0 CL =r r v v v v rl.o cn o CD :3 ;4: CD - O N N X X M ca w (CD O 0 cn c 0 0 3 <D p § n ~ o`D 0 m ((DD ((DD ° ~vfD,~ 0mco v3 O g v a 0 y 3 3`~ 0 O~ D CD CD CD (D (D w v C N CL ;:W CD (0 Q Q :3 cr -1 -1 :E 0 m v -0 0D ~o0W 3c =3 ca 0 ° Q- v =r v _ -+3 O <_.Q0 Q CD fu 0 a- @ o 0 CL :3 is CL 0 CL ~ < CD -0 c v Cn 0 N ' N CD N Q O (Q' -A :E (D O p 0 'a 0 "I (0 =3 c E; 0 0 O CD u c N v y < p 07 (n (D N 1 a CD cc O 0 i 3 v0v cn. O 0 o c (D = vi. ~ Q to 0 3 = = 0 v 5 < =r CD cn O W ,c cn c0 (D CD fD0 ~o~' -°a v ~ W 0- CD s 3 0 O CD' m 0 cn cn. CD v 3 cn Q- c 0- (a 0 a O O 0 r~ v O 3 cn N (Q' N 3' n * ° 0 rn o 282 m (c) 00 -4 0) 0 aZ D UZ =m ao Z app z v a ~D 0 O O O O D~ O CD a a O cn m F•CD m~,NN v 0 to < N O a _ o_ cn 0-8- O O y O (D (D v O CO) N N O cn cn CD =3 ? CA v cn ~.Q Q co) r O O n(a=3(Q 0 ~ v CO) CD O ~ - y _ c N O~ O m o ~ Qa s 6"-m p v a ~c v o ?m C D E57 D U) 0 cn aa, o~ nni CD@ 1^ 3'3 CD a) 0) CD o 3 a D a) Cl) CD CD :3 a " Q = m Q +n N o _ - c v cn C O a 3 Cl) CD m O n N = p N D. = N N (71 M. a 0- o 3 a c ow3v 0 << N 0 0 vo o O -h CD Q O N c O O CD cn CL ::r cn ::r l< =r CD CO m -0 CD a) cn w CT a) 70 O O 7 (D _6 O 5 o v O 3 ~ ccDD O O O O CYQ.Q d O' Q (D O can v 7 m O GJ CD CO D O Ut fu ^ a 3 CL m ~(D -y, Z y ~Z~ C N "O n'O s4Z ~D 'fD O V =r o Nom. (D U CD o rq~ at M -a m M 'a n O CD Cj) Cl) -1 0 =r :3 0 a) 0 O LA. S CD CD CD a- y CA O N n fn O ro. CL :r 0 CD CD a) h :3 cD o~ (F CD a : O ~ co r = CD N ~D - y -h (D (D h m to c>c O N CL 6 o C N n o c 7 (D v cD ° v a; CL Q ~ v ~ p D Ct O N U) CD CD c - CD (h CL 0 (n 0 a) IC) cn 0) a n; 'a 3 p w aQ N=o CD a'S N (Q CD i a' O O CD O 3y (D O S3 OCD ~v CD mQ- .p 0), -9 = Q. O cl) 0 N '-P -h CD O 0 O ~ a' o O o 3 3 w cc' 0 CCD C O a) a) o a~ o_ QO 3<< t0 y O O O (D a' P (D C r+ 0 =r ? O w a) w =r D1 v < Q to v O ,nM Q cn O~ C a0 CD ' O Q (7f 0 G. O ' 3 o (D n cD =3 fu (A CD a cn O 3 O CD O C CL - 5,51 3 N N O O' 0 (A w w 3 cn D CL CL a 0 (D -1 v Q =r o o c Cl) Cl) o m~ ~v ca CD 3 (O (OD ? N O~; (A y 00 00 y 3 Cl) (D O = O to O O 3 u, U D ~v ov ~CD C 0 3 a ~ 0 D CD a) --I 3 3 (D (D (D > 03 ;<o 0 (D C (D ~N s c~ ca N n cn can v N CD co ~ m o v O a3 : m cn O v = N W m oD mn ((D rn o ~ a va 0 ^a 3 N a "Q a (D rr v M = < (D (D N CL O a O (D O Z 2 S' -A_ y (A m U) m C w" =1 O a 3 o O C O 7' C S1 'O 3 y y 0 y N W FA C> N N N y rt y m (F CD cc CD cn CD y 7 o a(D to rtfn y O O a C N o a ~mo n y rt"o 0 7 (7 HMO 0 y M. o 3. C y O 5-4 K C 0 7 K C 0 0 O r~r ? C O O SD p~ = rr r rty o rrfCH O ~,y '*y 0 CD - CL 3 O o a 3 o = v 3 y y rf pa y y y 0 a- (O CL m a a co V a (a m a. s 5.0 F o O rr .rt o O 3 r, r* N 30 y= 3 (D y 30 D U! (y _ to 7 CD co Ui a3 O a<< (a 0 s0 JU ~ a N 0) a O O (D N 0 CL N C) V O 7 O t0 (n 0 Q.<.Q a< ju 0 a< 0 C CL a - R 3. a D y (D W O D y y ate. . y a~ O y ate O y 3 to 3 O O~ O C C rOr C). C1 ((D rt cr _ may , rL U (D (O( O D cQ = w (D y(a, c 7 7 K 7 0 K O 7 7 K rn 3 rn - rn m cn 3 N w o 90 2 ^ ^ cQ ^ n ~ 34 W y Q) C 0 ,f 0 W a 0 cQ c 3 o tu O cn l W cr 1 3 (D N 2. (D 0 N O ~ N -1 N ? O N y j 5.0 :3 'In 7 (Q O O v O< O= y CD (n - - y CD (D 'O C 0 _ O W (D =r . c, m O 3 > 7 O cn o ~ m a) m o n O (D D 10 % Q OC N O In = - -a (D a O G) .(p O 3 O (D 3 C _30 O•j O C t N ? X fn S -n (D O CA 0 0 Q v (D y (DD w co 3 C u' - (CD o O (D N N co W O o ca O L (Q (D C. O ~ . « n =r (D CD CL N (D + o 3 N v (D O (D a? Q (D N ~ T wD w m rnD CL m (D to ^ cl ^ cl W y Oo a 0) (n O' c (D c a I CL O 0 A) 0 (D ,_,h O (D N Q. (C C, 'o .0 p -0 O , 0 y C. y < C (D (D W (D Q y C' (D rl. y y O N 1 CL co 0 5; . ;L -1 CL -1 0 0 U) CD Q1 O O O U) 0-m-0 0 W O 0 (A U) CO) U) rqpl O v (C v O =r 0 4) C p r C ell. w @, O N ~ O N -h =r SD (D C~ (D (D C (D (D su CD 0) 0 O C 0 W to y -t to lu -O C.., p -1, C _ (D CD (o 'C p O Q (D (D 3 0-0 005. y CL Qo (D '4% O y p C C. 0 0 D (D (D e' y X y n, 7• (CD o y (D Q y a- p n 3 N 0 3 O CD 0 BE O p (D Q ~ ~ 7 (D Q' o ~ N (D ty C• CA I CD 7 y 'N 0~ 0 3 3 0 C. a C. (D 0 O Q y s O O y 3 _ a~ 0 ~3- C cC (D (D ro* W k cn su N v co 2 5 mcn 5- m 0 ~Z co) Z 3 •G N 3 N D m O (C O (D cn N cn M O Q' m CD N 2 < v (n O L O m :3 M -1 0) 0 (D 0 -a CL 0 -0 cn a cn ? 7 3 c3D y u3i C~C y (D O N O r. C 3 O CD N O m 3 -0 Q Q nr CD ~ O =r O.-O -q P- (D ► 0 cn (a O N m 0 3 C: w CD N cn co v ~(Q x n m -cn c Qv _ =r ~ c 0 C fl? & m _ cQ - v a- =3 (n 0 CL CL =3 cr m m m m cn 0 a cn p (n CD O < 3 v co a v a Cn m ~ ~ . ? 5i, a- -0 m y N m n ~•(a 3 M n C O CD cn N S Q- (Q v a- m =3 M OD CD -4 Cl) PD a .1h. Q CO y 0 N y 0. CL C C 0 fn (D C rm~ CL CL 0 O w Z 3 Z N' Z SU = CD o:* 0 O Or4' m > O 0 N O O p O 4 0 0 0 0 N O N 3= > N Q 0 0 U) C7 0 su -3 Q0 n (D n ~O N 00 N o 0 :3 :3 =5 :3 3 0) CD L m 0 C) cn . n O * m O C; m -0 (C O SD CD S p? ~ a C N C 'a N O O 3 rt O O N -O (N C. C (D 'a 7 y N N 3' 3 N r (D CD M CD CD N) - _ N -1 CD 0 00 CD CD CD 0 2) 0 CD O OO (D 0 (A CD ca 0 ~ 0.QO (D v v v 0 O C. a u)(8-0 (8-0 n ~ O cn cA cn C' N< (D O O 0 D (Q 7 (Q. ' ;W (D y ;I C m N O O ~a) ju O O O O. CD w ~cr O O CD N C 10 aC ~•3(D 0 Q a- :3 CD CD CD fu N 3 = O A 4<i 3 (D cn (D 3 C. C6, CL :r :3 n v m cn 3 C y C (D C1 (D co cc 0 - C N (D (D (C (D m w N a) =3 0.3 h~ -1 C O 'Os 0 =r 0 =4 O ((D O~ O~ N O O O (D N 7 C.10 . 0 O o U) 0- (D 0 m0 0 0 N C1 _ C- #-1- N O m rt :r 4) (1 (D 0 M y (D N (D N y c rt c ? O O O C .Nr (p m O O m C. N O n= C1, N C N 7 N C O N (D cn T). CL -s cn fn C C. ~ ~1 coo 6 AN- oq EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE PICKERING Report Number: CS 53-08 Date: December 8, 2008 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: Updated Sign By-law Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 53-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That staff be directed to solicit input from industry stakeholders and the public regarding the draft sign by-law included as Attachment 1 to this report; 3. That staff report back to Council, upon the completion of the consultation process and recommend a final sign by-law to Council; and 4. That the appropriate staff of the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: As part of the review of all municipal regulatory by-laws and, in an effort to resolve issues not clearly addressed in the existing sign by-law a new sign by-law has been created. The proposed sign by-law, (a) establishes new sign regulations, (b) addresses provisions that are currently silent or not clearly addressed in the existing sign by-law, (c) reflects current legislation and enforcement practices, (d) establishes a more timely and efficient administrative process for the application and processing of permanent and temporary signs, (e) implements a process for variance requests, and (f) clearly defines fees, enforcement processes, remedial actions and cost recovery terms. An extensive consultation process has taken place with Municipal Law Enforcement Services, Planning & Development and the City Solicitor to ensure a comprehensive review of the by-law was done. Key changes are listed further in this report. fR-port CS 53-08 December 8, 2008 287 Subject: Updated Sign By-law. Page - 2 Staff are seeking approval to move forward with a public consultation process, to solicit comments from industry stakeholders, commercial property owners, and the general public. Financial Implications: The proposed sign by-law increases fees for ground signs and development signs. New fees are proposed for new types of regulated signs and the variance process offered by the by-law. All other application fees remain consistent with the existing by-law. No significant change is expected in revenue from sign permits and licenses. Sustainability Implications: The proposed by-law significantly restricts portable signs and the permitted amount of temporary election signage.. This may reduce the consumption of resources for this purpose. Restrictions in these types of signs may be recognized by the community as a positive and environmentally sensitive City initiative, and assist in promoting a more sustainable culture. Background: The existing sign by-law, which was enacted in 1987, is based on a common Planning framework, that being, if the use is not listed, it is not permitted. From an enforcement perspective, this makes resolving sign issues extremely difficult as there is no clear contravention of a by-law provision. When staff began a coordinated review of the by-law, the goal was to create a by-law that provided clear regulations, prohibitions, application processes and enforcement provisions. The proposed sign by-law, • Distinguishes between permanent and temporary signs and which department administers each process. Municipal Law Enforcement Services will continue to process all licences for temporary sign uses, while the permit application process for all permanent signs, including wall signs, development signs and ground signs will now be administered by Planning & Development staff. As these types of signs require structural review and already require Planning & Development approval, it will make the processing of permit applications more efficient for the City and the applicants; • Sets out clear application requirements for both licences and permits; • Includes tables outlining specific height, area, number and setback provisions for each type of sign, based on zoning; CORP0227-07/01 revised Re ort CS 53-08 December 8, 2008 Subject: Updated Sign By-law Page 3 • Sets out specific provisions relating to development signs including location, number and size; • Limits sign licences to one 30 day licence per business in a calendar year; • Lists signs exempt from permits and licences and under what conditions; • Lists prohibited signs; • Identifies election sign restrictions. The Region has recently initiated consultation with local municipalities in an effort to harmonize standards relating to the control of election signs. Accordingly, the election sign provisions in the draft by-law will be revisited once the consultation process is complete; • Establishes a restricted area for new billboards and a'licence fee requirement for both new and existing billboards; • Establishes special sign districts ; • Establishes a variance process administered by the Director of Planning & Development; and • Sets out clear enforcement processes, including. orders to comply, remedial action, and cost recovery. The proposed public consultation process will solicit comments by mail from industry stakeholders, commercial property owners, _ and persons who have previously expressed an interest. In addition, the draft by-law will be made available on the City's website, and advertising will be placed on the City's Community Page Ad directing interested community members to review the draft by-law on-line or contact City Hall to request a copy. Upon the conclusion of the community consultation, comments received will be summarized and reviewed with staff responses and recommendations provided. A follow up Report to Council will include this information, as well as a final draft of the proposed sign by-law for Council's review and approval. A sign by-law provides essential tools to control the number and placement of signs within the City to limit adverse effects on the community. Sign issues can be contentious, and there are significant expectations from the public on the City's ability to resolve issues relating to signage. A new sign by-law will provide clear regulations governing sign installations throughout the City. CORP0227-07101 revised F3,eRcd CS 53-08 December 8, 2008 89 Subject: Updated Sign By-law 2 Page 4 Attachments: 1. Draft Sign By-law Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: K~ erly Thompson, CPSO, CMMI Debi Wilcox, CMO, CMMIII Manager, By-law Enforcement Services City Clerk Gillis Paterson, Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Thas°J. Quinn, DMV`R CMM II Chief Administr6 ive Offr er CORP0227-07/01 rev+sed 29 Cif REPORT TO COUNCIL I CKERIN Report Number: OES 34-09 Date: July 13, 2009 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Operations & Emergency Services Subject: Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two - Tender T-10-2009 for Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction -Phase Two - File: A-1440 Recommendations: 1. That Report OES-34-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two be received; 2. That Tender T-10-2009 submitted by Montgomery MacEwen Contracting for Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two at a cost of $868,333.66 (GST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $1,071,000 (GST included) including the tender amount and other associated costs and the total net project cost of $1,020,000 be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) that the sum of $680,000 be financed by the issue of debentures by The Regional Municipality of Durham over a period not to exceed ten (10) years, at a rate to be determined; b) that the sum of $190,000 be funded from the Development Charges Reserve Fund; c) that the sum of $150,000 be funded from the Third Party Contribution Reserve Fund; d) that the annual repayment charges in the amount of approximately $84,880 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2010, continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid, and any financing cost to be paid out of the Current Budget; Report OES 34-09 July 13, 2009? Subject: Tender T-10-2009 for Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two Page 2 e) the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has updated the City's 2009 Annual Repayment Limit and certified that this loan and the repayment thereof falls within the City's Annual Repayment Limit (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 is not required prior to City Council's authorization; f) undertake the financing of this project or portions thereof that cannot be accommodated through the foregoing through internal loans, Infrastructure Ontario - OSIFA Loan Program, or a financial institution offering long term financing under similar terms and conditions; g) to make any changes, adjustments, and revisions to amounts, terms, conditions or any other actions necessary in order to effect the above directions of Council; h) the Treasurer is authorized to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; 5. That the draft by-law attached to this report be enacted; and 6. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: As part of the 2009 Development Projects Capital Budget, Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two (Highway 7 to 1200 metres south) was approved as a construction project. Tender T-10-2009 was issued on Tuesday, June 9, 2009 and closed on Wednesday, June 24, 2009 with six (6) bidders responding. The total gross project cost is estimated to be $1,071,000 and an estimated net cost to the City of $1,020,000 (net of GST rebate). The City's purchasing policy requires staff to report to Council on results of the tender and financing in order to proceed with this project in a timely manner. Financial Implications: 1. TENDER AMOUNT T-10-2009 $826,984.44 GST 41,349.22 Sub-Total 868,333.66 GST Rebate (41,349.22) Total $826,984.44 Ppport OES 34-09 July 13, 2009 L 7 c_ Subject: Tender T-10-2009 for Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two Page 3 2. SOURCE OF FUNDS Development Projects Capital Budge t Location Project Code Source of Funds Budget Required Sideline 4 5321.0901.1702 Debt (10 Year) 680,000 680,000 Sideline 4 5321.0901.7610 DC Roads & Related 190,000 190,000 Sideline 4 5321.0901.7501 Third Party Contribution - 150,000 FUNDS AVAILABLE 870,000 1,020,000 3. ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTING SUMMARY T-10-2009 - Tender for Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction 826,984 Phase Two Associated Costs Materials Testing 15,000 Utility Relocations 50,000 Planting Restoration Requirements by TRCA 20,000 Consultant Fees 25,700 Miscellaneous Costs 2,500 Construction Contingency 79,816 Total $1,020,000 GST 51,000 Total Gross Project Cost $1,071,000 GST Rebate 5( 1,000) Total Net Project Cost $1,020,000 Project Cost under (over) approved funds by nil The total estimated net project cost has exceeded the approved budget for this project due to design changes to accommodate all Toronto Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) requirements. However $150,000 was collected as part of a sub-division agreement to be used toward this project. These funds, which were deposited in the Third Party Contribution Reserve Fund, will provide the additional financing. Report OES 34-09 July 13, 2009 Subject: Tender T-10-2009 for Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two Page 4293 The Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has reviewed the budgetary implications and the financing of the expenditures contained in this report and concurs. Sustainability Implications: This project will allow for the hard surfacing of the roadway improving the geometrics and vehicular movement in this area. This project will also reduce maintenance requirements and cost for years to come due to the road no longer requiring constant grading, additional granular material placement and annual dust suppression. Background:' As part of the Development Projects (D.C.Funded) 2009 Capital Budget, Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two was identified as a construction project. In order to satisfy TRCA requirements for this project, the detail design has been revised to include the construction of a new water course, hydro pole relocation and planting restoration. These changes have now brought this project over the Approved Development Projects Budget for 2009. With the approval of draft plan 18T- 88059 (Estate residential subdivision adjacent to Sideline 4) 15 lots were proposed to front onto Sideline 4, and as a condition of this approval the developer was required to contribute $150,000 towards the cost of the road reconstruction fronting the development. These funds have been deposited in the Third Party Contribution Reserve Fund to be used towards this project and will provide the additional funding necessary. Tender T-10-2009 was issued on Tuesday, June 9, 2009 and closed on Wednesday, June 24, 2009 with six (6) bidders submitting a bid. The low bid was submitted by Montgomery MacEwen Contracting. The total gross project cost is estimated to be $1,071,000 for an estimated net cost to the City of $1,020,000 (net of GST rebate). Montgomery MacEwen Contracting has previously worked for the City on Tender T-2- 2007 Sheppard Avenue Reinforced Soil System and is deemed acceptable by the Supervisor, Engineering & Capital Works. The Health & Safety Policy, current WSIB Council Amendment to Draft #7 (CAD-7), Certificate of Clearance issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board and Certificate of Insurance as submitted by Montgomery MacEwen Contracting have been reviewed by the Coordinator, Health & Safety and deemed acceptable. In conjunction with staff's review of the contractor's previous work experience, check of references submitted and the bonding available on this project, the tender is deemed acceptable. o~t OES 34-09 July 13, 2009 Subject: Tender T-10-2009 for Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two Page 5 Upon careful examination of all tenders and relevant documents received, the Operations & Emergency Services Department, Municipal Property & Engineering Division recommends the acceptance of the low bid submitted by Montgomery MacEwen Contracting for Tender T-10 -2009 in the amount of $868,333.66 (GST included) and that the total net project cost of $1,020,000 be approved. This report has been prepared in conjunction with the Manager, Supply & Services who concurs with the foregoing. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Supply & Services Memorandum dated June 29, 2009 3. By-Law to authorize the City Road Reconstruction for Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two and the issuance of debentures in the amount of $680,000. Prepared By: Approved / Endorsed y: Darr I B. Se ky, Everett unts a Su rvisor, Engineering & Capital Works Director, Operations & Emergency Services Vera A. F emacher illis A. Paterson C.P.P., CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M., CMM III Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Manager, Supply & Services GCf 7~~ RPision rd W. olborn, P. Eng. DHead Municipal Property & Engineering DS:nw Attachments Report OES 34-09 July 13, 2009 Subject: Tender T-10-2009 for Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two Page 6 2 9 Copy: Chief Administrative Officer (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council I ' ~ z (4-d T mas J Qu' , R , CMM III Chief Administrative Officer ~:....~,V.,.r•~R'~"~~.~ j.,..m.l"OREPORT# dEs 34-~~ ICI ' I I 296 MUNICIPAL PROPERTY & ENGINEERING Attachment for Tender T-10-2009 SIDELINE 4 HIGHWAY 7 7 7 KINSALE W U ~ Q HO 1WOOD SUBJECT o W o 0 14 AREA 23z_ W p W W - z J D -Z-- W o Q z a --0- rn F- m W~ P Y FIFTH CONCESSION ROAD y i TUIIVP~# OF j AJAX LOCATION MAP PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION INCLUDES: Complete reconstruction of Sideline 4 which includes, • Installation of a new and wider road, complete with new granular base and base asphalt • Drainage improvements where necessary Complete ditch restoration (fine grading and sodding where required) • to all areas affected by construction Z oE5 34-01 Call 0~ 2 9 7 PICKERING MEMO To: Richard Holborn June 29, 2009 Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering From: Vera A. Felgemacher Manager, Supply & Services Copy: Superintendent, Engineering & Capital Works Subject: Tender No. T-10-2009 Tender for Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction Phase two Closing: June 24, 2009 Tenders have been received for the above project. Nine (9) companies were invited to participate. An advertisement was placed in the Daily Commercial News and on the City's Website. A total of eleven (11) companies picked up tendering documents of which seven (7) bidders responded and submitted a tender for this project. A copy of the Record of Tenders Opened and Checked used at the public tender opening is attached. Tenders shall be irrevocable for 90 days after the official closing date and time. Purchasing Procedure No. PUR 010-001, Item 10.03 (r) provides checking tendered unit prices and extensions; unit prices shall govern and extensions will be corrected accordingly, which has been done. SUMMARY PST & GST included Bidder Total Tendered Amount $ After Calculation Check $ Montgomery MacEwan $868,333.66 $868,333.66 Contracting Elirpa Construction & Materials $966,628.27 $963,588.27 Ltd. Ambler & Co. Inc. $1,012,571.12 $1,012,571.12 Coco Paving Inc. $1,031,923.94 $1,031,923.94 Pilen Construction of Canada Ltd. $1,053,672.58 $1,053,672.58 Automatic rejection - Bid Deposit not sufficient. Reference: Ron Robinson Ltd. Purchasing By-law No. 5900-01, Procedure No. PUR 010-001, 10.04, Item 9d, TS Item 3, IB, 16, 17, 18. Serve Construction Late I-OR 298 Pursuant to Information to Bidders Item 20, the following will be requested of the low bidder for your review during the evaluation stage of this tender call. Please advise when you wish us to proceed with this task. (a) a copy of the current and dated Health and Safety Policy to be used on this project; (b) a copy of the current Workplace Injury Summary Report issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board (in lieu of the Workplace Injury Summary Report document, a copy of the current CAD 7, NEER, or MAP reports may be submitted); (c) a copy of the current Clearance Certificate issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board; (d) the City's Certificate of Insurance completed by the bidder's agent, broker or insurer; Include the following items in your Report to Council: (a) if items (a). through (d) noted above, are acceptable to the Co-ordinator, Health & Safety (b) any past work experience Montgomery MacEwan Contracting including work location; (c) without past work experience, if reference information is acceptable; (d) the appropriate account number(s) to which this work is to be charged; (e) the budget amount(s) assigned thereto; (f) Treasurer's confirmation of funding; (g) related departmental approvals; (h) any reason(s) why the low bid of Montgomery MacEwan Contracting is not acceptable; and (i) related comments specific to the project. Please do not disclose any information to enquiries except you can direct them to the City's website for the unofficial bid results as read out at the Public tender opening. Bidders will be advised of the outcome in due course. If u require further information, please feel free to contact me or a member of Supply & Se ices. Vera A. elgemacher VF/jg Attachments Tender No. T-10-2009 Tender for Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction Page 2 Phase Two 299 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. Being a by-law to authorize the Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two in the City of Pickering and the issuance of debentures therefore in the amount of $680,000. WHEREAS Section 11 of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a lower- tier municipality may pass by-laws respecting matters within the spheres of jurisdiction described in that Section; and, WHEREAS Subsection 401(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a municipality may incur a debt for municipal purposes, whether by borrowing money or in any other way; and, WHEREAS Subsection 401(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a lower-tier municipality in a regional municipality does not have the power to issue debentures; and, WHEREAS The Regional Municipality of Durham has the sole authority to issue debentures for the purposes of its lower-tier municipalities including The Corporation of the City of Pickering (the "City"); and, WHEREAS the Council of the City of Pickering wishes construction to proceed in respect of the Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two, project; and, WHEREAS before authorizing the construction to proceed in respect of the Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two, project on the date hereof the Council of the City had the Treasurer update the City's Annual Repayment Limit, the Treasurer calculated the estimated annual amount payable in respect of such project and determined that such .annual amount would not cause the City to exceed the updated Limit and, therefore, Ontario Municipal Board approval is not required as per Section 401 of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, and the regulations made thereunder; and, 3 REpoRT# QtE -s .34 I Page 2 By-law No. AND WHEREAS after determining that Ontario Municipal Board approval is not required, the Council of the City approved Report OES 34-09 on the date hereof and awarded Tender T-10-2009 for the Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two, project. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ENACTED AND ITS IS HEREBY ENACTED AS A BY-LAW OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the City proceed with the construction of the project referred to as "Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two project"; 2. That the estimated costs of the construction in the amount of $1,020,000 be financed as follows: a) That the sum of $680,000 be financed by the issue of debentures by The Regional Municipality of Durham over a period not to exceed ten (10) years; b) That the sum of $190,000 be funded from the Development Charges Reserve Fund; c) That the sum of $150,000 be funded by the Third Party Contribution - Sideline 4 Reserve Fund; 3. That the funds to repay the principal and interest of the debentures be provided for in the annual Current Budget for the City commencing in 2010 and continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid. By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 13th day of July, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk City REPORT TO COUNCIL I KERI Report Number: OES 43-09 Date: July 13, 2009 3 01 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Operations & Emergency Services Subject: Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton DumpTruck - Tender No. T-14-2009 - File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report OES 43-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck be received; 2. That Tender No.T-14-2009, as submitted by Scarborough Truck Centre Inc. for the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow and Wing, and Electronic Salt Metering, in the amount of $166,071.00 (PST and GST extra) be accepted; 3. That the total gross purchase cost of $187,660.23 and a net purchase cost of $179,356.68 be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows; (a) the sum of $179,000 be financed by the issue of debentures through the Regional Municipality of Durham for a period not exceeding five (5) years, at a rate to be determined; (b) that the balance of $356.68 plus financing costs be funded from 2009 Current Funds; (c) that the financing and repayment charges in the amount of approximately $40,200 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2010 and continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid; (d) that the Director, Corporate Services and Treasurer has certified that this loan and the repayment thereof falls within the City's debt and financial obligations approved annual repayment limit for debt and other financial obligations for 2009 as established by the Province for municipalities in Ontario; Report OES 43-09 July 13, 2009 Subject: Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Dump Truck 302 Tender No. T-14-2009 Page 2 (e) to undertake the financing of this project or portions thereof that cannot be accommodated through the foregoing through internal loans, the Ontario Strategic Infrastructure Financing Authority (OSIFA) - Loan Program or a financial institution offering long term financing under similar terms and conditions; (f) that the Treasurer be authorized to make any changes, adjustments, and revisions to amounts, terms, conditions or take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and 5. That the draft by-law attached to this report be enacted; 6. That the appropriate City of Pickering Officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto; Executive Summary: The City of Pickering currently utilizes a fleet comprised of nine 4-Ton dump trucks and three 5-Ton dump trucks to perform a wide range of road maintenance activities including winter control. A replacement for the oldest 4-Ton truck was approved in the 2009 Capital Budget. Four vendors were invited to bid, and the tender for this project was advertised on the City's Website. Three bidders responded to the tender call and submitted bids. Upon review of all bids received, the vehicle that meets the City's requirements and specifications is being recommended. The vehicle proposed by the low bidder does not, in staffs opinion meet the overriding requirement for engine torque. This was also the situation in 2008 when the City purchased its last new 4-Ton truck. Financial Implications: 1. Approved Source of Funds 2009 Roads Capital Budget Item Account Code Source of Funds Budget 4-Ton Dump Truck With 5320.0902.6158 Debt - 5 years $195,000 Plow & Wing Total Approved Funds $195,000 2. Estimated Project Costing Summary Tender No. T-14-2009 4-Ton Dump Truck $166,071.00 GST 8,303.55 CORP0227-07/01 revised Report OES 43-09 July 13, 2009 Subject: Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Dump Truck Tender No. T-14-2009 Page 3 303 PST 13,285.68 Total Gross Purchase Cost 187,660.23 GST Rebate (8,303.55) Total Net Purchase Cost $179,356.68 3. Project Cost under (over) approved funds by $15,643.32 The Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has reviewed the budgetary implications and the financing of the expenditure contained in this report and concurs. Sustainability Implications: The engine powering this truck meets the Environmental Protection Agency's Tier II emission standard. This will significantly reduce the amount of harmful emissions created by the operation of the vehicle as well as provide increased fuel economy. This purchase conforms to the environmental and economic lens of sustainability. Background: The purchase of a 4-Ton Dump Truck with Plow and Wing was identified and approved by Council in the 2009 Capital Budget. Utilizing existing specifications from past purchases, Supply & Services invited four vendors to participate in the bidding process, and posted the tender on the City's website of which three have responded. When the City called for Quotations for the purchase of a 4-Ton Truck in 2008, the low bidder, Freightliner Mid Ontario did not provide the required torque specified in the quotation document. At that time Council supported staff's recommendation not to accept their bid. The vehicle that was purchased did meet the required torque specification and performed well during the extremely heavy 2008-09 winter control season. Based upon these facts as well as a careful examination of all tenders received by Supply & Services, the Municipal Property and Engineering Division recommends the acceptance of the bid submitted by Scarborough Truck Centre Inc. in the amount of $166,071.00 (PST and GST extra) and that the total net purchase cost of $179,356.68 be approved. This report has been prepared in conjunction with the Manager, Supply & Services who concurs with the foregoing. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report OES 43-09 July 13, 2009 Subject: Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Dump Truck 304 Tender No. T-14-2009 Page 4 Attachments: 1. Memo from Supply & Services 2. Record of Tenders Opened and Checked 3. By-law to Confirm the Authorization of the Issuance of Debentures in the amount of $179,000 for the Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Dump Truck Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: 4 Grant Smith Everett untsma Supervisor, Fleet Operations Director, Operations & Emergency Services Vera Felgemacher illis Paterson C.P.P., CPPO, CPPB, .P.M., CMM III Director, Manager, Supply & Services Corporate Services & Treasurer Ri and Hol rn ision Head, unicipaI Property & Engineering GS:cr Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Thomas J. uin ,;RD CMM III Chief Administra ive Officer CORP0227-07/01 revised ATTACHMEN #TO REPORT t 43-0- of ~ RECEIVED Cr> o¢► 3 0 JUN 7 9 2009 I I CITY op I I UN CI A P G RTY& ENG(IN ERING PICKERING' MEMO To: Richard Holborn January 19, 2009 Division Head, Municipal Properties & Engineering From: Vera A. Felgemacher Manager, Supply & Services Copy: Subject: Tender No. T-14-2009 - Tender for Supply and Delivery of One (1) 41,000 lb. G.V.W. Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck Closing: June 17, 2009 Tenders have been received for the above project. Four companies were invited to participate. An advertisement was placed on the City's Website. Three (3) bidders responded and submitted a tender for this project. A copy of the Record of Tenders Opened and Checked used at the public tender opening is attached. Tenders shall be irrevocable for 60 days after the official closing date and time. Purchasing Procedure No. PUR 010-001, Item 10.03 (r) provides checking tendered unit prices and extensions; unit prices shall govern and extensions will be corrected accordingly, which has been done. Copies of the tenders are attached for your review along with the summary of costs. Each line item provides a space for the bidder to indicate a "Yes, No, Specify" to provide the City with information and details to subjectively review each line item and the sum total of all specifications. Information to Bidders Item # 6 states: Where minimums are called for, the unit should meet or exceed the capacity, size and/or performance specified. Since manufacturers may change specifications from time to time, the City reserves the right to accept minor deviations from the minimum specifications herein, provided that the proposed unit meets or exceeds the City's required performance functionality and compatibility requirements for its operation. Bidders were requested to provide cost and information, including literature of extended warranty plans, if available. This information has been provided on the Form of Tender for your review. These costs, if stated, are for information purposes only and are not associated with the bid prices. ors ~3 _o P_.n.. ;M r 0 REPORT41 306 ot -Z- SUMMARY GST/PST included Bidder Total Tendered Amount $ After Calculation Check $ Harper Truck Centres Inc. $187,384.51 $187,354.51 Scarborough Truck Centre $187,660.23 $187,660.23 Winslow-Gerolamy Motors $191,289.79 $191,289.79 Include the following items in your Report to Council: (a) without past work experience, if reference information is acceptable; (b) the appropriate account number(s) to which this work is to be charged; (c) the budget amount(s) assigned thereto; (d) Treasurer's confirmation of funding; (e) related departmental approvals; (f) any reason(s) why the low bid of Harper Truck Centres Inc. is not acceptable; and (g) related comments specific to the project. Please do not disclose any information to enquiries except you can direct them to the City's website for the unofficial bid results as read out at the Public tender opening. Bidders will be advised of the outcome in due course. If you require further information, please feel free to contact me or a member of Supply & Service-0. Vera A. Felgemacher VF/bk Attachments June 19, 2009 Tender No. T-14-2009 Page 2 Tender for Supply and Delivery of One (1) 41,000 lb. G.V.W. Diesel Snow Plow/Dump/Sander Truck 307 n -n d v umi g cn m N m n z am m -i o o =r c m 3 (D co o :r oo -i m 2 Q Pr =3 m (n 0 N z CC 1 U 0 CD O :3 O O T N N "r" (D D m C) O O CO < p m o o m 0 ~yJ a R m z n w C D O ° -L o ao m m m0 ~ > m v C/) CD 4 O - a -0n o mm ° z v c ° m :U W °z \ G7 z cn ° C 5 ° z z cn m, c Z m \ . -a cn m 0 ° D r 0 (7 a O OCC X G N o m z D ' z O m -t c 3 0 8 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. Being a by-law to confirm the authorization of the issuance of debentures in the amount of $179,000 for the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck in the City of Pickering WHEREAS Section 11 of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a lower- tier municipality may pass by-laws respecting matters within the spheres of jurisdiction described in that Section; and, WHEREAS Subsection 401(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a municipality may incur a debt for municipal purposes, whether by borrowing money or in any other way; and, WHEREAS Subsection 401(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a lower-tier municipality in a regional municipality does not have the power to issue debentures; and, WHEREAS The Regional Municipality of Durham has the sole authority to issue debentures for the purposes of its lower-tier municipalities including The Corporation of the City of Pickering (the "City"); and, WHEREAS the Council of the City is proceeding with the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck in the City of Pickering; and, WHEREAS before the Council of the City authorized the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck, the Council of the City had the Treasurer update the City's Annual Repayment Limit, the Treasurer calculated the estimated annual amount payable in respect of such project and determined that such annual amount 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 as per Section 401 of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, and the regulations made thereunder. AND WHEREAS after determining that Ontario Municipal Board approval is not required, the Council of the City approved Report OES 43-09 on the date hereof and awarded Tender T-14-2009 for the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck. CORP0223-07/01 0Es 4S-0q BY-LAW NO Page 2 309 NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the City proceed with the supply and delivery of 4-Ton Dump Truck. 2. That the estimated costs of the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck in the amount of $179,356.68 be financed as follows: a) That the sum of $179,000 be financed by the issue of debentures by The Regional Municipality of Durham over a period not to exceed five (5) years; b) That the balance of $356.68 be funded from the 2009 Current Budget; 3. That the funds to repay the principal and interest of the debentures be provided for in the annual Current Budget for the City commencing in 2010 and continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid. By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 13th day of July, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk CLtq OJ 310 PICKERING July 13, 2009 BY-LAWS .6965/09 [By-law referred from the June 15, 2009 meeting of Council] Being a by-law to regulate signs in the City of Pickering. 6969/09 Being a by-law to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for the purpose of enforcing parking restrictions on private property. (By-law attached) 6970/09 Being a by-law to dedicate those parts of Lot 4, Registrar's Compiled Plan 282, Pickering, being Parts 47, 49, 51 and 52, Plan 40R-25121 as public highway (Rockwood Drive) (By- law attached) 6971/09 Being a by-law to dedicate certain roads within the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham as public highways. (Fairport Road/Wingarden Crescent)(By-law attached) 6972/09 Being a by-law to dedicate that Part of Block 32, Plan 40M- 1987, Pickering, being Part 5, Plan 40R-25661, as public highway. (By-law attached) 6973/09 Being a by-law to amend By-law No. 6604/05 [Planning & Development & Executive Committee pages 266-267] 6974/09 Being a by-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 2511, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham on Part of Lot 19, Range 3, B.F.C., Part 1, 40R-8832 and part 1, 40R-10527, in the City of Pickering, (A 7/08) [Refer to Planning & Development & Executive Committee pages 123-135] 6975/09 Being a by-law to confirm the authorization of the issuance of debentures in the amount of $179,000 for the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck in the City of Pickering. [Refer to New and Unfinished Business pages 308-309] 6976/09 Being a by-law to authorize the Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction Phase Two in the City of Pickering and the issuance of debentures therefore in the amount of $680,000. [Refer to New and Unfinished Business pages 299-300] i I► 1 6977/09 Being a by-law to authorize the execution of a Lease Agreement between the Corporation of the City of Pickering and Rogers Communications Inc. for the leasing of the those lands consisting of part of the road allowance between Lots 34 and 35, Concession 5 (Sideline 34, north of Regional Road 27 (Whitevale Road)), for the purposes of installing and maintaining communications equipment. (By-law attached) 6978/09 Being a By-law regarding Development Charges. [Refer to New and Unfinished Business pages 105-115] THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING 411~ 312 BY-LAW NO. 6969/09 Being a by-law to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for the Purpose of Enforcing Parking Restrictions on Private Property WHEREAS pursuant to section 15(I) of the Police Services Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.15, as amended, a municipal council may appoint persons to enforce the by-laws of the municipality; and WHEREAS pursuant to section 15(2) of the said Act, municipal by-law enforcement officers are peace officers for the purpose of enforcing municipal by-laws; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the following people be hereby appointed as municipal law enforcement officers in and for the City of Pickering in order to ascertain whether the provisions of By-law 2359/87 are obeyed and to enforce or carry into effect the said By-law and are hereby authorized to enter at all reasonable times upon lands municipally known as: a) 1100 Begley Street Robert James Mitchell Darryl John Gordon David Daniels James Balendra Sandeep Sharma Igor Piatetskii Shiv Tharmalingam Don Sunny-Guy Steve Craveiro b) 1330 Altona Road & 400 Kingston Road Delgado Cobourne 2. The authority granted in section 1 hereto is specifically limited to that set out.in section 1, and shall not be deemed, at any time, to exceed the authority set out in section 1. 3. This appointment shall expire upon the person listed in section 1 a) ceasing to be an employee of Authorized Parking Only Ltd. or upon Authorized Parking Only Ltd. ceasing to be agents for 1100 Begley Street, 1b) ceasing to be an employee of Nemesis Security or Nemesis Security ceasing to be agents for 1330 Altona Road & 400 Kingston Road, whichever shall occur first 3 13 By-law No. 6969/09 Continued Page 2 4. The provisions of this by-law shall come into force and take effect on the day of the final passing thereof. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 13th day of July, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk CLry 00 31 4 Mi PI CKERI MEMO To: Debi Wilcox June 16, 2009 City Clerk From: Denise Bye Supervisor, Property & Development Services Copy: Director, Planning & Development Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering Manager, Development Control Subject: Request for Road Dedication By-law Owner: Cesare Gallo Parts 51 and 52, Plan 40R-25121 (1801 Pine Grove Avenue) LD 055/09 Owner: Gail Skidmore Parts 47 and 49, Plan 40R-25121 (1804 Woodview Avenue) LD 056/09 and LD 057/09 File: Roadded.498 Each of the above owners has applied to sever their lots through Land Division Applications LD 055/09, LD 056/09 and LD 057/09. One of the conditions of the land severance applications was for the reserves fronting each owner's lot to be dedicated as public highway, thereby permitting legal access to the severed/retained parcels. Accordingly, a by-law should be enacted authorizing the dedication of the reserve blocks. Attached is a location map and a draft by-law for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for July 13, 2009. DB:bg Attachments 31 5 PART 51 40R-25121-~ LD 055/09 PART47 PART 52 4OR-25121 40R-25121-► LD 05I - /09 057/09 PART 49 40R-25121 z O 1- O Li z z O u w 0 0 O O Y u O City of Pickering Planning & Development Depadment PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PARTS 47, 49, 51 AND 52,40R-25121 w OWNER CITY OF PICKERING DATE JUNE 15, 2009 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. ROADDED. #498 SCALE N.T.S. CHECKED BY DB IV Tero etEnterpriaea Inc. ontl ila supplies. All rights Reserved. Not o plan of 21-Y. PN-10 e rc 2005 MPAC antl its au ppliers. All ri hts Reservetl. Not a plan of Survey. 316 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING AW r K BY-LAW NO. Being a by-law to dedicate those parts of Lot 4, Registrar's Compiled Plan 282, Pickering, being Parts 47, 49, 51 and 52, Plan 40R-25121 as public highway (Rockwood Drive). WHEREAS The Corporation of the City of Pickering is the owner of certain lands lying within Pickering and wishes to dedicate them as public highway. NOW THEREFORE, the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Those parts of Lot 4, Registrar's Compiled Plan 282, Pickering, being Parts 47, 49, 51 and 52, Plan 40R-25121 are hereby dedicated as public highway (Rockwood Drive). BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 13th day of July, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk Roadded.498 3 7 Caq O~ I„I I I PICKERING MEMO To: Debi Wilcox July 6, 2009 City Clerk From: Denise Bye Supervisor, Property & Development Services Copy: Director, Planning & Development Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering Manager, Development Control Subject: Request for Road Dedication By-law Developer: Louisville Homes Limited Road Blocks 30 to 34, Plan 40M-2399 (Fairport Road / Wingarden Crescent) File: Roadded.510 When Plan 40M-2399 was registered, Block 30 was conveyed to the City for road widening purposes and Blocks 31, 32, 33 and 34 were conveyed to the City for turning circle purposes. As the road widening and turning circle have now been constructed to standards sufficient to permit public access, the required road dedicating by-law should be enacted. Attached is a location map and a draft by-law for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for July 13, 2009. DB:bg Attachments 318 STROUDS LANE o Z a E VPN~ OvD`' MWINGARDEN CRESCENT S~ R 44EDR M T V ~ HEDGEROW PL. v Z ° o a o o 0 0 a a SHADYBROOK o 0 PARK J _J ST. MARGUERITE HOURGEOYS BL 33 SEPARATE SCHOOL M-2 9 40M-2399 Y M Z~ AVENUE a EN RESCENT GOLDENRIDGE w ~F JACQUELINE T P WELRUS STREET 40M o D EDGEWOOD ° v~ w C) D o w o o a cn a cn RUSHTON ROAD .K SPRUCE COURT = 1= r 0 11 c~ OWN" ~g'E'S LANE o Z SHADYBROOK D 0 o a_ Ly a DUNG N ROP - Lu MERR\~~O SHEPPARD AVENUE T A ST. PAUL S ON THE HIL ANGLICAN CHURCH KINGSTON ROAD City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION BLOCKS 30-34, PLAN 40M-2399 07\ OWNER CITY OF PICKERING DATE JULY 6, 2009 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. ROADDED. # 510 SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY DB H aC: k Tera atrc`A pria Int. Pntl its suppliers. All rights a Not a plan of survey. PN-7 2005 MA -d it its suDPliers. All rights Res-ed. Not t a plo, peon of Survey. 319 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO Being a By-law to dedicate certain roads within the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham as public highways. WHEREAS The Corporation of the City of Pickering is the owner of certain lands lying within Pickering and wishes to dedicate them as public highways. NOW THEREFORE, the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Block 30, Plan 40M-2399, Pickering is hereby dedicated as public highway. (Fairport Road) 2. Blocks 31, 32, 33 and 34, Plan 40M-2399, Pickering are hereby dedicated as public highway. (Wingarden Crescent) BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 13th day of July, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk Roadded.510 City eq 320 _ M! I KERI MEMO To: Debi Wilcox July 7, 2009 City Clerk From: Denise Bye Supervisor, Property & Development Services Copy: Director, Planning & Development Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering Manager, Development Control Subject: Request for Road Dedication By-law Owner: Northcrest Homes Inc. Part of Block 32, Plan 40M-1987, being Part 5, 40R-25661 (Grayabbey Court) LD 112/08 and LD 113/08 File: Roadded.511 The Owner has applied to sever the remainder of Lot 71, Registrar's Compiled Plan 1041 to create 2 new lots through Land Division Applications LD 112/08 and LD 113/08. In order to ensure the orderly development of these lots, the reserve block referred to was placed fronting Grayabbey Court. As the Owner has complied with all of the other conditions of LD 112/08 and LD 113/08, it is now appropriate to lift the reserve, thereby permitting legal access to the severed parcels. Attached is a location map and a draft by-law for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for July 13, 2009. DB:bg JADocumentsTrop & Dev\ROADDEMSEO\511\Memo to Debi2009.doc Attachments 321 DETAIL INSET 1 SCALE N.T.S. c~ ~ w m O U < O GLENANNA w m O m } W o < Z to c~ Y Q° GA Q o a ~ PART 40R-25661 VOYAGER ~ AVENUE _J COU W S E NSET MAP m° o U NA w = m J i-- a U O w N VOYAGER = q~E BONITA C) WOODRUFF N N BO lFA PTTTTT z E~E W ~ PA ~ vai O~ a s = ° n a = CRICK F~ w NFL ° 0 z ~ o z V) STROUDS LANE a WINGARDEN CRESCENT STROUDS D M T DR F F-~ HEDGEROW PL. D U O 2 Q Q O~ O o O z Q ° Li SHADYBROOK ~ m PARK J J_ S D ~ o ST. MARGUERITE BOURGEOYS Fh ~ SEPARATE SCHOOL < o ~ City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PART 5, PLAN 40R-25661 OWNER CITY OF PICKERING DATE JULY 6, 2009 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. ROADDED. # 511 SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY DB N Tero etEnterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not o plan of survey. PN_~ a rc 2005 MPAC and its suppliers. Al, ri hts Reserved. Not o pion of Survey. 322 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. Being a by-law to dedicate that part of Block 32, Plan 40M-1987, Pickering, being Part 5, Plan 40R-25661, as public highway. WHEREAS The Corporation of the City of Pickering is the owner of that part of Block 32, Plan 40M-1987, Pickering, being Part 5, Plan 40R-25661 and wishes to dedicate it as public highway. NOW THEREFORE, the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That part of Block 32, Plan 40M-1987, Pickering, being Part 5, Plan 40R-25661, is hereby dedicated as public highway. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 13th day of July, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk Roadded.511 323 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. 6977/09 Being a by-law to authorize the execution of a Lease Agreement between the Corporation of the City of Pickering and Rogers Communications Inc. for the leasing of the those lands consisting of part of the road allowance between Lots 34 and 35, Concession 5 (Sideline 34, north of Regional Road 27 (Whitevale Road)), for the purposes of installing and maintaining communications equipment. WHEREAS pursuant to the provisions of Municipal Act, 2001, the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering may enter into lease agreements in relation to municipal property. NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. The Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to execute a Lease Agreement in the form acceptable to the City Solicitor, between the Corporation of the City of Pickering and Rogers Communications Inc. as set out in Planning & Development Committee Report PD 21-09 dated July 6, 2009. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 13th day of July, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk City 00 Minutes / Meeting Summary Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Meeting Thursday, May 14, 2009 MKKERING 7:00 pm Pickering Museum Village - Redman House Attendees: Laura Drake, Chair, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Carol Brown, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Rose Cowan, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Pat Dunnill, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Allan Espenlaub, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Rhonda Lawson, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Paul Savel, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Suzanne Primrose, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Bill Weston, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Absent: Bill McLean, Regional Councilor - Ward 2 Marisa Carpino, Supervisor, Culture & Recreation Bill Utton, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Staff Stephen Reynolds, Division Head, Culture & Recreation Present: Tony Prevedel, Division Head, Facilities Operations Katrina Pyke (Acting) Education & Collections Officer Mandy Smiles, (Acting) Volunteer & Program Coordinator Sandra Gelbard, Museum Program Assistant (Recording Secretary) Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) 1. Welcome & Introductions Laura introduced Tony Prevedel. 2. Site Walk About Hotel . Architect John Rutledge. Possible start date: Monday, May 25, 2009. It will not interfere with Steam up on Sunday, May 24, 2009. Recommended bit goes to Council Tuesday, May 19, 2009. Fence will be erected around the Hotel. Page 1 CORP0228-2/02 Loci Barn Possible start date: July - August 2009. Interference with Spirit Walk will have to be discussed. Possible start date can be changed so that it is after Fall Family Festival, Sunday, October 4, 2009. Tender has gone out, closes Monday, May 18, 2009. Everything must be taken out of the Log Barn. Barn will be moved to the south of its present location. It will take 2 days to move for the preparation of the poured concrete foundation. Loci House Future project: poured concrete foundation will be installed. Boardwalk in the Villacie The City will need sketch of boardwalk project. The City will provide funding; Woodwrights Guild will do the work. Trail Possible start date: to be discussed at later date. Looking at new design. Stairs at upper site will be removed (how it is replaced is still to be determined in the new design). Switch Back Ramp will be installed to the left of the stairs. Lighting from Collins House to the Steam Barn Drive Shed is presently being designed. Redman House Architect: Paul Jerika North door will receive a similar porch like the south entrance to the building because of ice build up in the winter. Leakage between the two buildings: original Redman House and the back addition will be fixed. 3. Advisor & Foundation Laura went through the amendments to the "Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Duties & Responsibilities" to be implemented by 2011. Pat announced that he has resigned from the Advisory Committee, however, will continue to Chair the Foundation and represent the Foundation at the Advisory Committee Meetings. Pat will Chair the Foundation for one more year if he is elected. Page 2 CORP0228-2/02 Foundation has drawn up "Foundation/Advisory Committee Interrelationship". Updated copy includes new item 3 & 4 with a total of 8 items. Laura asked for clarification on item 6, "like any other group," This means Volunteer Groups within PMV. Carol feels that the Advisory should be the group in the end to say what should be done. Steve asked for clarification on item 7 "proceed or not." Should read "proceed with funding or not." Point was made that the Foundation will not provide funding for projects.they feel The City should be providing funding for. Steve mentioned that the Capital Budget items are for items exceeding $5,000.00. Bill W. request at least 1 or 2 members of the Foundation sit on the Advisory Committee. Carol feels item 2 was out of place, however, should stay in Foundation to address the document to be placed in the later of the document. changes that were discussed this evening. Rhonda drafted a form for the Foundation to look at and Rhonda revise called "Request for Funding". The Request for Funding form will provide a paper trail. Steve requested that Rhonda email this form to him. First request needing approval using the draft Request for Foundation Members Funding form. Item: Vacuum for the Collection Requested by: Laura on behalf of Katrina. Cost: $1,517.66 + tax = $1,755.00. Note: Advisory Committee members can only be assembled with Pickering residence; however, the Foundation can have members from other municipalities. 4. Approval of Minutes and Agenda Motion That the minutes from May 4, 2009 be approved. Moved by Rose Cowan Seconded by Carol Brown CARRIED Page 3 CORP0228-2/02 Motion That the agenda for May 14, 2009 be approved. Moved by Rhonda Lawson Seconded by Paul Savel CARRIED 5. PMV New Mandate Laura read document written by Katrina. Document asking "that the Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee consider and endorse the expansion of the museum's mandate time period as written in the Mission Statement to include Pickering Township's development from 1810 to 1920." Concerns regarding above statement were as follows: • where will we store additional items that will be taken in due to the new expansion of time? • PMV should put a cap on its time line and not go any further then 1920. Steve mentioned that if the City acquires additional lands that the Heritage and Cultural Committees Mandate would be outside of the PMV Mandate of 1810 - 1920. Motion That Katrina's new mandate is implemented. Moved by Rose Cowan Seconded by Carol Brown Pickering Museum Village's new mandate will be 1810 - 1920. CARRIED 6. Work Plans - Everyone reads "PMVAC "2006-2010 Work Plan (Year of Focus: 2008)" Motion To forward 2006-2010 Work Plan (Year of Focus 2008) to Council. Moved by Rhonda Lawson Seconded by Paul Savel CARRIED Laura handed out the "PMVAC 2006-2010 Work Plan (Year of focus: 2009)" Laura will send a copy to Marisa. Laura Page 4 CORP0228-2/02 2009 Annual Work Plans will be presented at the August PMVAC committee meeting for review and endorsement before being submitted to Clerks. Rhonda handed out the "PMVAC Restoration & Capital Projects Sub-Committee 2006-2010 Work Plan (Year of Focus: 2009)" Greenwood Library has been designated as a heritage building. Goes to Council on Tuesday, May 19, 2009. 7. Budget Steve mentioned that On site Walk 2009-2010 report will going to Council after budget is approved. Executive Committee Meeting all items was approved. Capital was all approved. All looks good for Tuesday, May 19, 2009 for PMV. Steve, Pat & Bill W. are to sit down and discuss the Foundations donation to the Hotel Project. Steve will go through the agreement to see the arrival of Steve Provincial & Federal donation. 8. Upcoming Events Mandy asked if any one is available to help out to let her know. June 14, 2009 - 12:00 pm - 4:30 pm Kids Day July 11, 12, 18 & 19, 2009 Whodunit? The Backroom Back Stab Tickets go on sale: June 12, 2009. Cost: $50.00 Cater by: "burbs bistro & bar" Chef: Kevin Brown 1900 Dixie Road North, Pickering, ON L1 V 6M4 September 17, 18, 24, 25 & 26, 2009 A Spirit Walk Page 5 CO R P0228-2/02 9. Bicentennial Suggestion made that a book be written or video be made to document the early days of the Advisory and the Foundation. The heads of PMVs Volunteer Groups met in January 2009 to discuss their plans for the 2011 Bicentennial. Next meeting for the heads of the PMV's Volunteer Groups will be June 1, 2009. The City's goal is to bring the community together with year round activities. Heritage, Arts, Sports & Service groups will be working together. 10. Next Meetings Thursday, August 13, 2009 at 7:00 pm Pickering Civic Complex (Tower Room) Thursday, October 15, 2009 at 7:00 pm Pickering Civic Complex (Tower Room) Meeting Adjourned: 8:35 pm Copy: City Clerk Page 6 CORP0228-2/02 Committee of Adjustment Citti 00 Meeting Minutes Wednesday, May 27, 2009 7:00 pm pir'y~ M F1 Main Committee Room PRESENT: David Johnson - Chair Susan Kular Eric Newton - Vice-Chair Keith Wilkinson ALSO PRESENT: Ross Pym, Secretary-Treasurer Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer ABSENT: Kevin Ashe (1) ADOPTION OF AGENDA Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That the agenda for the Wednesday, May 27, 2009 meeting be adopted. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (II) ADOPTION OF MINUTES Moved by Susan Kular Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That the minutes of the 6th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, May 6, 2009 be adopted as amended. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 1 Committee of Adjustment City Meeting Minutes o~ JLA~ Wednesday, May 27, 2009 7:00 pm Main Committee Room APIL (III) REPORTS 1. P/CA 17/09 - U. & D. Schorn 1760 Finch Avenue (South Part of Lot 18, Concession 2, Part 2, 40R-8590) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, to permit a maximum height of 4.5 metres to a proposed detached garage and to permit a proposed detached garage to be erected in the front yard, whereas the by-law requires a maximum height of 3.5 metres to an accessory structure and that all accessory buildings shall be erected in the rear yard. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Development Control Manager expressing no concerns. Written comments were also received from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority requesting more time to review the flood proofing requirements for the proposed detached garage and recommended deferral of the application. Jasper Horn, agent, was present to represent the application. Maureen & Uwe Schorn were present in favour of the application. Catherine Reidt of 1744 Finch Avenue was also present to seek information on the application. In response to questions from the Committee, Jasper Horn explained there will only be one large tree that will have to be removed during the construction of the detached garage. Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That application P/CA 17/09 by U. & D. Schorn, be APPROVED on the grounds that the maximum height of 4.5 metres to a proposed detached garage and to permit a proposed detached garage to be erected in the front yard are minor variances that are desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 2 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, May 27, 2009 7:00 pm I Main Committee Room AP`T=MG 1. That these variances applies only to the proposed detached garage, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans with this application. 2. As part of the building permit submission, the applicant ensures that no habitable space is proposed within the proposed detached garage. 3. That the applicant obtains a building permit for the proposed construction within two years of the date of this decision, or this decision shall become null and void. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 2. P/CA 18/09 - Purdue Pharma Inc. 575 Granite Court Part Lot 30, Range 3 B.F.C. (Now 40R-4715 Parts 28 to 32, and 40R-4830 Parts 3, 4, 22 and 40R-8457 Parts 1 to 5) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511 as amended by By-law 789/78, to permit a minimum of 180 parking spaces, whereas the by-law requires a minimum of 380 parking spaces. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain final Site Plan Approval and a building permit for a proposed industrial building addition. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Development Control Manager expressing no concerns and the City's Economic Development Officer in support of the application. Written comments were also received from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority requesting more time in order to review and comment on the Site Plan application and recommended deferral of the application. Gino SaboSardro & Andrew Krendler, agent, were present to represent the application. Michael Miller, owner was also present in favour of the application. In response to questions from a Committee Member, Gino SaboSardro explained the parking lot is private parking for employees only. 3 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes CCtrt o~ 141 Aga, Wednesday, May 27, 2009 TcM PICKE 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Moved by Susan Kular Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 18/09 by Purdue Pharma Inc., be APPROVED on the grounds that the minimum of 180 parking spaces is a minor variance that is desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That this variance applies only to the proposed industrial building that is occupied by Purdue Pharma Inc., as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans with this application. 2. That the applicant obtains Site Plan Approval for the proposed parking lot within two years of the date of this decision, or this decision shall become null and void. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 3. P/CA 19/09 - J. Massie 1685 Pickering Parkway (Block A, Plan M-1024, Part 5, 40R-8639) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1896/84, to permit a north and south side yard width of 0.5 metres to a proposed raised rear yard deck, whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 1.2 metres on both sides. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were also received from the City's Development Control Manager expressing no concerns. Jean Massie, owner, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. 4 Committee of Adjustment CCtcj 00 Meeting Minutes ~4 Wednesday, May 27, 2009 P-1 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Moved by Keith Wilkinson Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 19/09 by J. Massie, be APPROVED on the grounds that the proposed 0.5 metre south and north side yard depths are minor variances that are desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances applies only to the proposed raised rear yard deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans with this application. 2. That the applicant obtains a building permit for the proposed construction within two years of the date of this decision, or this decision shall become null and void. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4. P/CA 20/09 - S. & K. Greene 4705 Carpenter Court (Lot 15, Plan 40M-.2143) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 6021/02 to permit a maximum height of 4.5 metres to a proposed detached garage and to permit a proposed detached garage to be partially erected in the side yard, whereas the by-law requires a maximum height of 3.5 metres to an accessory structure and that all accessory buildings shall be erected in the rear yard. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Development Control Manager expressing no concerns. 5 Committee of Adjustment City 00 Meeting Minutes Wednesday, May 27, 2009 A AL A- Plr-'T~ 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Written comments were received from Fred Parsons of 1621 Acorn Lane, D. Collins of 1623 Acorn Lane, Penny Whitehead of 4709 Carpenter Court, George Koitsopoulos of 1628 Acorn Lane and Garry and Madelon Fitzpatrick of 4721 Carpenter Court all in objection to the application. Sean & Kelly Greene, owners, were present to represent the application. Penny Whitehead of 4709 Carpenter Court was present in objection to the application. Correspondence received from Fred Parsons expressed concerns with the height of the proposed garage. Correspondence received from D. Collins expressed concerns with the aesthetic effects and set a precedent for future changes or building project to other properties in the surrounding area. Penny Whitehead outlined her correspondence and expressed several concerns with property values, losing the "live in the country" feel, blocking of sunlight, questioned what is the true building height, the use of the second floor and suggests relocating the proposed garage. Correspondence received from George Koitsopoulos expressed concerns with the proposed garage is too close to the property line removing the elegance of Claremont Estates, the proposed garage will encourage others in the surrounding neighbourhood to pursue additions making the hamlet less appealing to future purchasers. Correspondence received from Garry and Madelon Fitzpatrick expressed concerns with decrease in property value, questioned if building is being used for a home base business and suggests relocating the proposed garage. Sean & Kelly Greene outlined the application, provided examples of other properties in the area that have received minor variances, explained the rear of the garage will line up with the back of the neighbours house. Moved by Keith Wilkinson Seconded by Susan Kular That application P/CA 20/09 by S. & K. Greene, be DEFERRED until the next meeting in order to give the Committee Members an opportunity to visit the site and to provide an opportunity for the applicant to meet with the neighbours. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 6 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Cifl~ 01 Wednesday, May 27, 2009 fM 9I'W7-. PIC-IT= 7:00 pm Main Committee Room 5. P/CA 21/09 - Calloway REIT (Pickering) & First Simcha Shopping Centres 1899 Brock Road (Part of Lot 18, Concession 1, Plan 40R-8891 Parts 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 5511/99 to permit a maximum aggregate floor area of 49,710 square metres, a maximum outdoor storage area of 3,260 square metres and a total of 5 outdoor storage areas, whereas the by-law permits a maximum aggregate floor area of 49,237 square metres, a maximum outdoor storage area of 3,000 square metres and 1 outdoor storage area. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain Site Plan Approval. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions and the City's Economic Development Officer in support of the application. Written comments were also received from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority expressing no objection to the application. Robert Macaulay, agent, was present to represent the application. Jeff Boyd of Lowe's Companies Canada, owner, was present in favour of the application. Jawad Tanweer of 1861 Bainbridge Drive was present in objection to the application. Robert Macaulay Jeff Boyd provided a site plan, elevation drawings and explained the application, feels the application meets all four tests. Jawad Tanweer expressed several concerns with decrease in property value, increased traffic, blockage of view, hours of operation, noise problems and also commented there are several home improvements store already in Pickering. Moved by Susan Kular Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 21/09 by Calloway REIT (Pickering) & First Simcha Shopping Centres, be APPROVED on the grounds that the maximum aggregate floor area of 49,710 square metres, a maximum outdoor storage area of 3,260 square metres and a total of 5 outdoor storage areas are minor variances that are desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 7 Committee of Adjustment Cctcl o~ Meeting Minutes 141 Wednesday, May 27, 2009 7:00 pm I + Main Committee Room 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed development, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans with this application. 2. That the applicant obtains Site Plan Approval and enters into a site plan/development agreement for the proposed development within two years of the date of this decision, or this decision shall become null and void. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (IV) ADJOURNMENT Moved by Keith Wilkinson Seconded by Eric Newton That the 7th meeting of 2009 the Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 7:58 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, June 17, 2009. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Date Chair U" Assistant Secretary-Treasurer 8 City 00 Minutes I Meeting Summary Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee i i June 23, 2009 PICKERING ~ 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Attendees: Councillor Johnson Jim Simpson, Chair Keith Falconer Susan Gardner Joanne Glasser Gordon Zimmerman Debi Wilcox, City Clerk Linda Roberts, (Recording Secretary) Absent: Richard Fleming, Vice-Chair Terence Arvisais Rhonda Lawson Kelly McLean Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items/ Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) 1.0 Welcome 2.0 Approval of Minutes All Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Keith Falconer That the minutes of the May 26th meeting be approved. CARRIED 3.0 New and Unfinished Business 3.1) Accessibility Training Prem Noronha-Waldriff, Coordinator, Community Recreation Programs, provided a power point presentation on the mandatory Accessible Customer Service Training to the Committee. She went over the accessible standards and the purpose of the AODA. At the conclusion of the. training, she noted additional resources. Page 1 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) At the conclusion of the presentation, a quiz and comment/feedback form were filled out by the Committee and handed in to P. Noronha-Waldriff. 3.2) Rogers Farm Discussion ensued with respect to the Rogers Farm property municipally located at 3805 Salem Road. Councillor Johnson provided the Committee with an update on what had happened at the June 15th Council meeting with respect to this issue based on the resolution presented by Heritage Pickering. The main concern was the cost of moving the structure, as stone houses are very expensive to relocate. He informed the Committee that the matter had been referred to staff for further investigation. G. Zimmerman noted the fact that the 407 interchange needed to only be moved 100 metres in order to bypass the property. It was requested that the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee be advised of any future meetings pertaining to this. Councillor Johnson also noted this issue would be discussed at the Regional meeting on June 24tH 3.3) 285 Whitevale Road - Minor Variance J. Simpson introduced Michael & Sara Enright, who appeared before the Committee with respect to a minor variance application which had been submitted to the Committee of Adjustment and subsequently referred to the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee for comments. The applicants explained the need for the variance in order to construct an additional 1/2 storey onto the existing home. They provided pictures of their home for the Committee. J. Simpson provided a brief overview of the City's request and explained the process. The applicants had been requested to appear before the Committee for consultation purposes. The Committee approved the following recommendation: Moved by K. Falconer Seconded by S. Gardner Page 2 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) 1. That the Heritage Pickering Committee receive the verbal presentation of Sara & Michael Enright for property municipally known as 285 Whitevale Road; 2. That the applicants be advised that no heritage permit is required at this time; and, 3. That the Chief Building Official and the Chair, Committee of Adjustment be so advised. CARRIED J. Simpson thanked the applicants for appearing before the Committee and for being sympathetic to the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District guidelines when considering alterations to their structure. 3.4) Zoning By-law Amendment Applications Discussion ensued with respect to the following applications which were provided for the Committee's review and comments as follows: Zoning By-law amendment Application A 05/09 The Committee questioned whether this application was being sympathetic to the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District guidelines and was in accordance with the original consultant's report. The members also questioned the variation in density and felt it was too high and not in line with the density projections specified in the original report. Zoning By-law amendment Application A 06/09 The Committee expressed significant concerns with this application. The main area of concern being that the application is not in compliance with the original plan, as the area adjacent to the district was to be estate lots. Townhouses were not part of the plan. Also, it is not in line with the protection of conservation lands, not being sympathetic to the heritage conservation district. Zoning By-law amendment Application A 07/09 The Committee had concerns with this application not being sympathetic to the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District Page 3 CORP0228-2/02 Item % Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) guidelines and was in accordance with the original consultant's report. The members also questioned the variation in density and felt it was too high and not in line with the density projections specified in the original report. Zoning By-law amendment Application A 08/09 The Committee had concerns with the area of North Road, whether or not it was in compliance with the Central Pickering Development Plan. They questioned if it fit within the same densities as the original Plan. The Committee felt it had a higher density, which they felt was intended for the southern areas. Zoning By-law amendment Application A 09/09 The Committee had no comments on this application. 4.0 Correspondence 4.1) Notice of Passing -Amendment No. 18 Correspondence received from the Planning & Development Department regarding a notice of passing for Amendment No. 18 was received for information. 4.2) Ministry of Natural Resources Correspondence received from the Ministry of Natural Resources regarding the updated natural heritage reference manual being posted for public review on the environmental registry was received for information. 4.3) Council Support of Nomination J. Simpson read out a letter received from the City Clerk advising that at a meeting of Council held on June 15th, Council endorsed the nomination of Gordon Zimmerman for the Built Heritage recognition award under the Heritage Community Recognition Program. 4.4) CHO News Publication The June, 2009 edition of Community Heritage Ontario was received for information. Page 4 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items /Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) 5.0 Other Business 5.1) Nicole Best, Building Permits Update-320 Whitevale Road J. Simpson provided an overview on the application received for 320 Whitevale Road . The Committee reviewed the plans. The Chief Building Official had waived the permit requirement, therefore the plans and permit documents were received for information, as no significant changes were being proposed. 5.2) J. Simpson questioned the following: • Setting up a meeting with Mayor Ryan as part of the Debi to action outreach in the 2009 workplan. • Setting up a meeting with Councillors • Meet with City Clerk regarding display board 5.3) G. Zimmerman provided a brief overview of the Heritage Conservation Conference he attended in Peterborough. He also noted he had attended the open house regarding the Westney Road By-lass and the Highway 7 widening. 5.4) J. Simpson referred to R. Lawson's email with respect to the highway 7 widening. She had indicated that as a result of her research, she noted that only one property appeared to have herigate significance, being 2890 Highway 7. She noted more research was required. The Committee requested copies of the report. Due to the nature of the content of the report, it was suggested the Clerk's Division provide CD's to the Linda to action members. 5.5) J. Simpson asked G. Zimmerman if he could provide the members with any information he may have that would help in researching properties. G. Zimmerman noted he would pass along a file to L. Roberts. In acknowledgement of Gordon Zimmerman's dedication to the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee and all his work completed with respect to the Heritage Registry, the Committee thanked Gordon with a small token of appreciation. 6.0 Adjournment Moved by G. Zimmerman Seconded b J. Glasser Page 5 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items/ Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) That the meeting be adjourned. CARRIED The meeting adjourned at 8:40 m Copy: City Clerk Page 6 CORP0228-2/02