Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSeptember 21, 2009 ~itcj 00 Council Meeting PI ~KERI - Agenda Monday, September 21, 2009 Council Chambers 7:30 pm 7:15 PM IN CAMERA MEETING OF COUNCIL 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, July 13, 2009 1-26 Planning & Development Committee Minutes, September 8, 27-30 2009 In Camera Executive Committee Minutes, September 14, 2009 Under Separate Cover Executive Committee Minutes, September 14, 2009 31-38 IV) PRESENTATIONS 39 V) DELEGATIONS 40 VI) CORRESPONDENCE 41-123 VII) COMMITTEE REPORTS 124-129 a) Report 2009-08 of the Planning & Development Committee b) Report 2009-07 of the Executive Committee VIII) REPORTS - NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS 130-285 IX) MOTIONS AND NOTICE OF MOTIONS 286-301 X) BY-LAWS 302-327 XI) OTHER BUSINESS Accessible For information related to accessibility requirements please contact PICKS N G Linda Roberts Phone: 905.420.4660 extension 2928 TTY: 905.420.1739 Email: Irobe rts Wcitvofpickerina.corn XII) CONFIRMATION BY-LAW FOR INFORMATION ONLY • Minutes of the Sustainable Pickering Advisory Committee, May 26, 2009 • Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment, June 17, July 8, July 29 & August 19, 2009 • Minutes of the Taxicab Advisory Committee, June 25, 2009, July 23, 2009 and August 27, 2009 • Minutes of the Site Plan Committee, July 22, 2009 • Minutes of the Waterfront Coordinating Committee, August 13, 2009 • Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee, August 13, 2009 f 4 Cis _ Council Meeting Minutes Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 01 PRESENT: Mayor David Ryan COUNCILLORS: D. Dickerson B. Littley B. McLean J. O'Connell D. Pickles ABSENT: R. Johnson ALSO PRESENT: T. J. Quinn - Chief Administrative Officer E. Buntsma - Director, Operations & Emergency Services N. Carroll - Director, Planning & Development T. Melymuk - Director, Office of Sustainability G. Paterson - Director, Corporate Services.& Treasurer D. Wilcox - City Clerk M. Gadzovski - Stormwater & Environmental Engineer R. Pym - Principal Planner, Development Review D. Shields - Deputy Clerk (1) INVOCATION Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order and led Council in the saying of the Invocation. (II) DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST No disclosures of interest were noted. 1 Ctcy Council Meeting Minutes PICICERING Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM 02 Council Chambers (III) ADOPTION OF MINUTES Resolution # 162/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor McLean Council Minutes, June 15, 2009, Joint Planning & Development & Executive Committee Minutes, July 6, 2009 CARRIED (IV) DELEGATIONS 1. Lon Harnish Pickering Rotary Club Re:. Pickering Ribfest Lon Harnish, Pickering Rotary Club appeared before Council to thank Council and City staff for their assistance with the ribfest event. Mr. Harnish presented a photo album of the 2nd Annual Ribfest to Council in appreciation of their support for the event. (V) CORRESPONDENCE 1. CORR. 67-09 JIM KARYGIANNIS, MP SCARBOROUGH-AGINCOURT 3850 Finch Avenue E., Suite 206 Scarborough, ON M1T 3T6 Resolution # 163/09 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Littley That CORR. 67-09 from Jim Karygiannis, MP, Scarborough-Agincourt, requesting Council support of a Private Member's Bill regarding an amendment to the Motor Vehicle Safety Act be endorsed. CARRIED 2 City oo Council Meeting Minutes Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 03 2. CORR. 68-09 REGIONAL COUNCILLOR BILL MCLEAN CITY OF PICKERING Resolution # 164/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That CORR. 68-09 received from Councillor Bill McLean with respect to Region of Durham Report 2009-WR-12 of the Commissioner of Works regarding 'Results of Clear Bags Pilot Study in the Municipality of Clarington and the City of Pickering' be received for information. CARRIED 3. CORR. 69-09 MARISA CARPINO SUPERVISOR, CULTURE & RECREATION CITY OF PICKERING Resolution # 165/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor McLean That CORR 69-09 from Marisa Carpino, Supervisor, Culture & Recreation, submitting the 2008 Annual Report on behalf of the Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee be received for information. CARRIED 4. CORR. 70-09 ° STEPHEN REYNOLDS DIVISION HEAD, CULTURE & RECREATION CITY OF PICKERING Resolution # 166/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor McLean 3 Ciro _ Council Meeting Minutes Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM 04 Council Chambers That CORR. 70-09 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 be endorsed. CARRIED 5. CORR. 71-09 STEPHEN REYNOLDS DIVISION HEAD, CULTURE & RECREATION CITY OF PICKERING Resolution # 167/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor McLean That CORR. 71-09 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 be endorsed. .CARRIED 6. CORR. 72-09 ROGER ANDERSON, REGIONAL CHAIR REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM 605 Rossland Road East Whitby, ON L1 N 6A3 Resolution # 168/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Littley That CORR. 72-09 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 be endorsed. CARRIED 4 Czc~ _ Council Meeting Minutes Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 05 7. CORR. 73-09 DEBBIE LEROUX, CLERK TOWNSHIP OF UXBRIDGE 51 Toronto Street South Box 190 Uxbridge, ON L9P 1T1 Resolution # 169/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Littley That CORR. 73-09 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 be endorsed. CARRIED 8. CORR. 74-09 PATTI BARRIE, MUNICIPAL CLERK MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, ON L1 C 3A6 Resolution # 170/09 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Dickerson. That CORR. 74-09 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 be received. CARRIED Resolution # 171/09 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Dickerson 5 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM 06 Council Chambers That the rules of procedure be suspended in order to introduce a Motion with respect to CORR. 75-09 and 76-09 from the Indo-Canadian Cultural Association of Durham Inc. CARRIED ON A 2/3 MAJORITY VOTE 9. CORR. 75-09 SHASHI BHATIA INDO-CANADIAN CULTURAL ASSOCIATION OF DURHAM INC. 1894 Bainbridge Drive Pickering, ON L1V 6G6 Resolution # 172/09 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That CORR. 75-09 from Shashi Bhatia, Indo-Canadian Cultural Association of Durham Inc., requesting the City of Pickering waive the rental fees for the Pickering Recreation Complex in order to host their celebrations for the Heritage Festival of India be received. CARRIED 10. CORR. 76-09 SHASHI BHATIA INDO-CANADIAN CULTURAL ASSOCIATION OF DURHAM INC. 1894 Bainbridge Drive Pickering, ON L1V 6G6 Resolution # 173/09 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor O'Connell 6 City Council Meeting Minutes PICKEMG Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 07 That CORR. 76-09 from Shashi Bhatia, Indo-Canadian Cultural Association of Durham Inc., requesting the City of Pickering proclaim August 15, 2009 as India Independence Day be declared. CARRIED Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Pickles That the rules of procedure be suspended in order to change the order of business whereas Item 1 being Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 26-09 of Reports New and Unfinished Business be placed as the first report on the agenda following correspondence. CARRIED ON A 2/3 MAJORITY VOTE (VI) NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 26-09 2009 Development Charges Study for the City of Pickering A detailed question and answer period ensued. Resolution # 174/09 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Littley 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: 7 City oo _ Council Meeting Minutes Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM 08 Council Chambers 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 Recreation 2,249 1,614 1,217 893 Facilities Library 516 370 279 205 TOTAL 9,694 6,957 5,246 3,849 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, 8 Council Meeting Minutes PICKERING Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 09 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. CARRIED LATER IN THE MEETING ON A RECORDED VOTE (See Following Motions) 9 Czty 00 _ Council Meeting Minutes Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers Resolution # 175/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That Report CS 26-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be referred to a Special Meeting of Council for further clarification and discussion. MOTION DEFEATED ON A RECORDED VOTE AS FOLLOWS: YES NO Councillor Dickerson Councillor Littley Councillor O'Connell Councillor McLean Councillor Pickles Mayor Ryan Resolution # 176/09 Moved by Councillor Littley Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That Item 4 of the main motion and Item 12 of the main motion, Section 10 c) and 11 (1)(a) and (b) of the draft by-law be amended to reflect the following: That the non-residential development charge for stormwater management in the amount of .90¢ per square foot be phased in for 2010. CARRIED LATER IN THE MEETING ON A RECORDED VOTE AS FOLLOWS: YES NO Councillor Dickerson Councillor Pickles Councillor Littley Councillor McLean Councillor O'Connell Mayor Ryan 10 C-ttq o¢ _ Council Meeting Minutes PICKEiuiNu Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 11 Resolution # 177/09 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That the amendment (Res. # 176/09) be further amended by deleting "be phased in for 2010" and inserting "be changed immediately". CARRIED ON A RECORDED VOTE AS FOLLOWS: YES NO Councillor Dickerson Councillor Pickles Councillor Littley Councillor McLean Councillor O'Connell Mayor Ryan The main motion was then CARRIED, AS AMENDED, ON A RECORDED VOTE AS FOLLOWS: YES NO Councillor Littley Councillor Dickerson Councillor McLean Councillor O'Connell Councillor Pickles Mayor Ryan [The affect of the amendments on the draft development charge by-law is 10 c) changes to (100%) from (0%) and 11 (1)(a) changes to $40.47 per square metres ($3.76 per square foot) and 11 (1)(b) changes to $41.65 per square metre ($3.87 per square foot).] (VI) COMMITTEE REPORTS a) REPORT JT 2009-01 OF THE JOINT PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT & EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 11 City Council Meeting Minutes PICXEWNG Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM 2 Council Chambers Part A - PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT REPORTS 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 COUNCIL DECISION 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 restoratio n/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. 12 Citq 0~ Council Meeting Minutes PICKE Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 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 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 COUNCIL DECISION 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 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. 13 Cif Council Meeting Minutes PICKE Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM 4 Council Chambers PART B - EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 17-09 2008 Year End Audit COUNCIL DECISION 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 Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act - Adjustment to Taxes COUNCIL DECISION 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 Tow Truck "Anti-Chasing" Amendment to Traffic & Parking By-law 6604/05 COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report CS 23-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 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, 14 ciar Council Meeting Minutes Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 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 Tender for Facilities Cleaning Services - Tender No. T-3-2009 COUNCIL DECISION 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 Southeast Collector Trunk Sewer -Haul Roads COUNCIL DECISION 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 15 Council Meeting Minutes PICKE Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM 6 Council Chambers 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. 7. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 42-09 Roof Replacement - Pickering Public Library and Fire Hall #2 -Tender No. T-12-2009 COUNCIL DECISION 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; 16 Council Meeting Minutes PICKE Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 7 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. Resolution # 178/09 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor McLean That the Report of the Joint Planning & Development and Executive Committee, JT 2009-01 dated July 6, 2009 be adopted save and except Planning & Development Reports Items 1 and 2 and Executive Committee Report Item 6. CARRIED 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 A detailed question and answer period ensued. Resolution # 179/09 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor McLean 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; 17 Cis q _ Council Meeting Minutes PKJ~E Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 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. MOTION TIED AND DEFEATED LATER IN THE MEETING ON A RECORDED VOTE (See Following Motion) Resolution # 180/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That application A 1/08 be deferred until a full comprehensive conceptual plan for all of Duffin Heights Neighbourhood (including all land holdings) has been brought forward. MOTION DEFEATED ON A RECORDED VOTE AS FOLLOWS: YES NO Councillor Dickerson Councillor Littley Councillor O'Connell Councillor McLean Councillor Pickles Mayor Ryan The main motion was TIED AND DEFEATED ON A RECORDED VOTE AS FOLLOWS: YES NO Councillor McLean Councillor Dickerson Councillor Pickles Councillor Littley Mayor Ryan Councillor O'Connell 18 Cirq 00 _ Council Meeting Minutes Monday, July 13, 2009 pql - 7:30 PM Council Chambers 19 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 Resolution # 181/09 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor McLean 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 r 6. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 41-09 Frenchman's Bay Harbour Entrance Environmental Assessment -Status Update Resolution # 182/09 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor McLean 19 I Council Meeting Minutes PICKERING Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM 20 Council Chambers 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. CARRIED (VI) NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS (Continued) 2. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 14-09 Updated Sign By-law General discussion ensued on this matter. Clarification was requested on the amendment that was approved at the Joint Planning & Development and Executive Committee meeting held on July 6, 2009. Resolution # 183/09 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor McLean 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. REFERRED LATER IN THE MEETING (See Following Motion) 20 Council Meeting Minutes PICKERING Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 21 Resolution #184/09 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That Report CS 14-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be referred back to staff for further investigation and clarification. CARRIED 3. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 34-09 Re: Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two - Tender T-10-2009 for Sideline 4 Road Reconstruction - Phase Two Resolution # 185/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Littley 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; 21 I Council Meeting Minutes PICKERING Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM 22 Council Chambers 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. CARRIED 4. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 43-09 Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton DumpTruck -Tender No. T-14-2009 Resolution # 186/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Littley 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; 22 Crat o0 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 23 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. CARRIED 23 ear Council Meeting Minutes MCKEMG Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM 24 Council Chambers (IX) BY-LAWS 6965/09 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. 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) 6971/09 Being a by-law to dedicate certain roads within the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham as public highways. 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. 6973/09 Being a by-law to amend By-law No. 6604/05 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) 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 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. 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. 6978/09 Being a By-law regarding Development Charges. 24 Council Meeting Minutes PICKERIN Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 25 THIRD READING: Councillor Dickerson, seconded by Councillor McLean moved that By-law Number 6969 /09 to 6978/09, 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 REPORTS NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS (Report CS 14-09) (X) OTHER BUSINESS 1. The Chief Administrative Officer was requested to action the following: a) Councillor O'Connell requested that the Director, Planning & Development investigate the health and safety aspects of AM Satellite Towers. b) Councillor Littley gave notice that she would be bringing forward a Notice of Motion regarding the description used for Council Travel Expenses. c) Councillor Dickerson requested from staff the hours of operation for the washrooms at Progress Park. (XI) CONFIRMATION BY-LAW By-law Number # 6979/09 Councillor Littley, seconded by Councillor Pickles, 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 July 13, 2009. CARRIED 25 Council Meeting Minutes Monday, July 13, 2009 7:30 PM 26 Council Chambers (XII) ADJOURNMENT Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That the meeting be adjourned at 10:35 pm. CARRIED DATED this 13th day of July, 2009 MAYOR DAVID RYAN DEBI A. WILCOX CITY CLERK 26 City Planning & Development 101. Committee Meeting Minutes PICKERING Tuesday, September 8, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson 27 PRESENT: Mayor Ryan COUNCILLORS: D. Dickerson R. Johnson B. Littley J. O'Connell D. Pickles ABSENT: B. McLean ALSO PRESENT: T. Melymuk - Director, Office of Sustainability N. Carroll - Director, Planning & Development L. Taylor - Manager, Development Review D. Shields - Deputy Clerk (1) PART W- PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORTS 1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 24-09 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10/09 Pine Ridge Management Inc. & 1331301 Ontario Inc. Part of Lots 20 & 21, Concession 1 (1450 & 1525 Pickering Parkway) City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Littley Seconded by Councillor Pickles 1. That Report PD 24-09 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 1 clq Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes Tuesday, September 8, 2009 28 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10/09, submitted by Pine Ridge Management Inc. & 1331301 Ontario Inc. for lands being Part of Lot 20, Concession 1 & Part of Lot 21, Concession 1, be approved to broaden the range of commercial uses for the subject properties including offices and personal service uses, and add nursing home, retirement home and multiple dwelling-vertical (apartment) as permitted uses and increase the permitted height from six to eight storeys on the lands; 3. That no further notice is required to change the by-law to increase the permitted height from six to eight storeys, proposed subsequent to the holding of the public meeting, as it is within the provisions of the Planning Act, and 4. Further, that the zoning by-laws to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10/09, as set out in Appendices I and II to Report PD 24-09, be forwarded to City Council for enactment. REFERRED LATER IN THE MEETING (See Following Motions) Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That the main motion be amended by adding the following as Item 3 and renumbering Items 3 and 4 to 4 and 5; That the minimum height requirement for zoning by-law amendment application A 10/09 be eight storeys. REFERRED LATER IN THE MEETING (See Following Motion) Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Littley That Report PD 24-09 of the Director, Planning & Development be referred back to staff for further discussion with the applicant on proposed uses and height of building. CARRIED 2 Crai oo _ Planning & Development _ I Committee Meeting Minutes 111, P.1"C""PE Tuesday, September 8, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson 29 2. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 25-09 Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2009-10 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/09 Part of Lots 1, 2, & 3, Plan 505, Part of Block 165, Block 166, Lot 67, 40M-1810 Part 1, 40R-19732, Part 2, 40R-19734, Part 1, 40R-20042, Part 2, 40R-20043 Brand Group of Co. (Block 165 - Foxwood Trail) Cedaroak Development Corporation (1752 & 1764 Rosebank Road) Keleck Investments (Pickering) Inc. (1762 Rosebank Road) Parkmount Building Corporation (Part of Block 165 & Block 166 - Foxwood Trail & 1602 Autumn Crescent) City of Pickering David Brand, a representative for the applicants appeared before the Committee in support of Report PD 25-09 of the Director, Planning & Development. A question and answer period ensued. The Director, Planning & Development advised that he would have discussions with City staff and the applicant in regards to tree preservation and the types of trees that would be planted to replace the ones that are removed. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Dickerson 1. That Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2009-10 submitted by Sernas Associates, to permit a residential plan of subdivision on lands being Part of Lots 1, 2, & 3, Plan 505; Lot 67, 40M-1810; Part 1, 40R-19732; Part 2, 40R- 19734• Part 1 40R-20042; Part 2 40R-20043 as revised as shown on Attachment #3, to Report PD 25-09, be endorsed; 2. That the proposed conditions of draft plan approval to implement Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2009-10 as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 25-09, be endorsed; and 3. Further, that Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/09 submitted by Sernas Associates, to amend the zoning on lands being Part of Lots 1, 2, & 3, Plan 505; Part of Block 165, Block 166, Lot 67, 40M-1810; Part 1, 40R-19732; Part 2, 40R-19734; Part 1, 40R-20042; Part 2, 40R-20043 to 3 Cary Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes Tuesday, September 8, 2009 30 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson implement Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2009-10, and properties created through Land Division Applications LD 062/09 to LD 067/09 as outlined in Appendix II to Report PD 25-09 be forwarded to Council for enactment. CARRIED (III) OTHER BUSINESS 1. Councillor O'Connell gave notice that she would be bringing forth two Notices of Motion pertaining to the following; a) The proposed York/Durham Odour Control Facility and the legal action to be taken. b)_ Accessibility of all new sidewalks, trails and pedestrian connections within the City of Pickering. (III) ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:40 pm. 4 City 00 Executive Committee ICI Meeting Minutes Monday, September 14, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers 31 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 G. Paterson - Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer D. Wilcox - City Clerk An In Camera meeting of the Executive Committee was held prior to ,the regular meeting for the purpose of considering Confidential Report CS 34-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer. DELEGATIONS 1. Nicole Scarlett Re: Chief Administrative Officers Report CAO 06-09 Pickering Off-Leash Dog Park -Approval to Proceed with Park Development Ms. Nicole Scarlett, a representative of the Dog Park Working Group appeared before Committee in support of Report CAO 06-09 of the Chief Administrative Officer. She commended staff for the progress over the past few weeks and extended appreciation for the efforts of the members of the Working Group. She hoped that the City continued its efforts for more dog parks, and further encouraged the City to establish this off-leash park as a regional park, incorporating accessibility and walking trails. Ms. Scarlett responded to questions of the Committee. 1 Caq oo Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, September 14, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers 32 Chair: Councillor Dickerson 2. Rita Ciani VandenBroek Mathew Garrow Re: Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 32-09 Albacore Manor Sidewalk Removal Ms. Ciani VandenBroek, 1008 Albacore Manor and Mr. Matthew Garrow, 1010 Albacore Manor appeared before the Committee with respect to Report OES 32- 09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services. Ms. Ciani VandenBroek stated that the residents who signed the petition were in agreement with Option A or B noted in the report. Both residents outlined the concerns that the Albacore Manor residents are facing due to the limited parking situation. It was noted that there was only three parking spots on the street, which was untenable, along with concerns relating to property lines. A question and answer period ensued. (II) MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION 1. Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 06-09 Pickering Off-Leash Dog Park -Approval to Proceed with Park Development A brief discussion ensued on this matter. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Johnson 1. That Report CAO 06-09 of the Chief Administrative Officer regarding the Pickering Off-Leash Dog Park be received; 2. That Council approve the establishment of an off-leash dog park within the lands owned by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority west of Valley Farm Road and south of the Third Concession Road (Grand Valley Park); 3. That staff be directed to work with the Leash Free Working Group and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) on a detailed design of the off-leash dog park, and upon approval by the TRCA of that design, that staff be directed to commence development of the off-leash park, using available funds in the 2009 Budget approved by Council for this purpose; 2 cih/°o Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, September 14, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickerson 3 3 4. That staff be directed to review the City's Responsible Pet Ownership By-law 6811/07 and forward to Council any necessary amendments that are required to permit the establishment of an off-leash dog park as set out in this Report; 5. That staff be authorized to execute the necessary approvals and relevant documentation; and 6. That a copy of this Report be forwarded to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and the Leash Free Working Group. CARRIED 2. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 25-09 City Policy -ADM 010 -Standards for City Policies & Procedures A brief discussion ensued on this matter. Clarity was sought with respect to who is the designated Policy Coordinator, the inclusion of legislated duties within section 03.06 a); and what is deemed 'composition of Council' within section 03.07 a). RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson 1. That Report CS 25-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That City Policy ADM 010 Standards for City Policies & Procedures be approved; and 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering give effect thereto. CARRIED 3. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 27-09 2010 Standing Committee and Council Meeting Schedule The City Clerk was requested to review the schedule to determine if the March dates could be changed to reflect a Joint Planning & Development Committee meeting on March 1, 2010 and Council on March 8, 2010. RECOMMENDATION 3 cit °o Executive Committee da~i Meeting Minutes Monday, September 14, 2009 3 4 7:30 pm - Council Chambers. Chair: Councillor Dickerson Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson 1. That Report CS 27-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the 2010 Standing Committee and Council Meeting Schedule included as Attachment 1 to this report be approved; and 3. That the City Clerk be given authority to give effect thereto. CARRIED 4. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 28-09 Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report,for Information RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson That Report CS 28-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding Formal Quotations -Quarterly Report for Information be received for information. CARRIED 5. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 29-09 2009 Final Tax Due Dates for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential Realty Tax Classes RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson 1. That Report CS 29-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to issue the final 2009 Tax Bills for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-residential properties with a due date of October 19th, 2009; 4 Executive Committee dpi "tr Meeting Minutes PICKE Monday, September 14, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickerson 35 3. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to make any changes or undertake any actions necessary, including altering the due.date, in order to ensure the tax billing process is' completed and in order to comply with Provincial Regulations; 4. That the draft By-law attached to this report be enacted; and, 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect hereto. CARRIED 6. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 30-09 Cash Position Report as at June 30, 2009 RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson That Report CS 30-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. CARRIED 7. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 32-09 Application for Minor Variance to Sign By-law 2493/87, as amended -Bell Canada, 1762 Fairport Road RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson That the application for minor variance to Sign By-law 2439/87, as amended, submitted by Pattison Sign Group on behalf of Bell Canada, for property municipally known as 1762 Fairport Road, be approved. CARRIED 5 citq o0 _ Executive Committee - Meeting Minutes Monday, September 14, 2009 3 6 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickerson 8. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 33-09 Application for Minor Variance to Sign By-law 2493/87, as amended - Bell Canada, 5052-5044 Wixson Street, Claremont RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson That the application for minor variance to Sign By-law 2439/87, as amended, submitted by Pattison Sign Group on behalf of Bell Canada, for property municipally known as 5052-5044 Wixson Street, be approved. CARRIED 9. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 35-09 Public Reporting of Performance Measures A brief discussion ensued on this matter. RECOMMENDATION. Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor McLean That Report CS 35-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. CARRIED 10. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 32-09 Albacore Manor -Sidewalk Removal A question and answer period ensued. The Director, Operations & Emergency Services was requested to ensure the review of the following prior to the 2010 budget, in order for Council to review the matter in detail; policies related to moving the sidewalk (risk management); the number of parking complaints on Albacore Manor; the matter of liability if visitors to the lot have to travel on the road instead of a sidewalk; and comments from the residents of Tanzer Court and Begley Street should be solicited prior to further consideration of this matter. RECOMMENDATION 6 .l citq oo Executive Committee PICKERING Meeting Minutes Monday, September 14, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Dickerson 37 Moved by Councillor Littley Seconded by Mayor Ryan 1. That Report OES 32-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the removal of the sidewalk on Albacore Manor be received for information; and, 2. That Council address the matters in this report during the 2010 budget deliberations. CARRIED 11. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 46-09 Duffin's Trail from Finch Avenue to the Pickering-Ajax Border A question and answer period ensued, specifically as it related to accessibility issues and asphalting of the trail for this purpose. The Director, Operations & Emergency Services was requested to follow up with the TRCA concerning the policy in relation to asphalting the trail, along with the confirmation of the status/mandate of the Trail Advisory Committee. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Littley 1. That Report OES 46-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the Duffin's Trail Project from Finch Avenue to the Pickering-Ajax border be received; 2. That, notwithstanding the provisions of the City's Purchasing Policy, Council approve the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to develop and construct the trail at an estimated cost of $99,813.00 (GST included); 3. That the total gross project cost of $110,250 (GST included) including TRCA estimated cost and any unforeseen costs and the total net, project cost of $105,000 be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to fund the project as follows: a) the sum of 15,000 be funded from the Development Charges Parkland Development & Trails Reserve Fund 7 Ciaf °o Executive Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, September 14, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers 3 Chair: Councillor Dickerson b) the sum of $90,000 be funded from Parkland Reserve Fund and 5. That a copy of this report be forwarded to the TRCA for their information. CARRIED LATER IN THE MEETING (See Following Motions) Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor McLean That Report OES 46-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services be referred back to staff to report on the cost to make the trail fully accessible. MOTION DEFEATED The main motion was then CARRIED. (III) OTHER BUSINESS a) Councillor Littley advised that she would be bringing forth a Notice of Motion, along with Councillor Johnson with respect to requesting the Ministry of the Environment to issue a time out with respect to the Southeast Collector (SEC) Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment and Odour Control Facility. b) Councillor O'Connell advised that she would be bringing forth a Notice of Motion in regards to the recent comments made by Regional Chair Anderson with respect to the City of Toronto establishing a landfill within the City of Pickering. c) Councillor Johnson requested the Director, Planning & Development to review the site plan in relation to the Brockington Plaza and the location of the stop sign, as it was causing Bainbridge Street to be blocked. He advised that it would be better for the stop sign to be located closer to the road, rather than the sidewalk. d) Councillor Dickerson advised that at the next meeting of the Executive Committee he would be bringing forth draft sustainability guidelines and benchmarks, which would be a living document that would establish sustainable elements as a minimum for development. (IV) ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:40 pm. 8 3 9 PICKERING September 21, 2009 PRESENTATIONS 1 Mayor Ryan Re: Presentation of Certificate of Commendation From the Governor General of Canada to Mr. Vince Rizza in Recognition of his Rescue of a man from a smoke-filled house in Pickering 1 Caq o¢~ 4 0 PICKERING September 21, 2009 DELEGATIONS 1. Melville D'Mello Ajax Pickering Road Watch Committee Re: Statistical Update & Committee Achievements 2. Bonnie Harkness, Executive Director Kevin Modeste, Campaign Chair Jenn Meyer, Resource Development Manager Barb Fanin, Community Investment Coordinator United Way of Ajax-Pickering-Uxbridge Re: 2009 Campaign and Community Need 3. Michael Angemeer, President and CEO Glenn Rainbird, O.C., Chair Veridian Corporation Re: Annual Shareholder Update 4. Michael J. McQuaid WeirFoulds LLP Re: Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 05-09 and Addendum to Report CAO 05-09 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program 5. a) Maurice Brenner b) Peter Rodrigues C) Marilyn Metcalfe d) Dan Murphy e) Peter Herrmann f) Rhonda Mendes g) Betty Burkholder h) Etelka Nagy i) Rick Nicolussi j) Barb Findlay k) Harold (Bud) Cruise 1) Sharon Cruise m) Brian Berndt Re: Notice of Motion Item IX) a) and b) York Durham Odour Control Facility City o~ 41 R-' - September 21 2009 PICKE I CORRESPONDENCE Pages 1. CORR. 77-09 Motion for Direction TOWNSHIP OF WOOLWICH 46 P.O. Box 158 24 Church Street West Elmira, ON N3B 2Z6 Letter received from the Township of Woolwich requesting Council support for a resolution passed at a meeting held on June 30, 2009 with respect to their request that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs conduct a review of Chapter 27, Section 5(2) of the Development Charges Act 1997 and make changes that would eliminate the requirement for municipalities to deduct grant funding received from eligible portion of development charges. 2. CORR. 78-09 Motion for Direction MICHELLE CRABB, PRESIDENT 47 - 49 MADD DURHAM REGION 58 Rossland Rd. W., Suite 206 Oshawa, ON L1 G 2V5 Letter received from Michelle Crabb, President, MADD Durham Region, seeking confirmation of written support from local community partners of the efforts made by MADD Durham Region to reduce the number of injuries and fatalities by erecting road signs in the community. Written support is needed in order to obtain funding from MADD Canada's National Office. 3. CORR. 79-09 Motion for Direction DEBBIE THOMPSON 50 LEGISLATIVE SERVICES SUPERVISOR/DEPUTY CLERK TOWN OF CALEDON 6311 Old Church Road Caledon, ON L7C 1J6 Letter received from Debbie Thompson, Legislative Services Supervisor/Deputy Clerk, Town of Caledon seeking Council support.with respect to a resolution passed at a meeting held September 1, 2009 regarding the development of an Economic Development Strategy to support farming and municipalities in the Greenbelt in achieving financial sustainability. I 42 4. CORR. 80-09 Motion for Direction PAMELA MALOTT 51-52 CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER TOWN OF AMHERSTBURG 271 Sandwich St. South Amherstburg, ON N9V 2A5 Letter received from Pamela Malott, Chief Administrative Officer, Town of Amherstburg, seeking Council support with respect to a resolution passed at a meeting held July 27, 2009 regarding an appeal to the Province of Ontario and the Ministry of Finance to continue consultations with municipalities and the Solar Industry to reach a fair and equitable property assessment valuation method. 5. CORR. 81-09 Receive for Information JIM BRADLEY, MINISTER 53-54 MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION Ferguson Block, 3rd Floor 77 Wellesley St. West Toronto, ON M7A 1Z8 Letter received from Jim . Bradley, Minister, Ministry of Transportation to Regional Councillor Bill McLean in response to his letter regarding the road conditions on Highway 401 between Ajax and Pickering. 6. CORR. 82-09 Receive for Information LAURA DRAKE, CHAIR 55-63 PICKERING MUSEUM VILLAGE ADVISORY COMMITTEE c/o City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Letter received from Laura Drake, Chair, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee submitting the 2009 Work Plan on behalf of the Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee. 7. CORR. 83-09 Motion to Endorse DOUG DICKERSON 64-93 CITY COUNCILLOR -WARD 2 CITY OF PICKERING One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Copy of a letter forwarded from Doug Dickerson, City Councillor, Ward 2 and Chair, Sustainable Pickering Advisory Committee with respect to the Sustainable Pickering Advisory Committee's concerns with regulations pertaining to the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009. A copy of the Discussion Paper and the Green Energy & Green Economy Act, 2009 is attached. '43 i 8. CORR. 84-09 Motion to Endorse CATHERINE ROSE 94-105 CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT One The Esplande Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Copy of a letter forwarded from the Planning & Development Department to the Ministry of the Environment, Environmental Programs Division advising that they would be seeking Council endorsement with respect to revisions to the proposed MOE Regulations to implement the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009. 9. CORR. 85-09 Motion to Endorse DEBBIE LEROUX, CLERK 106-107 TOWNSHIP OF UXBRIDGE 51 Toronto Street S., 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 held August 14, 2009 with respect to the granting of an extension to the consultation period regarding Provincial Underserved Area Plan from August to late Fall. 10. CORR. 86-09 Motion to Accept Terms T.J. QUINN, CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER 108-111 CITY OF PICKERING AND PENNY WYGER VICE PRESIDENT, CORPORATE SERVICES METROLINX 20 Bay Street, Suite 600 Toronto, ON M5J 2W3 Memorandum from T.J. Quinn, Chief Administrative Officer, attaching a letter received from Penny Wyger, Vice President, Corporate Services, Metrolinx requesting the City of Pickering accept the terms as set out in the enclosed letter with respect to the necessary legal agreements between OPB and Metrolinx. From staffs perspective, what Metrolinx is requesting is appropriate and should be accepted by Council. 11. CORR. 87-09 Motion to Declare CLINTON SHANE EKDAHL 112-114 129 Avenue E South Saskatoon SK S7M 1 R7 Letter received from Clinton Shane Ekdahl requesting the City of Pickering proclaim May 29, 2010 as "Day of the Honey Bee". 44 12. CORR. 88-09 Motion to Declare KELLY MATIJCIO, RN 115 kmatijcio _rogers.com Letter received from. Kelly Matijcio, RN requesting the City of Pickering proclaim October 1 - 7, 2009 as World Breastfeeding Week. 13. CORR. 89-09 Motion to Declare BETH CULLEN-KEIDANN, RN 116 REGION OF DURHAM HEALTH DEPARTMENT 605 Rossland Road East Whitby, ON L1 N 0132 Letter received from Beth Cullen-Keidann, RN, Region of Durham Health Department, requesting the City of Pickering proclaim October, 2009 as Walk to School Month and October 7, 2009 as International Walk to School Day. 14. CORR. 90-09 Motion to Declare DON HEAD, COMMISSIONER 117 RESTORATIVE JUSTICE Restp ratove Ki sto ceCaD- csc-scc. g c. ca Letter received from Don Head, Commissioner, Correctional Service of Canada, requesting the City of Pickering proclaim November 15 to 22nd, 2009 as "Restorative Justice Week 2009". 15. CORR. 91-09 Motion to Declare KARYN KENNEDY, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 118 BOOST CHILD ABUSE PREVENTION & INTERVENTION 890 Yonge Street, 11th Floor Toronto, ON M3W 3P4 Letter received from Karyn Kennedy, Executive Director, Boost Child Abuse Prevention & Intervention, requesting the City of Pickering proclaim October, 2009 as "Child Abuse & Neglect Prevention Month". 16. CORR. 92-09 Motion to Declare SID RYAN, PRESIDENT 119 CUPE ONTARIO 305 Milner Ave., Suite 801 Scarborough, ON M1B 3V4 Letter received from Sid Ryan, President, CUPE Ontario, requesting the City of Pickering proclaim October 21, 2009 as "Child Care Worker & Early Childhood Educator Appreciation Day". 45 17. CORR. 93-09 Motion to Declare LISA HARKER 120 COORDINATOR; RECORDS & ELECTIONS City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1 B 6K7 Correspondence received from Lisa Harker, Coordinator, requesting the City of Pickering proclaim October 18 - 25, 2009 as "Local Government Week". 18. CORR. 94-09 Motion to Declare KATHY CROWHURST 121 LUPUS FOUNDATION.OF ONTARIO 294 Ridge Road N. Box 687 Ridgeway, ON LOS 1 NO . Letter received from Kathy Crowhurst, Lupus Foundation of Ontario, requesting the City of Pickering proclaim October as "Lupus Awareness Month." 19. CORR. 95-09 Receive for Information GORDON WILLSON 122-123 455 Whitevale Road Whitevale, ON Letter from Gordon Willson, Whitevale resident, with respect to concerns related to the Memorandum of Understanding, June 2005, between Pickering and York Region, waiving rights to compensation in regard to the `big pipe'. 46 Sfl ,.Og' . IC' The Corporation of the Township of Woolwich r---- - P.O. Box 158, 24 Church Street West Elmira, Ontario N313 2Z6 Tel. (519) 669-1647 / Fax: (519) 669-1820 DATE: July 3, 2009 TO: All Ontario Municipalities SUBJECT: Resolution to request support for a review of Chapter 27, Sec, 5(2) of the Development Charges Act 1997 On June 30, 2009, the Council of the Township of Woolwich passed the following resolution and respectfully requests support for this resolution by all municipalities in Ontario: WHEREAS development charges are collected fees levied on new development to help pay for the infrastructure required to service growth; r AND WHEREAS development charges help finance capital projects that would otherwise be financed through property taxes or other means; AND WHEREAS Chapter 27, Section 5 (2) of the Development Charges Act 1997 states that, "The capital costs, determined under paragraph 7 of subsection (1), must be reduced, in accordance with the regulations, to adjust for capital grants, subsidies and other contributions made to a municipality or that the council of the municipality anticipates will be made in respect of the capital costs"; AND WHEREAS municipalities in Ontario have recently been approved for grant funding under the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund and Building Canada Fund for capital works that have development charge components; AND WHEREAS municipalities are unable to collect that development charge component when they receive funding from sources such as the Infrastructure Stimulus Fund and Building Canada Fund; NOW THEREFORE be it resolved that the Council of the Township of Woolwich requests the Ministry of Municipal Affairs to conduct a review of Chapter 27, Section 5 (2) of the Development Charges Act 1997 and make changes that would eliminate the requirement for municipalities to deduct grant funding received from eligible portion of development charges; AND FURTHER that this resolution be forwarded to The Honourable Jim Watson, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing; Harold Albrecht, MP Kitchener-Conestoga; Leeanna Pendergast, MPP Kitchener-Conestoga; and to all municipalities in Ontario for support. ~I d q CA:Pu ma f6r 1birec:h'c,, T WMALWI: t. F Mothers Against Drunk Driving SE' 0 2 2019 47 Dear Sir/Madame: G0 P..,(2 `-18 -0 9 ~ lit a ra 6V rt i ^ r In an attempt to reduce the number'of injuries and fatalities as a result of alcohol and/or drug- related crashes, MADD Durham Region plans to launch a project called Campaign 911 in September 2009. As part of this launch, the Chapter hopes to erect several road signs within the Region. A sample of the proposed sign is attached to this letter for your reference. It is our hope that Campaign 911 efforts will heighten public awareness and serve as a reminder to all to call 9-1-1 if they suspect an impaired driver. For information on the 10 possible signs of an impaired driver and what to do if you observe a suspected impaired driver, please visit this link: http://www.madd.ca/campaig~n9l Lhtml. Our goal is a safer community for all. In Durham Region, impaired driving continues to be a major safety concern for our community. Did you know that impaired driving is the number one criminal cause of death in Canada? Everyday, 4 Canadians are killed and another 207 people are injured because of this senseless crime. An estimated 4.5 million,impaired drivers are on the roads every single month and 1 out of 25 drivers on the road every night is impaired. In Durham Region alone, during the R.I.D.E. campaign conducted by the Durham Regional Police Service from January 28, 2009 to January 31, 2009, 31 roadside tests were conducted. Some results included 5 twelve-hour suspensions, 3 exceeded 80mg, 2 charges of impaired operations, 1 charge of dangerous operation, 39 provincial offence charges and 3 suspension notices were served. During Week 4 of the Festive R.I.D.E. blitz that the Durham Regional Police Services conducted, over 2455 vehicles were stopped. Out of those stopped, over 200 breath roadside tests were given to suspected impaired drivers. 28 drivers received 12 hour suspensions, 30 drivers exceeded 80mg and 11 G1/G2 drivers were arrested for breaching the no-alcohol conditions on their license. MADD Canada's mission is to "Stop impaired driving and Support victims of this violent crime." In order to obtain funding available from MADD Canada's National Office for this important community initiative/project, we must confirm the support of local community partners. If you can kindly sign the attached letter or draft your own letter of support for this pro ect it would be greatly appreciated and would assist us in obtaining the necessary financial assistance to move forward with this initiative/project. I look forward to hearing from you and hope to see this valuable venture become axeality. Sincerely, Michelle Crabb, President MADD Durham Region 58 Rossland Rd W, Suite 206 Oshawa, ON L1G 2V5 905-576-7473 or Toll Free 1-877-576-7473 Fax 905-576-4675 www.madd-durham.com madddurham@interlinks.net V, 48 Letter of Support Re: MADD Durham Region Campaign 911, Project Dear Sir/Madame: This letter is to confirm my support of the efforts. made by MADD Durham Region to reduce the number of injuries and fatalities by erecting road signs in our community. Since its' inception, MADD Durham Region has partnered with many local agencies, schools, Media and police in an attempt to reduce the number of incidents of impaired driving in our community and to support victims of this violent crime. Their hard work and dedication to create awareness and promotion of safe and sober driving is of great need. A reminder for residents to call 9-1-1 if they suspect an impaired driver can only help in the fight for safer roads. I am in complete support of the installation of road signs along our streets. Sincerely, Signature Name Title/Agency Date I 3 49, x DD YrxII Mothers Against Drunk Drlring° TOWN HALL 6311 Old Church Road, Caledon, ON UC 1J6 "r- `R' i N G `['OWN OF CALEDON 905.584.2272 11.888.CALEDON ~ FAX 905.584.4325 ~ www.caledon.ca SEP _ 200 50 co R,2 . -I CI.- O September 4, 2009 CLERKS VIS10 Honourable Jim Watson, Minister Honourable George Smitherman, Minister Municipal Affairs and Housing Minister of Energy and Infrastructure 777 Bay Street, 17th Floor 900 Bay Street, 4th Floor, Hearst Block Toronto, ON M5G 2E5 Toronto, Ontario M7A 2E1 Dear Honourable Minister's; Re: Development of an Economic Development Strategy to support farming and municipalities in the Greenbelt in achieving financial sustainability. At the regular Council Meeting held on September 1, 2009,.,Council passed a resolution regarding the development of an Economic Development Strategy to support. farming and municipalities in the Greenbelt in achieving financial sustainability. The resolution reads as follows: Moved by A. Thompson - Seconded by N. deBoer 537-2009 Whereas the Province of Ontario. through new planning policies, the Greenbelt, Oak Ridges Moraine and Niagara Escarpment plans as well as Provincial Policy statements and new source water protection legislation and regulations have created a framework which restricts both farms and municipalities in achieving financial sustainability; _ Therefore be it resolved that the Province of Ontario be requested to develop an economic development strategy to support farming and municipalities in the Greenbelt in achieving financial sustainability; and That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to MPP Sylvia Jones, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Minister of Energy and Infrastructure, Greenbelt Municipalities, OMAFRA, Greater Toronto. Agriculture Action Plan Group, Ontario Rural Council and the Greater Toronto Countryside Mayor's Alliance for their support. Carried. Council .looks forward to your response to this matter. Regards, Debbie Thompson Legislative Services Supervisor/Deputy Clerk Administrative Department Cc MPP Sylvia Jones Greenbelt Municipalities i OMAFRA a K Greater Toronto Agriculture Action Plan Group Ontario Rural Council Greater Toronto Countryside Mayor's Alliance r!! r 'f x riC1"!Ct k Administration Department v - Co z r The Corporation of be 51 Tobin of RmOotburg Pamela Malott Chief Administrative Officer pmalott(damherstburg.ca August 31st, 2009 Attention: Clerk's Department RE: MPAC Evaluation of Solar Energy Development Pleased be advised of the following motion of the Council of the Town of Amherstburg on Monday July 27", 2009: WHEREAS the Province established the Renewable Energy Standard Offer Program (RESOP) and subsequently, the Green Energy and Green Economy Act to promote the development of wind, water, solar and biomass power projects; and WHEAREAS the Province committed to a balanced and sustainable property assessment system for the renewable energy sector; and WHEAREAS the Province committed to consult with municipalities, the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation (MPAC) and the energy generation sector to ensure that the property tax treatment of renewable energy facilities remains fair and consistent, promoting the development of green energy; and WHEREAS the Solar Industry offers unique, clean energy technology to Ontario; and WHEREAS the Ontario market for solar energy is at an early stage of maturity with very little operating solar capacity which warrants a fair approach to Property Assessment to foster wider adoption of this proven technology; and WHEREAS the current valuation method is unfair and burdensome in that the entire property area of the development is assessed at a Full Industrial Rate; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that we, The Council of the Town of Amherstburg, appeal to the Province of Ontario, Ministry of Finance, to continue consultations with Municipalities and the Solar Industry to reach a fair and equitable property assessment valuation method; and Website: www.amhersthurg,ca 51* 21 Cove;/ 271 SANDWICH ST. SOUTH, AMHERSTBURG, ONTARIO N9V 2A5 L 1 Phone: (519) 736.0012 Fax: (519) 736-5403 TTY: (519) 736-9860 52 FURTHER,' that until such agreement is reached that assessment be derived by totaling the area of all solar panels in a project to determine PV surface area; and that the PV coverage area (approximately 20%) be assessed at a full Industrial Rate and the balance of the area at a Vacant Industrial land rate; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that we, The Council of the Town of Amherstburg, request ----;-~at AMO lobby the Province of Ontario on our behalf and that a copy of this resolution be sent to Bruce Crozier MP, Dwight Duncan, Minister of Finance and all Municipalities in Ontario requesting their support. Sincerel Pamela Malott Chief Administrative Officer Cc: Bruce Crozier, MPP Dwight Duncan, Minister of Finance AMO Association of Municipalities of Ontario I Ministry of Ministere des Transportation Transports Office of the Minister Bureau du ministre Ferguson Block, 3rd Floor Edifice Ferguson, 3e etage 77 Wellesley St. West 77, rue Wellesley ouest Ontario Toronto, Ontario Toronto (Ontario) c~ 7J M7A 1Z8 M7A 1 Z8 416 327-9200 416 327-9200Q www.mto.gov.on.ca www.rrto.gov.on.ca TO: JUL 16 2009 cogV TO: a F Mr. Bill McLean Regional Councillor Ward 2 City of Pickering One The Esplanade 6 _T< Pickering, Ontario L1 V 6K7 C„ R~~[ Ea~4m~ i Dear Mr. McLean: Thank you for your letter regarding pavement conditions on Highway 401 between Ajax and Pickering. I share the concerns raised in your letter and I am sorry to hear that your vehicle suffered damages. I assure you that maintaining the condition of our provincial highway system is a priority of our ministry. During the winter months, severe changes in temperature cause freezing and thawing of the pavement. This can result in the rapid deterioration of the pavement surface and the creation of numerous potholes some of which are very large and deep. As a result of the harsh conditions experienced this past winter, sections of Highway 401 through the Toronto and Durham areas, including the area between Ajax and Pickering, suffered extensive pavement deterioration. Our maintenance contractor attempted to patch the most severe potholes but weather conditions at that time made this approach ineffective. Due to the extensive damage to the pavement, the top layer of asphalt was removed by grinding as an interim measure. The asphalt removal work took place during February and March of this year. Over the past winter, the ministry tendered and awarded $4 million worth of paving contracts to repave areas on Highway 401 where the top layer of pavement was milled. The repaving work started in April and was completed in late May. The ministry recently awarded two larger pavement rehabilitation contracts on Highway 401 between Highway 404 and Highway 35/115, to repave areas where multiple lifts of pavement were removed over the winter and to carry out more extensive pavement repairs. These contracts are expected to commence early this summer. In the meantime, the ministry's maintenance contractor continues to monitor all milled pavement areas, carrying out sweeping and pavement repair operations as required. /2 IA . 54 -2- Again, thank you for bringing your concerns to my attention and please accept my best wishes. Yours sincerely, Jim Bradley Minister c: -Roger Anderson, Chair, Regional Municipality of Durham Wayne Arthurs, MPP, Pickering-Scarborough East Joe Dickson, MPP, Ajax-Pickering ~I a a, CITY 05' A { 1 6 20099 5 5 Co P* $.)--007 August 15, 2009 C RKS DIVISION Debi Wilcox Clerk, City of Pickering Dear Ms. Wilcox: . First, let me apologize for the tardiness of our reports and workplan. Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee's objectives for 2009-10 term are as follows: 1) review policies re our collections, working procedures and documents 2) conserve and catalogue our vast collection 3) support and improve our volunteer base 4) work on Bicentennial Celebration of Pickering and the 50`h Anniversary of Pickering Museum Village 5) create a vision statement(s) for the future of Pickering Museum Village Attached to this letter are the workPlaps for our 3 suV=committees 1) collections management 2) capital projects 3) special events. You will notice that much of our work is already well underway. Sincerely, Laura Drake Chair, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee 7 RUE 56 Cn n -n C o o 0 o n n cc ro N ~ ro' ~ ~ 3 o - 3 m ~ n c~i ~ y 3 ° N N a d O Z ~ ~ - p fv ro <D Mn<i BCD 5 G) EL- 0 CD (D ~ C o n -n 0 > G) > CD CD o - o « 0 ~o n CD - - CD O m CD ° c c c n -0 °o C a L v, 0 ° 0 o 9° oio L. a C/) N o o ° 3° 3 o 0 CCDD co CD O c a' o o > > u, :3 0 En mF IDoD 3 = (D CD ID ro a Cn CD N - Cn c 0 7 CU CD CD 77 En _ m a S Z D. o 0- CCDD is o 0' O o, cv__ CD CD ch < s o CD CD CD ° CD CD 3 (A z CA m o ~O < o can < c a C (D ° ano a- d co b C n v Co CD (0 CD 7 CD n 0 0 0 CD 3 g 0 N CD O O 4 0 CD CD t0 CD d <ro goy v~ wD'o~ ooDv~ COD o~ ccncn0 ccn(n() ccncnn ccnCt)0 ' v -n ro N: CD Q CD CD CD 3 N . CL 0 CD CD Cn to < c N CD CD _ C C S o o Q 3 CD Ca Co mC= ~ ~ c ro n (o (n =r =r CD 0 - m @ CD -0 CD CD ~cn. CL :3 5'Z 3 CD CL c--_ 3 a CD n Q) CD C c CD CD D cn CD = 0. n Cn;. o 0 CD CL 3'.na m a, CL 2. m CD v o• o :5. :5. 3 CD C CD r 57 U) 0 ~ w d o 'a m GO1 C(A a. D C D) c°a A CL 0 (D C 0 o c O 0 m a ~ cn v, d 3 O Co a n N m o cp 0 co v m ~ m ~<o' ~o N 0 N O C O O a n N > d j N n O CL n C p~ X, iU (n N Q N 0 2 7 O n O O O c CD 7 O 7 - N _ CD r O O O S [D O (D O EQ• O v a 0 0 C = (D 0 y N O 0 p 0 S O N CD O ~ O O N N O' O O Q p C (n cn fn (n a<=n) o o < o <n one od C a 1. N 7 O O n Q° 0 - 13 ~ccDac~3 CD (D 0 z d our c CD 0 -n Q. CD cn a n -0 p o Q n c c CD < CD CCDD W O CD _ CD O CD C)- in c o 0 CA) N) 0 CD CD CD 3 ~ cQ o ~ ~ w -0 m sp -M m ca m ' c° m7o o a~~~oa3~ ~cD cD O O p D 0 O GJ 0 ~CD Q° iU O c c ~ A CD 0 CDW~c(nCD wCD m 0C: CD ~~~D.0 nwoCD.<o --m -m ~ cQ3 `n o ° I n~5 I sp~~~'cD CD CD . VT (D (n _0 CD N CD -0 O CD .7 (n SU D CD Q O _ (D Q O O O fn Q CD c D m T CD ~ Cl) '2) m U) CD o3 <CD CD W U) ova N^ O X _ c N CD 6 <D N) N) ''C^^ 'C) CD W W (D CD (D O ^ p -0 O 0 c C :3 CD m C (n (D (D (D (f) 0 Q cp Q CD ~O O T 0. 3 a (D O ~ Q W CCDD w O 3 1-0 N O Q. CD Q. O Co o 3 CD O Q CD c 59 ~-nv0-m ani 3 ~ 0 0 -6 - v, -a-a D acn~O 7 oo ° ~ crt~ ~ caw oO ~ ain3.3 ~m o-w rn O = n ' as ~ CD 0 ~.~n n ~o o=°a -n° 05-W o CDaD ° o 3 om°~ o~ x CD w~ < m~ O a1< QSV O O W W(C :3 cD o = cD ' D .7- cD cD 3 co Q 0 v O CD CD CD :3 Cn CD r.N° =3 5-0 C' aD - =r :3 1~0 -0 0 CA CD CD _ c v N 0-0 p A> ca Q 0 Q :3 ca ° O D W 030 g o o l<. ° c cQ o a - o CD w W O o O° - w 0 _0 o cQ - ? C: 0~ U m o -mooO m cQ :r 0 ooaCD c3cm °0W~3o.0". ~Q~Qa`~D N c .nom n OHO.-: 3 ° O-~ -*~0.O.3 3a(Qo Q CD `G S1' "'r CD CD O CD tQ , CD CD o CD cn 0 m U) o U W 0- W ~ 0 3 0 3 N o CC !DO 'a3 0 ~ m c~ N) N) O O O 0 m o O O CD cp N cn m 0 27 ° D Cf) 0 CD 3 . 0 c 3 ch V~ CD 0- 3 0 m c!~ L 60 c 0 Z' 7 0 0 CL am .3 Q *U3 c~ cn 0 C7 Ct) c ~ CL n ~ 0 3 0 N ro 0 f7 CD N <D 0c ~ a Q• 0 CD ' D ~w _0 (D 0 CD Q 6 D C~ N p aw CD 0 c 61 o 3 o N O nCD N n O Ona Q Q~U a C7 n° D (fl CD N ~ °O C7 < 7 C CD c a n AO (D (D CD CD O O 7 3 j O w w Q ry O D CL CD 3 CD CD W CD ° CL oQ cD Da <r, w3 0 M CD -0 c: W CD CD 0,0 CD < -0 c CD ao (n CD CD CD CL 0 - _ T - ty (n A O w = O -(a (D A Cl tT cfl3ccDD - 3° ~°cn CD 3 .CD co > (D w 0 0 0- O O -0 o O CL O CD j- "tea G O O to CD 7 N C') E =3 CD p fA 7 CD 0 71 c w O CD CD :3 cc CD =3 (D CD CD (n (n (5. O c fA 5 N CD 7 CD (D O O N N c 3 N ° ~ C w G cNZ. D N ' N N 7 y c 3 CD CD c 0 a O a D =3 Q =3 o m~ D~ a CO 0 < (n a (D U) N to O N. O 3 N N n 3 CO O O W N C7 (D - 0- O N O O p -.a O° o Q d C 0 3 3 - N O (D a 3 f1l N 3 CD C3 ° w (co o CD CD c c ((D a c O D co 3 a CD p ° N 3 5 3 (D C N O O O O •a X N O O N O C: O O p O N .~-r• (~D (DO CD w O n a a CD N n~ c ~ N CD 'D 0 62 W CD (D M M CD CD O o N O O O CD w CD 0 =r o' o < 3 o 3 0 c d 'O Cam C(D o CD Cj) N CD CD O N CD O p t0 ~ N j O La. < N "U (D cn c: =3 cn 'a O In N C o c CL p CD c d - cn x =3((DD . CD nm m > CD ` U) 0 CL 7' ca O m o 0 CD N O O n 3 CL c n G (n O (D 0 3 (D O vo <D N CCDD AO CD (D ~ ~2• O ~ 3 m 'a x ~c a CD fn w 00 cD 3 CD oc- a m 1 C N C N m CD a 0 63 a C 7 0 - ? (D ' cD A~ CD O w~CCDD<y_(~ CD :3 D mo3° rn~~ 3 (0 CD 3o ° N°o o CD CD M. x ~ ° ? 0 ~ mmn3 Q CD° w co~3°w< (o3 y O n x c CD ;:w 0 C) 3 m m -p N N ( ~ D C y 01 N 7 C CDC a to 3 sc o, o c N Cn ~ O. C y .t C 3 W0Cn0 mn M z ~6 6 C C - A13o no NN m (n C) d O. ° (D + + cD N < N p 0 N' O O T). 0 O N N ° N 3 w ° n o 3 C: 0 QC) 00 o CD 3 m (D c o 11)(0 - CD P)<. ( 3 m 2) a a ~ as m (D n~ c N cD 'O O Pickering Civic Complex Call One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario 1 A6 " Canada L1V 6K7 Direct Access. 905.420.4660 PICKERING T°11 Free 1.877.42.4666 TTY 905.420.1739 cityofpickering.com b 4 Doug Dickerson City Councillor - Ward 2 - - C.oo_.83 -61 July 17, 2009 i .~,ax~ Mike Parkes Cabinet Liaison & Strategic Policy Coordinator Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure Regulatory Affairs and Strategic Policy Strategic Policy and Research Branch 880 Bay Street, 6th floor Toronto, ON M7A 2C1 FILE J . PPR, AcVcN Subject: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, a2 The Sustainable Pickering Advisory Committee (SPAC) congratulates the Ministry on the enactment of the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009. While the SPAC supports the Act in its goal to facilitate the development of green energy and a green economy, a review of the Act has indicated a number of implications and concerns for the City of Pickering. Key concerns involve ensuring municipalities a significant role in the approval of renewable energy projects; establishing a meaningful dialogue with municipalities regarding the location and approval of renewable energy projects; ensuring that major investments in renewable energy projects do not jeopardize a municipality's ability to implement the policies of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005, and the Growth Plan; implementing the recommendations of municipal energy conservation and demand management plans; and addressing cost implications of the requirement to consider energy conservation and efficiency when acquiring goods and services and when making capital investments. The attached discussion paper offers a more thorough review of the Committee's concerns. The SPAC requests that the Minister of Energy and Infrastructure prepare regulations that: 1. Establish a local consultative process to be completed within 120 days that allows municipalities a significant role in the review of renewable energy projects and ensures a meaningful dialogue with municipalities regarding the location and approval of renewable energy projects. Using a process similar to the one recently established by Industry Canada for radio communication and broadcasting antenna systems, it is recommended that the process for renewable energy projects include: • Mandatory pre-consultation between the host municipality and proponents of renewal energy projects in order for the municipality to advise of local circumstances and requirements early in the approval process; Direct: 905.420.4605 Fax: 905.839.3684 Residence: 905.839.3684 www.dougdickerson.ca Email: ddickerson@cityofpickering.com The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 July 17, 2009. Page 2 J • Public notification and consultation to address relevant concerns and an opportunity for the submission of written comments from the public; • Notification by mail of proposed renewable energy projects to host municipalities; • Response by proponents of renewable energy projects addressing public and municipal concerns; • Submission of conditions of approval from the host municipality to the Director of the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office; 2. Require the Director of the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office to consider the cumulative effects on the surrounding land uses, impose conditions requested by the host municipality and apply appropriate distance separation requirements from sensitive land uses when reviewing and approving renewable energy projects; 3. Require that preliminary and approved site plans be filed with the host municipality to provide appropriate information for the municipality's review and comment as well as a record of the approval; 4. Require notification of all future proposed Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009, regulations mailed for comment directly to municipalities in addition to the Ontario Environmental Registry posting; 5. Prohibit approvals of renewable energy projects that are considered significant or major investments that would prejudice the use of lands for urban development within the provincially-mandated 2031 growth plan areas or within planned urban extension areas; 6. Allow Municipalities to phase in and/or prioritize, based on greatest energy savings, recommendations that arise from municipal energy conservation and demand management plans; and 7. Address possible increased project costs when public agencies must consider energy conservation and efficiency when acquiring goods and services and when making capital investments. The Pickering Sustainability Advisory Committee is pleased to be working with the Province of Ontario and other stakeholders in creating a more green and sustainable future for all Ontarians. Thank you for considering these comments. By copy of this letter to the City Clerk, it is my intent to have this correspondence placed on the agenda of an upcoming meeting of Pickering Council. Yours truly Doug Dickerson City Councillor - Ward 2 Chair, Sustainable Pickering Advisory Committee Attachment Copy: City Clerk I?Bill 150, Green Energy and Green Ewnomy Act, 2009V_etter\Letter.doc City DISCUSSION PAPER June 15, 2009 P CKERING .66 Subject: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR) Registry No. 010-6017 Executive Summary: In February 2009, Bill 150, The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 (the Act), was introduced in the Ontario Legislative Assembly and received Royal Assent on May 14, 2009. The Act amends and repeals various Acts including the Planning Act and has implications for various sectors of the economy including municipalities, the energy industry and consumers. A summary of the Act is provided as Attachment #1. The Province has stated that the purpose of the Act, is.to position Ontario as a renewable energy leader by attracting new investment in renewable energy projects, creating new green economy jobs and addressing climate change. At the request of the Sustainable Pickering Advisory Committee, staff reviewed the Act focusing on the potential impacts for The Corporation of the City of Pickering including its ownership interest in Veridian. The impacts are: • Requirement to develop corporation wide energy conservation and demand management plans, targets, and.annual reporting; • Requirement to consider energy conservation and efficiency when acquiring goods and services and when making capital investments; • Reimbursement of direct costs incurred by the City to facilitate the development of public and private renewable energy projects; • Potential for the City to pursue green power generation opportunities under 10 megawatts to power its facilities or to feed into the power transmission and distribution grid without incorporating a separate. business entity; • Guaranteed connection of renewable energy generation facilities to the transmission and distribution grid; Creation of feed=in tariff (FIT) pricing program providing standard pricing and procurement rules for renewable energy. projects; • Removal of approvals for renewable energy projects from the municipal. land use process (official plans, zoning, site plan control) as well exemption from provincial policy statements acid plans. Approvals are now uploaded to the Province creating an unclear role for the City in the approval process; • Requirement to undertake reviews of the Ontario Building Code every 5 years to increase energy conservation; and. • Potential for short term increase in energy costs resulting from FIT pricing program and upgrades required to the energy distribution system. Subject: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 June 15, 2009 Page 2 67 While the City supports the Act in its goal to facilitate the development of green energy and a green economy, staff recommend that the Minister of Energy and Infrastructure be-requested to prepare regulations that: 1. Establish a local consultative process to be completed within 120 days that allows municipalities a significant role in the review of renewable energy projects and ensures a meaningful dialogue with municipalities regarding the location and approval of renewable energy projects. The process is to include: • Mandatory pre-consultation between the host municipality and proponents of renewable energy projects in order for the municipality to advise of local circumstances and requirements early in the approval process; • Public notification and consultation to address relevant concerns.and an opportunity for the submission of written comments from the public; • Notification by mail of proposed renewable energy projects to host municipalities; • Response by proponents. of renewable energy projects addressing public and municipal concerns; ® Submission of conditions of approval from the host municipality to the Director of the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office; 2. Require the Director of the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office to consider the cumulative effects on the surrounding land uses, impose conditions requested by the host municipality and apply appropriate distance separation requirements from sensitive land uses when reviewing and approving renewable energy projects; 3. Require that preliminary and approved site plans be filed with the host municipality to provide appropriate information for the municipality's review and comment as well as a.record of the approval; 4. Require notification of all future proposed Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009, regulations mailed for comment directly to municipalities in addition to the Ontario Environmental Registry posting; 5. Prohibit approvals of renewable energy projects that are considered significant or major investments in the provincial mandated 20,31 growth plan areas or within planned urban extension areas; 6. Allow municipalities to phase in and/or prioritize, based on greatest energy savings, recommendations that arise from municipal energy conservation and demand management plans; and 7. Address possible increased project costs when public agencies must consider energy conservation and efficiency when acquiring goods and services and when making capital investments. Specific implications of the Act are unknown as future regulations will outline implementing details. Staff recommend that notice of future regulations be monitored and that staff report back to Sustainable Pickering Advisory Committee or comment directly to the Ministry as appropriate. Subject: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 June 15, 2009 68 Page 3 1.0 Background: 1.1 Introduction The purpose of the Act is to position Ontario as a renewable energy leader by:, • Fostering the growth of renewable. energy projects; • Ensuring that the public sector conserve energy and use energy efficiently; and • Promoting and expanding energy conservation by all Ontarians. This legislation represents a new level of provincial commitment. to facilitating increased renewable energy generation, energy efficiency, the implementation of a smart grid and addressing climate change. There are also corresponding radical changes to approval processes required for renewable energy projects. Bill 150, the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009, an Act that amends or repeals a number of Acts, was introduced on February 23,. 2009, in the Ontario Legislative Assembly by the Minister of Energy. and Infrastructure. The Bill was posted on the Provincial Environmental Registry (posting 010-4636) for a 30 day comment period ending March 26, 2009. The Standing Committee on General Government held public hearings on Bill 150 in Toronto, London, Ottawa and Sault Ste. Marie during April. Input received during the hearings can be viewed on the Environmental Registry website www.ebr.gov.on.ca. The City of Pickering did not submit comments. On May 14, 2009, the Green Energy and Green Economy Act received Royal Assent. The various schedules of the Act have individual dates when they are in force. The Act is available for viewing and downloading from Ontario's Environmental Registry website noted above. A summary of the Act is found in Attachment #1 to this report. 2.0 Discussion: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act (the Act), which amends and repeals various other Acts including the Planning Act has implications for various sectors . of the economy including municipalities, the energy industry and consumers. Staff reviewed the Act for implications for The Corporation of the City of Pickering including its ownership interest in Veridian. The following reviews and discusses implications for Pickering, and concludes that the Minister of Energy and Infrastructure be requested to consider a number of recommendations for the preparation of future regulations. Subject: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 June 15, 2009 Page 4 69 2.1 Financial Implications for the City The Act will have financial impacts in many areas of the City's operations. Indirect and direct costs for technical/pees review will be incurred. by the City if future regulations provide opportunities for municipalities a role in the streamlined approval process to review and comment on renewable energy projects. Presently, application fees cover these municipal costs. Additional costs will be incurred in conducting and implementing the required energy conservation and demand management plans. It is also expected that there will also be significant costs to energy -providers to expand and reinforce the power grid to accommodate distributed renewable energy generation facilities. It is not possible to accurately and fully.assess the financial impacts at this time as details are not provided. Proposed regulations may provide more information on which to assess some. of the financial impact. 2.2 Sustainability Implications The Act supports the City in implementing green energy initiatives within the City and particularly in Seaton where there are unique opportunities to implement new green energy technologies such as district energy, green roofs, geothermal heating and solar powered heating. 2.3 Mandatory home efficiency disclosure has been revised Bill 150, which initially proposed mandatory home energy consumption and efficiency reports for every sale of property, was amended to allow purchasers of property to opt out of requiring an audit. The Act now provides purchasers of property the right to request from the seller home efficiency disclosure information as well as the right to waive a request for energy consumption and efficiency information. 2.4. Staff recommend that findings of municipal energy conservation and demand management plans be phased in or prioritized Public agencies will be required to prepare energy conservation and demand management plans which must include for each of the public agency's operations, a summary.of annual energy consumption, a forecast of results of current and proposed activities and measures to conserve energy and a summary of the progress and achievements since the previous plan. Further details of these plans will be outlined in future. regulations. In addition, prescribed targets and energy and environmental standards may be required by public agencies. While significant savings can be. realized from energy conservation and demand management plans, there can be significant initial costs in preparing plans for each of Pickering's operations and achieving certain targets and standards It is recommended that findings of municipal energy conservation and demand management plans be phased in or prioritized according to the greatest energy savings that can be achieved. Subject: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 June 15, 2009 Page 5 70 2.5 The City must consider energy conservation and efficiency when acquiring goods and services and when making capital investments Public agencies will now be required to consider energy conservation and efficiency when purchasing goods and services and when making capital investments. Future regulations will provide additional details regarding purchases and capital investments. Again, while significant savings can be realized when purchasing energy efficient products and services, the initial purchase costs may adversely affect a project's feasibility. It is recommended that regulations address possible increased project costs when public agencies must consider energy conservation and efficiency when acquiring goods and services and making capital investments: 2.6 Programs will be available to reimburse municipalities' direct costs incurred in facilitating the development of renewable energy generation facilities The Act allows for the development of programs designed to reimburse the direct costs incurred by municipalities in order to facilitate the development of renewable energy generation facilities, transmission systems and distribution systems. Funding may be directed toward infrastructure associated with or affected by the. development of renewable energy generation facilities or transmission/distribution systems. Examples could include roads and servicing. .2.7 The feed-in-tariff program is intended to spark investment in renewable energy generation Through the feed-in-tariff (FIT) program the Act allows for standard pricing and procurement rules for electricity produced by renewable energy projects., While a FIT program is expected to spark investment in renewable energy generation, it is thought that increased short term electricity costs for all energy users including the City can be expected as a result of the FIT pricing program. .2.8 The right to connect.to the transmission and distribution grid is guaranteed Where renewable energy projects meet certain criteria set out in the future regulations, connection to the transmission and distribution grid, will be guaranteed. The right to connect is viewed by the renewable energy generation. sector as an incentive for the development of renewable energy projects. However, the electricity transmission/distribution industry has commented that the current distribution system could require, at significant cost, upgrading to accommodate the integration of new renewable energy sources. 2.9 Municipalities may now generate electricity without incorporating a separate business entity A municipal corporation may now generate electricity without incorporating a separate entity under the Business Corporations Act provided the energy generation facility is a renewable energy generation facility that does not exceed 10 megawatts and meets criteria prescribed by future regulations. Subject: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 June 15, 2009 'Page 6,~ 2.10 Annual reports The Environmental Commissioner of Ontario will be required to provide annual reports to the Speaker of the Assembly on the progress of activities with regard to energy reduction and efficiency. The reports shall include any by-laws and policies of municipal councils that result in barriers to the implementation of measures to reduce the use or make more efficient use of electricity, natural gas, propane, oil and transportation fuels. Future regulations are to detail what are considered to be barriers. 2.11 The renewable energy approvals process is streamlined and uploaded to the Province The Act streamlines approvals of renewable energy projects by exempting renewable energy projects from Planning Act approvals and uploading the approvals to the Province. A-Renewable Energy Facilitation Office is established and mandated to work with proponents of renewable energy projects and facilitate the development of renewable energy projects. A renewable energy project will require the approval of the Director of the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office. More specifically, renewable energy projects will not be subject to official plans, zoning by-laws, holding by-laws, interim control by-laws, temporary use by-laws, demolition by-laws, site plan control, development permit regulation, parkland conveyance and subdivision provisions of the Planning Act. Renewable energy projects are also exempted from Provincial policy statements.and plans, such as the Central Pickering Development Plan, Greenbelt Plan, and Provincial Growth Plan as well as from Minister's Orders permitted under the Ontario Planning and Development Act and under the Planning Act. 2.12 Staff recommend that regulations be developed to give municipalities a greater role in the approval of renewable energy projects In an effort to maintain a community approach to land use issues, municipalities should be given a significant role in the Provincial approval process for renewable energy projects. This role should include a number of coordinated actions including: requiring mandatory pre-consultation with the host municipality; circulating the renewable energy project proposal directly to municipalities rather than simply a posting on the Environmental Registry which only allows a 30 day comment period, requesting the provincial review to consider stated municipal comments and interests and imposing conditions on development requested by municipalities. It is suggested that a municipal consultation process for siting or modifying renewable energy projects, similar to Industry Canada's public consultation process for radio communication and broadcasting antenna systems, be established to address concerns from both the host municipality and community. Subject: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 June 15, 2009 Page 7 72 The process can be required to be completed within 120 days and is suggested to include: • Mandatory pre-consultation between the host municipality and proponents of renewable energy projects in order for the municipality to advise of local circumstances and requirements early in the approval process; • Public notification and consultation to address relevant concerns and an opportunity for the submission of written comments from the public; Notification by mail of proposed renewable energy projects to host municipalities; • Response by proponents of renewable energy projects addressing public and municipal concerns; • Submission of conditions of approval from the host municipality to the Director of the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office; 2.13 Staff recommend that cumulative effects on surrounding land use, municipal conditions, and appropriate separation distances be considered when approving renewable energy projects Removing approvals of renewable energy projects from municipal approval processes, such as official plans and zoning, and uploading approvals to the Province will make it difficult for the City to ensure that development of renewable energy projects meet local, planning objectives. It is anticipated that restrictions such as setbacks on development of renewable energy projects that are usually determined through Planning Act approval processes at the community level will be standardized. by the Province. Staff recommend that the Director of the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office, when reviewing and approving renewable energy projects, consider: cumulative effects on the surrounding land uses; conditions requested by the host municipality; and appropriate separation distances from sensitive lands uses. 2.14 Provincial policy and plans Municipalities must comply with the Provincial Policy Statement and Growth Plan when considering land use proposals other than renewable energy generation facilities. The Provincial Policy Statement and Growth Plan require municipalities to protect resources such"as aggregate resources, prime agricultural lands and natural heritage features. Exempting renewable energy projects from Planning Act approvals hinders a municipality's ability to fully implement provincial policy directions and to address land use compatibility between renewable energy facilities and surrounding existing and future land uses. To assist municipalities in implementing policy direction of the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005, and Growth Plan, it is recommended that regulations prohibit approvals of renewable energy projects of significant or major investment that would prejudice the use of lands for urban development within the provincially-mandated 2031 growth plan areas or within planned urban extension areas. Subject: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 June 15, 2009 Page 8 73 2.15 Mandatory 5 year review of the Building Code The Building Code Act is amended to include, a review of the Building Code with regard to standards for energy conservation every five years, and the establishment of a Building Code Energy Advisory Council to advise the Minister on the Building Code with regard to standards for energy conservation. Regular five year revisions to the Building Code will require training and upgrading of municipal building officials imposing a further cost to municipalities. 2.16 Staff recommend that notice of future regulations and.request for comment be mailed directly to municipalities On May 12, 2009, notice of the first of the regulations for the Act was posted on the Ontario Environmental Registry inviting comment, (see Attachment #2). To ensure that the City of Pickering has an opportunity to comment, it is recommended that the Province be requested to mail notice of all future proposed Act regulations directly to municipalities in addition to the Ontario Environmental Registry posting. The notice indicates that the regulation would exempt renewable energy installations including roof or wall mounted solar photo voltaic, roof or wall mounted solar thermal water/air and ground source heat pump, from local legal barriers preventing or restricting their use such as municipal by-laws, condominium by-laws, encumbrances on real property and agreements. The notice is also seeking comments on standards, related to size, noise and performance ratings of building mounted micro wind turbines. Additionally comments are requested on municipal by-laws, condominium by-laws, encumbrances on real property or agreements which could be considered legal barriers to renewable energy generation but which should be permitted to continue to operate to ensure that cultural, health, safety and environmental considerations are protected. An example of such a by-law that should be permitted to. apply (i.e. restrict renewable energy generation) is a municipal by-law that prohibits or regulates the destruction or injuring of trees. The rationale is that trees provide significant reduction in energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. Staff is reviewing the notice for the proposed regulations and will prepare comments if necessary for submission directly to the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure. 2.17 Proposed Ministry of the Environment Regulations and Ministry of Natural Resources approval requirements for renewable energy projects On June 9, 2009, proposed Ministry of the Environment regulations to implement the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009,' and the Ministry of Natural Resources Approval and Permitting Requirements Document for Renewable Energy Projects were posted on the Ontario Environmental Registry inviting comment (see Attachments # 3 & #4). Subject: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 June 15; 2009 4 Page 9 Staff is reviewing the proposed regulations and approval requirement document and will prepare comments and report back to the Sustainable Pickering Advisory Committee on the proposed regulations if necessary. 3.0 Next steps: 3.1 Staff will monitor the progress of future regulations Now that the Act has received Royal Assent, regulations will be prepared and.it is expected that notice of proposed regulations will be posted for comment on the Ontario Environmental Registry website. Staff recommend that notice of future regulations be monitored and that staff report back to the Sustainable Pickering. Advisory Committee or comment directly to the Ministry as appropriate. 4.0 Conclusion and recommendations The general intent of the Act of promoting renewable energy should be supported. However, when considering implications for the City of Pickering, there are concerns with. the Act regarding the lack of implementation details, the financial impacts on Pickering as well as the role of the City in the streamlined renewable energy project approval process. Staff have reviewed the Act and are recommending that the Minister of Energy and Infrastructure be requested to prepare regulations in a number of areas that address recommendations of municipal energy conservation and demand management plans, the requirement to consider energy conservation and efficiency when acquiring goods and services. and when making capital investments, to ensure that meaningful dialogue with municipalities takes place regarding the location and approval of renewable energy projects as well as allowing municipalities a significant role in the approval of renewable energy projects. Attachments: 1. Summary of the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 2. Removing Local Barriers to Renewable Energy Installations: Proposed Regulation, Ontario Environmental Registry, EBR Registry Number 010-6455. 3. Proposed Ministry of the Environment Regulations to Implement the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009, EBR Registry Number 010-6516 4. Approval and Permitting Requirements Document for Renewable Energy Projects, Ministry of Natural Resources, EBR Registry Number 010-6708 Subject: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 June 15, 2009 Page 10 75 Prepared By: Deborah Wylie Senior Planner - Poli Catherine Rose, MCIP, PP Manager, Policy DW: jf IABM 150, Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 Repofl Oiscussion papecdocx Copy: Director, Planning & Development I 7 Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 Summary The Green Energy and Green Energy Act, 2009, is enacted as Chapter 12 of the Statutes of Ontario, 2009 and amends/repeals the following existing Provincial statutes: • Building Code Act, 1992 • Clean Water Act, 2006 Conservation Authorities Act • Co-operative Corporations Act Electricity Act, 1998 • Energy Conservation Leadership Act, 2006 (repealed) Energy Efficiency Act, RSO 1990 (repealed) • Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993 • Environmental Protection Act . Ministry of Energy Act • Ministry of Natural Resources Act Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act • Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998 • Planning Act • Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Act Public Lands Act Schedule A Green Energy Act, 2009 Schedule A enacts the.Green Energy Act, 2009, and amends and repeals the Energy Conservation Leadership Act, 2006 and the.Energy Efficiency Act. Many of the provisions of the two repealed statutes are re-enacted in the Green Energy Act, 2009. Subsection 1 (1) of the Act contains definitions.. Subsection 1 (2) is an interpretation section and provides that the Act shall be interpreted in. a manner that is consistent with section 35 of the Constitution Act, 1982 and with the duty to consult aboriginal peoples. Section 3 provides that a person.making an offer to purchase an interest in real property has the right to receive from the person selling the property prescribed information, .ratings or reports relating to energy consumption and efficiency. The purchaser may, in writing, waive this right. 1 Section 4 authorizes the Lieutenant Governor in Council to designate goods, services 7 , 7 and technologies by regulation in order to promote energy conservation. A person is permitted to use designated goods, services and technologies in prescribed circumstances despite a restriction imposed at law that would prevent or restrict their use. This does not, however, apply to a restriction imposed by an Act or regulation. Section 5 permits the Lieutenant Governor in Council to designate renewable energy projects, renewable energy sources or renewable energy testing projects by regulation to assist in the removal of barriers to and to promote opportunities for the use of renewable energy sources and to promote access to transmission systems and distribution systems for proponents of renewable energy projects. Section 6 authorizes the Lieutenant Governor in Council, by regulation, to require public agencies and prescribed consumers to establish energy conservation and demand management plans. Section 7 of the Act authorizes two or more public agencies to establish, publish and administer a joint energy conservation and demand management plan. The Lieutenant Governor in Council may, by regulation, require agencies to consider energy conservation and energy efficiency when acquiring goods and services and when making capital investments, in section 8 of the Act. Section 9 authorizes the Minister of Energy to enter into agreements to promote energy conservation and energy efficiency. The Act sets.out guiding principles for the Government of Ontario in constructing, acquiring, operating and managing government facilities. These principles include reporting on energy use and greenhouse gas emissions, ensuring energy efficiency in the planning and design of government facilities, making environmentally and financially responsible investments in government facilities and using renewable energy sources to provide energy for government facilities. The Act establishes the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office and permits the designation of a Renewable energy Facilitator. The objects of the Office include facilitating the development of renewable energy projects. The Facilitator is given certain authority to collect information, which is treated as confidential or secret. Part III of the Act largely re-enacts parts of the Energy Efficiency Act. This Part places restrictions on the sale or lease of regulated appliances or products that do not meet the prescribed efficiency standards or requirements and on the labeling or marking of appliances and products. Part IV of the Act provides the Lieutenant Governor in Council with regulation-making authority. I I I 2 .7 8 Schedule B Electricity Act, 1998 Schedule B enacts changes to the Electricity Act, 1998. Section 1 of the Schedule enacts and repeals and re-enacts a number of definitions consistent with the green energy initiative. These include enacting the definitions of "renewable energy generation facility" and "smart grid" and repealing and re-enacting the definition of "renewable energy source". Section 25.11 of the Act, which requires the establishment of the Conservation Bureau within the Ontario Power Authority (the OPA) is repealed. Amendments to the Environmental Bill of Rights in Schedule F require that the Commissioner under that Act make annual reports on energy, conservation. Section 25.32 of the Act is amended to provide the Minister with additional authority to issue directions to the OPA to undertake a request for proposal, any other form of procurement solicitation or any other initiative that relates to the procurement of electricity supply and capacity, including supply and capacity from renewable energy sources, reductions in electricity demand or measures related to conservation or the management of electricity demand. Subsection 25.32 (4.5) permits the Minister.to direct the OPA to establish measures to facilitate the participation of aboriginal peoples in_the development and implementation of renewable energy generation facilities and transmission and distribution systems. Subsection 25.32 (4.6) enacts a similar measure with respect to community groups and organizations. The Minister may, under subsection 25.32. (4.6), also direct that the OPA establish measures to facilitate the development of renewable energy generation facilities, transmission systems and distribution systems. Subsection 25.32 (4.7) permits the Minister to direct the OPA to develop programs that are designed to reimburse the direct costs incurred by. municipalities in order to facilitate the development of renewable energy generation facilities, transmission systems and distribution systems. Subsections 25.33 (1) and (2) are amended to require the Independent Electricity System Operator (the. IESO) to calculate payments in accordance with the regulations for classes of market participants. The scheme requiring distributors and retailers, through their billing systems, to make adjustments to payments to reflect amounts paid is amended to address classes of consumers, rather than simply consumers. The Act is amended to permit the Minister to direct the. OPA to develop a feed-in tariff program, in section 25.35. A feed-in tariff program is a program for procurement that provides standard program rules, standard contracts and standard pricing regarding classes of generation facilities differentiated by energy source or fuel type, generator capacity and the manner by which the generation facility is used, deployed, installed.or located. 3 79 A new section 25.36 requires transmitters and distributors to connect generation facilities to their transmission systems or distributions systems if specified criteria are satisfied. A new section 25.37 requires distributors, transmitters, the OPA and the IESO to provide prescribed information about the distribution system's or transmission system's ability to accommodate generation from a renewable energy generation facility. Section 26 is amended to require transmitters and distributors to provide priority access to their systems for renewable energy gene ratio n.facilities that meet prescribed requirements. There are some technical amendments in section 32 to allow the IESO to make rules with respect to the reliability of electricity service.or the,IESO controlled. grid. The Lieutenant Governor in Council is given the power to make regulations governing the smart grid and its implementation by the new section 53.0.1. There are amendments to the regulation making authority in section 114 of the Act that are consequential to substantive changes made in the Schedule. There are amendments to section 144 of the Act that deal with the authority of a municipality to generate electricity other than through a Business Corporations Act corporation. Schedule C Ministry of Energy Act Schedule C amends the Ministry of Energy Act to update its name and other references to reflect the change of the Ministry from the Ministry of Energy to the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure. The Schedule also amends the.objectives of the Ministry to include references to infrastructure, growth planning, renewable energy and energy conservation. Schedule D Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998 Schedule D amends the Ontario Energy Board Act, 1998. With respect to electricity, the Board's objectives are amended to include the promotion of the conservation of electricity and demand management, the facilitation of investments to implement a smart grid and the promotion pf the use and generation of electricity from renewable energy sources, in subsection 1 (1) of the Act. Similarly, the Board's objectives with respect to gas are amended to `include the promotion of energy conservation and energy efficiency, in section 2 of the Act. 4 80 Section 3 of the Act, the definition section, is amended to adopt the definitions of "renewable energy generation facility", "renewable energy source" and "smart grid" from the Electricity Act, 1998. Some definitions are moved from section 56 as certain defined terms are now used more broadly in the Act. The Act is amended to require the Board.to assess prescribed persons or classes of persons for expenses incurred and expenditures made by the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure in respect of conservation programs or renewable energy programs provided under this Act, the Green Energy Act, 2009, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure Act and any other Act, in section 26.1. for the purpose of the Financial Administration Act, assessments under section 26.1 are deemed to be money paid to Ontario for special purposes, in section 26.2. The new section 27.2 allows the Minister, with the approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Council, to issue directives to the Board that contain conservation and demand management targets to be met by distributors and other licensees. A directive may also require that a distributor meet any portion of its conservation target by contracting with the OPA to meet the target through province wide programs offered by the OPA. The Minister, with the approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Council, may issue directives to the Board relating to the. establishment, implementation.of promotion of a smart grid for Ontario, in section 28.5. Similarly, with the approval of the Lieutenant Governor in Council, the Minister may issue directives requiring the Board to take such steps as are specified in the directive relating to the connection of renewable energy generation facilities to a transmitter's transmission system or a distributor's distribution system, in section 28.6. Section 70 of the Act is amended to permit the Board, with or without a hearing, to grant an approval, consent or make a determination required for any matters provided for in a licensee's licence. The section is also amended to include deemed conditions in licences of transmitters and distributors. Section 71 of the Act is amended to permit a distributor to own and operate a renewable energy generation facility in certain circumstances. Section 78 of the Act is amended to allow the Board to make orders permitting the OPA or distributors to establish deferral or variance accounts related to costs associated with a directive issued under section 27.2. The Act is amended, by the new section 78.5, to require the IESO to make payments to a distributor or to the OPA on behalf of other. prescribed persons with respect to amounts approved by the Board for conservation and demand management programs approved by the Board pursuant to a directive issued under section 27.2. A rate protection provision is added for prescribed consumers or classes of consumers where a distributor incurs costs for making specified investments for the purpose of 5 81 connecting certain specified generation facilities to its distribution system, in section 79.1. The regulation making authority in subsection 88 (1) of the Act is expanded to deal with renewable energy capacity and storage and circumstances dealing with the costs to a transmitter or distributor of construction, expansion or reinforcement associated with the connection of a renewable energy generation facility to the transmitter's transmission system or the distributor's distribution system. Subsection 96 (2) of the Act is expanded so the Board shall, where applicable, consider the promotion of the use of renewable energy sources when it considers whether the construction, expansion or reinforcement of an electricity transmission line or electricity distribution line or the making of an.-interconnection is in the public interest. The Act is amended by adding subsection 127 (5) that permits the Lieutenant Governor in Council to make regulations governing transitional matters to facilitate the implementation of amendments to this Act arising from the enactment of the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 and to facilitate the implementation of the Green Energy Act,' 2009. Schedule E Clean Water Act, 2006 The amendments to Section 15 of the Clean Water Act, 2006 are consequential to the amendments to the Environmental Protection Act. Schedule P Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993 The Environmental bill of rights, 1993 is amended to require the Environmental commissioner to report annually to the Speaker of the Assembly on energy conservation and greenhouse gas emissions. Schedule G Environmental Protection Act The Environmental Protection Act is amended by adding Part V.0.1, which deals with renewable energy. Section 47.3 of the Act states that.if a renewable energy project involves engaging in specified activities, a person shall not engage in the project except under the authority of and in accordance with a renewable energy approval issued by the Director. A person who is engaging in a renewable energy project is exempt from specified approval and permit requirements. Part V.0.1 also deals with applications for renewable energy'approvals and the Director's powers with respect to those approvals. 6 82 The Act is amended to extend existing appeal rights to persons with respect to renewable energy approvals. Persons who would not otherwise be entitled to a hearing may, on specified grounds, require a hearing by the Tribunal in respect of a decision of the Director in relation to a renewable energy approval. Other amendments to the Act are consequential to the addition of Part V.0.1, including amendments related to inspections by provincial officers and regulation-making powers. Schedule H Ontario Water Resources Act The amendments to the Ontario Water Resources Act are consequential to the amendments to the Environmental Protection Act. Schedule Co-operative Corporations Act The Co-operative Corporations Act is amended to authorize the incoroporation of renewable energy co-operatives. A renewable energy co-operative is. a co-operative. whose articles restrict its business to generating and selling electricity produced from renewable energy sources. As part of its business, a renewable energy co-operative may establish or develop generation facilities to generate electricity produced from renewable energy sources and may promote the purchase by electricity users of electricity. produced from renewable energy sources. Other amendments to the Act authorize a renewable energy co-operative to distribute its surplus in accordance with the by-.laws of the co-operative and not in accordance with the rules in the Act relating to patronage returns. Schedule J Building Code Act, 1992 Subsection 34 (5) of the Building code Act, 1992 lists, among the purposes of the building code (the regulations made under section 34), the establishment of standards for "conservation". The subsection is amended to clarify that this includes energy and water conservation. New subsection 34 (6) requires the Minister.to initiate reviews of the building code with reference to standards for energy conservation, at five-year intervals. New section 34.1 of the Act requires the Minister to establish the Building Code Energy and Advisory Council, whose mandate is to advise the Minister on the building code with reference to standards for energy conservation. 7 83 Schedule K Planning Act The Planning Act is amended to provide that the following do not apply to renewable energy undertakings (defined as renewable energy generation facilities, projects, testing facilities or testing projects): Policy statements and provincial plans, with certain exceptions. Section 24, which requires public works and by-laws to conform with official plans. Demolition control by-laws under section 33. Zoning by-laws and related by-laws and orders under Part V, with a transitional exception for existing agreements under that Part. Development permit regulations and by-laws under section 70.2. By-laws under section 113 or 114 of the City of Toronto Act, 2006. Orders under section. 17 of the Ontario Planning and developmentAct, 9994. Leases for the purposes of renewable energy generation facilities or renewable energy projects are exempt from subdivision control and part-lot control under section 50 of the Planning Act if they are for periods of 50 years or less. Schedule L Ministry of Natural Resources The Schedule sets out amendments proposed by the Ministry of Natural Resources. The main amendments are as follows: Conservation Authorities Act If a person requests permission under section 28 of the Act for development related to a renewable energy project, as defined in section 1 of the Green Energy Act, 2009, a conservation authority or the executive committee appointed by a conservation authority, is not allowed to refuse the permission or to impose conditions on the permission unless it is necessary to do so to control pollution, flooding, erosion or dynamic beaches.. Ministry of Natural Resources Act The Minister may require that the proponent of a renewable energy project, as defined in section 1 of the Green Energy Act, 2009, provide to the Minister the information or studies that the Minister considers necessary before the Minister issues a permit or approval under an Act for whose administration the Minister is responsible. 8 i 84 Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act The Schedule amends the French version of the term "Niagara Escarpment Plan" in the Act and other Acts and amends the definition of "utility" in the Niagara Escarpment Plan to include renewable energy projects, as defined in section 1 of the Green Energy Act, 2009, in the reference to the generation, transmission and distribution of electric power. Provincial Parks and Conservation Reserves Act, 2006 Subsection. 19 (2) of the Act presently allows facilities for the generation of electricity to be developed in provincial parks and conservation reserves for use within communities that are not connected to the IESO-controlled grid if the Lieutenant Governor in Council approves. The Schedule changes the requirement for approval from the Lieutenant Governor in Council to the Minister responsible for the administration of the Act. Public Land Act A person who has entered into an agreement, including a lease, a licence or an easement, with.the Crown under the Actor to whom a permit to occupy public lands has been issued under the Act is required to comply with the agreement or permit, as the case may be. It is an offence to contravene the requirement. A court that convicts a person of the offence can make a compliance order. 9 L11 Y 11 V 1L11V 11tU1 1\L•YJl OLI J r .b ~r ~',,~1t ~li Jul nl~17 f ~t51 F 1. F~. 1 4 / It rrl r r .i.:3-i:relz A Helr.il J Ontario Government of Ontario Site.Map . Frangais., About the Registry ) Search How do I MyEBR y III FAQs 1 1 Links III Contact Us Home Advanced Search Basic Search 0 Court Action D Information Notice: EBR Registry Number: 010- 6455 Title: Ministry: Removing Local Barriers to Renewable Energy Installations: Proposed Regulation . Ministry of.Energy Date Information Notice loaded to the Registry: May 12, 2009 May 15, 2009: This notice was republished to include an end-date cn the comment period. The balance of the notice remains unchanged i Keyword(s} Electricity This notice is for your information. The Environmental Bill. of Rights does not require this notice to be placed on the Environmental Registry, however, section 6 of the Act does allow the Environmental Registry to be used to share information about the environment with the public. _.._.,...w Rationale for Exemption to Public Comment: Contact: This proposal is for a potential regulation that. could be made under the authority of Alan Kirschbaum the Green Energy Act, 2009, should Bill 150 (.Green Energy and Green Economy Senior Policy Advisor Act, 2009) be passed by the Legislature. As the Bill has not passed, the proposed Ministry of Energy Green Energy Act, 2009 is not prescribed for the purpose of s.16 of the Renewables and Energy Environmental, Bill of Rights. Efficiency Energy Efficiency and However, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure invites comments on the Distributed Energy proposed regulation, and will consider these comments when making a decision on 880 Bay Street the. proposed regulation.' Comments should be e-mailed to Alan Kirschbaum, Toronto Ontario Senior Policy Advisor, at alan kirschbaum.@ontario_ca on or before June 11, 2009. M7A 2C1 Phone: (416) 325-5767 Description: Additional Information: The Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure ("the Ministry"), under the proposed Green The documents linked below Energy Act, 2009 (Schedule A of Bill 150, the Green Energy and Green Economy are provided for the purposes Act, 2009) is proposing a regulation that would designate specified renewable of enhancing public energy installations that will be exempt from local legal barriers that prevent or consultation, restrict their use. All links will open in a new window Section 4 of the proposed Green Energy Act, 2009 would permit the Lieutenant, . Governor in Council to designate renewable energy projects or renewable energy sources by regulation to assist in the removal of barriers to and to promote 1. Bill 150, Green Energvand opportunities for the use of renewable energy sources. Such legal barriers are Green Economy typically found in municipal by-laws, condominium by-laws, encumbrances on real Act, 2009 property, or agreements. This proposed regulation would designate the use of renewable energy installations including: • Roof or wall mounted solar photo voltaic; • Roof or wall mounted solar thermal water/air; and • Ground source heat pump. 86 At a future date, the ministry will post a document on the Environmental Registry that will discuss building mounted micro wind turbines. The posting will address standards related to size, noise and performance ratings. The proposed regulation would also identify those local legal barriers that exist in municipal by-laws, condominium by-laws, encumbrances on. real property, or agreements which would be permitted to continue to operate with respect to renewable energy installations in recognition that some cultural, health, safety and environmental by-laws should be protected. The Ministry is seeking input on which by-laws, instruments or other restrictions should continue to operate and be included in the proposed regulation to ensure the above considerations are protected. An example of these by-laws would be provisions under the Municipal Act that empower municipalities to develop by-laws that prohibit or regulate the destruction or injuring of trees. The proposed regulation does not apply to restrictions imposed by provincial Acts or regulations (e.g., Ontario Building Code). Other Information: Background renewable energy information: Solar photo-voltaic; Directly converts solar energy into electricity. The proposed regulation would allow roof and wall mounted installations. The size of the installation would depend on site specific circumstances, limited by the available roof and/or wall area. Solar thermal water heating: Solar energy pre-heats water for domestic use, or to heat pool water. Solar thermal water heaters are typically roof-mounted. Solar thermal air heating: Solar energy heats air in residential, industrial, commercial and institutional settings. Panels are typically placed on the exterior wall of a building. Ground source heat pump: Heat in the ground is used to heat space and water in residential, industrial, commercial and institutional settings. Heat can also be taken from the building and put in the ground to provide more efficient coaling in summer. To affect the heat transfer between the building and the ground, fluid can be circulated through pipes installed horizontally or vertically in the adjacent ground. Alternatively, available ground or'surface water can be accessed to exchange heat. Micro wind turbine: Wind energy is captured by a turbine and.then converted by.a generator into electricity. Micro turbines can offset some of the electricity used in a building. In addition to removing local legal barriers to renewable energy installations, the proposed bill would: • Create a new attractive feed-in tariff regime - a pricing system for renewable energy sources including solar photo voltaic, wind, water power, landfill gas, biogas and biomass - that will guarantee rates and help spark new investment in renewable energy generation, increase investor confidence and access to financing. • Establish the "right to connect" to the electricity grid for renewable projects. • Establish a Renewable Energy Facilitator. If passed, the Green Energy Act would create an estimated 50,000 jobs in its first three years. The economic benefits would be spread across the province through local involvement in energy production, and opportunities for First Nations and Metis communities. .Other Public Consultation Opportunities: http://www.ebr.gov.on.ca/P-RS-WEB-External/displaynoticecontent.do?noti6eId=MTA2... 09/06/2009 . The Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure also posted a notice of the proposed 87 Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009, on the Environmental Registry for public review and comment. The Registry number for this posting is 010-6017. Add Notice into My Watch List The materials on this web site are protected by Crown copyright. You may copy and re-distribute any of the Environmental Bill of Rights information on this web site provided that the ron,tents remain unchanged and the source of the contents is clearly referenced. You are not perinitted lo.alter or add to the contents. ONTARIO HOME i CONTACTS I HELP i SITEMAP I FRAN AIS i/" Ontario This site is maintained by the Government of Ontario, Canada. PRIVACY i IMPORTANT NOTICES Copyright information: ©9ueen's Printer for Ontario. 1994-2009 http://www.ebr. jZov. on. ca/ERS -WEB -External/displ aynoticec ontent.do?noticeId=MTA2... .09/06/2009 0nta r 1 o Government of Ontario Site I" FranCais ' About the Registry u Search I u How do I I l l MyEBR I u 111 FAQs I l l Links I Q' Contact Us 111 Name 10 Advanced Search D Basic Search 0 Court Action 0 Regulation Proposal Notice: EBR Registry Number: 010- 6516 Title: Ministry: Proposed Ministry of the Environment Regulations to Implement the Green Energy Ministry of the Environment and Green Economy Act, 2009 Date Proposal loaded to the Registry: June 09, 2009 Keyword(s): Electricity Legislation Related Act(s): Environmental Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990 Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993 Environmental Protection Act, R.S.O. 1990 Comment Period 45 days submissions maybe made between June 09, 2009 and July 24 2009. Description of Regulation: Contact: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009, was passed in the Legislature, All comments on this on May 14, 2009: The Act places a priority on expanding Ontario's use of clean and proposal must be directed renewable sources of energy including wind, water, solar, biomass and biogas to: power. Developing these renewable resources is a cornerstone of this province's future prosperity. The Ministries of Natural Resources and the Environment issue approvals for Marcia Wallace renewable energy projects and are proposing an improved approval process to Manager ensure continued, protection of human health and the environment. The ministries Ministry of the Environment aim to administer their processes in a coordinated fashion with a view to integrating Environmental Programs all provincial ministry requirements for the review and approval of renewable energy Division projects. A coordinated process. will eliminate duplication, provide certainty and Program . Planning and meet the requirements set out under legislation administered by various ministries. Implementation Branch 55 St. Clair Avenue West Floor 7 The Ministry of Natural Resources has also posted information for public review Toronto Ontario regarding approval and permitting requirements for renewable energy projects M4V 2Y7 under the Ministry of Natural Resources Act. It can be accessed by entering Phone: (416) 327-2079 Registry Number 010-6708. Fax: (416) 327-9823 Environmental Protection Act, New Regulation In order to implement the new Renewable Energy Approval .under amendments to the Environmental Protection Act (Schedule G) a new regulation is proposed. To submit a comment online, click the submit button The attached document outlines the proposed content of this regulation. It identifies below: the complete submission requirements an application for a Renewable Energy Approval would be required to meet, including plans, studies, consultation, and technology-specific requirements such as setbacks where applicable. Submit Comment Regulatory Amendments under the Environmental Assessment Act and the Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993 It is proposed that five regulations be amended as part of the new approval process Additional Information: under the Green Energy and Economy Act, 2009. The following government Environmental Assessment Act, Ontario Regulation 116101 (Electricity offices have additional i hr+„•//asninarahr ~~/FRC_~xIFR_Fvtarnal/rl;cr~lavnnt;rPrnntPnt rIr)?nnt;rPTrI=MTA ? 1 (1/i ciionnc) Projects) information regarding this o It is proposed that O. Reg 116/01 be amended to create an exception for Proposal. To arrange a*' 8 9 most renewable energy generation facilities, as this term is defined in the viewing of these documents Electricity Act. 1998. The result is that, going forward, this regulation and the please call the. Ministry Environmental Assessment Act will not apply to the establishment or change Contact or the Office listed . of these renewable energy generation facilities, below. This is subject to two exceptions: the establishment of hydro electric facilities Program Planning and 200 Megawatts (MW) or larger and expansions to existing hydro electric facilities that result in both a 25% increase in nameplate capacity and result implementation Branch in the facility having a nameplate capacity of 200 MW or more. For both of 55 St. Clair Avenue West these situations, individual environmental assessments will be required. Floor Toronto Ontario In respect to renewable energy generation facilities that have already been M4V 2Y7 authorized under the Environmental Assessment Act, the exception is Phone: (416) 327-2079 proposed to be crafted so as to require proponents that have already completed an environmental assessment, class environmental assessment The documents linked below or the Environmental Screening Process to comply with the construction, are provided for the purposes operation and retirement of their project as originally authorized and to of enhancing public comply with any documented commitments made to the public or consultation. government agencies. All links will open in a new window It is also proposed that the regulation be amended to clarify.the application of exemptions for generation facilities by the Crown, Municipalities or public bodies. 1. Green Energy_ Act homepUp Environmental Assessment Act, Revised Regulations of Ontario 1990, 2. Green _Ener Regulation 334 (General) Energy It is proposed that Regulation 334 be amended. to state that renewable 3. Amended,_O__Reg..116101. energy generation facilities and renewable energy testing facilities that are 4. Amended 0._Req. . 10110.7 carried out by the Crown, municipalities or public bodies.are exempt from the 5. Amended Revised Environmental Assessment Act. Re~c of Ontario It is proposed that any undertakings of the Crown that are required to 1990.0_Reg;_334 implement a renewable energy project or a renewable energy testing project 6. Amended O. Req. 681194 (e.g. building an access road, a dock, a disposition of crown land, etc.) 7. Amended O. Reg. 73/94 would be exempt from the Act. 8. Requirement Document- Approval and It is also proposed that undertakings by a municipality that are roads and Permitting Requirements for water crossings by municipality that are required for a renewable energy Renewable Energy Projects project will be exempt from the Act. (EBR # 010 .6708.) Environmental Assessment Act, Ontario Regulation 101107 (Waste 9• Ecological Land CIa.ssificotion Prim Management Projects) er It is proposed that. O. Reg 101/07 be amended to create an exception for 10. Lake Simcoe Protection most renewable energy generation facilities, as this term is defined in the plan Electricity Act, 1998. The result is, that, going forward, this regulation and the 11. Consultation Session Environmental Assessment Act will not apply to renewable energy 12. Rmpoosed_Content _for.the generation facilities that are also a waste disposal site (e.g. a waste disposal Renewable site where biomass is disposed of through thermal treatment). Energy Approval Regulation under In respect to renewable energy generation facilities that have already been the EPA authorized under the Environmental Assessment Act, the exception is proposed to be crafted so as to require proponents that have already completed an environmental assessment, class environmental assessment or the Environmental Screening Process to comply with the construction, operation and retirement of their project as originally authorized and to comply with any documented commitments made. to the public or government agencies. = Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993, Ontario Regulation 681194 (Classification of Proposals for Instruments) It is proposed that an amendment to O. Reg. 681/94 be made to classify the Renewable Energy Approval as a Class II instrument under the Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993. This would require the Ministry of the .Environment to give notice of proposals for a Renewable Energy Approval in accordance with. the Environmental Bill of Rights Act, 1993 and subject to any relevant exceptions. I http://www.ebr.gov.on.ca/ERS-WEB-External/displaynoticecontent.do?noticeld=MTA2... 10/06/2009 90 Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993, Ontario Regulation 73194 (General) It is proposed that an amendment to O. Reg. 73/94 be made to specify that the provisions of the Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993 relating to leave to appeal do not apply to a proposal to issue, amend or revoke a Renewable Energy Approval. The leave to appeal process under the EBR is proposed to be replaced by an appeal as of right for third parties under the Environmental Protection Act. It is also proposed that the regulation be amended to reflect the current names of the following ministries: o Ministry of Economic Development o Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure o Ministry of Government Services o Ministry of Small Business and Consumer Services It is also proposed that the regulation be amended lo reflect the repeal of the Energy Conservation Leadership Act, 2006 and the Energy Efficiency Act. In addition, the regulation is proposed to be amended to prescribe the Green . Energy Act, 20,09 and the Ontario Heritage Act. - Environmental Protection Act, Revised Regulations of. Ontario 1990, Regulation 347 (General - Waste Management). The Ministry of the Environment is considering making complementary amendments to Reg. 347 to facilitate: • intermediate processing of biomass materials, if needed before being sent to a renewable energy generation facility to generate electricity, and • the use of biomass materials from processing agricultural products as green energy for purposes other than electricity generation, such as for energy in. a . manufacturing process. These regulations have not been developed or included here, but comments and suggestions concerning the nature of these possible amendments would be welcome through this Environmental Registry Posting. For example, cornments and suggestions would be welcome on matters such as the following: • the types of biomass materials to be dealt with in the possible amendments, possible rules and limitations on the handling, processing and use of these materials, and • possible changes to existing waste managernent approval requirements to facilitate the use of these materials. Purpose of Regulation: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 and the proposed content of the new regulations represent a key pillar in supporting the development of Ontario's green economy. The proposed approach is based on sound science and will improve the environmental approval process for renewable energy projects, which will be protective of human health and the environment. Other Information: Please visit the Green Energy and Green Economy Act. 2009 hornepage at: http://www.ontario.ca/greenengLgy-for more information. Public Consultation: This proposal has been posted for a 45 day public review and comment period starting June 09, 2009. If you have any questions, or would like to submit your comments, please do so by July 24, 2009 to the individual listed under "Contact". Additionally, you may submit your comments on-line. All comments received prior to July 24, 2009 will be. considered as part of the I lhttn•//www Phr vnv nn ca/F.RC-WFR-Rxternal/tli¢nlavnnticPCnntent.rin?nnticeTd=MTA2.._ .10/06/2009 5 171 Z' decision-making process by the Ministry of the Environment if they are submitted in writing or electronically using the form provided in this notice and reference EBR 91 Registry number 010-6516. Please Note: All comments and submissions received will become part of the public record. You will not receive a formal response to your comment, however, relevant comments received as part of the public participation process for this proposal will be considered by the decision maker for this proposal. I Other. Public Consultation Opportunities: Public information meetings will be held in June, 2009 in locations across Ontario. For more information on the consultation sessions, please visit the Ministry of the Environment at http://www.ene, ov.on.ca/en/business/green-energy/index-ph.p. - For further information, please contact 1-877-354-0707. Add Notice into My Watch List The materials on this web site are protected by Crown copyright. You may copy and re-distribute any of the Environniental Bill of flights information on this web site provided that the contents rernain unchanged and the source of the contents is clearly referenced. You are not permitted to alter or add to the contents. ONTARIO HOME I CONTACTS I HELP. I SITEMAP. I FRANQALS Ontario This site, is maintained by the Government of Ontario, Canada. . PRIVACY I IMPORTANT NOTICES Copyright information: © Queen's Printer for Ontario 1994_2009 http:%/www.ebr.gov.on.ca/ERS-WEB-External/displaynoticecontent.do?noticeld=MTA2... 10/06/2009 lift 9 2 t ~ t4\ J t-:r.,,1_,T!-:' .1+M :-eAillf..r7A..le2.:l: ' Ontario Government of Ontario Site Maw Fran~ais U About the Registry I U U Search I U I How do I ...?I U U MyEBR I U O 1 FAQs 111 Links 101 Contact Us I U Nome I O What's on the Registry U Purpose 0 Statements of Environmental Values I7 Policy Proposal Notice: EBR Registry Number: 010- 6708 Title: Ministry: Approval and Permitting Requirements Document for Renewable Energy Projects Ministry of Natural Resources Date Proposal loaded to the Registry: June 09, 2009 Keyword(s) Electri city Fish and Wildlife Health Land Water Comment Period 45 days submissions maybe made between June 09, 2009 and July 24 2009, Description of Policy: Contact: The Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009, was passed in the Legislature All comments on this on May 14, 2009. The Act places a priority on expanding Ontario's use of clean and. proposal must be directed renewable sources of energy including wind, water, solar, biomass and biogas to: power. Developing these renewable resources is a cornerstone of this province's future prosperity. The Ministries of Natural Resources and the Environment issue approvals for . Sue Jones renewable energy projects and are proposing an improved approval process to Technical Officer ensure continued protection of human health and the environment. The ministries . Ministry of Natural Resources aim to administer their processes in a coordinated fashion with a view to integrating Natural Resource Management all provincial ministry requirements for the review and approval of renewable energy Division projects. A coordinated process will eliminate duplication, provide certainty and Lands and Waters Branch meet the requirements set out under legislation administered by various ministries. 300 Water Street Floor 5 PO Box 7000 This proposed requirements document outlines the Ministry of Natural Resources' Peterborough Ontario requirements for review and approval of renewable energy projects as per section K9J 8M5 13.2 . of. the Ministry of Natural Resources Act. The proposed. requirements Phone: (705) 755-5320 document covers all aspects of renewable energy development relevant to the Fax: (705) 755-1206 ministry's core business. Its aim is to provide as much up-front clarity as possible on requirements, while ensuring environmental protection and public health and safety. The Ministry of Environment (MOE) has also posted information for public review To submit a comment online, regarding renewable energy project requirements under the Environmental click the submit button Protection Act. It can be accessed by entering Registry Number 010-6516. below: Purpose of Policy: Submit Comment, The purpose of this notice is to inform the public of the opportunity to comment on the Ministry of Natural Resources' proposed Approval and Permitting Requirements Document for Renewable Energy Projects. Other Information: In support of this proposed requirements document, the Ministry of Natural httn://www,ebr. izov.on.ca/ERS-WEB-External/disolavnoticecontent.do?noticeld=MTA2... 10/06/2009 Resources' may also develop technical guidance documents to help proponents design renewable energy projects that ensure protection of Ontario's natural resources. Comments received on this proposed Approval and Permitting 9 3 Requirements Document for Renewable Energy Projects may inform the shaping of future documents. The proposed requirements document can be accessed on the web at: W?6 .mnr_.g_ov.on.ca/272327.pddf (English version) www.mnr.gov.cn.ca1272328.pdf (French version) Additional background information on the Green Energy and. Green Economy Act, 2009, is available at the following websites: Green Energy Act website: http://www.mei.gov.on.ca/english/enerciy/Clea/ Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure website: http://www.mei.gov.on.ca/ Ministry of the Environment website: http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/ Public Consultation: This proposal has been posted for a 45 day public review and comment period. starting June 09, 2009. If you have any questions, or would like to submit your comments, please do so by July 24, 2009 to the individual listed tinder "Contact". Additionally, you may submit your comments on-line. ' All comments received prior to July 24, 2009 will be considered as parl of the decision-making process by the Ministry of Natural Resources if they are submitted in writing or electronically using the form provided in this notice and reference EBR Registry number 010-6708.- Please Note: All comments and submissions received will become part of the public record. You will not receive a formal response to your comment, however, relevant comments received as part of the public participation process for this proposal will be considered by the decision maker for this proposal. Other Public Consultation Opportunities: Public information meetings will be held in June, 2009 in locations across Ontario. For . more information on the consultation sessions, please visit the Ministry of the Environment at http://wwvW.ene.gov.on.ca/en/business/green-energy/index.ph~ For further information, please contact 1-877-354-0707. Add Notice into My Watch List The materials on this web site are protected by Crown copyright. You may copy and re-distribute any of the Environmental Bill of Rights information on this web site provided that the contents remain unchanged and the source of the contents is clearly referenced. You are not permitted to alter or add to the contents. ONTARIO HOME I CONTACTS I HELP I SITEMAP I FRAN AIS Ontario This site is maintained by the Government of Ontario, Canada. http://www.ebr.gov. on.ca/ERS-WEB-External/displaynoticecontent.do?noticeld=MTA2... 10/06/2009 Pickering Civic Complex cial O~ One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario Canada LIV 6K7 I I An Direct Access 905.420.4660 T T T T T T^ Toll Free 1.866.683.2760 ~Jl 1K`1~-.{~ 111 \yl (yT cityofpickering.com PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Department 905.420.4617 Facsimile 905.420.7648 RECEIVED TTY 905.420.1739 _ plan&devl@cityofpickering;com T O CITY OF PICKERING _ t a:Cts t July 24,.2009 JUL 2 7 2009 TO p ~ } CLERK'S. DIVISION Marcia Wallace . Manager Ministry le Environmental Programs Division r~MJ' T V-o~ly A'q ~O n W ` Program Planning and Implementation Branch .55 St. Clair Avenue West, Floor 7 Toronto, ON M4V-2Y7 Subject: Proposed Ministry of the Environment (MOE) Regulations to Implement the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 (EBR 010-6516) Proposed Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) Approval and Permitting. Requirements Document for Renewable Energy Projects (EBR 010-6708) - Filer L-1100-035 The Chair of the Sustainable Pickering Advisory Committee (SPAC) has provided. comments to Mike Parkes, Cabinet Liaison& Strategic Policy Coordinator, Ministry.of: Energy and Infrastructure, regarding the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009. The comments were directed at matters the regulations should address. Staff of the Planning & Development Department have reviewed the two documents noted above. Outlined below are comments on the proposed regulations and attached is an inter-office memo offering more detail of our review of the proposed regulations. In keeping with the comments of the Chair of SPAC, and staffs review, it is requested that the Minister of the Environment revise the proposed regulations to: • Require and outline a process of pre-consultation with the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office and/or the MOE and MNR to determine the required applications and approvals; Require that the studies required in support of the application that are made available to the public are also made available to the host municipality 30 days prior to, a community meeting; • Specify that consultation with the host municipality take place in the initial stages of the process; Allow municipal comments and suggested conditions to be submitted and considered by the MOE to be applied to a renewable energy approval; • Allow a comment period for the host municipality of a minimum of 60 days; 1 a cm io ckcrse) Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 July 24, 2009 Page 2 95 • Require that the notice of approval to the host municipality be mailed and accompanied by the approved site plan and.any conditions; • Replace the term "self-assessment" with the term "assessment by a qualified expert" • Clarify whether "written confirmation" that the local council has provided consent to modify a heritage property is intended to mean a Council resolution; and when in the process such consent is required; and • Clarify that the policies/regulations pertaining to natural heritage and hydrological features do apply for proponents meeting minimum setbacks, but have different submission requirements than proponents that. do not meet minimum setbacks. Thank you for considering these comments. By copy of this letter to the City Clerk,. it is requested that this correspondence be laced on the Agenda of an upcoming meeting of Pickering Council for endorsement. p _ Yours truly Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development DW;jf 1:041 150, Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 20091LettefVLetter.wallace.julyt 09.doc Attachment Copy` City Clerk City o¢~ il DICKERING MEMO To: Catherine Rose July 23, 2009 Manager, Policy From: Deborah Wylie Senior Planner- Policy Subject: Proposed Ministry. of the Environment. Regulations to Implement the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 (EBR 010-6516), and, Proposed Ministry of Natural Resources Approval and,Permitting Requirements Document for Renewable Energy Projects (EBR 010-6708) File: L-1100-035 Background On June 9, 2009, Ministry of Environment (MOE) regulations to implement the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009, were posted on the province's Environmental Registry (EBR 010-6516). Also posted on June 9, 2009, were the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) Approval and Permitting Requirements Document for Renewable Energy Projects (EBR 010-6708). The comment periods for both the MOE regulations and the MNR document end on July,24,.2009. Under the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009, approvals of renewable energy projects will be issued by the MOE under the Environmental Protection Act. The MNR under the Ministry of Natural Resources Act will be responsible for the issuance of applicable permits, licences and authorizations for projects on provincial park lands, and Crown lands and water as well as for projects in proximity to or impacting forests, fisheries, wildlife and mineral aggregate resources. The ministries aim to administer their processes in a coordinated fashion with a view to integrating all provincial ministry requirements for the review and approval of renewable energy projects. The proposed MOE regulation outlines complete submission requirements for an application for renewable energy approval, including required plans, studies, consultation, and technology-specific requirements such as setbacks. The proposed MNR, document outlines draft approval and permitting requirements for renewable energy projects. Discussion A. Proposed Ministry of the Environment Regulations to Implement the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 97 Application for Renewable Energy Approval New applications, expansions, modifications and redevelopment proposals for renewable energy projects require the submission to the MOE of an application form and the following supporting documentation: • description of the project; • construction plan; • site plan; • stormwater management plan; response/safety, plan; • consultation summary; • cultural heritage/natural heritage/water bodies assessments; • provincial policy plan analysis; and 0 specific technology requirements. Renewable energy projects can require approval by the MOE as well as permits, licences or authorization by the Minister of Natural Resources. In order to ensure that proponents of renewable energy projects are clearly aware early in the process of the approvals that will be required, it is recommended that the regulations require and outline a process of pre-consultation with the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office and/or the MOE and MNR to determine the required applications and approvals. Renewable energy approval will not be required for renewable energy testing facilities including the devices. or structures used to gather information about natural conditions. Consultation Prior to the submission of the application, a minimum of two consultation meetings with the public will be required. A community consultation meeting is required at the early project planning stage. Also at this stage, public notice will be required and is to include notice within 1.5 km radius of the proposal and notice in a local newspaper. The method of notice is not specified. A further community consultation meeting is required once the supporting documentation is available and prior to submission of the application. Thirty days prior to this further meeting, the required studies are to be made available for public review. It is recommended that the regulations require that the studies required in support of the application are also made available to the host municipality 30 days prior to a community meeting. While not clear, it appears that consultation with the host municipality is also required at the preliminary planning stage. For purposes of clarification it is recommended that the regulations specify that consultation with the host municipality will take place in the initial project planning stage. The regulations specify that proponents are required to consult with municipalities regarding the following matters: July 23, 2009 Page 2 Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 g Project area and property boundaries; • Road access; • Location and type of municipal service connections; • Traffic management plans during construction and operation; • Construction plans related to rehabilitation of temporary disturbance areas and any municipal infrastructure that maybe damaged during construction; • Emergency management procedures; and • Proposed site landscaping, if applicable. In order to ensure that input from the host municipality is effective and is considered by the MOE, it is recommended that the regulations allow municipal comments and suggested conditions to be submitted and considered by the WE to be applied to a renewable energy approval. The regulations require the proponent to document all community consultation efforts, and explain how it attempted to address issues raised during the consultation. In regard to municipal . consultation, MOE will provide the proponent with a template that will be completed in conjunction with the municipality and will document (or explain why documentation was not possible) and explain how the proponent attempted to address any. issues raised during municipal consultation. While notice is required as described above, consultation with the community or municipality is not required for the following renewable energy projects: , • Wind power greater than 3 kW and with, a sound power rating less than 102 dBA; • Wall or roof mounted solar greater than 10 kW; and • Farm-based biogas and biomass combustion facilities. The Government of Ontario is required to consult with Aboriginal peoples on decisions that may affect a constitutionally protected aboriginal or treaty right. The regulation permits the Crown to .delegate some aspects of the consultation to proponents of renewal energy projects who are seeking approval and outlines minimum documentation related to delegated consultation. Future guidance materials will clarify responsibilities for the substantive and procedural aspects of consultation and the appropriate accommodation of Aboriginal communities. Approval Process Once MOE determines that an application is complete, a proposal notice will be posted on the Environmental Bill of Rights Registry (EBR). Following a public comment period, MOE will begin the formal review of the application: There is no indication of the length of the public comment period and whether the comment period for municipalities will be the same. It is recommended that the regulations allow a comment period for the host municipality of a minimum 60 days. Following MOE's decision on the application, the proponent and host municipality are notified and a notice of decision will be posted on the EBR. Notice of the decision will also be provided to the host municipality. However, the regulations do not indicate how that notice is delivered. It is recommended that the regulations require that the notice of approval to the host municipality be mailed and accompanied by the approved site plan and any conditions. July 23, 2009 Page 3 Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 Appeal of Decision on Application 99 Appeals of decisions on renewable energy approvals by the applicant and third parties must be lodged within 15 days of the notice of decision posted on the EBR. Appeals are heard by-the Environmental Review Tribunal (ERT). It is proposed that ERT's decision be issued 9 months from the date that a hearing is requested by a third party. Cultural Heritage The regulation reads that, "It is proposed that proponents would be required to undertake a self-assessment to identify any known or potential effects to archaeological. or heritage resources that could result from the projects." For purposes of clarification, it is recommended that the regulations replace the term "self assessment" with the term "assessment by a qualified expert". Archaeological and/or heritage assessments are required to confirm assessment findings that identify any known or potential negative impacts. No heritage assessment is required where a property is subject to heritage easements, designation and districts. In such a case the proponent will be required to provide written confirmation that the local council or agreement holder(s) have provided consent to modify the property. It is recommended that the regulations clarify whether "written confirmation" that the local council has provided consent to modify a heritage property is intended to mean a Council resolution, and. when in the process such consent is required. Heritage assessment requirements do not apply to the following renewable energy projects: Wind power greater than 3. kW and with a sound power rating less than 102 dBA; • Wall or roof mounted solar greater than 10 kW; and • Farm-based biogas and biomass combustion facilities. Natural Heritage Renewable energy projects requiring renewable energy approval must meet a minimum setback of 120 metres from any part of a natural heritage feature with the exception of significant areas of natural and scientific interest (earth science) where the minimum setback is 50 metres. A proponent submitting an application for Renewable Energy Approval must demonstrate that the proposed facility will meet the minimum required setbacks. The proposed regulations indicate that the proposed policies associated with natural heritage features do not apply where renewable energy facilities maintain a minimum setback distance or where more stringent requirements exist in the proposed regulations for provincial policy plans.. However, the regulations outline submission requirements where minimum setbacks are maintained. It is recommended that the proposed policies/regulations associated with natural heritage features be clarified to indicate that submission requirements are provided for proponents meeting minimum setbacks but that they differ from those required for proponents not meeting minimum setbacks. If the facility is proposed within the applicable setback, an environmental impact study demonstrating the ability to mitigate negative impacts and written confirmation that MNR has reviewed the approach must be provided. July 23, 2009 Page 4 Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009, i All hydro electric facilities and off-shore wind turbine facilities are not subject to natural heritage require ep as these facilities are required to assess effects and document mitigation measures. Water Bodies The regulations propose that a renewable energy generation facility will not be permitted within 120 metres of a hydrologic feature, unless the proponent demonstrates an ability to mitigate the effects. Hydrological features include lakes, permanent and intermittent streams seepage areas and springs. At no time will a facility be permitted closer than 30 metres of a sensitive hydrologic. feature. All water crossings, bridges, culverts and causeways are exempt from this requirement as they are subject to the MNR Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act. Similarly with proposed natural heritage regulations noted in the previous section of this memo, the proposed regulations for water bodies indicate that policies associated with sensitive hydrologic features do not apply to renewable energy generation facilities that maintain a. minimum setback distance or where more stringent requirements exist in the proposed regulations for provincial policy.plans. However, the regulations outline submission requirements where minimum setbacks are maintained. It is recommended that the proposed policies/regulations associated with sensitive/hydrological features clarified to indicate that submission requirements are provided for proponents meeting minimum setbacks but that they differ from those required for proponents not meeting minimum setbacks. Ali hydro electric facilities and off-shore wind turbine facilities are not subject to natural heritage requirements as these facilities are required to assess effects and document mitigation measures. In addition: Provincial Plans It is proposed that the regulation will incorporate aspects of the following Provincial Policy Plan Areas: Niagara Escarpment, Oak Ridges Moraine, Greenbelt, Lake Simcoe and Central. Pickering. Oak Ridges Moraine Renewable energy facilities will not encroach into the minimum.setback zones or conditional development zones of the Oak Ridges Conservation Plan unless mitigation can be demonstrated. The minimum setback zone identified in the Plan cannot be varied. Not permitted within the wellhead protection areas and areas of high aquifer vulnerability of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan are the following: • Prohibited uses (e.g. waste disposal sites and facilities); • Stormwater management facilities that include rapid infiltration basins or rapid infiltration columns. July 23, 2009 Page 5 Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 Greenbelt Renewable energy facilities will not encroach into the minimum setback zones or conditional 1 01 development zones of.the Greenbelt Plan unless mitigation can be demonstrated. The minimum setback zone identified in the Plan cannot be varied. Central Pickering Renewable energy facilities are prohibited if they involve soil disturbance on known significant archaeological sites. Noise Setbacks/Renewable Energy Approval The regulations establish minimum setbacks for various renewable energy technology which. are summarized in the table below: Technology ` -Renewable Setback from the Nearest Point of Noise Reception Energy Approval A. Land-based Wind Turbine Facilities 1-25 Wind Turbines Required 550 metres to 1500 metres 26+ Turbines Required Noise study required. Wind Turbines Equal Not required Not applicable to or less than 3 kW Wind turbines must be setback a distance equal to or more than the turbine hub height plus, blade length from all roads, railways, and property side and rear lot lines. In order to account for the combined contribution from neighbouring wind farms when determining the setback, it is proposed that the number of turbines considered for determining the appropriate setback include all wind turbines found within 3 km radius of the Point of Reception, including those turbines by other proponents existing or planned. Transformer Substation Serving a Wind Turbine Project - without noise 1000 metres abatement - with an acoustic 500 metres barrier July 23, 2009 Page 6 Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 Technology Renewable Setback from the Nearest Point of Noise Reception Energy . n 2 Approval B. Off-shore Wind Required MOE & MNR are developing future setbacks to address Turbine Facilities natural heritage, coastal impacts & emissions. C. Biogas Facilities (Anaerobic Digesters) Farm-Based Anaerobic Required Minimum setback is 250 metres (which can be reduced Digesters that Process to 125 metres with MOE satisfaction) for facilities less Agricultural Material than 500 kW, any biomass storage areas, .gas engines, Other than only flares, and anaerobic digesters. Manure (e.g. Facilities with a name plate capacity greater than greenhouses, cash 500 kW must meet a setback of 250 metres and have croppers, etc.) plans to ensure best management practices are met or an equivalent alternative design in place to address odours. If the minimum setback cannot be met, these facilities can be sited closer, if the proponent can satisfy MOE that the operations will not cause an adverse effect through the following studies: emission summary, and noise and odour studies. Farm-based Anaerobic Required Facility and any biomass storage areas, gas engines, Digestion Facilities flares, and anaerobic digesters must be setback Accepting Regulated 250 metres which can be reduced to 125 metres subject Waste (that require a to MOE satisfaction. certificate of approval Facilities with a name plate capacity greater than. under Part V of the 500 kW must meet a setback of 250 metres and have Environmental plans to ensure best management practices are met or Protection Act) an equivalent alternative design in place to address odours. If the minimum setback cannot be met, these facilities can be sited closer, if the proponent can satisfy MOE that the operations will not cause an adverse effect through the following studies: emission summary, noise and odour studies, design and operations report, effluent management plan, and decommissioning plan. July 23, 2009 Page 7 Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 Technology Renewable Setback from the Nearest Point of Noise Reception Energy Approval Non-farm Based Required Not subject to minimum setbacks; however, proponents Anaerobic Digestion would have to satisfy MOE that operations will not Facilities cause an adverse effect through the following studies: emission summary, noise and odour studies, design and operations report, surface water assessment, hydro-geologic assessment, effluent management plan, and decommissioning plan. D. Biomass Facilities (Thermal Treatment) Thermal Treatment of Required Not subject to minimum setbacks; however, proponents Woodwaste would have to submit surface water assessment, effluent management plan and a decommissioning plan. On-Farm Thermal Required 250 metres from any biomass storage areas;. however, Treatment of Mixed these facilities can be sited closer if they are unable to Biomass meet the minimum setback provided the. proponent can satisfy MOE using appropriate studies demonstrating the operations will not cause an adverse effect. Non-Farm Thermal Required Not subject to a setback; however, proponents have to Treatment of Mixed satisfy MOE that the operations will not cause adverse Biomass (industrial or effects through the following studies: emission commercial based summary, noise and odour studies, surface water facilities) assessment, design and operations plan, hydro-geologic assessment, effluent management plan, and a decommissioning plan. E. Landfill Gas Required None additional to setbacks requirements for landfill. Facilities F. Solar Photovoltaic Facilities Ground mounted, Not required rooftop and wall mounted 10 kW or less Ground mounted, Required rooftop and wall mounted greater than 10 kW July 23, 2009 Page 8 Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 It isle6o+&nmended that the regulations: • Require and outline a process of pre-consultation with the Renewable Energy Facilitation Office and/or the MOE and MNR to determine the required renewable energy approval applications and approvals; • Require that the studies required in support of the application that are made available to the public are also made available to the host municipality. 30 days prior to a community meeting; • Specify that consultation with the host municipality take place in the initial stages of the process; • Allow municipal comments and suggested conditions to be submitted and considered by the MOE to be applied to a renewable energy approval; • Allow a comment period for the host municipality of a minimum 60 days; • Require that the notice of approval to the host municipality be mailed and accompanied by the approved site plan and any conditions; • Replace the term "self-assessment". with the term "assessment by a qualified expert"; Clarify whether "written confirmation" that the local council has provided consent to modify a heritage property is intended to mean a Council resolution, and when in the process such consent is required; and • Be revised to clarify the policies/regulations pertaining to natural heritage and hydrological features require different submission requirements for those proponents meeting minimum setbacks. B. Proposed Ministry of Natural Resources Approval and Permitting Requirements Document for Renewable Energy Projects The MNR approval and permitting requirements are primarily for renewable energy projects on Crown land and water. The MNR requirements apply where renewable energy testing project or a renewable energy project is proposed on private lands and may involve resources for which the `MNR has a legislative responsibility. The statutes administered by the Ministry that are applicable to private lands include: • Lakes and Rivers Improvement Act • Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act • Endangered Species Act, 2007 • Crown Forest Sustainability Act • Forest Fires Prevention Act • Aggregate Resources Act • Oil, Gas and Salt Resources Act • Conservation Authorities Act Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act July 23, 2009 Page 9 Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 There are no comments suggested regarding the proposed MNR Approval and Permitting Requirements Document for Renewable Energy Projects.. Pickering has no Crown lands. Where MNR's interests in other areas come in to play, the proponents.will follow both the MOE. regulations implementing the Green Energy and Green Economy Act, as well as any M N R 105 approval and permitting requirements. DW: jf I:\Bill 150, Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009\RegulationsWlemo.EBR010-6516.jjuly23209.doc Attachments July 23, 2009 Page 10 Green Energy and Green Economy Act, 2009 The Corporation of the Town Nall 51 Toronto Street South `~own8 ~ P.O. Box 190 j Uxbridge, ON L9P 1T1 ° 0 V ® Telephone (905) 852-9181 Facsimile (905) 852 -9674 Ue Web www.town.uxbridge.on.ca e Regional Munlcipahty of Durham RE CE CITY 01F AUG 1 1.1 Coe.2 August 14, 2009 CLERK'S DIVISION Honourable David Caplan a' Minister of Health an - ng-Term Care 1 v Ministry of Healt ` d Long-Term Care m n E M-113114, M nald Block - rio~___^ ^ Z7'N et F k RE: PROVINCIA L UNDERSERVED AREA PLAN I_~PT - l TOWNSHIP FILE NO. GM-406.1 C019FZ.F' .E Please be advised that during the regular meeting of Council on August 14 , 2009 the following motion was carried; WHEREAS the Ontario Ministry of Health is considering making changes to its Underserved Area Plan (U.A.P.); AND WHEREAS the Township of Uxbridge has found the U.A.P. to be a useful tool in its recruitment efforts; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council for the Corporation of the Township of Uxbridge requests that the Ministry of Health reconsider any changes to the U.A.P. that would limit communities that are under-serviced by family physicians programs; AND FURTHER BE IT RESOLVED THAT an extension to the consultation from end of August to late Fall be given to enable communities and the public time to consider the effect of these changes; AND FURTHER THAT this resolution be circulated to GTA municipalities, M.P.P.'s, the Minister of Health and the Premier of Ontario. ~C' 1 >G 'ate TV /ln'~~ 1 07 1 trust you will find the above to be satisfactory. Yo s truly, Debbie Leroux Clerk /Ijr cc: Premier Dalton McGuinty Honourable John O'Toole, MPP Honourable Jerry Ouellette, MPP Honourable Christine Elliot, MPP Honourable Wayne Arthurs, MPP Durham Region Municipalities Peel Region Municipalities York Region Municipalities Halton Region Municipalities City of Toronto ~L 00 PICKERING MEMO To: Mayor Ryan and September 17, 2009 Members of Council From: Thomas J. Quinn Chief Administrative Officer Copy: (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Directors City Clerk City Solicitor Subject Pickering GO Transit Commuter Parking Garage and Pedestrian Bridge L-4100-001-09 07 Attached please find a copy of a letter that I received today from Metrolinx. The letter is requesting confirmation that the City will convey easements over Pickering Parkway and assign existing construction drawings to Metrolinx in order to facilitate construction of the pedestrian bridge. From staff's perspective, what Metrolinx is requesting is appropriate and should be accepted by Council Thomas J. Quinn Chief Administrative Officer TJQ: ks - Attachment ~YY~O~tQn ~ ~~i ~r1S~ I he 20 Bay Street . Suite 600 r Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5J 2W3 109 N i T C _ 20 rue Bay, bureau 600 ,.._.Lx rft Pt 39 V Toronto (Ontario) Canada MW 2W3 Phone: (436) 869-3600 ext. 5532 Fax: (416) 869-1755 September 1.7, 2009 Email: Penny.Wyger@gotransit.com VIA E-MAIL Mr. Tom Quinn Chief Administrative Officer The Corporation. of the, City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario L1V 6K7 Dear Mr. Quinn: Subject: Pickering GO Transit Commuter Parking; Garage and Pedestrian Bridge As you are aware; as a result of the efforts of the City of Pickering, funding commitments from the Provincial and Federal government has been secured to enable Metrolinx to construct an enclosed pedestrian 5ridge across Highway 401. The bridge will connect the existing Pickering GO Transit Station to a new transit hub located within the road allowance on the north side of Pickering Parkway. In addition, Metrolinx is currently negotiating with OPB Realty ("OPB"), the owners of the Pickering "Down Centre Lands, for a GO Transit commuter parking facility. The new facility will be integrated into the proposed new office tower being constructed by OPB, on the south west portion of the Pickering Town Centre lands, immediately adjacent to the new transit hub. The new commuter parking facility will be linked to the pedestrian bridge over Highway 401. Legal arrangements are being carefully structured between Metrolinx and OPB. These arrangements will require the co-operation and ongoing support of the City of Pickering as the project develops. In return, it is expected that the bridge, the parking facility and new transportation hub will create a number of transportation improvements to the area and will bring long term economic development benefits to the City of Pickering. Prior to moving forward with the necessary legal agreements between OPB and Metrolinx, Metrolinx requires confirmation in writing from the Corporation of the City of Pickering of the fallowing' (a) That the City will convey to Metrolinx, upon request, and at no cost to Metrolinx: (i) a permanent easement over any and all City of Pickering owned lands as may be required by Metrolinx to accommodate the permanent placement of a Metrolinx owned and operated transit hub to be located within the northerly portion of the Pickering Parkway road allowance; n 5' 014 Y) C4, l µ af r ~n ~r~ ~~e i►' 1 j 0 Page 2of3 (ii) such temporary easements as may be required for Metrolinx, its contractors and its agents to undertake construction upon City of Pickering lands within the proposed bridge and landing development area (generally to be located between the north limit of Highway 401 and the north limit of Pickering Parkway road allowance); a permanent easement for the air rights above City of Pickering lands as may be required by Metrolinx, to permit the construction and continued operation of the proposed pedestrian bridge, transit hub and bridge connections; (iv) such temporary easements as may reasonably be required to enable cranes to swing over City of Pickering owned lands, and to enable other necessary construction equipment, supplies and machinery to operate and be stored upon City of Pickering's lands. in close proximity to the building site, including such staging and construction storage areas as may be reasonably required and agreed to between Pickering and Metrolinx from time to time, and (v) such other permanent and temporary easements and rights as may be required to provide for the development and placement of permanent support structures for the pedestrian bridge, transit hub and bridge connections. (b) That upon request by Metrolinx, at no cost to Metrolinx, the City of Pickering will take all necessary steps to authorize the temporary closure of part of Pickering Parkway, in order to permit the safe construction of the bridge, the hub and associated works. It is understood and agreed that Metrolinx will work co-operatively with the City of Pickering to minimize any impacts on neighbouring lands and on the City of Pickering road network throughout the construction process. (c) That the City of Pickering will immediately transfer and convey to Metrolinx., at no cost to Metrolinx, all of its rights and interests in the drawings, documents and design works prepared by its consultants AECOM (formerly Totten Sims Hubicki Associates (1997) Limited) (the "Consultant"), pursuant to an agreement dated April 10, 2006, entered into between the City of Pickering and the Consultant, as amended from time to time (the "Consulting Contract"). The City of Pickering will also immediately transfer to Metrolinx, any permanent non-exclusive royalty-free license to use any concept, product or process which is patentable, capable of trademark or otherwise produced by or resulting from the services rendered by the Consultant in connection with the proposed pedestrian bridge, as set out in the said Consulting Contract. (d) That the City of Pickering will immediately transfer and deliver to Metrolinx, at no cost to Metrolinx, copies of all documentation related to works undertaken by the Consultant under the Consulting Contract, including all supporting documents related to the environmental assessment that was undertaken for the proposed pedestrian bridge project and such further and other documentation associated with the environmental assessment process, as may be reasonably requested by Metrolinx. Page 3 of 3 1 1 1 Please note that it is imperative that the detailed bridge design; is completed as soon as possible and that construction of the bridge commences quickly, as the funding commitments are time sensitive. Metrol.n.x intends to consider the objectives of all stakeholders as we move forward on these projects. We look forward to continuing our effective and cooperative working relationship with the City as we complete the final design and construct these projects. Thank you for your anticipated co-operation and ongoing support. Sincerely, _ Penny Ier Vice President, Corporate Services Pwlkw C. Mayor Dave Ryan, City of Pickering Ron Taylor, City cif Pickering I 144 " Y" ' °„1 i AV F,.. i 11~ A U G J f 2009 C©9-e .0-7 -0 GL AKE-'.05 iS1 N From: clinton ekdahl [mailto:cccssseee@hotmail.co.uk] Sent: August 6, 2009 1:00 PM To: mayor@cityofpickering.com; Littley, Bonnie, Councillor; McLean, Bill, Councillor; Johnson, Rick, Councillor; jenniferoconnell@sympatico.ca; Dickerson, Doug, Councillor; Pickles, David, Councillor Subject: Day of the Honey Bee Aug 6, 2009 Good Day Your Worship and Council Members. My name is Clinton Shane Ekdahl and I live in Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada. I believe that one person can change the world. With that in mind, I wish to impart a message that transcends all human barriers of language, skin, income, identity, religion or politics. 'T'he message I bring before you is regarding the Honey Bee and their alarming disappearance from hives all over our country and the world. In fact Honey Bees are disappearing in EVERY country on every continent where they are raised. According to the Canadian Association of Professional Apiculturists (CAPA), Canada lost 35 percent of our Honey Bees last year and they warn that this is 20 percent more than what is sustainable loss. This means that if they continue to die as they are, there will be serious negative consequences for our economy, agriculture and the environment. You should be made aware that the Honey Bee has been known by mankind since at least 6000 B.C. as evidenced by rock paintings in Spain found in 1924. Honey Bees have been used by mankind as a food source through domestication since at least 5000 B.C. In that.ancient time they were regarded as tears of the Sun God Ra by the Ancient Egyptians and honey was believed to ward against evil spirits. Honey and bee's wax have also been used throughout the Stone Age in medicines and food through to the present day. In pre-industrial times, the Honey Bee was respected and beekeepers were wealthy and esteemed leaders in their communities. Today unfortunately; in many ways, Mankind is still in the Stone Age with regards to understanding these creatures that predate our own species by millennia. It was only in the 18th century that mankind understood the nature and origin of the materials that Honey Bees collect that result in bee's wax and honey. It was only 1 after 1851 that a way was devised to extract honey from hives without killing these industrious insects. It was at this same time that the Honey Bee was found in almost every country around the world. 13 Mankind has learned in the time since many fascinating things about Honey Bees, however, if we knew or fully understood what was killing Honey Bees in such alarming numbers; I would not be where I am today asking for no Begging, your help. Honey Bees all over the world are dying for reasons that Mankind can not fully explain. They are succumbing to what has been called Colony Collapse Disorder or CCD. Up to this point this fact has remained largely unknown to the general public and if it turns out to be that mankind's influence on the environment is a factor in CCD, we need to know what it is. There are many theories offered as an explanation to their disappearance including pesticides, neonic.otinoids, genetically modified crops, cell phones, pollution, and radiation, among others. With these theories abounding, it is still a fact that we do not know for sure what is killing them. CCD may even be a syndrome or a combination of these factors and this does not yet take into account other factors that we KNOW are killing Honey Bees. Such is the case with Varroa destructor or the Bee Mite Nosema apis and Nosema-ceranae, the latter of which was only discovered in Canada in 2007. This single-celled internal parasite has decimated thousands of Canadian hives as it has to hives all over the globe. CCD is only exacerbating the already dire situation for Honey Bees. However, only by realizing the cause of their disappearance can we affect our actions, behaviour and attitudes towards an insect that, I would argue, beyond all other domesticated animals and plants has been THE MOST influential, and important to the development and advancement of Humanity across the globe. Honey Bees have taken up the mantle of responsibility for a staggeringly large proportion of the food we eat on a primary, secondary and tertiary level. We eat what they produce, we eat what they pollinate and we eat animals that also live as a result of that pollination. Some sources suggest up to seventy percent of food crops are dependant upon the Honey Bee. To name only a few of the millions of species of plants and animals that have become partly, if not completely dependant upon these pollinators for survival would still take up the rest of your day if not your week. Yet, I will say that WE are on the very top of that list. Some of these partially or completely dependant food crops are almonds, sunflower, rapeseed, canola, strawberries, pears, apples, squash, melons, cranberry, blueberry, alfalfa, clover, Mint, Basil, and countless other fruits, trees, shrubs, vegetables, and herbs. This does not take into account the ecological impact of Honey Bees to plant species not used by mankind for food but have an equally important role in the stability and survival of our environment. The true value of the Honey Bee is not measured in numbers or monetary amounts or even in metric tones of honey. Yet, in terms of the survival our own species, if the Honey Bee continues to die as they are, the saga of Humanity on this planet will be jeopardised. We might return to ages far darker than the walls of cave paintings in Spain. My concern for the people of your city and mine and all of the people across Canada and the World is that if Honey Bees disappear, there will be without a doubt less food available - in fact there may be terrible shortage. My goal is for all levels of Government in Canada - Municipal, Provincial and Federal, to declare May 29, 2010 as the first annual "Day of the Honey Bee The result of this. declaration will be to raise the level of awareness and respect for Honey Bees back to some of the former glory it witnessed in ancient Egypt. This movement began in Saskatoon, SK, Regina, SK and Tisdale SK. These three Municipalities are the first to have proclaimed that May 29, 2010 will be the First annual "Day of the Honey Bee". 2 11 4 I invite your Worship and Members of City Council to join, what began in Saskatchewan, a cause that will change the world. More people need to be made aware of this situation which affects us all to effect change before it is too late. With great respect I call upon each of you to declare May 29, 2010 (in perpetuity if possible) as the first annual "Day of the Honey Bee". It will be this step, the first in many, which may prove to be our salvation. Thank you your Worship and Members of City Council. Clinton Shane Ekdahl 129 Avenue E South Saskatoon Saskatchewan S7M 1R7 Stay in the loop and chat with friends, right from your inbox! Learn how! 3 ^iK' 1 .h 115 AUG G 39 -0 Attention: Pickering City Council and Durham Regional Council August 5, 2009 Around the world on August 1-7th every year the introduction at birth to optimal life-long health and well-being is celebrated during World Breastfeeding Week. This event is routinely supported and celebrated by our own community here in Durham Region and in Canada in the first week of October, October 1-7. The Durham Region Breastfeeding Coalition and. numerous professionals, related agencies and lay persons work together to build an event and celebration in recognition of World Breastfeeding Week. Building healthy communities means building healthy people through the benefits that can only be provided through breastfeeding. Breastfeeding results from a reproductive health continuum for the mother to the child with no beginning or end, from generation to generation. This year the theme for World Breastfeeding Week draws attention to the lifesaving ability of breastfeeding when disaster strikes. There is no question that breastfeeding is a lifeline that shields and protects infants in emergencies. 1 would respectfully request your proclamation of October 1-7 as World Breastfeeding Week in the City of Pickering and the Region of Durham. I would be pleased to received written notification of your approval of my request. If you require and further information please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, Kelly P. Matijcio RN, IBCLC, RLC, LCCE, CHBE, Leader-LLLC Breastfeeding Specialist/Educator Support, Discover Birth www.discoverbirth.com Specialist in Childbirth/Childbirth Education, Human Lactation/Breastfeeding, Parenting in Early Infancy/0-2 1877 BIRTH36 / 905 509 0995 direct ~•Pt 0a) I ®4 L-ew~c~ 1 vv~o~`o~, ~ ~►rocla;m, 116 ~c~2(~ Hof -0 'HIV CITY O August, 2009 • City of Pickering Municipal. Office One The Esplanade CLERK'S DIVISION Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 The Regional Municipality of Durham Attention: Ms. Debbie Wilcox, Municipal Clerk Health Department Dear Ms. Wilcox, . 605 ROSSLAND RD. E. LEVEL 2 October is recognized as Intemational Walk to School Month and PO BOX 730 WHITBY ON L1 N 0132 Wednesday October 7th, is known as International Walk to School Day CANADA (IWALK). Durham Region Health Department and Green Communities 905-668-7711 (www.saferoutestoschool.ca) invite the residents of the City of Fax: 905-666-6214 Pickering to participate in the 9th annual IWALK events. 1-800-841-2729 www.durham.ca Community members.are encouraged to engage in active An Accredited transportation methods such as walking, cycling and wheeling as a Public Health Agency means by which to get to and from school. By participating in active . transportation, individuals are increasing their physical activity levels and reducing air and noise pollution in their community. Additional benefits include increased street safety, and opportunities to meet new people. We encourage the City of Pickering to proclaim the month of October as, Walk to School Month and Wednesday October 7th, 2009, to be International Walk to School Day. With your support we can make this event a success for all. For more information on this initiative please contact Durham Health Connection Line at 1-800-841-2729 or 905-666-6241. TOt 6.. ~~.-..~_..._..~...__....w._7. TO: Beth Cullen-Keidann RN, BScN -°-T Public Health Nurse Durham Region Health Department a i cc: Dr. Kyle - Sept al /09 Cor~4/ Q "Service Excellence for our Communities" 100% Post Consumer /j 117 71 2009 COP-E. . ~yj 0 _ . v rtai4. ,~r'~ J '~.e S. TSrY i yVVV'Arb It gives me great pleasure to call upon all Mayors, Reeves, Councillors and community leaders from across Canada to proclaim Restorative Justice Week 2009. The Correctional Service of Canada (CSC) has been an active partner in the restorative justice community for more than a decade and has been proud to provide leadership to the annual celebration since 1996. Restorative Justice Week 2009 will be held within Canada, and throughout the world, from November 15`h to November 22nd. The theme is "Communities Responding to Human Needs", which focuses on sharing the concrete learning and results that have come from the growing experience of practitioners and stakeholders in the application of a restorative justice approach and processes. In 2008, there were 167 towns and cities across Canada, representing almost 40% of the Canadian population, who proclaimed Restorative Justice Week. Things you could do as leaders in your community include the following: • Declare / proclaim Restorative Justice Week 2009. The following link provides a printable version of a proclamation form: http://www.csc-§cc.ge.ca/text/ri/ri2009/proc-en2.shtml; Host a town hall meeting to promote an awareness of how restorative justice is expressed in your communities; • Promote an open, respectful dialogue in an effort to help members of your community deal with issues such as community safety and relationship, deterioration caused by conflict, in order to nurture the healing process; • Challenge your community partners to create a local planning committee for Restorative Justice Week 2009 activities; • Invite a guest speaker(s) from your community, who is involved in restorative justice, to share their perspectives or contact CSC-'s Restorative Justice Division for speakers to come to your event at: Res to rativeJustice(iz~,csc-scc.gc.ca Municipal participation in previous years has been a great success and we hope to build on that this year with your support. Please let us know if your city, town or village is planning an event or proclaiming Restorative Justice Week 2009. We would like to recognise your participation in our national report. It would be appreciated if you could fax a copy of the proclamation or the minutes of the meeting declaring/proclaiming Restorative Justice Week 2009. Please include your contact information to the attention of Carol-Anne Grenier at (613) 943-2171. Sincerely } 4 Don Head Commissioner eno j , ; _ s a R rs is t a' RECEIVED: is 1 1 8 i FILE NO.: CEIRD ABUSE PBEXEXI,.X A IBi[BYEXiIOX • FOLLOW VP: A 1. o 75 August 7, 2009. PO l-.ate COUNCIL i-•.. - t"-0RP SSERV Or'FiCE His Worship Mayor David Ryan & Council U G CC~ j L IN, ~ DEV :1,ER? 3 1 1 aq `t "0 ' u EMERG LEGAL _ City of Pickering ; 'rt;"L ~ Ric E-: t.1 M^I,E ?E: S One The Esplanade FEE CC; A C . MPE MGRCU^ ~T33ERLF~f Pickering, ON L1C 6K7 Dear His Worship Mayor Ryan & Council, " hi s.Z'x s~tteus(.4ar~p "'"...w•~B..,+wwrr,~, Boost Child Abuse Prevention & Intervention is planning the 5th anL-CW,-PJAWL* The campaign is held each year to raise awareness and provide education to prevent abuse and violence in the ` lives of children and youth and to raise funds to support our primary prevention programs. Our goals for the coming year include advocating for the implementation of mandatory prevention programs for all children in schools across Ontario. The cost of these programs is $3,000 per school. The programs are delivered to classrooms to Grades 1 to 4 over six weeks. An investment of only $40 per child will benefit the child that will last a lifetime. Isn't every child in our community worth it? We are seeking your support to proclaim October as Child Abuse & Neglect Prevention Month in your community. We would like to invite you and the City of Pickering to think of Boost when you plan an event and include a message on your outdoor advertising signs outside sports and recreation centres, city hall and on your website during the month of October. Encourage your citizens to wear something purple to show their support and don't forget to send us pictures so we can post theta on our website and include them in our newsletter. Plans for this year's campaign include: ❖ Campaign Launch at the Air Canada Centre on September 27, 2009 to kick off our national campaign ❖ Encourage third party and community fundraising events in support of campaign ❖ Promoting awareness to over 15,000 hockey fans at Toronto Maple Leaf Hockey game at the Air Canada Centre ❖ Promoting awareness and holding a 50/50 draw at Toronto Mathes game at the Ricoh Coliseum on November 1, 2009 ❖ Organizing a kite flying day "One Sky, One World, No Violence" event at the fall festival at Downsview Park and inviting kite clubs and members of the community to come out and fly kites with their children and families ❖ Inviting municipalities, child daycare centres, schools, colleges, universities, businesses, individuals and community agencies to participate and support our campaign Everyday in Canada thousands of children are at risk of abuse, bullying or other types of violence. Your support is critical to the success of the campaign. Please feel free to contact us with any questions. Please do not hesitate to contact Siew Lee Brett at 416-515-1100 ext. 224 to discuss an event in your community. We look forward to our continued partnership with you and the City of Pickering to end violence and abuse in the lives of children and youth. Thank you. Yours truly, v G Karyn Kennedy, Siew Lee Brett Executive Director Manager of Fund Development n 0 oZ~ ~nci Encls: (1 305 Milner Ave, Suite 801 119 PE -SCFF Scarborough, ON M1B 3V4 Phone: 4 6-2-99; 9739, Fax: 4:16-299-3480 Ont. Web: cupe:on ca it-mail „c.upeont@web.net September 1, 2009 a ~ ID 2 cl'v1-09 SE, To Mayors and Councils, We are writing to ask that you and your Council endorse a day of recognitro 16r the many people who work providing care to children in your community. Last year a record number of municipalities proclaimed and celebrated this day of appreciation, and it was a great a success. m The Ontario Coalition for Better Child Care (OCBCC), the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) and our other labour partners representing child care workers across Ontario are asking that Wednesday October 21, 2009 be proclaimed as Child Care Worker & Early Childhood Educator Appreciation Day in accordance with the attached resolution. Many groups are recognized by way of Municipal Resolution. Such a day allows the community to recognize the work of various groups and to acknowledge the contributions they make in the lives of communit} members. Many children, families and communities benefit from the work of child care workers. Child care also contributes to the economic life of communities. Research shows the many economic benefits accrued from affordable; accessible high quality child care. This benefit comes from the number of people employed in the child care industry and because the availability of child care allows parents to work and to contribute to the economic life of society. Even if your Council does not issue official proclamations, there are many ways for your municipality to participate in and celebrate this special day. M this case, we ask your.Council sponsor public announcements, display our posters and distribute pins. Many municipalities also organize events and contests for the day or have Councillor' or the Mayor participate in events hosted by child care centres within the municipality. A list of ideas and examples is attached. We hope that your proclamation of this day of appreciation, or your active support, will encourage and promote a day of community recognition for childcare workers. Please fax the attached order to request posters and pins to help you raise awareness and celebrate. Please advise us of your participation in this day of recognition so that.we can acknowledge your community's role in celebrating child care workers across Ontario on October 21". Please direct any correspondence on T proclamations and/or celebration activities to the attention of ~ Kathy Johnson, by mail: CUPE, 305 Milner Ave., Suite 800, Scarborough, ON M1B 3V4, or by fax: 416-292-2839. Thank you for your consideration.. p p- a A Yours sincerely, z R -CEIVED: j.' F LE •UP: i FWD-COPY-CI~iCULA~~ To: CAO COUNCIL CoRP SERV OFFICE SUSTAIN Sid Ryan, Tracy Saarik ' N & DEV CLERK & EMERG LEGAL t? President, CUPE Ontario President, OC R E C HUMAN RES FIRE CUSTCARE cc: CMSMs/DSSABs MPE MGRCUST&ADM ope441 City O~ PICKERING MEMO 120 To: Debi A. Wilcox September 10, 2009, City Clerk Coe? q --01 From: Lisa Harker Coordinator, Records & Elections Copy: Subject: Local Government Week - File: A-2500 To celebrate the central role that Ontario's Municipalities play in the lives of residents, please accept this memorandum as a formal request that the City of Pickering proclaim October 18-25, 2009 as Local Government Week. Local Government Week is "a learning partnership between schools and municipalities that provides an opportunity for Ontario's youth to learn about local government and become better- informed, more engaged members of the community". In collaboration with AMO, AMCTO, and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Local Government Week allows citizens to further engage and understand our organizations. LH ~ I s a Honorary Patron: Lupus Foundation 294 Ridge Road N Box 687 Ridgeway ON LOS 1NO The Hon. David C. Onley of Ontario (800) 368-8377 ON Only 121 Lieutenant Governor of Ontario September 9, 2009 t. (905) 894-4611 qt (905) 894-4616 e® lupusont@vaxxine.com Website: www.vaxxine.com/lupus Serving Ontario since 1977 (Inc.) cop-R-9 L~_og Mayor & Council Members City of Pickering One The Esplanade ~rz~c;►nlr~~.. Pickering ON L1V 6K7 Re: "October is Lupus Awareness Month" Dear Mayor & Council Members: Lupus Foundation of Ontario has been serving the citizens of Ontario for the past 33 years. During this time, we have noticed an alarming increases oof ' g those seeking information for their health concerns. Many requests ad-e-1 0 ap~YPr>t Of--- young children and adolescents who have been positively diagnosed w' ,yr she is lupit ' ~ p TAKE APPR. AC-1 !GN We would like to request that you read our Proclamation meeting to inform everyone in your community that lupus is a serious illness that, unfortunately, many are still unaware. We receive no funding from governmental sources and our public awareness campaigns are most efficient through our grass roots initiatives. There are many Ontarians who have been diagnosed with lupus throughout our province. By reading our Proclamation during your meeting and by declaring October as Lupus Awareness Month, you will greatly assist our Foundation in educating all citizens that our Foundation exists and that help is just a telephone call away. Each month, over 250,000 hits are recorded on our website. Through personal and corporate donations, Memoriam contributions and membership fees, we have donated in excess of $1,400,000 over the years for much-needed and valued research. Your assistance with this awareness initiative will allow us to help others to help themselves. Thank you. Very truly yours, Kathy Crowhurst V~a-~1©v~ ~O ~✓~C Charitable Registration Number 10764 9410 RR0001 Working together to conquer lupus 1 2 2 C or- P- 9-s--0,71 SEP 1 7 2009 K'S DIVISION CT- :91 17 September 2009 To Mayor and Council of Pickering REGARDING: Memorandum of Understanding, June 2005, between Pickering and York Region, waiving rights to compensation etc in regard to York Regions 'big pipe' scheme through Pickering/ I am dumbstruck to learn that elected representatives of the past Council of Pickering, signed-away the potential to make a claim for compensation should something go wrong with the York Region's Sewer scheme to pass through land in Pickering. A_guestion about its legality: How can a municipality sign away its right to make a claim for compensation should plans fail or go wrong? It seems very irresponsible. How is the public interest served by signing off future objections -'claims or cross-claims to this project...', and, '...not to seek compensation'? A question of Protocol: Considering the immense scale and potential negative impact of the York Region Sewer System project on lands in Durham, there is a question in my. mind whether proper protocol was followed. Should not such an important agreement such as this be between one region and another? The inclusion of the paragraph that points out the future benefit to Pickering, should urban expansion proceed, is an obvious reference to potential urbanization of the provincially enacted Duffin Rouge Agricultural Preserve lands through which the 'big pipe' is to pass. The owners of this same land were also the underwriters of the phoney Growth Management Study which was actively under way at the same time as this made-in-Pickering agreement was concocted. As such, the MOU appears to serve particular vested interests and not the Citizens.of Pickering. C -RCC6 u e_ 4r- )n fV I 1 23 I trust the present Council of Pickering will address and correct this obvious failing of the People by members of the past Council. I am sending this letter of concern as, due to prior commitments, I am unable to attend or to be a 'delegation' to address this matter at Council meeting next Monday. Thank you. Sincerely Gordon Willson 455 Whitevale Road Whitevale Ontario LOH 1MO copies to: Right Honourable Dalton McGuity, Premier of Ontario Honourable John Gerretsen, Ontario Ministry of the Environment Lorn Almack, Green Door Alliance Brian Buckles, Durham Conservation Peter Rodigues, Whitevale and District Residents' Association Cty o~ 1 2 4 September 21, 2009 PICKERING COMMITTEE REPORTS a) REPORT PD 2009-08 OF THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE P&DPAGES BLUE 1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 25-09 30-86 Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2009-10 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/09 Part of Lots 1, 2, & 3, Plan 505, Part of Block 165, Block 166, Lot 67, 40M-1810 Part 1, 40R-19732, Part 2, 40R-19734, Part 1, 40R-20042, Part 2, 40R-20043 Brand Group of Co; (Block 165 - Foxwood Trail) Cedaroak Development Corporation (1752 & 1764 Rosebank Road) Keleck Investments (Pickering) Inc. (1762 Rosebank Road) Parkmount Building Corporation (Part of Block 165 & Block 166 - Foxwood Trail & 1602 Autumn Crescent) City of Pickering [Refer to attached memorandum dated September 14, 2009 from Director, Planning & Development with respect to this matter] RECOMMENDATION 1. That Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2009-10 submitted by Sernas Associates, to permit a residential plan of subdivision on lands being Part of Lots 1, 2, & 3, Plan 505; Lot 67, 40M-1810; Part 1, 40R-19732; Part 2, 40R-19734; Part . 1, 40R-20042; Part 2, 40R-20043 (as revised) as shown on Attachment #3, to Report PD 25-09, be endorsed; 2. That the proposed conditions of draft plan approval to implement Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2009-10 as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 25-09, be endorsed; and 3. Further, that Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/09 submitted by Sernas Associates, to amend the zoning on lands being Part of Lots 1, 2, & 3, Plan 505; Part of Block 165, Block 166, Lot 67, 40M-1810; Part 1, 40R- 19732; Part 2, 40R-19734; Part 1, 40R-20042; Part 2, 40R-20043 to implement Draft Plan of Subdivision SP-2009-10, and properties created through Land Division Applications LD 062/09 to LD 067/09 as outlined in Appendix II to Report PD 25-09 be forwarded to Council for enactment. I City O~ ICI PICKERING MEMO 125 To: Debi Wilcox September 14, 2009 City Clerk From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Copy: Manager, Development Review Subject: Tree Preservation Condition for Draft Plan of Subdivision S-P-2009-10 Brand Group of Co. et al Rosebank Road/Foxwood Trail/Autumn Crescent At the September 8, 2009 Planning & Development Committee Meeting, Councillors O'Connell and Littley addressed the issue of tree preservation opportunities related to this draft plan of subdivision, with an emphasis on the existing trees adjacent to Rosebank Road. There was concern that the wording of the proposed Condition #20 of the recommended conditions of draft plan approval did not provide sufficient scope to require analysis of preservation/transplanting/replacement planting opportunities for the 17 White Spruce trees adjacent to Rosebank Road. Staff have reviewed the wording of the proposed Condition #20 in light of this concern, and recommend that Condition #20 be revised as follows: Condition #20 to Draft Plan Approval for Draft Plan of Subdivision S-P-2009-10 The owner shall submit a tree preservation/transplanting/replacement planting plan which shall address, amongst other matters, the opportunity to relocate/transplant the existing 17 White Spruce trees located adjacent to the Rosebank Road right-of-way. Further, if it is determined that the planting of one tree, in the front yard, per lot, is not possible due to smaller lot frontages, the Owner will be required to pay either cash-in-lieu for the remaining. trees or plant the remaining trees in a location within the Plan boundaries or adjacent to Rosebank Road, to the satisfaction of the Director, Planning & Development. Should Council wish to amend Condition #20 to reflect the revised wording, the item should be pulled from the report of the Planning & Development Committee and the revised condition introduced. LT:jf J V)0.uments\PIanningtLT-memo david brand tree cond0ion.doc 1 2 6 September 21, 2009 PCOMMITTEE REPORTS a) REPORT EC 2009-07 OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE EXECUTIVE PAGES YELLOW 1. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Confidential Report CS 34-09 Appeal of 2009 Development Charges By-law That the recommendations as contained in Confidential Report CS 34-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be adopted. 2... Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 06-09 1-5 Pickering Off-Leash Dog Park -Approval to Proceed with Park Development RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report CAO 06-09 of the Chief Administrative Officer regarding the Pickering Off-Leash Dog Park be received; 2. That Council approve the establishment of an off-leash dog park within the lands owned by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority west of Valley Farm Road and south of the Third Concession Road (Grand Valley Park); 3. That staff be directed to work with the Leash Free Working Group and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) on a detailed design of the off-leash dog park, and upon approval by the TRCA of that design, that staff be directed to commence development of the off-leash park, using available funds in the 2009 Budget approved by Council for this purpose; 4. That staff be directed to review the City's Responsible Pet Ownership By-law 6811/07 and forward to Council any necessary amendments that are required to permit the establishment of an off-leash dog park as set out in this Report; 5. That staff be authorized to execute the necessary approvals and relevant documentation; and 6. That a copy of this Report be forwarded to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and the Leash Free Working Group. I i 127 3. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 25-09 6-31 City Policy -ADM 010 -Standards for City Policies & Procedures RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report CS 25-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That City Policy ADM 010 Standards for City Policies & Procedures be approved; and 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering give effect thereto. 4. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report'CS 27-09 32-34 2010 Standing Committee and Council Meeting Schedule RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report CS 27-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the 2010 Standing Committee and Council Meeting Schedule included as Attachment 1 to this report be approved; and 3. That the City Clerk be given authority to give effect thereto. 5. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 28-09 35-39 Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information RECOMMENDATION That Report CS 28-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding Formal Quotations -Quarterly Report for Information be received for information. 6. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 29-09 40-45 2009 Final Tax Due Dates for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential Realty Tax Classes RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report CS 29-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; i 128 2. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to issue the final 2009 Tax Bills for Commercial, Industrial and Multi-residential properties with a due date of October 19th, 2009; 3. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to make any changes or undertake any actions necessary, including altering the due date, in order to ensure the tax billing process is completed and in order to comply with Provincial Regulations; 4. That the draft By-law attached to this report be enacted; and, 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the necessary actions to give effect hereto. 7.. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 30-09 46-56 Cash Position Report as at June 30, 2009 RECOMMENDATION That Report CS 30-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. 8. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 32-09 57-61 Application for Minor Variance to Sign By-law 2493/87, as amended -Bell Canada, 1762 Fairport Road RECOMMENDATION That the application for minor variance to Sign By-law 2439/87, as amended, submitted by Pattison Sign Group on behalf of Bell Canada, for property municipally known as 1762 Fairport Road, be approved. 9. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 33-09 62-66 Application for Minor Variance to Sign By-law 2493/87, as amended - Bell Canada, 5052-5044 Wixson Street, Claremont RECOMMENDATION That the application for minor variance to Sign By-law 2439/87, as amended, submitted by Pattison Sign Group on behalf of Bell Canada, for property municipally known as 5052-5044 Wixson Street, be approved. 10. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 35-09 67-101 Municipal Performance Measurement Program - Provincially Mandated Public Reporting of Performance Measures RECOMMENDATION I r ~ 129 That Report CS 35-09 of.the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received for information. 11. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 32-09 102-107 Albacore Manor -Sidewalk Removal RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 32-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the removal of the sidewalk on Albacore Manor be received for information; and, 2. That Council address the matters in this report during the 2010 budget deliberations. 12. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 46-09 108-114 Duffin's Trail from Finch Avenue to the Pickering-Amax Border RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 46-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the Duffin's Trail Project from Finch Avenue to the Pickering-Ajax border be received; 2. That, notwithstanding the provisions of the City's Purchasing Policy, Council approve the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to develop and construct the trail at an estimated cost of $99,813.00 (GST included); 3. That the total gross project cost of $110,250 (GST included) including TRCA estimated cost and any unforeseen costs and the total net project cost of $105,000 be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to fund the project as follows: a) the sum of 15,000 be funded from the Development Charges Parkland Development & Trails Reserve Fund b) the sum of $90,000 be funded from Parkland Reserve Fund and 5. That a copy of this report be forwarded to the TRCA for their information. I Cctq o~ 3 0 lit September 21, 2009 PLI r CKEMG NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS PAGES 1. Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 05-09 135-171 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program -Direction to Proceed with Program At the July 6, 2009 meeting of the Executive Committee, Report CAO 05-09 was referred to the September 21, 2009 meeting of Council. RECOMMENDATION 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. 2. Chief Administrative Officer, Addendum Report to CAO 05-09 172-216 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program -Revised Approach RECOMMENDATION 1. That the Addendum to Report CAO 05-09 of the Chief Administrative Officer, regarding a revised approach to completing the required Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program (now "Review"), be received; 2. That, in response to the City's Request for Proposals RFP-7-2009 for consulting services for the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review, the 1 31 proposal submitted by Sorenson Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Inc., in association with The Planning Partnership, LEA Consulting Inc., SCS Consulting Group Ltd., N. Barry Lyons Consultants Limited, Robin Dee & Associates, and Bray Heritage, dated September 8, 2009, in the amount of $655,592 be accepted, subject to landowners executing a funding agreement; 3. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to: a) pay any expenses incurred in 2009 related to the Review from funding received from the Seaton Landowners Group; b) include the remaining expenditures and funding related to the Review in the 2010 Current Budget of the Planning & Development Department with the funding of the costs of the draft plan and zoning review component being provided from the application fees received for this purpose; 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to give effect thereto, including entering into any necessary agreements; and 5. That a copy of this Report and Council's resolution be forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the 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. 3. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 50-09 217-223 Tender for Hot Water Boiler Replacement - Pickering Recreation Complex - Tender No. T-17-2009 RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 50-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the Hot Water Boiler Replacement at the Recreation Complex be received; 2. That Tender T-17-2009 submitted by Plan Group Inc./ACE Services at a cost of $111,825 (GST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $138,075 (GST included) and a net project cost of $131,500 including the tender amount and other associated costs be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: 132 a) the amount of $131,500, as provided for in the 2009 approved Capital Budget for the Pickering Recreation Complex, to be financed through Federal Gas Tax Funding; b) the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary in order to affect the foregoing; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. 4. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 51-09 224-230 Replacement of Air Handling/Air Conditioner Unit -Pickering Recreation Complex -Tender No. T-18-2009 RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 51-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the replacement of the Air Handling/Air Conditioner Unit at the Pickering Recreation Complex be received; 2. That Tender T-18-2009 submitted by Plan Group Inc./ACE Services at a cost of $74,025 (GST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $84,525 (GST included) and a net project cost of $80,500 including the tender amount and other associated costs be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) the amount of $80,500 as provided for in the 2009 approved Capital Budget for the Pickering Recreation Complex, to be financed through Federal Gas Tax funding; b) the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary in order to affect the foregoing; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. 5. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 31-09 231-275 Revised Proposed Sign By-law RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report CS 14-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, included as Attachment 1, be received as information; ' I 133 2. That Report CS 31-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 3. That the proposed sign by-law, included as Attachment 2, providing regulations for signs erected within the City of Pickering, be enacted; and 4. Further, that the appropriate staff of the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto. 6. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 47-09 276-285 Tender T-19-2009 -Toy Avenue Road Reconstruction and Toy Avenue - Bayly Street - Intersection Improvements RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 47-09 of the. Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the Toy Avenue Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Works, Region Road, Watermain and Traffic Signal Underground Construction be received; 2. That Tender T-19-2009 submitted by Ron Robinson Limited for the Toy Avenue Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Works, Region Road, Watermain and Traffic Signal Underground Construction at a cost of $1,507,841.88 (GST included) and a net cost of $1,436,039.88 be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $1,683,528 (GST included) including the tender amount, the Region of Durham's portion and other associated costs and the total net project cost of $1,603,360 be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) that the sum of $700,000 be funded by the Building Canada Fund Communities Component (BCF - CC) - Intake 2 Grant with breakdown as follows; i) $350,000 from the Federal Government ii) $350,000 from the Provincial Government b) that the sum of $175,000 be funded from the Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund; c) that the sum of $175,000 be funded from the Move Ontario Reserve; d) that the sum of $508,770 be funded by the Regional Municipality of Durham; e) that the additional sum of $44,590 be funded equally from the Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund ($22,295) and Move Ontario Reserve ($22,295); I i 134 f) the Treasurer is authorized to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. REPORT TO Report CAO 05-09 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE PI ~KERI Referred to Sept. 21, 2009 Council - Report Number: CAO 05-09 Date: July 6, 2:009 135 From: Thomas J. Quinn Chief Administrative Officer Subject: Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program - Direction to Proceed with Program File: D-1100-001 Recommendation: 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 4 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. Executive Summary: On October 20, 2008, Council passed Resolution # 210-08 concerning the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program (see Attachment No. 1). Through that Resolution, Council took a position on a number of matters, including: • Endorsed Terms of Reference for the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program; • Endorsed a collaborative management approach to undertaking the Program between the City and the Seaton Landowner Group; and • Authorized the issuance of a Request for Proposal by the Seaton Landowner Group to qualified consulting firms to undertake the Neighbourhood Planning Program in accordance with the approved Terms of Reference. Report CAO 05-09 July 6, 2009 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Page 2 136 Since that time and despite our repeated requests, staff has been unable to obtain the agreement of the Seaton Landowner Group to work with the City in a collaborative manner to undertake the comprehensive Neighbourhood Planning Program. Moreover, rather than pursuing a collaborative approach, two of the Seaton landowners have recently submitted Official Plan amendment applications to the City for the approval of neighbourhood plans for their lands. We have also been advised that other Seaton landowners are considering submitting similar Official Plan amendment applications. The interests of the City are not well served if neighbourhood plans for Seaton are prepared by individual landowners on a neighbourhood by neighbourhood basis rather than on a comprehensive basis. This "piece-meal" planning approach also provides little confidence that the vision for Seaton as a sustainable urban community will be respected or achieved. Accordingly, it is recommended that Council rescind its previous direction to proceed on a collaborative basis with the Seaton Landowner Group, and direct staff to proceed with the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program as a City initiative, in accordance with the Terms of Reference set out in Appendix I. Financial Implications: There re no financial implicati s to the City to send out a Request for Proposals (RFP). Sta ouncil in September on the results of the RFP with detailed information on cost. As noted in the recommendations to the Report, financial assistance is being requested from the Province of Ontario to undertake the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program. It is the intent that this work be funded by the Province (and/or others) not the City. The estimated cost of the Program as outlined in the Terms of Reference is approximately $800,000. The exact cost will not be known until the proposals are received through the RFP process. Sustainability Implications: Seaton is intended to be a national and potentially international model of urban sustainability. Accordingly, an important initial step in the Neighbourhood Planning Program as set out in the Terms of Reference is the establishment of performance measures to benchmark and assess the ongoing sustainability of Seaton. As part of the program, a number of performance measures will be developed including measures related to energy conservation, building and community design, cultural heritage conservation, accessibility for the disabled, air quality, human health promotion and environmental net gain. Report CAO 05-09 July 6, 2009 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Page 3 137 Background: The provincially approved CPDP sets out a vision for Seaton as a sustainable urban community supporting 70,000 residents and 35,000 jobs - a vision that the City shares and supports. Indeed, this vision for Seaton was adopted by the Province in large part because of the input provided by the City and others during the preparation of the CPDP. The CPDP also outlines a three stage planning process. Stage One involves the approval of the CPDP and complementary Official Plan amendments by the Region and the City. Stage Two involves the approval of a number of other plans and studies that work together to facilitate the logical phasing and development of Seaton. It also includes the preparation and approval by the City of detailed neighbourhood plans. Stage Three involves the ongoing role of the City in managing change in Seaton over the long term. In October 2008, Pickering Council passed Resolution # 210-08 which is attached to this Report as Attachment No. 1. This Resolution provided direction on a number of important matters related to the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program, including: • Approving Terms of Reference for undertaking the comprehensive .Neighbourhood Planning Program for all of Seaton, including a number of revisions made by Council to address and clarify matters related to public consultation, conflict of interest, community facility requirements, the early introduction of transit services, and jobs in the Highway 407 employment corridor prior to residential development; • Endorsing a collaborative management approach to the study between the City and the Seaton Landowner Group, and requiring a Management Committee Agreement with the Landowner Group in order to formalize the collaborative working arrangement; • Authorizing the issuance of a Request for Proposal by the Seaton Landowner Group to qualified consulting firms interested in undertaking the Neighbourhood Planning Program; • Appointing the Director, Office of Sustainability; the Director, Planning & Development; and the Manager, Policy to a Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Management Committee; and • Confirming Council's desire to have the final decision on any matters regarding the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program, and requesting City staff to formally report to Council regularly for information, direction and endorsement as necessary and as work progresses. Report CAO 05-09 July 6, 2009 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Page 4 132 Following Council's approval of this Resolution, in order to move forward with the project, the City sent a draft "Management Committee Agreement" to the Seaton Landowner Group for review and comment. No formal response was received. Follow- up conversations with various landowners ensued, and it became increasingly apparent that some of the landowners were not prepared to proceed in a collaborative manner with the City as long as. the approved Terms of Reference contained a provision requiring jobs in the Highway 407 employment corridor before residential development. In addition, over the past few months, a number of discussions have been held at the request of the Minister of Energy and Infrastructure to see if consensus could be reached between the Province, the Seaton Landowner Group, the Region of Durham and the City on a possible path forward with respect to the remaining planning and other pre-development work associated with Seaton. Despite some progress being made on some issues, no consensus was reached on moving forward collaboratively with,the City's Neighbourhood Planning Program. In fact, during the course of these discussions, two of the Seaton landowners chose to submit individual Official Plan amendment applications to the City for the approval of Neighbourhood Plans for their lands. Amendment applications were submitted for seven separate neighbourhoods. These submissions "started the clock" and set the stage for possible Ontario Municipal Board appeals. They also send a very clear message that there is no longer a consensus amongst the Seaton Landowner Group to work collaboratively with the City on the Neighbourhood Planning Program. This leaves the City with very little choice but to proceed with the Neighbourhood Planning Program as a City initiative. It would not be in the-best interest of Pickering if detailed neighbourhood plans for Seaton are prepared on a neighbourhood by neighbourhood basis by individual landowners and then submitted to the City for our review and approval (or approval through an appeal to the Ontario Municipal. Board). A developer-driven, "piece-meal" approach to neighbourhood planning is inappropriate for a community as large and important as Seaton. It also provides little confidence that at the end of the exercise, it will be possible to achieve and maintain the vision for Seaton as a sustainable urban community of 70,000 people and 35,000 jobs. It is therefore recommended that Council rescind its previous direction to proceed on a collaborative basis with the Seaton Landowner Group, and direct staff to proceed with the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program as a City initiative, in accordance with the Terms of Reference set out in Appendix I. The Terms of Reference are very similar to the Terms of Reference endorsed by Council in October 2008, except that changes have been made to delete or modify any reference to a collaborative management approach with the Seaton Landowner Group and to update the status of related studies and background information. The changes are not substantive - there are of a technical or housekeeping nature in order to allow the City to move forward at this time with the Neighbourhood Planning Program as a City initiative, with funding assistance from the Province. Report CAO 05-09 July 6, 2009 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Page 5 1.39 Although "collaboration" with the Seaton Landowner Group will no longer be an explicit requirement of the Terms of Reference, input from the Seaton landowners (and others) will be sought regularly throughout the Neighbourhood Planning Program, and all studies, background information and applications submitted by the Seaton landowners will be used as input to the process. Appendix: I Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Terms of Reference dated June 2009 Attachment: 1. Pickering Council Resolution # 210-08 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Thomas E. Mel uk o as J. Qui (Acting) Chief dministrative Office Chief Administr ive Officer Neil Carro Director, Planning & Development Catherine Rose Manager, Policy TM:jh Recommended' for the consideration of Pickering City ouncil cw ? X as J. Quin DM MM III Chief Administr e Officer APPENDIX I TO 1 4 0 REPORT CAO 05-09 TERMS OF REFERENCE SEATON NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING PROGRAM JUNE 2009 141 CENTRAL PICKERING DEVELOPMENT PLAN SEATON NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING PROGAM 1.0 BACKGROUND 1:1 Introduction Over the next 20 years, a significant amount of.Pickering's new growth will occur in the existing urban area as infill and intensification. The City is also planning for the development of a greenfield urban area for 35,000 jobs and 70,000 persons. This urban area is referred to as the Seaton Community. The City of Pickering is seeking the professional services of a qualified Consulting Team to undertake the Neighbourhood Planning Program for lands in the Seaton Community. The study will be undertaken in cooperation with the Province of Ontario, the Region of Durham, and in consultation with the public, agencies and other stakeholders. The selection of the Consulting Team is to be to the satisfaction of the City. 1.2 Seaton Community Location and Area Seaton is bounded generally by Highway 7 to the north, the West Duffins Creek to the west, the C. P. Railway to the south, and the boundary between the City of Pickering and the Town of Ajax on the east. The Seaton Community, together with lands to the west to the boundary between the City of Pickering and the City of Toronto - Town of Markham, comprise Central Pickering (see map, Attachment #1). The Seaton lands have a rich cultural history. Early occupation of the land occurred following the retreat of the Wisconsin glacier in about 9500 BC. First Nations continued occupation and settlement of the area until Euro-Canadian farm settlers began to dominate starting in the 1800s. The hamlets of Green River, Brougham and Whitevale, which abut the Seaton lands, developed to serve the farm communities and remain today as small settlements. Whitevale and its environs are designated as a Heritage District. Following a recent history of expropriation by the Province for the development of a new community, designation of the lands as "urban area", numerous planning studies, and finally a land exchange between the Province and several developers, the future of the Seaton lands is now one of urban development. 18 June 2009 Page 1 142 Central Pickering Development Plan Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Recommended Terms of Reference Nevertheless, over 50% of the land in Seaton is being retained in a rich and extensive natural heritage system. Lands in the natural heritage system will remain in the ownership of the Province. Through the land.exchange, about half of the developable lands (about 620 ha) are now in the ownership of four major developers. The Province has retained ownership of about one-third of the residentially-designated lands (about 225 ha), and all of the employment lands (about 400 ha). 1.3 Central Pickering Development Plan The most recent planning study completed was by the Province of Ontario in 2006. The Province completed the Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP), under the Ontario Planning and Development Act. A significant amount of background and planning work was completed during the preparation of the CPDP. The Plan contains land use designations and detailed goals, objectives, policies and implementation strategies for Seaton. Most importantly, the Plan contains a clear vision for a sustainable urban community. 1.4 Sustainable Pickering Pickering Council launched a comprehensive Sustainable Pickering program in 2005. The program is grounded on five sustainability objectives (healthy environment, healthy society, healthy economy, responsible development, and responsible consumption). Various initiatives have been and are being undertaken by the City and its partners under each of these objectives, including initiatives related to climate change, energy management, environmental protection, job creation, waste reduction and sustainable development. In 2008, Pickering became the first municipality in Ontario to establish an Office of Sustainability to oversee and guide Pickering's transformation from a suburban community to a sustainable City. It is the City's expectation that the development j of Seaton will make a substantial contribution to this transformation, and set a new benchmark for sustainable community development in Ontario and Canada. 1.5 Initiating the Neighbourhood Planning Process On May 22, 2007, Council passed Resolution #114/07 authorizing staff to initiate the process for hiring an appropriate consulting firm to prepare neighbourhood plans for Seaton. The Terms of Reference for this Study were prepared by City staff with input from the Seaton Advisory Committee, senior City staff, and landowner 18 June 2009 Page 2 Central Pickering Development Plan 143 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Recommended Terms of Reference representatives, Ministry, of Municipal Affairs and Housing representatives and the Region of Durham representatives. City Council endorsed the Terms of Reference on XXXX, 2009. 1.6 Public Engagement & Consultation The City of Pickering is committed to public involvement, participation, openness and accountability in addressing land use issues. The public includes the City's residents, business-people, landowners, relevant public agencies, and other interested groups and individuals. In keeping with the City's fundamental approach to doing business, inclusive and meaningful public involvement must also be integral to the undertaking of the Neighbourhood Planning study. Section 4.0 of the Terms of Reference identifies the requirements for the Consulting Team to outline their specific approach to public stakeholder and First Nations consultation. 1.7 The Consulting Team The City of Pickering is looking for a superior interdisciplinary consulting team to undertake.the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program. As project manager, your past experience demonstrates your abilities to coordinate major multidisciplinary projects of a similar scope and scale, exercise strong financial control, integrate and/or inform work underway through related studies by others, and creatively address competing interests. Your team demonstrates strong leadership skills and a commitment to implementing the model of sustainable development set out in the Central Pickering Development Plan. Your team brings expertise in sustainable community development, urban design, housing, retail market assessment, parks and recreation, transportation, engineering, planning, landscape ecology, communication, consultation and engagement, report writing and drafting policy. Your team values the extensive base of work completed for the Central Pickering Development Plan, recent reports by the Province and the Landowner Group, and related work by the City of Pickering, and is willing to build upon it. 18 June 2009 Page 3 144 -Central Pickering Development Plan Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Recommended Terms of Reference 1.8 Consultant Selection The consulting team shall include in their proposal a section on Conflict of Interest. This section shall contain information respecting disclosure of possible conflict of interest, including any business, financial or other interest respecting the lands, owners/developers of the Seaton lands, or prospective owners/developers of the Seaton lands. The Evaluation criteria to be used by the Selection Committee for reviewing the proposals and recommending a consulting team to Council may include, but shall not be limited to, the factors listed below. The Selection Committee may apply different weights to the different factors: • Overall completeness and quality of submission • Relevant company experience, scope and value of similar completed projects • Professional qualifications and experience of project personnel • Understanding of Provincial, Regional and Pickering objectives for the development of Seaton • Experience with planning and developing innovative and marketable projects in the GTA, and with sustainable community design • The quality of the public and First Nations consultation programs • Creative approach to completing the study • Approach to incorporating leading edge sustainable community design • Approach to integrating and informing related implementation studies • Detailed project schedule, timetable and work program • Cost effectiveness to deliver project • The advice of references provided in the submission • The oral and visual presentation, if selected for an interview 2.0 THE PROJECT 2.1 Purpose of the Project The purpose of the project is to undertake the Neighbourhood Planning Program for Seaton. The CPDP identifies a number of implementation studies and the proponents for those studies. The CPDP identifies the following studies as being required in relation to the neighbourhood planning program: development of sustainable performance measures and benchmarks; preparation of neighbourhood plans and related amendments to the Pickering Official Plan; a retail market analysis; and the affordable housing strategy. To complete the neighbourhood planning program, the City has identified several other matters 18 June 2009 Page 4 Central Pickering Development Plan 145 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Recommended Terms of Reference that need to be addressed (such as urban design guidelines, development guidelines, and a community services and facilities plan). 2.2 Relationship to Other Implementation Studies Where other implementation studies have been completed by others, the consulting team shall integrate, where appropriate, the findings and recommendations of those studies into the Neighbourhood Planning Program. Where studies are in progress or commence during the course of this project, the consulting team shall where appropriate integrate available information, findings and conclusions, and inform those studies through work on the Neighbourhood Planning Program. The chart on the following page lists the other implementation studies, some of the key topics of that study related to the Neighbourhood Planning Program, the status of the studies, and the proponent. Study Name Status Proponent - Topics related to Neighbourhood Planning Program Highway 407 (Seaton Lands) Economic Completed Province Development Study - Detailed land uses and policies - Detailed road patterns - Urban Design Guidelines - Sustainability Guidelines - Phasing - Implementation strategies DurhamNork/Toronto Transportation Study In progress; Province Draft Report completed January 2009 Natural Heritage System Management Plan & Completed Province Master Trails Plan Study - Principles for trail heads, network - NHS/ development interface Seaton Trail Management Plan In progress Oak Ridges Moraine Trust; Cit ; TRCA Water Balance Study Completed Province 18 June 2009 Page 5 it 146 Central Pickering Development Plan Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Recommended Terms of Reference Fiscal Impact Study (Pickering) In progress Landowners - Phasing Fiscal Impact Study (Regional) In progress Landowners - Phasing Master Environmental Servicing Plan In progress; Landowners - Phasing Existing - Precise location of road/creek crossings Conditions - Location and size of stormwater management Report facilities completed - Location and size of major community facilities August 2008 - Trail network - 3-D Groundwater Model - Major utility placement - Energy management plan Transit Development Charge By-law (Regional; Completed* Region excludes Seaton. Note: Completed* November 2007, effective January 1, 2008 Development Charges Study & By-law (Regional Completed* Region water, sewer, roads and soft services. Note: By- law excludes Seaton for water and sewer, but includes Seaton for roads and soft services Water Supply, Sanitary Sewerage and In Progress; Region Transportation EA (Regional) Regional - Detailed locations of water, roads and sewers Council - Phasing selected consultant in June 2009 Conformity amendments (Durham Regional Pending Region Official Plan Development Charges Study & By-law (Regional Pending Region water, sewer and transit for Seaton only) Conformity amendments (Pickering Official Plan Pending City Development Charges Study & By-law (City - In progress; City excluding Seaton) Background Study completed May 2009 Development Charge Study & By-law (City - Pending City Seaton specific) Duffins Creek & Carruthers Creek Watershed Completed TRCA Plans *Under appeal 18 June 2009 Page 6 147, Central Pickering Development Plan Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Recommended Terms of Reference 3.0 DETAIL OF WORK TO BE UNDERTAKEN BY THE CONSULTANT 3.1 Neighbourhood Planning Program 3.1.1 Seaton Community Sustainable Development Program The CPDP identifies six broad sustainable community principles. The principles include: fostering a healthy natural environment; • encouraging a healthy built environment; • ensuring economic health; • creating opportunities for public education and public awareness; • fostering social and cultural well-being; and • providing appropriate measures for monitoring and measuring success. The preparation, review and approval of development applications within Seaton will be carried out with the view to achieving these principles. Performance measures are to be established and incorporated in the Neighbourhood Plans to play a role in the, ongoing success at achieving sustainability. Building on the City's work on sustainability, including our Measuring Sustainability initiative, Draft Sustainable Development Guidelines for Neighbourhoods and for Draft Plans, Rezonings, Site Plans and Building Permits, and Draft Sustainable Neighbourhood Scorecard, Partners for Climate Protection Plan, and the sustainable development principles and guidelines in the CPDP, the consulting team shall prepare the Seaton Community Sustainable Development Program. The Program shall include: the preparation of sustainability performance measures and benchmarks for the development of Seaton, integrating the sustainability guidelines from the Highway 407 (Seaton) Economic Development Study, performance measures and benchmarks for matters including but not limited to energy conservation, building and community design, transit usage, cultural heritage conservation, accessibility for the disabled, air quality, human health promotion and environmental net gain; the monitoring process; identification of short, medium and long term actions that address integration of the community sustainability principles in the Neighbourhood Plans; and implementation of the Program into the development review and approvals process including recommended official plan policy support. 18 June 2009 Page 7 148 Central Pickering Development Plan Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Recommended Terms of Reference 3.1.2 Urban Design Guidelines Urban design guidelines help bridge the gap between policy, zoning and site development, and knit together public and private spaces. With higher intensities of development, urban design becomes a key element to creating livable communities. Building upon the neighbourhood development principles and guidelines in the CPDP, the urban design and sustainability guidelines contained in the CPDP, and the City's existing design principles and considerations in the Pickering Official Plan, the consulting team shall prepare the urban design guidelines for Mixed Use Areas and Residential Areas. The Guidelines shall: use text, graphics, drawing and maps as required; address urban form, architectural control, landscaping, public realm, streetscapes, focal points, and significant views and vistas; place particular emphasis on development in Mixed Use,Areas and development adjacent to arterial and collector roads; and identify recommended official plan policy support. The Guidelines will become the basis for the draft Development Guidelines (see task 3.1.8). Urban design guidelines have been prepared for the Employment Lands through the Provincial Highway 407 (Seaton Lands) Economic Development Study, and is the basis for the draft Development Guidelines (see task 3.1.8) covering the Employment Lands. 3.1.3 Affordable Housing Strategy It is an objective of the CPDP that the Seaton Community provide an adequate range of housing opportunities that respond to existing and future needs, and characteristics of the anticipated population in terms of form, location, size, cost and tenure. The CPDP requires the preparation of a strategy detailing the -means to achieve a 25% target of new residential units in housing forms considered affordable to low and moderate-income households. The strategy shall identify appropriate housing forms and shall be implemented through the neighbourhood plans. Contributions to the 25% target may vary by neighbourhood. In the context of the overall housing objectives for Seaton, the consulting team shall prepare an Affordable Housing Strategy to achieve a 25% target of new residential units in housing forms considered affordable to low and moderate-income households. The Strategy shall identify: the appropriate housing forms considered affordable to low and moderate-income households; the , recommended distribution of such forms within and between 18 June 2009 Page 8 Central Pickering Development Plan 149 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Recommended Terms of Reference neighbourhoods; and the recommended official plan policy and other implementation measures to achieve the target. 3.1.4 Retail Market Analysis The CPDP designates lands for mixed uses. The mixed use designations permit, in addition to medium and higher density residential uses, the introduction of retail uses. The CPDP requires a retail market analysis to assess and rationalize the amount of retail floor space to serve the population in Seaton. The consulting team shall prepare a Retail Market Analysis. The analysis shall: determine the amount, location, hierarchy and distribution of retail uses for the population in Seaton, in keeping with the vision of Seaton as a sustainable, mixed-use, transit-supportive and pedestrian-friendly community; and identify recommended official plan policies to implement the results of the analysis. In completing the Retail Market Analysis, if a concentration of commercial floor space is proposed exceeding 56,000 m2 or larger on an individual or cumulative basis, the analysis is required to ensure the proposal does not unduly affect the planned function and viability of any other -Downtown Pickering or other local Centre. The Seaton Landowner Group prepared a retail market analysis in September 2005, and is to be used as input to this study. 3.1.5 Community Services and Facilities Plan Community, cultural, recreational and other public uses are an essential component of the development of the Seaton Community. The Consulting Team shall prepare a Community Services and Facilities Plan for Seaton to guide the provision of recreation, parks (including open space and trails), culture (including libraries) and other municipally provided facilities. The Community Services and Facilities Plan shall: include the projected demographic profile for Pickering and Seaton for the next 20 years (to build out); include an assessment of trends in parks, recreation and leisure services over the next 20 years (to build out); identify leading examples of best practices regarding parks and recreation and municipal facility development demonstrating sustainable development,. successful joint and mixed use facilities, and other strategies to achieve land use efficiencies; identify the community needs and uses in all areas of recreation programs, facilities, services, parks and open space and other facility needs including an appropriate hierarchy, function, and 18 June 2009 Page 9 150 Central Pickering Development Plan Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Recommended Terms of Reference property and facility sizes and locations; and the anticipated timing and phasing of uses relative to the timing of development. For clarification, in identifying joint and mixed use facilities, the consultant should look at integration of facilities among different providers (Regional, City, school board, places of worship, etc.). A Master Environmental Servicing Plan (MESP) is underway, and anticipated to be completed during 2009. One deliverable of the MESP is to identify the number and general locations of major community facilities, including emergency service facilities, secondary schools, neighbourhood and community parks, and recreation complexes. The consultant should confirm or revise the community facilities information from MESP in light of the work from in the Neighbourhood Planning Program, 3.1.6 Neighbourhood Plans i The CPDP requires the preparation of Neighbourhood Plans to implement the Central Pickering Development Plan. Neighbourhood Plans will become part of the Pickering Official Plan by amendment. The CPDP states that it is an objective in respect of employment to "Plan for a community that will accommodate 35,000 jobs" and with respect to housing and mixed use, to "Plan for a community with a population of up to 70,000 residents". Developers within Seaton have prepared and submitted to the City draft plan of subdivision applications. Some developers have prepared official plan amendment applications for Neighbourhood Plans for their lands. These plans are input to the preparation and analysis of neighbourhood plans. The consulting team shall prepare Neighbourhood Plans for all lands in the Seaton Community, whether the lands are part of the natural heritage system, the employment lands, or the mixed use and residential designations. The consulting team shall: identify appropriate neighbourhood boundaries combining more than one pocket of developable land where appropriate; and prepare a comprehensive Neighbourhood Plan for each neighbourhood. The Neighbourhood Plans shall: address the list of matters detailed in Appendix A to this Terms of Reference; integrate where appropriate the results of the background and other related studies such as but not limited to the Highway, 407 (Seaton) Economic Development Study, Natural Heritage System Management Plan and Master Trail Study, and the Master Environmental Servicing Plan; use policies, designations, schedules and maps as necessary; 18 June 2009 Page 10 Central Pickering Development Plan 151 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Recommended Terms of Reference and implement the vision of a sustainable, mixed use, transit-supportive community. 3.1.7 Draft Conformity Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan Amendments are required to the Pickering Official Plan to bring it in to conformity with the CPDP. The Neighbourhood Plans will also be incorporated into the Official Plan by amendment. The consulting team shall prepare: draft policy and schedule amendments to Pickering Official Plan incorporating the Seaton Neighbourhood Plans as well as revisions to other sections of the Official Plan as may be required. to reflect the findings of the outcomes of the Seaton Community Neighbourhood Planning Program; and prepare draft revisions to the informational text and to the maps in the Plan as necessary. The consulting team shall also identify draft Regional Official Plan amendments that may be required as a result of the Pickering Official Plan amendments. 3.1.8 Draft Development Guidelines for the Compendium Document to the Pickering Official Plan In Pickering, some urban design guidelines and other development controls are identified in Council-adopted Development Guidelines. The Development Guidelines are contained in a Compendium Document to the Pickering. Official Plan. The consulting team shall prepare draft Development Guidelines for Seaton. The Guidelines shall: identify appropriate lands or corridors requiring Development Guidelines; incorporate relevant material from the Neighbourhood Planning Program that is to be Council-adopted, rather than form part of the Official Plan. 4.0 COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND FIRST NATIONS CONSULTATION Community consultation is an integral part of undertaking the neighbourhood planning study. Community consultation provides an opportunity to explore and test options with the public, agencies, development industry and others. The Consulting Team shall: design and undertake effective and inclusive Community Outreach and First Nations Consultation programs, with the objectives to engage, obtain comments from, and exchange information with, members of the community, on anon-going basis during the study; describe their 18 June 2009 Page 11 3 152 Central Pickering Development Plan Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Recommended Terms of Reference approach to public, agency and other stakeholder consultation, including how the community Outreach Program will engage and obtain the views of Pickering's multicultural population, and other groups who are less inclined to participate in traditional planning processes; describe their approach to engaging First Nations, Metis and other aboriginals in this process; and prepare a Community & Agency Consultation Report and a First Nations Consultation Report. 5.0 DELIVERABLES For the reports listed below, it is anticipated that a "Draft", a "Revised Draft" and a "Final" Report will be required. The Management Committee may give direction during the course of the Study on whether any particular report does not require both the draft or revised draft version. 1. Seaton Community Sustainable Development Program 2. Urban Design Guidelines (for required areas) 3. Affordable Housing Strategy 4. Retail Market Analysis 5. Community Services and Facilities Plan 6. Neighbourhood Plans (for all lands in Seaton) 7. Draft Pickering Official Plan Conformity Amendment & Related Draft Regional Plan Amendment 8. Draft Development Guidelines 9. Consultation Report(s) for Community, Agencies & First Nations For the deliverables listed in section 5.0, the Consulting Team shall forward to the City of Pickering the following: • For each "Draft" Report: 25 draft copies (paper); one copy in digital format using the Microsoft Office suite of applications (all mapping to be provided in AutoCad.dwg or.dxf); one copy in PDF); • For each "Revised Draft" Report: 25 copies (paper); one copy in digital format using the Microsoft Office suite of applications (all mapping to be provided in AutoCad.dwg or.dxf); one copy in PDF); • For each "Final" Report: 100 copies (paper); one camera ready copy of the final version; one copy of the final version in digital format using the Microsoft suite of applications (all mapping to be provided in AutoCad.dwg or dxf format). 18 June 2009 Page 12 Central Pickering Development Plan 53 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Recommended Terms of Reference 6.0 SCHEDULE AND WORK PROGRAM The Consulting Team is to provide a detailed work program and schedule as part of the response to this RFP. It is an objective to complete the study within 8 - 12 months. 7.0 STUDY MANAGEMENT 7.1 General The City of Pickering will manage the study. A Management Committee consisting of 3 members from City staff, being the Director, Office of Sustainability; the Director, Planning & Development, and the Manager, Policy, will be established to provide strategic direction -to the Consulting Team, and liaise with the Seaton Advisory Committee. The Management Committee will also be responsible for supervising the study work to ensure that it is carried out in accordance with the Terms of Reference and to the satisfaction of the City of Pickering. The Consulting Team shall meet with the Management Committee on a regular basis as well as at milestones during the study. The Management Committee shall monitor study progress, liaise with the Consultant, the Province and the Region of Durham, and exercise budgetary control and revisions to the Terms of Reference. The Management Committee may identify additional issues for which options may be necessary to generate discussion, when additional public input may be required and whether both draft and revised draft reports are required in all instances. The Management Committee shall also be responsible for the circulation of study products, notices and approval of consultant liaison with the public and other agencies. In addition, the Consulting Team shall be responsible for recording, typing and distributing minutes of the Management Committee meetings, subject to the approval of the Management Committee. 7.2 Technical Support Team A Technical Support Team will be established to provide technical advice and guidance to the Consulting Team. The Consulting Team shall meet with the Technical Support Team as needed to address issues, obtain comments and at milestones during the study. The Consulting Team shall be responsible for recording, typing and distributing minutes of Technical Support Team meetings. 18 June 2009 Page 13 154 Central Pickering Development Plan Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Recommended Terms of Reference 7.3 Seaton Advisory Committee of Council The Seaton Advisory Committee of Council receives updates from, and provides advice and guidance for the consideration of, senior City staff and others as may be invited, on the many related studies and activities respecting the development of Seaton. It is anticipated that the Consulting Team would update the Committee at milestones during the study. APPENDICES A Detailed Requirements for Neighbourhood Plans B Selected List of Resources Available j\oocuments\planning\Seaton Neid Plan\TeonsofRef\2009\1RecommendeoToRSeatonNPPIBJune09MainTe)d 18 June 2009 Page 14 Appendix A to the Recommended Terms of Reference for the Seaton 15 5 Neighbourhood Planning Program - Detailed Requirements to be Addressed in Neighbourhood Plans (must be read in conjunction with section 3.1.6 of the. Terms of Reference) Housing and Mixed Use 1. The Neighbourhood Plans shall include: (a) preparation of the transportation network 'including transit, arterial, collector and local road, and a pedestrian and bicycle systems plan based on the overall network developed through the Master Environmental Servicing Plan (MESP), and considering the results of the Master Trail Plan component of the Natural Heritage System Management Plan and Master Trail Plan Study; (b) consideration of previously completed archaeological and heritage assessments; (c) identification of drainage boundaries and stormwater management system/facility locations, type, preliminary sizing and discharge quantity, quality and sedimentation targets based on the findings of the MESP and functional servicing plans; (d) identification of detailed community facility requirements including but not limited to municipal facilities, and such other facilities as elementary and secondary schools and places of worship; and (e) identification of environmental sustainability measures. 2. The Neighbourhood Plans shall reflect the following principles: (a) creation of a compact neighbourhood structure with an appropriate mix of land uses to serve local residents and visitors; (b) integration of commercial, residential and employment uses, both horizontally and vertically, to ensure that neighbourhood centres are popular and active destinations, supported by transit and proximity to open space; (c) provision of a range of sizes of lots and blocks to encourage a variety of housing types and sizes, and to create flexibility and options for intensification particularly within mixed use nodes and corridors; (d) consideration of pedestrian requirements for safety and comfort in the location of transit stops, day care centres and community facilities; (e) provision of the highest development density at the neighbourhood centres; Appendix A to the Recommended Terms of Reference for the Page 2 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program (18 June 2009) 156 (f) provision of variations in the design of blocks and streets around natural elements such as woodlots, creeks and topography, to enhance views and achieve a distinctive neighbourhood character; (g) permission for individual lots to integrate elements of the surrounding natural and cultural heritage; (h) making the garage a subordinate elements of the residential development; (i) providing for laneways to support alternative garage locations, where appropriate; and (j) ensuring that surface parking areas are not dominant features of mixed use development areas. 3. The Neighbourhood Plans shall identify and incorporate appropriate strategies to realize the objectives of the Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP) for higher density, transit supportive development by: (a) beginning with the first residential neighbourhood and employment lands along the 407 corridor, facilitating the early introduction of transit services, alterative transportation facilities, and retail and service uses to accommodate residents' needs; (b) setting achievable targets for the construction of higher density residential uses along transit spines; (c) providing for financial incentives for the creation of higher density and/or affordable housing; and (d) enabling development intensification over time. 4. The Neighbourhood Plans shall contain policies: (a) enabling the provision of retail and service commercial uses in the community to serve the needs of residents and businesses, such that sufficient retail and commercial uses are planned to meet local needs, in forms and locations consistent with the objectives and polices of this Plan for urban design; (b) identifying and establishing a hierarchy of retail and commercial uses for the community that addresses, among other matters, city and region-wide market demand and supply considerations, the Pickering Official Plan policies with respect to the primacy of the Downtown Core, and taking into consideration the results of the Seaton Retail Market Analysis. Appendix A to the Recommended Terms of Reference for the Page 3 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program (18. June 2009) 157 Employment 5. With respect to Employment, the Neighbourhood Plans shall establish policies: (a) reflecting the objectives and primary locations for employment from the CPDP; (b) requiring high performance standards for development and site design in the employment areas; (c) requiring employment areas to be readily accessible by alternative modes of transportation, including vehicular, transit, bicycle and pedestrian; (d) implementing the results of the Highway 407 (Seaton Lands) Economic Development Study completed by Hemson Consulting Limited, et al (April 2007); and (e) requiring the commencement of the development of the employment lands along the Highway 407 corridor prior to the commencement of the residential neighbourhoods; I 6. Schedules 6, 7, 8 and 9 to the CPDP serve as examples of the key principles and policies to be addressed by the Neighbourhood Plans, and together with the policies of the CPDP, provide a vision for achieving the goals and objectives of the CPDP. The Neighbourhood Plans shall be prepared having regard for the contents of those four schedules: (a) Schedule 6: Neighbourhood Planning Guidelines - Gateway Neighbourhood; (b) Schedule 7: Neighbourhood Planning Guidelines - Central Neighbourhood; (c) Schedule 8: Neighbourhood Planning Guidelines - Employment Lands; and (d) Schedule 9: Urban Design Guidelines. General 7. The Neighbourhood Plans shall incorporate an appropriate policy framework, which supports and incorporates into the development review process, the results of the various other studies required by this Terms of Reference, including: (a) the Seaton Community Sustainable, Development Program, as required by section 3.1.1 of the Terms of Reference; Appendix A to the Recommended Terms of Reference for the Page 4 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program (18 June 2009) (b) the Urban Design Guidelines, as required by section 3.1.2 of the Terms of Reference; (c) the Affordable Housing Strategy, as required by section 3.1.3 of the Terms of Reference; (d) the Retail Market Analysis, as required by section 3.1.4 of the Terms of Reference; and (e) the Community Services and Facilities Plan, as required by section 3.1.5 of the Terms of Reference. 8. Subject to the refinements that may be made through the various implementation studies, including the Neighbourhood Planning Program, the Neighbourhood Plans shall incorporate: (a) the basic structural elements of the CPDP, as shown on the following four Schedules to the CPDP: (i) Schedule 2: Land Use; (ii) Schedule 3: Natural Heritage System; (iii) Schedule 4: Transportation Network; and (iv) Schedule 5: Servicing System; (b) the goals set out in Part 2 of the CPDP respecting the following: (i) Natural Heritage; (ii) Cultural Heritage; (iii) Social, Institutional, Open Space and Recreational Facilities; (iv) Transportation and Transit; (v) Servicing; (vi) Employment; and (vii) Housing and Mixed Use. Natural Heritage System 9. The Neighbourhood Plans shall establish the appropriate land use policies and designations to reflect the Primary Natural Heritage System Designation, considering the objectives and policies in the CPDP, the results of the Natural Heritage System Management Plan and Master Trail Plan Study, and the results . of the Neighbourhood Planning Program. Cultural Heritage 10. The Neighbourhood Plans shall establish the appropriate design, land use and development policies to reflect the Cultural Heritage objectives and policies of the CPDP. Appendix A to the Recommended Terms of Reference for the Page 5 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program (18 June 2009) 159 11. More specifically with respect to Cultural Heritage, in the preparation of Neighbourhood Plans, recognize the importance of cultural heritage features by: (a) where possible, creating a development pattern that reflects the historic concession grid in order to integrate wood lots, hedgerows, tree lines, and filed pattern into the new urban pattern and Natural Heritage System; (b) protecting and maintaining cultural heritage landscape elements such as treelines, hedgerows and the rolling topography, where feasible; (c) ensuring new development and land uses near or adjacent to cultural heritage landscape features respect cultural heritage patterns and their integrity; (d) viewing the Natural Heritage System and open spaces associated with social facilities as opportunities for cultural heritage resource integration and protection; (e) requiring the urban design guidelines prepared as a component of the Neighbourhood Plans address conservation of significant cultural heritage resources and landscape features, and the integration of significant views associated with these features into the design of the new urban community. In particular, these considerations shall be an integral element of the design of public spaces. In the preparation of the urban design guidelines, the assessment and recommendations contained in the Fall 2005 Report entitled "Cultural Landscape Assessment Central Pickering: Seaton Lands" prepared by Wendy Shearer Landscape Architect Limited shall be considered; and (f) integrating and conserving locally significant individual heritage buildings or related features, where appropriate into neighbourhood designs. 12. Further with respect to Cultural Heritage, the design and preparation of the Neighbourhood Plans for lands adjacent to and including parts of the Hamlet of Whitevale Heritage Conservation District shall: (a) demonstrate an appropriate transitional design and compatibility with the area's existing character, including use of social, institutional, open space and recreational and renewable energy systems to serve as a buffer and referred to as Hamlet Heritage Open Space; (b) direct north-south and east-west arterial road assignments away from the built up area of the Hamlet of Whitevale; (c) protect where feasible, built-heritage features and structures; and Appendix A to the Recommended Terms of Reference for the Page 6 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program (18 June 2009) I 6 (d) ensure that new development is generally consistent with the character of existing buildings. 13. The relevant Neighbourhood Plans shall: (a) address uses in the Hamlet Heritage Open Space adjacent to Green River; (b) enable the expansion of the Brougham Pioneer Cemetery; and (c) identify appropriate trail and pedestrian connections to the hamlets. 14. The Neighbourhood Plans shall incorporate an appropriate set of policies about First Nations cultural and spiritual connection to the Area and strategies for dealing with long-term protection of archaeological resources through the development process, including, but not limited to, the following: (a) requiring the development process to be undertaken in a respectful manner; (b) requiring as a condition of development approval, the retention of an appropriate archaeological monitor, preferably of First Nations' ancestry and funded by the proponent of the development; and (c) requiring for licensed archaeologists to assess any land alteration and/or grading in the Natural Heritage System considered to have archaeological potential. 15. The consultant shall actively seek the input and advice of First Nations in considering the most appropriate actions to take with respect to the protection, commemoration, long-term management and/or mitigative excavation of archaeological sites. Social, Institutional, Open Space and Recreational Facilities 16. With respect to Social, Institutional, Open Space and Recreational Facilities, the Neighbourhood Plans shall: (a) reflect the objectives of the CPDP; (b) identify and refine the locations for the social, institutional, open space and recreational facilities, in light of the results of the Community Services and Facilities Plan, the Highway 407 (Seaton Lands) Employment Land Study with respect to a potential university/college site, and the MESP; and (c) identify alternative means of providing for social, recreational or cultural amenities that enhance the quality of the natural or build environment Appendix A to the Recommended Terms of Reference for the Page 7 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program (18 June 2009) 161 and/or reflect the sustainability benchmarks developed through the sustainable development program. Transportation Network 17. The Neighbourhood Plans shall incorporate an appropriate policy framework to implement the objectives of the CPDP, with respect to transportation, transit, active transportation and the road network. 18. In particular with respect to Transportation, the Neighbourhood Plans shall establish a policy framework: (a) requiring road connections to be completed through conditions of draft approval; (b) establishing a robust local road network-to support arterial functions; (c) defining a street structure based on a modified grid that provides a high degree of permeability, access to key locations, and supports pedestrian and bicycle movement; (d) designing roads with reduced rights-of-way dimensions wherever possible to promote intimate streetscapes and neighbourhoods with sense of place, while respecting operational and safety requirements; (e) incorporating where appropriate, narrow lanes, on-street parking and central medians in the road design to encourage slow moving traffic through residential areas and mixed use neighbourhood centres; (f) supporting the requirement for interconnected roads through conditions of plan of subdivision approval; (g) designing streets as public spaces that link with the open space system; (h) identifying conditions of subdivision approval may be imposed establishing street trees and boulevard landscaping for various reasons including shade, contribution to neighbourhood character, and reducing stormwater runoff; (i) address alternative transport ation facilities (including park and ride, car pooling, bicycle storage areas, bus bays and accessible transit stop pads) in order to encourage and maximize the use of public transit from the earliest stage of development; and Q) address commuter parking and transit stations. Appendix A to the Recommended Terms of Reference for the Page 8 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program (18 June 2009) 162 19. Further with respect to transportation, to inform ongoing or future environmental assessments, the Neighbourhood Plans shall: (a) identify locations where road widenings should be undertaken in a manner that protects, incorporates and/or commemorates key heritage characteristics, such as treelines and hedgerows associated with traditional road allowances, and identify the required development measures (special grading and drainage, road widening off-set to one side) to protect these features; (b) in recognition of the unique heritage character of the Whitevale Road corridor from the Hamlet of Whitevale to the proposed Whitevale Road By-pass: (i) integrate new development along this corridor in a manner that is compatible with the existing cultural heritage value or interest of the landscape, properties and structures; (ii) determine an appropriate road cross-section, traffic management measures and accessibility that are compatible with the character of this corridor; (iii) evaluate and recommend appropriate measures such as lower rights-of-way widths, a pedestrian oriented streetscape and reduction of motorized vehicular traffic, as a way of conserving heritage attributes, context and character of the corridor; (iv) address Pickering Council's Resolution #04/06 (see attachment) respecting the potential extension of the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District easterly to Sideline 16 in light of previous Whitevale Heritage District Background Study, landscape work prepared under the Natural Heritage System Management Plan, the Landscape Study by Wendy Shearer, and the ability to achieve the population and development objectives of the CPDP; and (v) identify locations where road cross-sections should feature drainage ditches instead of curbs and gutters to extend or maintain the visual character of rural roads in new neighbourhood. 20. With respect to transportation, the Neighbourhood Plans shall also: (a) encourage minimum rights-of-ways widths on roads where feasible and appropriate; (b) establish design and landscape detail for road cross-sections to achieve the creation of high quality public realm, with particular emphasis on the ease of pedestrian movement along and across the road; and (c) establish policies enabling areas around interchanges, the GO station, and other major transit areas to support accommodate more intensive development and higher densities. Appendix A to the Recommended Terms of Reference for the Page 9 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program (18 June 2009) 163 21. Also with respect to transportation, the Neighbourhood Plans shall be accompanied with an analysis of travel demand sensitivity to determine that the transportation network, level of service and community design objectives of the CPDP will be achieved. Servicing 22. The Neighbourhood Plans shall incorporate policies on the phasing and timing of development considering: (a) the results of the Highway 407 (Seaton) Economic Development Study; (b) the results of the MESP; (c) the results of the Regional Class Environmental Assessment; (d) the results of the Fiscal Impact Studies; (e) creation of a transit supportive community; and (f) the City and Regional objectives to enable the development of jobs in the Prestige Employment Lands ahead of or concurrent with residential development. 23. With respect to servicing, the Neighbourhood Plans shall establish policies as follows: (a) requiring the submission of functional servicing plans prior to draft subdivision approval, and outlining the requirements of those plans based on the CPDP,, the MESP and, where appropriate, the Regional Class Environmental Assessment; and an understanding of the design of best management practices identified in the MESP and Regional EA; and; (b) integrating the results of the MESP and, where appropriate, the Regional Class Environmental Assessment, with respect to stormwater management, utilities, ground and surface water performance standards, aquatic habitats, and energy management. Implementation 24. To ensure the development of the community does not cause a financial burden on either the City of Pickering or the Regional Municipality of Durham with respect to facilities, services and infrastructure, the Neighbourhood Plans shall Appendix A to the Recommended Terms of Reference for the Page 10 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program (18 June 2009) 164 include an appropriate policy framework for the implementation of financial measures and financial agreements, including such matters as. (a) front-ending agreements, cost-sharing agreements and development charges; (b) the results of the Fiscal Impact Studies being undertaken for the City of Pickering and the Region of Durham; and (c) enabling the imposition of appropriate conditions of development approval requiring the cost, of development of community services and facilities to be fairly shared by all benefiting parties, as conditions of development approval. JADocuments0anning\Seafon Neighbourhood Plan%Tem ofRef\2009U2ecammendedAppendhWtoSeatonTert ISJune09.docx I 165 CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT CLERKS DIVISION notion as required clerk to Action -copy of DIRECTIVE MEMORANDUM Correspondence to Follow Receive as Information i i January 23, 2006 RECDI N E . , To: Neil Carroll JAN 2 5 2006 Director, Planning & Development PAN Ise &►,;ti RJN oFPap From: Debi A. Bentley Tnn~NT City Clerk Subject: Direction as per Minutes of the Meeting of City Council held on January 16, 2006 Designation of Heritage Conservation District COUNCIL DECISION RESOLUTION #04/06 WHEREAS section 8.1 of the Pickering Official Plan states that Council shall respect the City's cultural heritage, and shall conserve and integrate important cultural heritage resources from all time periods into the community; and WHEREAS section 8.4 of the Pickering Official Plan states that City Council, in consultation with its heritage committee, shall implement the provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act, including the designation under the Act of heritage conservation districts where appropriate; and WHEREAS policy 2.13(n) of Council adopted Amendment 13 to the Pickering Official Plan, which implements the results of the City's Growth Management Study, states that for the Central Pickering Area, Council shall recognize the heritage character of the Whitevale Road Corridor and require the design of new development to be compatible with the existing heritage, features and sites; and WHEREAS policy 2.13(1) of Council adopted Amendment 13 to the Pickering Official Plan identifies the need for a neighbourhood planning process for Central Pickering; and L 166 Directive Memorandum January 23.200§ WHEREAS the City of Pickering has designated by by-law the Hamlet of Whitevale and its surroundings, including lands on either side of Whitevale Road to the east of Sideline 26 as a heritage conservation district; and WHEREAS Heritage Pickering, the City's heritage committee, has approached Council requesting a potential extension of the heritage conservation district designation through Seaton along Whitevale Road, from the east limit of the existing heritage - conservation district to Sideline 16, extending one half a concession in width north and south of Whitevale Road and including Whitevale Road itself (the "Study Area"); and WHEREAS section 40 of the Ontario Heritage Act permits the Council of a municipality, in consultation with its heritage committee, to undertake a study of an area of the municipality for the purpose of designation of a heritage conservation district; and WHEREAS section 40.1 of the Ontario Heritage Act permits a municipality undertaking a study under section 40 of the Act to designate by by-law a defined area as a "heritage conservation study area" for a period of up to one year. NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby directs staff, as input to the neighbourhood planning process for Seaton, to undertake a heritage study of the Study Area in the context of an urbanizing area consistent with the City's Growth Management Study / Amendment 13, and prepare an appropriate by-law designating such area as a heritage conservation study area; and THAT a copy of this resolution be forwarded to all landowners within the Study Area, Heritage Pickering, the Minister of Culture, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Ontario Realty Corporation, the North Pickering Land Exchange Team, and DEL Property Management. Debi A. Bentley /dw Copy: Chief Administrative Officer City Clerk Appendix B to Recommended Terms of Reference for the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program - Selected List of Resources Available 167 The Regional Municipality of Durham Official Plan, Consolidation June 5, 2008 Pickering Official Plan, Edition 5, June 2008 City of Pickering Sustainable Development Guidelines - Consultants' Final Report, prepared by Dillon Consulting Limited et al, May 2007 Working Draft Sustainable Neighbourhood Scorecard, City of Pickering, May 2007 Sustainable Indicators - The Benchmarking Process, City of Pickering, June 2008 City of Pickering Growth Management Study: Phase 2: Preferred Growth Management Concept and Structure Plan, Dillon Consulting Limited, Sorenson Gravely Lowes Planning Associate Inc., Joseph Bogdan Associates Inc., Enid Slack Consulting Inc., February 2004 Central Pickering Development Plan, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, May 2006 Summary of Background Studies: Cultural Heritage; Housing and Mixed, Use, Natural Heritage System, Social, Institutional, Open Space and Recreational Facilities; Transportation Network; Water and Wastewater Servicing System; for Proposed Central Pickering Development Plan, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, July 2005 Durham/TorontoNork Area Transportation Study, Transportation and Infrastructure and Service - Quick Starts, TSH for Ministry of Transportation, February 2007 Highway 407 (Seaton Lands) Economic Development Study, Final Report, Hemson Consulting Ltd. et al, for Ontario Realty Corporation, April 2007 Highway 407 (Seaton Lands) Economic Development Study, Appendices, Hemson Consulting Ltd. et al, for Ontario Realty Corporation, April 2007 Seaton Community: Master Environmental Servicing Study, Existing Conditions Summary Report, prepared by Sernas et al, for the North Pickering Community Management Inc., August 2008 Seaton Community: Master Environmental Servicing Study, Existing Conditions Appendices, prepared by Sernas et al, for the North Pickering Community Management Inc., August 2008 Natural Heritage System Management Study and Master Trail System, Final Report, Schollen & Company Inc., et al, for MMAH, October 2008 Water Budget Assessment for the OPDA Development Planning Area (Seaton), Clarifica, Water Resources and Environmental Consulting for MMAH, July 2005 A Watershed Plan For Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek, A Report of the Duffins Creek and Carruthers Creek Watershed Task Forces, Toronto & Region Conservation for the Living City, August 2003 Appendix B to the Recommended Terms of Reference for the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program (18 June 2009) Page 2 . ~ 8 Ontario Realty Corporation, Class Environmental Assessment, Environmental Study Report, Acquisition of Oak Ridges Moraine Lands in Richmond Hill and the Sale or Disposal and Severance of Lands in Pickering (Seaton), Marshall Macklin Monaghan, January 2006 Cultural Landscape Assessment, Central Pickering: Seaton Lands, prepared by: Wendy Shearer Landscape Architect Limited, date stamped February 28, 2006 Seaton Built Heritage Assessment, Prepared for the North Pickering Land Exchange Team, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Planning and Development Division, Prepared by: Andre Scheinman, Heritage Preservation Consultant, November 2004 Seaton Cultural Heritage Resources Assessment, Summary Report, Volume I, by Hough Stansbury Woodland Naylor Dance Limited-Prime Consultants, July 1994 Seaton Cultural Heritage Resources Assessment, Technical Appendix, by Hough Stansbury Woodland Naylor Dance Limited-Prime Consultants, July 1994 Volume II Seaton Cultural Heritage' Resources Assessment, Confidential Appendix, by Hough Stansbury Woodland Naylor Dance Limited-Prime Consultants, July 1994 Volume III The Hamlet of Whitevale Heritage Conservation District. Study, Background Report, prepared by The Town of Pickering, August 1989 The Hamlet of Whitevale Heritage Conservation District Study, The District Plan, prepared by The Town of Pickering, June 1990 Whitevale Heritage Conservation District Guide, prepared by The City of Pickering Draft Plan Applications and supporting information for Metrus lands in Seaton, December 2007 & December 2008 Draft Plan Applications and supporting information for Lebovic lands in Seaton, January 2008, & April 2009 Seaton Landowner Group, Compiled Concept Plan, Sernas, January 2008 Seaton Retail Analysis, IBI for Seaton Landowners Group, September 2005 Durham/Toronto/York Area Transportation Study, Draft Final Report, TSH for Ministry of Transportation, January 2009. Draft Plan Applications and supporting information for Mattamy lands in Seaton, March 2009 Draft Plan Applications and supporting information for White Sun lands in Seaton, May 2009 Official Plan Amendment Applications, submitted for Lebovic lands in Seaton - Neighbourhood Plans for Neighbourhoods 6, 10 and 11, April 2009 Official Plan Amendment Applications submitted for Metrus lands in Seaton - Neighbourhood Plans for Neighbourhoods 3, 4, 5, and 9, April 2009 City of Pickering - Major Community Facility Needs and Locations for Seaton, Letter, June 2009 j\documents\planning\SeatonNeidPlan\TermsofRef\2009WRecommendedAppendixBtoTennsofRef1 Uune2009 .1 6. Y~ fONCES$~ON ROAO - ~ - ss sENENn• „~sr qT E i - ml 4 w + ROU z - NropJ>!NV z - 1 3 a Y ? Q O J z WMTEVAL I 1 E I , t x a a ee„e ~ $ 1 R 3 a RRID R wo GO I ,.,twuNTOY I ' HYDRO gT ' F I saroN no•o rte•n HE OOD RR a Z O HYDRO RR OR \ + Ti 11 I , . Q I _ 1 ' U RDOR 1 - - MyDR OORR~O d ' i - Goa ■ L _ + ~RE~ I I. I i ~ 1 1 1 1 I I I - 1 ~ ( City of Pickering Planning & Development Department CENTRAL PICKERING DATE: JUNE. 19, 2009 Terenet enter pate ~e ureee: a ® ® Orissa Inc. .-le. and All right e Reeervetl. Not o p.le plot of isl THE SEATON COMMUNITY ppli-. H MPAC and its eu pplie ' All rights R e°-e tl. Not Nol o plan of Survey. y. 1 L ATTACHMENT # TO REPORT # 20-05-09 170 Council Resolution # 210-08 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Dickerson 1. That Report PD 35-08 of the Director Planning Development regarding the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program be received; 2. That the draft Terms of Reference for the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program which requires appropriate opportunity for public engagement and consultation, be endorsed as set out in Appendix I as amended as follows: Section 18 (Consultant Selection) - First paragraph to read: The consulting team shall include in their proposal a section on Conflict of Interest. This section shall contain information respecting disclosure of possible conflict of interest including any business, financial or other interest respecting the lands, owners/developers of the Seaton lands or prospective owners/developers of the Seaton lands; Appendix A Section 1 (d~- identification of detailed community facility requirements including but not limited to municipal facilities and such other facilities as elementary and secondary schools, and places of worship; Appendix A Section 3 (a) - beginning with the first residential neighbourhood and employment lands along the 407 corridor, facilitating the early introduction of transit services, alternative transportation facilities, and retail and service uses to accommodate residents needs; and Appendix A Section 5 (e) - Requiring the commencement of the development of the employment lands along the Highway 407 corridor prior to the commencement of the residential neighbourhoods. 3. That the collaborative management approach to the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program between the City of Pickering and the Seaton Landowner Group (North Pickering Development Management Inc.) be endorsed; 4. That to formalize the collaborative management approach, the Mayor and the Clerk be authorized to enter into a Management Committee agreement with the Landowner Group that is consistent with the terms and conditions set out in Section 2.2 of this Report; 5. That the issuance of a Request for Proposals by the Seaton Landowner Group for the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program be advertised appropriately, authorized to the consulting firms listed below and any additional consulting firms wishing to submit a Request for Proposal, following the execution of the Management Committee agreement between the City and the Landowner Group: • Bousfields Inc; 171 • Malone Given Parsons Ltd. • Macaulay Shiomi Howson Ltd. • planningAlliance • Planning Partnership • Sorensen Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Inc. • Walker Nott Dragicevic Associates Limited • Weston Consulting Group Inc.; and • Young Wright/ISIGroup 6. That the following City staff be appointed to the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Management Committee: the Director, Office of Sustainability; the Director, Planning & Development; and the Manager, Policy; 7. That Council make the final decision on any matters regarding the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program, and that City staff formally report to Council regularly for information, direction and endorsement as appropriate on the work of the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program as it progresses; and 8. Further that a copy of this Report and Councils resolution be forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Ministry of Infrastructure and Energy, the Ontario Realty Corporation, the Region of Durham, the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, the Trustee for the North Pickering Development Management Inc. and the Sernas Group on behalf of the Landowner Group. REPORT TO COUNCIL PICKERING Addendum to Report Number: CAO 05-09 172 Date: September 21, 2009 From: Thomas J. Quinn Chief Administrative Officer Subject: Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program - Revised Approach - File: D-1100-001 Recommendation: 1. That the Addendum to Report CAO 05-09 of the Chief Administrative Officer, regarding a revised approach to completing the required Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program (now "Review"), be received; 2. That, in response to the City's Request for Proposals RFP-7-2009 for consulting services for the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review, the proposal submitted by Sorenson Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Inc., in association with The Planning Partnership, LEA Consulting Inc., SCS Consulting Group Ltd., N. Barry Lyons Consultants Limited, Robin Dee & Associates, and Bray Heritage, dated September 8, 2009, in the amount of $655,592 be accepted, subject to landowners executing a funding agreement; 3. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to: (a) pay any expenses incurred in 2009 related to the Review from funding received from the Seaton Landowners Group; (b) include the remaining expenditures and funding related to the Review in the 2010 Current Budget of the Planning & Development Department with the funding of the costs of the draft plan and zoning review component.being provided from the application fees received for this purpose; 4. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to give effect thereto, including entering into any necessary agreements; and 5. That a copy of this Report and Council's resolution be forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the 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. Addendum to Report CAO 05-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Page 2 173 Executive Summary: At the July 6, 2009 Joint Planning & Development and Executive Committee, Report CAO 05-09 requesting direction to proceed with a City funded Neighbourhood Planning Program (NPP) for Seaton, was referred to the September 21,'2009 Council meeting. The referral came following a delegation on behalf of the private Seaton landowners requesting time to meet with staff to discuss an alternative approach to completing work outlined in the draft Terms of Reference for the Seaton NPP (see Submission from Michael McQuaid, Attachment #1). Following discussions amongst senior City staff and landowners, a revised approach was proposed, and a general consensus was reached by staff and the landowners. As described in a Memorandum to Mayor Ryan and Members of Council from the Chief Administrative Officer, dated August 6, 2009 (see Attachment #2), key aspects of the alternate approach included: • the City hiring and directing a consulting team to review all the work on Seaton that either has been or will be completed by the Landowners Group, undertake any new required work and analysis, and provide recommendations to the City with respect to the following: 1. Official Plan policies and related matters for Seaton, including Official Plan amendments, neighbourhood plans,,sustainable performance measures, and development guidelines; 2. Required background studies, including a retail market review and affordable housing strategy; and 3. Draft plans of subdivisions and zoning by-laws for Seaton. • the Landowner Group, which includes the Province, funding the Review; and • a Request for Proposals (RFP) being issued over the summer based on the revised scope of work to expedite the start up time for the consultant, should Council select a consultant (see RFP-7-09, Attachment #3). The RFP was an open proposal call. A notice of the RFP was placed on the City's website and in Novae Res Urbis (see Attachment #4). In addition, five qualified consulting firms were forwarded a copy of the RFP based on the list contained in Council's resolution from October 2008. Another five firms picked up copies of the RFP. Two proposals were received: one from Malone Given Parson Limited, in association .with others; and the other from Sorensen Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Inc., in association with others. A Selection Committee consisting of senior City staff reviewed the proposals against the criteria outlined in the RFP. The Committee was impressed by the quality of the both proposals. The Selection Committee found that the proposal led by Sorensen Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Inc. et al (SGL) best met the City's needs in completing the Review, considering their team's strengths relative to the required work, and value for the money. It is recommended that SGL be retained to undertake the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review, subject to the landowners executing a funding agreement. Addendum to Report CAO 05-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Page 3 174 A draft funding agreement has been prepared and circulated for comment to the landowners (see Attachment #5). At the time of writing this Report, staff had not received comments from the Landowners Group on the draft agreement. As we are advised that the Landowners Group is meeting on September 21, 2009, staff is optimistic that the Group will be able to confirm their funding of the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review at or prior to the September 21 Council meeting. Financial Implications: The consultant will not be retained unless a funding agreement is executed by the Landowners Group. Landowner funding will cover parts one and two of the scope of work. Part three (approximately $95,000) will be covered by subdivision and rezoning application fees already received by the City for development applications in Seaton. Indirect costs will include staff time. Recommendation #3, prepared by the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, is to provide the authorities required to manage the funding and the payment of the expenses related to this Review through to completion in 2010. Sustainability Implications: Seaton is intended to be a national and potentially international model of urban sustainability. As with the original Terms of Reference for the comprehensive NPP, the revised scope of work requires the establishment of performance measures and benchmarks to assess the ongoing sustainability of Seaton. The proposal by SGL indicates the team will draw on a number of sources including the City's draft Sustainable Development Guidelines and use the expertise of The Planning Partnership to prepare the required performance measures and integrate them into the operative sections of the Official Plan. Background: 1.0 Seaton Neighbourhood Planninq Process 1.1 Report to Executive Committee CAO 05-09 was Referred to the Council Meeting of September 21, 2009 On October 20, 2008, Council passed Resolution #210-08 authorizing a collaborative approach to a comprehensive Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program (NPP), fully funded by the Landowner Group. On July 6, 2009, Report CAO 05-09 concerning the Seaton NPP appeared on the Agenda. The Report requested direction to proceed with a comprehensive NPP for Seaton, and to request financial assistance from the Province of Ontario to undertake the Program. Addendum to Report CAO 05-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Page 4 175 The Report explained that staff had been unable to obtain the agreement of the Seaton Landowner Group to fully fund and work with the City in a collaborative manner to undertake the comprehensive Program. Further, the Report noted that several landowners had prepared and submitted Official Plan Amendments and Neighbourhood Plans for their lands, and that other landowners were considering submitting similar applications. At the July 6, 2009 meeting, Michael McQuaid, on behalf of the Seaton Landowners Group, appeared as a delegation. He requested a deferral of the Report CAO 05-09 requesting time to meet with City staff to discuss an alternative approach to completing work outlined in the draft Terms of Reference for the Seaton NPP (see Submission from Michael McQuaid, Attachment #1). Executive Committee referred Report CAO 05-09 to the September 21, 2009 Council meeting. 1.2 A Revised Scope of Work and Process were Identified As a result of the discussions amongst senior City staff and landowners, a revised scope of work was prepared to recognize the significant amount of work already completed (or commenced) by the various landowners. Much of the work was now characterized as "review" rather than starting from a clean slate (as the City's original Terms of Reference had contemplated). Required background studies were limited to those reports mentioned in the Central Pickering Development Plan (eliminating the Community Services and Facilities Plan component). In addition, a development review component was added to advance the subdivision and zoning reviews. Overall, three components of work were identified as follows: 1. Policy and related matters: • prepare a draft amendment to Parts One and Two of the Pickering Official Plan to integrate pertinent policies and provisions for the development of Seaton as a whole, and a draft amendment to Part Three of the Pickering Official Plan to integrate pertinent policies and provisions as Neighbourhood Plans; • prepare sustainable performance measures and benchmarks for the development of Seaton; • prepare a draft Regional Plan amendment to integrate pertinent policies and provisions for the development of Seaton; • address Pickering Council's Resolution regarding a potential expansion of the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District; • prepare draft Development Guidelines for the Neighbourhoods; and • consult with stakeholders; Addendum to Report CAO 05-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Page 5 176 2. Background Studies: • prepare an updated retail market analysis; and • prepare an affordable housing strategy; and 3. Development Application Review: • prepare recommendations on the submitted draft plan of subdivision and zoning by-law amendment applications. Also, as a result of the discussions amongst senior staff and the landowners, a Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued over the summer. The RFP process helped identify the cost of the Review for the Landowners Group, and consultants interested and able to do the work for the City (see copy of RFP-7-09, Attachment #3; the detailed Scope of Work commences on Page 8 of the Attachment). 2.0 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review 2.1 The RFP Closed September 8, 2009 Five qualified consulting firms were forwarded a copy of the RFP based on the list that Council endorsed in considering Report PD 35-08 last October (Malone Given Parsons Ltd., Planning Alliance, Sorensen Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Inc., The Planning Partnership and Weston Consulting Group Inc). In addition, a notice of the availability of the RFP was place on the City's website and in Novae Res Urbis (see copy of notice, Attachment #4). Weston Consulting Group declined to bid. Five other firms picked up a copy of the RFP (MHBC Regional and Urban Planning, Urban Strategies Inc., nD Insight Consulting, iTrans Consulting Inc., and The MBTW Group). Two proposals were received. One proposal was submitted by Malone Given Parson Ltd., in association with the Rocky Mountain Institute, Perkins + Will, Science Applications International Corporation, Cosburn Associates Ltd., Poulos & Chung Ltd., Cole Engineering Group Ltd., Beacon Environmental, Wayne Morgan Heritage Planner, and Planning Solutions. The proposal cost is $995,627 inclusive of professional fees and expenses, excluding GST. The other proposal was submitted by Sorensen Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Inc., in association with The Planning Partnership, LEA Consulting Ltd., SCS Consulting Group, N. Barry Lyons Consulting Inc., Robin Dee & Associates and, Bray Heritage. The SGL proposal cost inclusive of professional fees, a contingency, expenses and GST is $655,592. Addendum to Report CAO 05-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Page 6 7 7 A copy of each proposal has been provided to Members of Council for their reference under separate cover, (subject to the provisions of the Municipal Freedom of Information & Protection of Privacy Act). A copy of each proposal has been provided to Sernas on behalf of the Landowner Group (subject to the provisions of the Municipal Freedom of Information & Protection of Privacy Act). 2.1 The Proposal by Sorensen Gravely Lowes (SGL) Ranked the Highest. A Selection Committee consisting of the (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer, the Director, Planning & Development, the Manager, Policy, Planning & Development and the Manager, Supply & Services reviewed the proposals against the following five criteria, as outlined in the RFP: • overall completeness and quality of submission; • qualifications of personnel, work program, quality of recommendation letters; • professional fees; • relevant company experience in undertaking projects of similar complexity, scope, importance and value, and lessons learned to be applied to this project; and • insurance, health and safety, addenda, and conflict of interest documentation. Although the Committee was impressed by the quality of both proposals received, the proposal by SGL was ranked higher, particularly with respect to the qualification of the personnel, work program, relevant company experience and proposal cost. SGL is the lead firm with significant experience in both public sector and private consulting. Warren Sorenson, with over 40 years of land use and policy planning would be Overall Project Manager. Paul Lowes, with over 20 years of experience on large scale policy matters and large scale development proposals, would be Lead for Official Plan and Neighbourhood Policies. SGL has a strong background with the planning for Seaton including the vision and policies of the Central Pickering Development Plan, and with the structure and content off the Pickering Official Plan. SGL has put together a team that includes strong skills in policy and development review planning, urban design, sustainability, public consultation, transportation, civil engineering, housing, retail market analysis, and cultural heritage. It is recommended that team led by Sorensen Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Inc. be retained to undertake the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review, subject to the landowners executing the funding agreement. Addendum to Report CAO 05-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program . Page 7 178 3.0 The Funding Agreement 3.1 The Draft Funding Agreement is Currently with the Landowners Group for Review A copy of the draft funding agreement is provided as Attachment #5. Key aspects include the following: • The Landowners Group and the City agree that the consultant selected by Council shall be responsible for the preparation of the consulting work, as set out in the RFP; • The Landowners Group is responsible for the cost of the consulting work excluding the development review component; • The City would fund the development review component of the consulting work from the subdivision and rezoning applications fees already received for development applications in Seaton; • The Landowners Group may appoint up to three people on the Technical Group; • If City Council materially alters the Terms of Reference or Study Management, the Trustee for the landowners shall have the option of terminating the agreement; and The City shall not include any costs or expenses associated with this consulting work in the calculation of any development charge by-law enacted by the City for Seaton. The City Solicitor and the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer have been involved in the drafting of this agreement. At the time of the writing of this Report, comments had not been received from the Landowners Group on the draft agreement. Attachments: 1. Submission from Michael McQuaid, dated July 6, 2009 2. Memorandum from the Chief Administrative Officer, dated August 6, 2009 3. Request for Proposals RFP-7-09 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review 4. Notice of Availability of RFP-7-09 5. Draft Funding Agreement between Landowners Group and City of Pickering Addendum to Report CAO 05-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program Page 8 179 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Tho as . Quinn, RD C I Manager, Policy Chief Administrative Office Neil Carrot , PP Director, Planning & Development Tomas E. ely uk, MCIP, RPP (Acting) Chief A ministrative Officer CR:ld Copy: Chief Administrative Officer (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer All Directors City Solicitor Recommended for the ideration of Pickering City ou cil V o J. Quinn, R MR, c r~tW II Chief Administrative Officer d ATTACHMENT #_L_ TREPORT # CAO 05-~ Barrister & Solicitors WeirFould SLLP 180 July 6, 2009 Michael J. McQuaid, Q.C. T: 416-947-5020 mcquaid@weirfoulds.com DELIVERED File 00056.00037 Mayor and Members of Council RECEIVED City-of Pickering One The Esplanade JUL 0 6 2009 Pickering, ON L1 V 6K7 CITY OF PICKERING Dear Mayor and Members of Council: DEPARTMENT Re: July 6, 2009 - Council and Executive Committee meeting I am appearing on behalf of a number of Seaton private landowners, including 1133373 Ontario Inc. (Lebovic Enterprises Ltd.), Mattamy (Seaton) Limited, Oakridges Farm Co-tenancy, a group including and represented by Metrus Developments Ltd., and White Sun Developments Limited, to make submissions relating to Report - CAO 05-09, which deals with the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Program. A summary of the points we would ask Council to consider and the relief or conclusion we would ask Council to reach is as follows. 1. We believe the landowners 'and City share a common goal in seeing Seaton is developed to the high standards set out in the Central Pickering Development Plan ("the Plan"). The processing and approval of Seaton will provide a significant benefit to the City and Region as one can see from the attached summaries of IBI. 2. For the past year or more one of the main issues all participants had to address was the timing of the servicing and marketing of the ORC Employment Lands. City and Regional representatives wanted assurances that the Employment Lands would be serviced developed and marketed so that jobs would be available either before or in conjunction with residential development. 3. Since November 2008 there have been extensive discussions and recent Symposium meetings under the direction of Minister Smitherman of MPIR and senior ORC and Ministry representatives. These meetings have led to a commitment from ORC to advance sufficient funds to accelerate the servicing of the ORC Employment Lands. The estimated cost of new Regional Services within Seaton is approximately $150 million The Exchange Tower, Suite 1600 P.O. Box 480, 130 King Street West Toronto, Ontario, Canada M5X U5 T:416-365-1110 F:416-365-1876 www.weirfoulds.com Addcrxlum +o ATTACHMENT #TO REPORT # CAD_45-09WeirFouldsLLP Barristers & Solicitors 181 which will have to be funded by the landowner group including the Ontario Realty Corporation ("ORC"). Council members will understand why the landowners and their banks or other financial lenders will want to see the Neighbourhood Plans ("NPs") and plans of subdivision processed before their substantial financial front end contributions to regional services are advanced to the Region. 4. Active discussions are underway with the Region to prepare the documentation for the front-end regional servicing agreement and an accompanying Development Charge By- law providing for credits during development. As well the landowners and ORChave committed $6.7 million in funding for the required EA which will be commence shortly by the Region. 5. In addition the ORC and our clients have retained consultants to prepare a Master Environmental Servicing Plan ("MESP") covering issues of surface and sub-surface water and , stormwater management, municipal servicing, transportation and transit servicing, community facility types and location identification, energy sustainability and development phasing for all of the 15 neighbourhoods and the ORC Employment Lands. That work has been underway since 2007. The final cost of this study including additional wetland monitoring will likely exceed $1.6 million. The MESP will be ready for submission to the City and Region this Fall. 6. Council members should not be concerned that the approach the landowners are following will result in an uncoordinated or piece meal result for the NPs. The areas of land use have clearly been established by the Provincial land use plan. The review by the City's staff and that of the consultant it retains for review will insure that a comprehensive coordinated plan results. We should also mention that the MMAH have a special role here. Policy 5.1.4 at p. 77 of the Plan requires review by the MMAH for the Province to insure the NPs conform with the provincial policies of this Plan. 7. Historically we know that the Province, through MMAH-MNR. and ORC undertook significant background studies during 2002-2006 to prepare the Plan pursuant to the Ontario Planning and Development Act, ("OPDA"). These studies are found in a 49 page summary prepared by ORC. All environmentally significant lands were identified and retained for the significant Natural Heritage System ( approximately 55% of the area)and significant planning work established the major land uses for the Development Planning Area that would allow development for up to 70,000 persons and 35,000 jobs. J 2 Qendurn Barristers & Solicitors ATTACHMENT # 1 TO REPORT#j~k0~-09 WeirFouldSLLP 182 8. Section 1.3 of the Plan confirms that the Plan is a major provincial plan. At page 18 it states: "The Plan is a complementary element of the Province's Greenbelt Plan (Order-in- Council 208/2005) and the Proposed Growth Plan for the Great Golden Horseshoe. The proposed land-use plan is shown .opposite." The coloured Land Use Plan found at page 19 is attached. 9. The Plan was approved by Cabinet by Order-in-Council 985/2006 on May 3, 2006. Section 3.2, Stage Two at p. 25 indicated: "Detailed Neighbourhood Plans shall be prepared by the City of Pickering, acting reasonably and in a timely fashion, and in no event commencing such work later than one year following the approval of this Plan, and concurrent with or prior to the processing of plans of subdivision." We are obviously way past the anticipated date of May 3, 2007 for the start of the NP process.. I 10. In April 2009 two of the landowners, Lebovic Enterprises and the Metrus Development group filed applications for NPs. The other two major landowners, Mattamy and White - Sun, are currently working on similar applications which will be filed shortly. ORC is undertaking to lead the development of a Seaton Implementation Plan which will form the basis to move forward with the NP process of the provincially owned lands. 11. It was made clear in a letter to City staff that by filing these applications that the landowners expected there would be continued discussion and dialogue with the staff and Members of Council respecting the content of the NPs and in fact an offer was made and is still open to suggest the City retain a planning consultant at the landowners' expense to review the applications for the NPs and the draft plan of subdivision and Zoning By-law. 12. We want to make it clear that the landowners are completely open to dialogue respecting the content of the NPs and draft plans within the context of the Plan. 13. Unfortunately we have a different view of the process to be followed for the NPs. We do not believe the City needs to undertake an $800,000 study over the next 8 to 12 months 3 ATTACHMENT#_L_TO REPORT 44-0 0-5-09 183 Barristers & Solicitors 183 to allow it to process the NPs. Such a long and complex process is not contemplated in the Plan. 14. All landowners have already filed application fees in significant amounts for review of the subdivision plans and NPs submitted to date. Additional fees are forthcoming when the other neighbourhood plans are submitted. We estimate the filing fees will amount to a sum over $3 million which the landowners think will be sufficient to review and process all NPs and the applications for plans of subdivision. 15. We should not be debating process or procedure but should be concentrating on - addressing the content of the NPs and plans. Some of the content of the Terms of Reference can be used as input in a review under the framework set out in the Planning Act. Also the landowners' planners will be submitting reports on how the applications for NPs and plans of subdivision each address the Sustainable Development Guidelines Consultants' Final Report dated May 2007 [the "SDG"]. There is substantial work already completed which will constitute important input to the process. 16. The substantial planning environmental and economic study work to date related to provision of regional services has been submitted to the Region and the EA studies and the engineering and economic reviews needed for a front-ending agreement and DC by- law processing and enactment are proceeding at the Region on a parallel critical path schedule. We believe that the City could process the NPs and plans of subdivision on a similar basis over the next 6 months using the substantial amount of planning and environmental work to date as well as additional work generated during the review process by the combination of landowners and City staff and its consultant. Proceeding on such a basis would allow work on Regional services to begin in 2010 and accelerate realization of the substantial job and tax benefits that Seaton will bring to the City and Region. 17. We believe we share the same goal with staff and Council, that of seeing the Plan built to the high level standards that are called for in the Plan thereby securing over time the significant jobs, taxes, and development charges set out in the IBI study referred to above. We submit this is a good time for a "reset". Motion Requested 18. We ask that the staff report b deferred until the first meeting in September to allow discussion to occur on theteps that will allow the applications for NPs and plan of 4 AdJendum ~O Barristers & Solicitors ATTACHMENT #-J-TO REPORT _0 0-m WeIrFoUld S LLP 184 subdivision to be processed in a cooperative way having regard for the Plan, the Planning Act and the historical documents created to date such as the Terms of Reference, the SDG, etc. Yours truly, WeirFoulds LLP Michael J. McQuaid, Q.C. MJM/ves Enclosures 1132306.1 5 AAACrAum ATTACHMENT #-J-TO REPORT #k 0.5-0 a N~ 00 ~m m m m B J as Em J 96 mm~y m c ~zz s m c m mm m~~ Tl~ C m ~4 L Z ~ J ..00a 3 and m Lo k T > ~+mmm '~ma a~<mUmg'el o m ~~my ju _E 'n gg 6 $ zisw3i~~~i~a` I ! W V N r = I `1 I r 1~ i 1 1 QZ OUIRP 1 - zaz WHOM bd WHOM s. ~'ti'r' .,..x+ rn1 ,o, 9z qupps tom. ~ ♦ - O ez -Ipgs veOa WON ` y d Y Bu 1 UmOl W04-0-410A y I4d d er►dum ~ 'ATTACHMENT #_J•_TO REPORT d9 186 Q 00 00 CD N N O r r o r r o v er v r N M ~ V7 F ~ W s E"' 0 d v C ~ a a Q r- N C h C O ^ it a' M d' pp . r_ a N Nom... n W O Q _l y ^ J O J W Q D C W) ON O r t- O 0 0 0 a abi. C. 0 IOnO C' e}'. 00 T v'i R Op O~ 00 r ~ r 1i M c00 aN l N CC 1,0 00 69 M 46S 60) OS 61~ E w o ~ a 00 rn = o o v, -tr rn o v K ICI In o y o I*- G c o _ t- o 000 a .41. IN 46S 46S ct In, r. h O ? •O C •O 69 L O L L C) It ' ;a C V O et 00 In 7 F °O M In oo I= C, 00 A. 0 O V1 06 K r o ao b!) ..7 ~ fi w+ u 'n N oo oo t- vi r N bi c ~7 In In c~ bA < O 6Li 46S 69 46S y y 69 69 69 c E' 40) m C6 O O p - O O ~ ~ Q' O O p ~ O O p U C o o o o c c y sF c O v7' i cd 14, W m q` L L ry . _ L L d d Ld 61 F I oil r 40, 75 N d d d d r C h O O O O w a+ C! h V V w~ V U L L L L opI d o c 8` c o f c o o e i CL ..y ^ V tai y I F~1 CQ 'O CO ' 4. '3 C yt y u a c y y c d N - U a Addendum ~ ATTACHMENT #-I-TO REPORT # CAS O'09 187 Exhibit 1.4 Seaton Development, Region of Durham Summary Page Annual Property Taxes at Mature State ('$000) (Based on 2007 Assessment and 2007 Tax rates) Durham City of Region Pickering Education Total' Residential. $45,605 $22,430 $16,499 $84,533 Non-Residential $18,925 $10,356 $22,195 $51,476 Total $64,529 $32,786 $38,694 $136,009 Development Charges ('$000) (Based on the current Region Wide Charges) Durham City of ('$000) Region Pickering EDC Total Residential $359,940 $193,720 S28,222- $581,883 Non-Residential $85,619 $45,427 $0 $131,046 Total $445,559 $239,148 $28,222 $712,929 IBI Tax_DC_Analysis_2008-11-20 \ Summary GROUP 11/20/2008 it ~~duM~o~ ~q Ccty o~ ATTACHMENT# TO REPORT -0 DICKERING MEMO To: Mayor Ryan and August 6, 2009 Members of Council From: Thomas J. Quinn Chief Administrative Officer Copy:. (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Director, Planning & Development .Manager, Development Review Subject: Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Process File: 2:1100-001 On July 6, 2009, Executive Committee considered a staff report recommending a City-initiated neighbourhood planning program for Seaton. At that meeting, Michael McQuaid, on behalf of the Seaton Landowners Group, requested that the staff report be deferred to allow discussion to take place between the Landowners Group and staff on an alternative approach to completing the neighbourhood planning program. At the meeting, Executive Committee deferred the staff report to the September 21, 2009 Council meeting. Following deferral of the item, staff reviewed Mr. McQuaid's submission and prepared an alternative approach to undertaking the Seaton neighbourhood planning program for discussion with the Landowners Group. On July 28, a meeting was held with the Landowners Group to discuss this alternative approach to see if consensus could be reached on proceeding with the project. .The alternative approach proposed by staff involves the hiring by the City of a consulting team to review all work on- Seaton that either has been or will be completed by the Landowners Group, undertake any required new work and analysis, and provide recommendations to the City with respect to the following: • Official Plan policies and related matters for Seaton, including Official Plan ..amendments, neighbourhood plans, sustainable performance measures, and development guidelines • required background studies, including a retail market review and an affordable housing strategy • draft plans of subdivisions and zoning by-laws for Seaton As drafted, the suggested alternative approach would be a City led initiative with all funding provided by the Landowners Group (which includes the Province). A community consultation program would also be included. It should also be noted that. the alternative approach would continue to recognize and reflect the vision for Seaton as a sustainable, mixed use, transit- supportive community of up to 70,000 people and 35,000 jobs. ,Qbder,dum -b ATTACHMENT #-.2-TO REPORT # C+4005`0q 189 We expect to receive a formal response from the Seaton Landowners Group early next week. Should the Landowners Group be prepared to proceed at this time with the alternative approach, staff would then issue a Request for Proposal (RFP) to qualified consulting firms to-see what firms are interested in undertaking the work, and at what cost. The information that we gather through the RFP process would be presented to Council for consideration at the September 21 meeting. Council would then have the option. at the meeting of directing staff to immediately engage a consulting team (selected by Council) to proceed with the alternative approach to undertaking the Seaton neighbourhood planning program through a cooperative process funded by the Landowners Group. An excerpt from the draft RFP that staff provided to the Landowners Group is attached for your information. The excerpt provides information on the suggested work to be undertaken by the consulting team through this alternative approach. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate contacting me or Tom Melymuk. 1 TJQ:Ijg . ME09080801.do" Attachment August 6, 2009 Page 2 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Process ATTACHMENT # 3 TO REPORT D #44O45-b9 190 Citq d ,kI PI RE-QUEST FOR PROPOSAL RFP-7-2009 Consulting Services for Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review Closing: Tuesday, September 8, 2009, before. 2:00PM (local time) - ATTACHMENT # 33 TO RE RT #CAb 05-09 No. RFP-7-2009 Consulting Services for Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review INFORMATION TO BIDDERS DELIVERY, CLOSING DATE, TIME AND LOCATION 1. One original and 4.(four) copies of the bidders submission shall be provided by the closing date and time, and each shall be no more than ten letter size pages printed "double-sided". 2. Each submission shall be printed double-side, corner "stapled" or "clipped". No other form of binding (cerlox, heated plastic spine,.vinyle, 3 ring binders or similar) to be used. 3. All submissions will be prepared at no cost to the City and will become the property of the City. 4. Submissions shall be sealed, clearly marked as to content - RFP-7-2009, Consulting Services for Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review and shall be delivered only to Supply & Services, 2nd Floor, Pickering Civic Complex, One The Esplanade, Pickering, Ontario L1V 6K7, before 2:00 p.m. local time Tuesday, September 8, 2009 5. The bidder is responsible for delivering the proposal before the closing date and time and assumes the risk of and all means of delivery be it by hand or courier. 6. Submissions must be time stamped at the above location. Submissions, which are time stamped after 2:00 pm local time, will be returned unopened, without exception. The time stamp applied by the time clock located in Supply & Services will be the only recognized time piece used in this process. 7. Submissions received at any other location or after the aforementioned date and time will be rejected. 8. Facsimile or electronic (email) transmissions will not be considered - and will be rejected. y 9. Where an envelope does not bear the Consultant or company name and/or address and it is received late by the City, the City is required to open the envelope or carton only for the purpose of returning the submission. 10. Proposals submitted shall be considered final and may not be altered by subsequent offerings, discussions or commitments unless authorized by the City. 11. Submissions will be opened by a member of Supply & Services as soon as practicable following the closing date and time, which is not a public opening. Only the company names of submissions received by the closing date and time will be made available to enquiries. This is only a list of company names responding to the proposal and is not deemed to indicate compliance with submission requirements. Page 2 Addenaurn ~o ATTACHMENT # TO REPORT #9 o 05-69 192. No. RFP-7-2009 Consulting Services for Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review 12. Proposals shall be irrevocable and valid for acceptance by the City of Pickering for a period of ninety (90) days from the proposal closing date. 13. If the Company is not a limited company, pursuant to the relevant Provincial or Federal legislation, include status of company within the proposal and if available include a copy of the most recent business or partnership registration form filed with the Ministry of Consumer and Commercial Relations., 14. The City, its elected officials, employees and agents will not be responsible for any liabilities, costs, expenses, loss or damage incurred, sustained or suffered by any person or business prior or subsequent to, or by reason of the acceptance, or non- acceptance by the City of any submission, or by reason of any delay in the acceptance of any submission. 15. In the receipt of proposals, no obligation is incurred by the City to accept the lowest, highest or any proposal. 16. Should a dispute arise from the terms and conditions outlined herein, regarding meaning, intent or ambiguity, the decision of the City shall be final. ESSENTIAL,SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS 17. The submission of a proposal will be considered presumptive evidence that the bidder has carefully examined the City's requirements, investigated and is fully informed of all conditions which may be encountered and may affect the delivery of the services, quality and volume of work to be performed outlined within the Terms of Reference. 18. Proposal is to include the following essential documentation and be organized and presented in the order outlined below, in an indexed format. Proposals which do not include essential documentation, are incomplete or assembled not in accordance with instructions will adversely affect its evaluation by way of scoring reductions and could include not considering the proposal at all. 19. Qualifications of Personnel Resume(s) for each of the personnel assigned to the project and a description of roles of each of the personnel in carrying out the scope of services required. Detailed resumes are excluded from page count referred to in Clause 1. 20. Work Program and Schedule Work program and schedule including details of the study process, personnel assigned to each task, milestones, projected dates for Draft and Final deliverables, and timing for meetings with the Management Committee, Technical Group and other public/agency/land owner consultation meetings. Page 3 L ~aenaum~ ATTACHMENT # ~LTO REPORT#CAoo5-oq No. RFP-7-2009 Consulting Services for Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review 193 21. Letters of Recommendation: Provide three letters of recommendation from municipal / government clients which include a description of the work performed and the outcomes. Letters of recommendation are excluded from page count referred to in Clause 1. 22. Professional Fees: Per diem and hourly fees shall be stated for each person. Time for each personnel assigned, by individual task, within each stream of work (i) policy and related matters (ii) background studies and (iii) development application review, with fees totalled per task and stream of work. Rates and details of travel (mileage, accommodation) shall be stated as applicable. Rates and details of disbursements shall be stated, as applicable. 23. Company Experience A description of company experience in undertaking projects having similar complexity, scope and importance, of similar value, and lessons learned from similar completed projects that will be applied to this one. 24. Insurance, Health & Safety, Addenda, Conflict of Interest (a) Proof of insurance or letter from Insurance Agent/Broker confirming the bidder can be insured for Commercial General Liability Insurance Coverage, Automobile Liability Insurance Coverage, Property Damage and Professional Liability, each of not less than Two Million Dollars ($2,000,000). (b)A copy of the current Clearance Certificate issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board. (c) Acknowledge City's Health & Safety Regulations form (attached). (d) Statement to acknowledge Addenda received. If no Addenda has been issued by the City and therefore, not received, a statement to that effect shall be included. (e) Statement to confirm that there is no actual or potential conflicts of interest that would preclude involvement on this project, and that we will be notified in the event a specific task creates an actual or potential conflict of interest that may preclude involvement in a particular component of the project. (a) to (e) excluded from the page count referred to in Clause 1. Paae 4 Addendum ~ ATTACHMENT # 3 TO REPORT # A -65-09 No. RFP-7-2009 194 Consulting Services for Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review EVALUATION OF SUBMISSIONS 25. Submissions will be evaluated according'to the following criteria: Relative Value/100 a. Overall completeness. and quality of submission 10 b. Qualifications of personnel, work program 30 and schedule, quality of recommendation letters c. Professional Fees 15 d. Relevant company experience in undertaking 35 projects of similar complexity, scope, importance and value and lessons learned to be applied to this project. e. Insurance, health & safety, addenda, conflict of 10 interest documentation 26. Submissions will be reviewed by an Evaluation Committee consisting of the Director, Office of Sustainability, Director, Planning & Development, Manager, Policy, Planning & Development and the Manager, Supply & Services, and evaluated according to the criteria described above. The Evaluation Committee will rank the submissions lowest to highest score to-tabulate an average score per submission and develop a short-list of up to 2 highest scoring proposals for consideration. An interview may be requested of the 2 consultants by the evaluation committee to tabulate a combined average score (proposal and interview) to recommend the highest scoring consultant for consideration.. The Evaluation Committee may recommend the highest scoring submission for consideration without undertaking the interview process. The score or ranking by the committee for any or all proposals/interview will not be disclosed on enquiry. 27. Unsatisfactory references known to a member of the evaluation committee or unsatisfactory previous work experience will result in the Consultant's proposal not being considered. 28. The City reserves the right to: • accept a proposal in whole or in part • expand the number of Consultants for consideration, as recommended by the evaluation committee; • not consider, not accept or reject any or all submissions; • waive omissions, notwithstanding essential items; or • cancel or amend this call if in so doing the best interests of the City will be served and no liability shall accrue to he t City from such undertakings and all decisions derived therefrom. Page 5 ,ATTACHMENT # TO REPORT# No. RFP-7-2009 Consulting Services for Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review 29. Professional fees must include all operating, overhead, and incidental costs and the Consultant must be satisfied as to the total requirements of this request for proposal. Pricing is subject to Goods and Services Tax. Provincial Sales Tax is not applicable. 30. All invoices will precisely indicate the tasks for which work has been completed as well as the remaining percentage of a task or tasks to be done. 31. Any representation or solicitation to the City, its elected officials, employees or agents with respect to the proponent's submission will disqualify the submission. The City, its elected officials, .employees and agents will not be responsible for any liabilities, costs, expenses, loss or damage incurred, sustained or suffered by any proponent, prior or subsequent to, or by reason of the acceptance, or non-acceptance by the City of any submission, or by reason of any delay in the acceptance of any submission. 32. Disclosure of information submitted is subject to the Municipal Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act. To prevent the release of information the proponent must state the information is submitted in confidence and indicate the nature of the confidential information and what harm would result from the release. ENQUIRIES 33. Enquiries can be made as follows: Related to Scope of Work Related to Procurement Process City of Pickering City of Pickering Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Vera A. Felgemacher, C.P.P., CPPO, CPPB, Manager, Policy C.P.M., CMM III Planning & Development Manager, One The Esplanade Supply & Services Pickering, ON L1V 61<7 One The Esplanade Tel.. 905.420.4660 Ext 2038 Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Fax 905.420.7648 Tel. 905.420.4660 Ext 2152 Fax 905.420.5313 34. Information respecting the Seaton Community can be found on.the City's website at cityofpickering.com. Some of the Selected Resources Available (see Appendix A) are available on the web site. A paper copy of the Selected Resources are available for viewing, by appointment, at the Planning Development Department. Page 6 Addendu,n ~ . ATTACHMENT #__3 TO REPORT # CAb Q6-09 No. RFP-7-2009 _ 196 Consulting Services for Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review TERMS OF REFERENCE VISION FOR SEATON 35. In May 2006, the Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP), which was prepared under the provisions of the Ontario Planning and Development Act, 9994, was approved. The CPDP sets out a clear vision for Seaton as a sustainable, mixed-use, transit-supportive and pedestrian-friendly urban community, integrated with an extensive natural heritage system. The CPDP identifies a number of plans, studies and reviews that must be completed to implement the Plan. Since CPDP's approval, many of the required studies have been completed or are underway (see Appendix A - Selected Resources Available). This request for consulting services is to address some of the remaining requirements, and commence review of development applications. SCOPE OF SERVICES General 36. Using the principles and vision of the CPDP, and reviewing all available work completed to date or in progress, and undertaking original research to address gaps where. necessary, and taking into consideration the results of a consultation program, the Consultant shall undertake three streams of work as follows: (i) Policy and relat ed matters:. Prepare a draft amendment to Parts One and Two of the Pickering Official Plan to integrate pertinent policies and provisions for the development of Seaton as a whole, and a draft amendment to Part Three of the Pickering Official Plan to integrate pertinent policies and provisions as Neighbourhood Plans, • Prepare sustainable performance measures and benchmarks for the development of Seaton; • Prepare a draft Regional Plan amendment to integrate pertinent policies and provisions for the development of Seaton; • Prepare draft Development Guidelines for the Neighbourhoods.; and • Consult with stakeholders; y (ii) Background Studies: . • Prepare an updated retail market analysis; and • Prepare an affordable housing strategy; and (iii) Development Application Review: • Prepare recommendations on the submitted draft plan of subdivision and zoning by-law amendment applications. Page 7 gdd~nau~r, ~o ATTACHMENT # 3 TO REPORT # C* 65-09 No. RFP-7-2009 Consulting Services for Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review 197 Details 37. More specifically, the"Consultant's work shall include but may not necessarily be limited to the following: Policy, Neighbourhood Plans and Development Guidelines • Review available information, identify and address critical gaps in the,Neighbourhood Plans prepared by the landowners relative to the objectives of the-Central Pickering Development Plan; (to date, two of the major private landowners have submitted seven neighbourhood plans for their holdings and the other two major private landowners are currently preparing neighbourhood plans for their holdings; the Province of Ontario intends to prepare Neighbourhood Plans for its lands in Seaton through the Seaton Implementation Plan); • Review completed and ongoing governmental and non-governmental, studies (i.e.: Highway 407 (Seaton) Economic Development Study, Natural Heritage System Management Plan and Master Trail Study, Master Environmental Servicing Plan (MESP), Region of Durham's Class Environmental Assessment (EA) and Seaton Implementation Plan); determine policy options by which the results of the studies can be implemented; identify matters that require inclusion in the City's amendment and development guidelines; and prepare implementing draft official plan policy or guidelines; • Building on the City of Pickering Draft Sustainable Development Guidelines, the sustainability guidelines from the Highway 407 (Seaton) Economic Development Study, the Seaton Master Environmental Servicing Plan (MESP) and the Seaton Implementation Plan, identify short, medium and long term actions that address the integration of the community sustainability principles in. the Neighbourhood Plans including benchmarks for: energy conservation; building and community design; transit usage; cultural heritage conservation; accessibility for the disabled; air quality; human health. promotion; and environmental net gain; and prepare implementing draft official plan policy; • Considering the urban design guidelines in the CPDP, and the urban design sections of the landowners' Neighbourhood Plans, and other design work from completed or in- progress studies, prepare draft Development Guidelines for the neighbourhoods including text, graphics, drawing and maps as required to address urban form, architectural control, landscaping, pub.lic realm, streetscapes, focal points, significant views and vistas, development within Mixed Use Areas and development adjacent to arterial and collector roads; and prepare related draft official plan policy to support where necessary; • Address Pickering Council's resolution regarding a potential expansion of the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District (see Appendix B); • Provide consulting services to prepare: Paae 8 3 ,~ldendum~ _ _ ATTACHMENT# TO REPORT# CA6 05-04 No. RFP-7-2009 198 Consulting Services for Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review (i) a draft general conformity amendment to the Pickering Official Plan (Parts One and Two), including policies and schedules that apply across all of Seaton; (ii) a related draft Durham Regional Official Plan amendment, including policies and schedules for Seaton; and (iii) draft Neighbourhood Plans and related amendments to the Pickering Official Plan (Part Three), including policies and maps, addressing unique neighbourhood-wide or site-specific matters that require additional policy guidance; Neighbourhood Plans shall be prepared for the entire geography.of Seaton (all developable lands: residential, mixed use areas and employment lands; as well as the Natural Heritage System lands). • Prepare and implement a consultation program to engage a broad range of stakeholders including: the public; area residents; regional and municipal departments, agencies, utilities, organizations and developers/landowners who are instrumental in 'building' Seaton; and other interested stakeholders; • Provide input, as appropriate, to ensure that information and recommendations from the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review are effectively communicated to a Consultant in the process of being retained by Sernas Associates to undertake a combined First Nations Consultation Program for the Seaton Master Environmental Servicing Plan (MESP), the Seaton Regional Class EA, and this Review (Sernas is undertaking the Seaton MESP); Background Studies • Reviewing the Seaton Landowner Group's retail market analysis from September 2005, and updating the information as necessary, assess and rationalize the amount of retail floor space to serve the population in Seaton, determining the amount, location, hierarchy and distribution of retail uses in keeping with the vision of Seaton, and prepare implementing draft official plan policy. If a concentration of commercial floor space is identified exceeding 56,000 m or larger on an individual or cumulative basis, the analysis is required to address the effect on the planned function and viability of Downtown Pickering or other local Centres; • Prepare a housing strategy detailing the means to achieve a 25% target of new residential units in housing forms considered affordable to low and moderate income households, identify the appropriate housing forms, and prepare implementing draft official plan policy; Development Review • Considering the work completed through this consulting assignment, review and make recommendations to the City on the submitted draft plans of subdivision and zoning by-law amendment applications; (the four major private landowners have submitted a total of 20 draft plans of subdivision and zoning by-law amendment applications covering most if not all their land holdings); Page 9 ATTACHMENT# 3 Addendum~o TO REPORT # Coo 05-09 No. RFP-7-2009 Consulting Services for Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review 38. The Consultant shall assist staff at meetings of Council or Committees of Council to present or discuss the comprehensive review and official plan conformity amendments. 39. In addition, the Consultant shall be responsible for recording, typing and distributing minutes of the Management Committee meetings, and the Technical Group meetings, subject to the approval of the Management Committee. 40. The term of this consulting assignment is for eight to ten months from the date of confirmation of a purchase order. 41. An award is subject to Council approval and confirmation of funding. DELIVERABLES 42. For the reports- listed below, it is anticipated that a "Draft" and a "Final Report will be required. 1. A Policy Report containing: • Draft general amendment to the Pickering Official Plan, including policies and schedules that apply across all,of Seaton; • Draft Neighbourhood Plans (including sustainability measures and benchmarks) and related amendments to the Pickering Official Plan; • Draft Durham Regional Official Plan amendment, including policies and schedules for Seaton; • Draft Development Guidelines for the neighbourhoods; and • Summary of Consultation; 2. A Background Studies Report containing: • Affordable Housing Strategy; and • Retail Market Analysis; and 3. A Development Application Review Report containing: • the recommendations on the draft plans of subdivision and zoning by-law amendment applications. For the deliverables listed, the Consultant shall forward the following to the City of Pickering - • For each "Draft" Report:' 25 draft copies (paper); one copy in digital format using the Microsoft Office suite of applications (all mapping to be provided in AutoCad.dwg or.dxf); one copy in PDF); and • For each "Final" Report: 100 copies (paper); one camera ready copy of the final version; one copy of the final version in digital format using the Microsoft suite of applications (all mapping to be provided in AutoCad.dwg or.dxf format). 43. All documents shall become the property of the City of Pickering and the City shall be the sole copyright holder of these documents. Paae 10 i AAA"m 40 .4TTACHMENT#-23-TO 010-05-09 No. RFP-7-2009 200 Consulting Services for Seaton. Neighbourhood Planning Review STUDY MANAGEMENT 44. The City of Pickering will manage the study. A Management Committee consisting of three members from City staff, being the Director, Office of Sustainability; the Director, Planning & Development, and the Manager, Policy, will be established to provide strategic direction to the Consultant, and liaise with the Seaton Advisory Committee. The Committee will also be responsible for supervising the study work to ensure that it is carried out in accordance with the Terms of Reference and to the satisfaction of the City of Pickering. 45. The Consultant shall meet with the Management Committee on a regular basis as well as at milestones during the study. The Committee shall monitor study progress, liaise with the Consultant, the Province and the Region of Durham, and exercise budgetary, control and revisions to the Terms of Reference. The Committee may identify additional issues for which options may be necessary to generate discussion, when additional public input may be required and whether both draft and revised draft reports are required in all instances. The Committee shall also be responsible for the circulation of study products, notices and approval of Consultant liaison with the public and other agencies. 46. Day to day reporting and communications will be with the Manager, Policy, Planning & Development. TECHNICAL GROUP 47. A Technical Group will be established to provide technical input, advice and address issues. The Group comprises, as a minimum, planning or other consultants for the Landowners and Province, Provincial staff, Regional staff, City staff, and other agencies as may be required such as the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, school boards or utilities. The Consulting Team shall meet with the Technical Group as a regular part of the process and at milestones during the study. APPENDICES A Selected List of Resources Available B City Council Resolution 04/06 Page 11 1 A,ddendu~»~ ATTACHMENT # _~-LTO REPORT#Gko Z-o9 No. RFP-7-2009 Consulting Services for Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review 01 APPENDIX A: Selected List of Resources Available 2 The Regional Municipality of Durham Official Plan, Consolidation June 5, 2008 Pickering Official Plan, Edition 5, June 2008 City of Pickering Sustainable Development Guidelines - Consultants' Final Report, prepared by Dillon Consulting Limited et al, May 2007 Working Draft Sustainable Neighbourhood Scorecard, City of Pickering, May 2007 Sustainable Indicators - The Benchmarking Process, City*of Pickering, June 2008 City of Pickering - Major Community Facility Needs and Locations for Seaton, Letter, June 2009 Central Pickering Development Plan,.Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, May 2006 Highway 407 (Seaton Lands) Economic Development Study, Final Report & Appendices, Hemson Consulting Ltd. et al, for Ontario Realty Corporation, April 2007 Natural Heritage System Management Study and Master Trail System, Final Report, Schollen & Company Inc., et al, for MMAH, October 2008 Durham/Toronto/York Area Transportation Study, Draft Final Report, TSH for Ministry of Transportation, January 2009 (subject to Provincial release) Cultural Landscape Assessment, Central Pickering: Seaton Lands, prepared by: Wendy Shearer Landscape Architect Limited, date stamped February 28, 2000 Seaton Built Heritage Assessment, Prepared for the North Pickering Land Exchange Team, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing., Planning and Development Division, prepared by: Andre Scheinman, Heritage Preservation Consultant, November 2004 Seaton Cultural Heritage Resources Assessment, Summary Report and Technical Appendices, Volume I, by Hough Stansbury Woodland Naylor Dance Limited-Prime Consultants, July 1994 The Hamlet of Whitevale Heritage Conservation District Study, Background Report & District Plan, prepared by The Town of Pickering, August 1989 Whitevale Heritage Conservation District Guide, prepared by. The City of Pickering Seaton Community: Master Environmental Servicing Study, Existing Conditions Summary Report & Appendices, prepared by Sernas et.al, for the North. Pickering Community Management Inc., August 2008; and Energy Management Plan, by SAIC, for Sernas Associates, July 2009; Seaton Retail Analysis, IBI for Seaton Landowners Group, September 2005 Seaton Landowner. Group, Compiled Concept Plan, Sernas, January 2008 Seaton Draft Plan and Rezoning Applications for Metrus lands (December 2007 & December 2008), for Lebovic lands (January 2008 & April 2009), for Mattamy lands (March 2009) and for White Sun lands (May 2009) and Official Plan Amendment Applications, submitted for Lebovic lands - Plans for Neighbourhoods 6, 10 and 11, April 2009, and Metrus lands - Plans for Neighbourhoods 3, 4, 5, and 9, April 2009 Seaton Implementation Plan Terms of Reference, Ontario Realty Corporation, July 2009 Regional Class Environmental Assessment for Water, Sewers and Transportation Terms of Reference, Region of Durham, 2007 Page 12 40 ATTACH MENT#-3- TO REPORT e,40 05-0c1 - 202 PPNDlx CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT. P action as required CLERKS DIVISION Cleric to Action . copy of DIRECTIVE MEMORANDUM Correspondence to Follow Receive as JnfORTUM n January 23, 2006 S E C F-' V E: D JAN 2 5 2006 To: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development CITY of '-k4EL6Pb1ENT PLANNIpF PRTMCN From: Debi A. Bentley City Clerk Subject: Direction as per Minutes of the Meeting of City Council held on January 16, 2006 Designation of Heritage Conservation District COUNCIL DECISION 13ESSOLUTION #04106 WHEREAS section 8.1 of the Pickering Official Plan states that Council shall respect the City's cultural heritage, and shall conserve and integrate important cultural heritage resources from all time periods into the community; and WHEREAS section 8.4 of the Pickering Official Plan states that City Council, in consultation with its heritage committee, shall implement the provisions of the Ontario HenTege Act, including the designation under the Act of heritage conservation districts where appropriate; and WHEREAS policy 2.13(n) of Council adopted Amendment 13 to the Pickering Official Plan, which implements the results of the City's Growth. Management Study, states that for the Central Pickering Area, Council shall recognize the heritage character of the Whitevale Road Corridor and require the design of new development to be compatible with the existing heritage, features and sites; and WHEREAS policy 2.13(1) of Council adopted Amendment 13 to the Pickering Official Plan identifies the need for a neighbourhood planning process for Central Pickering; and i ~~endum-b ATTACHMENT # .~=LTO REPORT# CV~o t5-bq APPENDIX B .203 Directive Memorandum January 23, 2006 WHEREAS the City of Pickering has designated by by-law the Hamlet of Whit evale and its surroundings, including lands on either side of Whitevale Road to the east of Sideline 26 as a heritage conservation district; and WHEREAS Heritage Pickering, the City's heritage committee, has approached Council requesting a potential extension of the heritage conservation district designation through Seaton along Whitevale Road, from the east limit of the existing heritage conservation district to Sideline 16, extending one half a concession in width north and south of Whitevale Road and including Whitevale Road itself (th(3 "Study Area"); and WHEREAS section 40 of the Ontario Heritage Act permits the Council of a municipality, in consultation with its heritage committee, to undertake a study of an area of the municipality for the purpose of designation of a heritage conservation district; and WHEREAS section 40.1 of the Ontario Heritage Act permits a municipality undertaking a study under section 40 of the Act to designate by by-law a defined area as a "heritage conservation study area" for a period of up to one year. NOW THEREFORE the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby directs staff, as input to the neighbourhood planning process for Seaton, to undertake a heritage study of the Study Area in the context of an urbanizing area consistent with the City's Growth Management Study / Amendment 13, and prepare an appropriate by-law designating such area as a heritage conservation study area; and THAT a copy of this resolution be forwarded to all landowners within the Study Area, Heritage Pickering, the Minister of Culture, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and . Housing, Ontario Realty Corporation, the North Pickering Land Exchange Team, and DEL Property Management. Debi A. Bentley /dw Copy: Chief Administrative Officer ' City Clerk A~aendum ~ #Cl a5-D9 ATTACHMENT# - TO REPORT 204 No. RFP-7-2009 Consulting Services for Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review HEALTH AND SAFETY REGULATIONS 1. (a) The City is the "owner" throughout the term of this contract. (b) The Company is the "employer" throughout the term of this contract. 2. The company certifies that it, its employees, its subcontractors and their employees, (a) are aware of their respective duties and obligations under. the Occupational Health and Safety Act, as amended from time to time, and all Regulations thereunder (the "Act'); and (b) have sufficient knowledge and training to perform all matters required pursuant to. this contract/quotation safely and in compliance with the Act. (c) are covered by WSIB. 3. In the performance of all matters required pursuant to this contract/quotation, the company shall, (a) act safely and comply in all respects with the Act, and (b) ensure that its employees, its subcontractors and their, employees act safely and comply in all respects with the Act. 4. The company shall rectify any unsafe act or practice and any non-compliance with the Act at its expense immediately upon being notified by any person of the existence of such act, practice or non-compliance. 5. The company shall permit representatives of the City on site at any time or times for the purpose of inspection to determine compliance with this contract/quotation. 6. No act or omission by any representative of the City shall be deemed to be an assumption of any of the duties or obligations of the company or any of its subcontractors under the Act. 7. The company shall indemnify and save harmless the City, (a) from any loss, inconvenience, damage or cost to the City, which may result from the company or any of its employees, its subcontractors or their employees failing to act safely or to comply in all respects with the Act in the performance of any matters required pursuant to this contract/quotation; and (b) against any action or claim, and costs related thereto, brought against the City, by any person arising out of any unsafe act or practice or any non-compliance with the Act by the company or any of its employees; its subcontractors or their employees in the performance of any matter required pursuant to this contract/quotation. (c) from any and all charges, fines, penalties, and costs that may be .jncurred or paid by the City if the City (or any of its council members or employees) shall be made a party to any charge under the Act in relation to any violation of the Act arising out of this contract/quotation. 8. The company shall abide by the Workplace Safety & Insurance Board Act, as amended from time to time and all Regulations thereunder. CONDITION OF WORK SITE 9. The company shall remove and legally dispose of debris, packaging and waste materials frequently, or as directed by the City, in accordance with all governmental regulations applicable to such activities. Acknowledged: Date: Signature Print Name Company Page 15 Addendum fo ATTACHMENT # !~LTO REPORT # C40 05 ag 205 Excerpts from Novae Res Urbis of Wednesday, August 19, 2009 REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Consulting Services for Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review No. RFP - 7 - 2009 Sealed proposals will be received by the undersigned department for the above no later than 2:00 pm (local time): Tuesday, September 8, 2009 Proposals are invited from consultants to review recent work on Seaton that has been or is being completed by the landowners (in- cluding the Province), undertake required new work and analysis, undertake a consultation program, and provide recommendations to the City with respect to the following: • Official Plan policies and related matters for Seaton, including Official Plan amendments, neighbourhood plans, sustainable performance measures, and development guidelines; • results of required background studies, including updating the retail market analysis,.and establishing an affordable housing strategy; and • submitted draft plan of subdivision and zoning by-law applications for Seaton. This is not a conclusive listing of requirements - it is solely the bidder's responsibility to review the Terms of Reference for full requirements. Terms of Reference can be obtained from Supply & Services, 2nd Floor, One The Esplanade, Pickering = Tel. 905.420.4616, Fax. 905.420.531.3. . Lowest, highest or any proposal not necessarily accepted. The Corporation of the City of Pickering Corporate Services Department Supply and Services, 2nd Floor One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario LIV 6K7 Vera A. Felgemacher, C.P.P., CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M., CMM III Manager, Supply and Services Ad~d~rn ~ , ATTACHMENT # : TO REPORT #CJ~-09 206 SEATON NEIGHBOURHOOD PLANNING REVIEW AGREEMENT September_, 2009 Between: THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING (the "City") - and - 1133373 ONTARIO INCORPORATED ("1133373") - and AFFILIATED REALTY CORPORATION LIMITED ("Affiliated") - and CHESTERME'RE INVESTMENTS LIMITED ("Chestermere") and - HUNLEY HOMES LIMITED Hunley' ) - and - 1350557 ONTARIO LIMITED ("1350557") -and- ZAVALA DEVELOPMENTS INC. ("Zavala") -and- MATTAMY (SEATON) LIMITED ("Mattamy Seaton") a&r1bAm ATTACHMENT # 5 TO REPORT#CAD 65-DI and - 207 WHITE SUN DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED ("White Sun") -and- ONTARIO REALTY CORPORATION acting as agent on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal (the "Province") (1133373, Affiliated, Chestermere, Hunley, 1350557, Zavala Mattamy Seaton, White Sun and the Province are collectively referred to in this Agreement as the "Landowners" and individually as a "Landowner") - and - NORTH PICKERING COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT INC. (the "Trustee") WHEREAS the Landowners are owners of the lands in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham shown in Schedule "A (the "Seaton Lands"); and. WHEREAS the Trustee has been appointed trustee for the Landowners in respect of certain matters relating to the development of the Seaton Lands; and WHEREAS the Seaton Lands are located within the area that is subject to the Central Pickering Development Plan ("CPDP") which was approved by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing pursuant to the Ontario Planning and Development Act, 1994; and WHEREAS the CPDP identifies a number of studies that must be completed, many of which have been completed or are underway; WHEREAS the City has issued Request for Proposal RFP-7-2009 ("RFP") for consulting services to address some of the remaining study requirements and to commence review of development applications within the Seaton Lands (the "Consulting Work"); and WHEREAS the Landowners have agreed to fund the Consulting Work in the manner set out in this Agreement. 2 ~Cvld(.ym'~O ATTACHMENT #-5-TO REPORT # CAo a5 09 208 NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: Consulting Services 1. The Landowners and the City agree that (the "Consultant") shall be responsible for the preparation and delivery of all of the Consulting Work. 2. The Landowners acknowledge that the scope of consulting services and deliverables included as part of the Consulting Work are as set out in sections 36 through 43 of the RFP. 3. The Landowners and the City shall approve the form of consulting service contract and all amendments to it (the "Consulting Contract"). City Responsibilities 4. The City shall, (a) enter into the Consulting Contract with the Consultant; (b) provide copies of the Consulting Contract to the Landowners; (c) approve all Consulting Contract invoices for payment; (d) pay all approved Consulting Contract' invoices; (e) ensure that all deliverables meet ` the requirements of the Consulting Contract; (f) make all decisions -relating to the administration of the Consulting Contract; and (g) generally ensure that the Consultant proceeds with and completes the Consulting Work in a timely and diligent manner. Landowners/Trustee Responsibilities 5. The Landowners, through the Trustee, shall, (a) direct and instruct their staff to use all of their available powers and authority to undertake all actions necessary to ensure that the Consulting Work can be completed in a timely and diligent manner; and (b) be responsible for all costs and expenses properly payable under the Consulting Contract up to a maximum of $ 3 QooCvldUm~ ATTACHMENT # -6 -TO REPORT # A 05 09 209 6. Prior to or concurrent with the City's execution of the Consulting Contract, the Trustee shall deposit with the City the sum of $ to be applied towards payments required to be made by the City under the Consulting Contract. Any such monies that have not been applied towards the Consulting Contract following completion of all of the Consulting Work shall be returned to the Trustee without interest or deduction. 7. The Landowners acknowledge that the figure set out in section 6 represents the upset limit under the Consulting Contract less the amount estimated by the Consultant to undertake the work described under the heading "Development Review" in section 37 of the RFP and that such work shall be funded using monies submitted to the City with the Landowners' applications for subdivision approval. Technical Group 8. The Landowners may appoint up to three persons to sit on the Technical Group described in section 47 of the RFP. Remedies 9. If the Landowners are in default of any term of this Agreement and such default. has continued for a period of thirty (30) days after receipt of notice (or such longer period as may be reasonably required in the circumstances to cure such default), the City, without 'prejudice to any other rights which it may have with respect to such default, may terminate this Agreement without further notice. 10. If the Council of the City materially alters the Terms of Reference set out in sections 35 through 47 of the` RFP, then the Trustee shall have the option of terminating this Agreement and any monies deposited with the City pursuant to section 6 shall be returned to the Trustee forthwith upon such termination. Development Charges 11. All parties acknowledge that the City shall not include in the calculation of a developmentcharge imposed by a development charge by-law enacted by the City in accordance with section 5 of the Development Charges Act, 1997 any costs or expenses included in the Consulting Contract. General Provisions 12. Any notice, demand, acceptance or request required to be given under this Agreement (a "notice") shall be given in writing and shall be deemed to be given if either personally delivered or mailed by registered mail, postage prepaid, (at any time other than during the general discontinuance of postal services due to a strike, lockout or otherwise) and addressed to the following addresses (or such updated address provided through written notice to all parties): 4 21 0 ATTACHMENT # 5 TO REPORT #C&--.~-b9 To the City as follows: The Corporation of the City of Pickering Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Attention: City Clerk To the Landowners as follows: North Pickering Community Management Inc. 30 Madras Place Brampton ON WS 2Z2 Attention: Andrew Orr with a copy to: Weir Foulds LLP The Exchange Tower, Suite 1600 P.O. Box 480, 130 King Street West Toronto ON M5X U5 Attention: Michael J. McQuaid provided that where the Agreement provides for notice to the Landowners it shall be effected by such Notice being given to the Trustee, but courtesy copies will also '°be,provided to the Landowners at the addresses set out below: 1133373 Ontario Incorporated c/oLebovic Enterprises Limited 12045'McCowan'Road, Box 1250 Stouffville ON L4A 8A2 Attention: Lloyd Cherniak Affiliated Realty Corporation Limited c/o Masters and Masters 65 Queen Street West, Suite 440 Toronto ON M51-12M5 Attention: Robert Masters 5 ATTACHMENT #-5-TO REPO # A0 05-09 211 Chestermere Investments Limited c/o Robins, Appleby & Taub LLP Barristers and Solicitors 120 Adelaide Street West, Suite 2600 Toronto ON M5H 1T1 Attention: Ronald Appleby and Gerald Taub Hunley Homes Limited c/o Metrus Developments Inc. 1700 Langstaff Road, Suite 2003 Concord ON L4K 3S3 Attention: Bruce Fischer 1350557 Ontario Limited c/o Brookfield Homes 7303 Warden Avenue, Suite 100 Markham ON UR 5Y6 Attention: Peter Nesbitt Zavala Developments Inc., c/o Metrus Developments lnc. 1700 Langstaff Road, Suite 2003 Concord ON L4K 3S3 Attention: Bruce Fischer Mattamy (Seaton) Limited c/o The Mattamy Development Company 206 - 140 Renfrew Drive Markham ON M1 X 1A1 Attention: Rodger Miller c/o Joseph and O'Donoghue LLP Barristers and Solicitors 2200 Yonge. Street, Suite 1301 Toronto ON M4S 2C5 Attention: Adam Joseph 6 perdu rn ATTACHMENT # 5 TO REPORT 21 2 White Sun Developments Limited 4576 Yonge Street Suite 500 Toronto ON M2N 6N4 Attention: Stephen Goldhar To the Province as follows: Ontario Realty Corporation 1 Dundas Street West Toronto ON M5G 21_5 Attention: Graham Martin, General Manager, Acquisition/Easements with a copy to: Chappell Bushell Stewart LLP Suite 3310, 20 Queen Street West Toronto ON M5H 3R3 Attention: David Flynn 13. Notice shall be deemed to have been given to and received by the party to which it is addressed, (a) if delivered, on the date of delivery; or (b)if mailed; on the 5t" day, after the mailing. 14. References in this Agreement to a section shall, unless expressly stated otherwise, mean a section of this Agreement. References in this Agreement to a Schedule means, unless expressly stated otherwise, a Schedule attached to this Agreement. 15. Schedule "A" (Sketch of Seaton Lands) forms an integral part of this. Agreement. 16. In this Agreement, reference to any Act is reference to that Act as it is amended or re-enacted from time to time and any regulations under that Act. 17. If any provision of this Agreement is determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be illegal or beyond the power, jurisdiction or capacity of any party bound hereby, such provision shall be severed from this Agreement and the remainder of this Agreement shall continue in full force and effect. The parties agree that they shall not question the jurisdiction of any party to enter into this 7 ATTACHMENT # 5 TOREPORT #W 06-09 213 Agreement nor question the legality any portion of this Agreement, nor question the legality of any obligation created under this Agreement and the parties are and shall be stopped from contending otherwise in any proceeding before a Court of competent jurisdiction or any administrative tribunal. 18. The parties shall execute such further documents and cause the doing of such acts and cause the execution of such further documents as are with their power as any party may reasonably request to be done and or executed, in order to give full effect to the provisions of this Agreement. 19. This Agreement shall be enforceable against the Landowners, jointly and severally, their heirs, executors, administrators, successors, assigns and successors on title. 20. The rights and obligations of a Landowner under this Agreement may be assigned to a successor in title to all or a portion of the Seaton Lands provided that no such assignment to any person is valid unless such successor in title first has entered into an agreement in a form satisfactory to the City agreeing to assume and be bound by the provisions of this Agreement as if such successor were an original party to this Agreement. Upon the execution of such assumption agreement, the Landowner shall be released from its future obligations under this Agreement in respect of the Landowner's lands conveyed. 21. This Agreement shall be interpreted under and is governed by the laws of the Province of Ontario. 22. Time is of the essence of this Agreement'and each of its provisions. 23. This Agreement may , be executed in counterpart and/or by facsimile transmission, and when each party has executed in counterpart and/or facsimile, each part shall be conclusively deemed to be an original and all parts, when taken together, shall constitute one and the same document. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties have executed this Agreement. THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING Dave Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk 8 ATTACHMENT #-5-TO REPORT # QqD C6-09 214 1133373 ONTARIO INCORPORATED Name: Title: Name: Title: AFFILIATED REALTY CORPORATION LIMITED I Name: Title: Name: Title: CHESTERMERE INVESTMENTS LIMITED Name: Title: Name: Title: HUNLEY HOMES LIMITED Name: Title: Name: Title: 9 A~,ondum+~ ATTACHMENT # TO REPORT # CAo C6-`1 1350557 ONTARIO LIMITED 215 Name: Title: Name: Title: ZAVALA DEVELOPMENTS INC. Name: Title: Name: , Title: ' MATTAMY (SEATON) LIMITED Name: Title: Name: Title: WHITE SUN DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED Name: Title: Name: Title: 10 /-~Adendum }o ATTACHMENT # Jr- TO REPORT #A a5-09 216 NORTH PICKERING COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT INC. Name: Title: Name: Title: ONTARIO REALTY CORPORATION acting as agent on behalf of Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario as represented by the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal Name:.;; Title: Name: Title: 11 REPORT TO COUNCIL I ~KERING Report Number: OES 50-09 Date: September 21, 2009 217, From: Everett Buntsma Director, Operations & Emergency Services Subject: Tender for Hot Water Boiler Replacement - Pickering Recreation Complex - Tender No. T-17-2009 - File: A-1440-001-09 i Recommendation: 1. That Report OES 50-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the Hot Water Boiler Replacement at the Recreation Complex be received; 2. That Tender T-17-2009 submitted by Plan Group Inc./ACE Services at a cost of $111,825 (GST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $138,075 (GST included) and a net project cost of $131,500 including the tender amount and other associated costs be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) the amount of $131,500, as provided for in the 2009 approved Capital Budget for the Pickering Recreation Complex, to be financed through Federal Gas Tax Funding; b) the Director, Corporate-Services & Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary in order to affect the foregoing; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: The energy audit undertaken at the Pickering Recreation Complex in 2008 identified a number of sustainable projects, as reported previously in Report Number OES 17-09. As a result of the energy audit, Council approved the Hot Water Boiler Replacement at the Pickering Recreation Complex in the 2009 Capital Budget for the total amount of $200,000. Report OES 50-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Tender for Hot Water Boiler Replacement - Pickering Recreation Complex 2 - Tender No. T-17-2009 Page 2 Bids have been received, and acceptance of the low bid submitted by Plan Group Inc./ACE Services is recommended. Financial Implications: 1. TENDER AMOUNT- T-17-2009 $106,500 GST 5,325 Sub-Total 111,825 GST Rebate (5,325) Total $106,500 2. APPROVED SOURCE OF FUNDS Operations & Emergency Services Department Capital Budget Location Project Code Source of Funds Budget Required Pickering 5731.0904.6178 Federal Gas Tax $200,000 $131,500 Recreation Complex FUNDS AVAILABLE $200,000 $131,500 3. ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTING SUMMARY T-17-2009 $106,500 Tender & Miscellaneous Costs 2,000 Construction Contingency 20,000 Consultant Fees 3,000 Total Project Costs 131,500 . GST 6,575 Total Gross Project Cost 138,075 GST Rebate (6,575) Total Net Project Cost $131,500 Project Cost under (over) approved funds by $68,500 Sustainability Implications: This project is a direct result of an energy audit undertaken at the Pickering Recreation Complex in keeping with the City's mandate on CORP0227-07/01 revised Report OES 50-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Tender for Hot Water Boiler Replacement - Pickering Recreation Complex - Tender No. T-17-2009 Page ~ 1 9 sustainability. Replacement of the hot water boilers will increase efficiency to 88%, thereby saving energy by lowering gas consumption. The payback period through energy savings is estimated at two years. Background: _ Bids have been received to the tendering call, which closed on Wednesday, August 26, 2009 for the Hot Water Boiler Replacement at the Pickering Recreation Complex. An advertisement was placed in the Daily Commercial News and on the City's website. A mandatory site visit was held on Tuesday, August 11, 2009 and sixteen (16) bidders attended of which eight (8) bidders responded and submitted a tender for this project. The low bid was submitted by Plan Group Inc./ACE Services. This company's references have been checked and are deemed acceptable by the Division Head, Facilities Operations. The Health and Safety Policy, Clearance Certificate issued by Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB), the WSIB Cost and Frequency Record and Certificate of Insurance as submitted by Plan Group Inc./ACE Services have been reviewed by the Coordinator,. Health & Safety and are deemed acceptable. In conjunction with staff's review of the contractor's previous work experience and bonding available on this project, the tender is deemed acceptable. Upon careful examination of all tenders and relevant documents received, the Facilities Operations Division recommends the acceptance of the low bid submitted by Plan Group Inc./ACE Services for Tender No. T-17-2009 in the amount of $111,825 (GST included) and that the total net project cost of $131,500 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 50-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Tender for Hot Water Boiler Replacement - Pickering Recreation Complex 220 -Tender No. T-17-2009 Page 4 Attachments: 1. Supply & Services Memorandum dated August 27, 2009 2. Record of Tenders Opened and Checked Prepared By: Approved / Endorsed By: Tony ev del Everett Bunts Division Head, Facilities Operations Director, Operations & Emergency Services Gillis Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Tre urer T era A. Felgemacher C.P.P., CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M., CMM III TP:mld Manager, Supply & Services Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Cou• Th a . Quinn, D R, M I I I Cfiief Administrativ fficer CORP0227.07/01 revised ATTACHMENT#-J- TG IZEPCJItT#SQ- Q of Ci o0 221 rail PICKERING MEMO To: Tony Prevedel August 27, 2009 Division Head, Facilities Operations From: Vera A. Felgemacher Manager, Supply & Services Copy: Subject: Tender No. T-17-2009 Tender for Hot Water Boiler Replacement - Pickering Recreation Complex Closing Date: August 26, 2009 Tenders have been received for the above project. Twelve (12) companies were invited to participate. An advertisement was placed in the Daily Commercial News and on the City's Website. Thirteen (13) bidders picked up tendering packages. A mandatory site visit was held on Tuesday, August 11, 2009 and sixteen (16) bidders attended of which eight (8) 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. All deposits other than the low three bidders may be returned to the applicable bidders as provided for by Purchasing Procedure No. PUR 010-001, Item 10.03(w). Three (3) bids have been retained for review at this time. SUMMARY PST & GST included Bidder Total Tendered After Calculation Check $ Amount $ Plan Group Inc./ACE Services $111,825.00 $111,825.00 Hone ell $171,675.00 $171,675.00 Mack Mechanical Solutions Inc. $178,290.00 $178,290.00 Royal Windsor Mechanical Inc. $180,600.00 $180,600.00 Ma lerid a Mechanical $202,125.00 $202,125.00 Bird Mechanical $231,000.00 $231,000.00 Nekison Engineering $264,013.00 $275,835.00 Canadian Tech Air Systems Inc. $272,025.60 $272,025.60 Gimco Ltd. Unable to Bid ATTACHMENT# l TORE PORT #_LL5__5&Qg _ of 222 Pursuant to Information to Bidders Item 21, 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 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 or approved alternative form shall be completed by the bidder's agent, broker or insurer; (e) list of all equipment, manufacturer's and quantities who will be carrying out any part of this Contract in accordance with GC Item 22, (page 17); (f) list of sub-contractors in accordance with GC Item 26, (page 18); (g) detailed engineered solution to replace the three (3) existing boilers with three new units of equal capacity and improved efficiency in accordance with Specifications Item 3 (page 25). In accordance with Information to Bidders Item 22. As a minimum, the solution must identify the minimum operating efficiencies of the proposed boilers. In addition, a request to acknowledge by signature the City's Accessibility Regulations for Contracted Services and request to provide their Accessibility Training Policy if available. . 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 Plan Group Inc./ACE Services 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 Plan Group Inc./ACE Services 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 y, u require further information, please feel free to contact me or a member of Supply & Se ces. VAF/j~ Attachments August 26, 2009 Tender No. T-17-2009 Page 2 Tender for Hot Water boiler Replacement - Pickering Recreation Complex TTA HM NT * -ORE PORT # ~ -SO- ~dI W 223 O U j Z_ Z C9 W X a) CL E O m j E -7 O N U X C O ov t, r. Q m p ai E a R' Q -o 2 Q) cm F_ W Y I C~ c~ r U C) N z C w 7'D U' Q N E Z m r Z ~ cc w co rn C o W Z w LLJ U n R ¢ ¢ d O O LL cn o C O w L z ~m \ \ \ U~ = o a LL O C) o Cn`~ C N m ° fl o Q o z L C N Q~ N Cum c a) a~ c Z U C wn \ W cn ~ c E T z L) U_ L { E U Q O L C) Q U 2c\ N cu CL 'a UL C V o L) c p U' NO W cu (D a 2 Y O C6 0 c c _0 L) a) O Ca m - Ca 0 E z z U ~ m d ~ ~ C~ Cirq REPORT TO COUNCIL I KERING Report Number: OES 51-09 224 Date: September 21, 2009 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Operations & Emergency Services Subject: Replacement of Air Handling/Air Conditioner Unit - Pickering Recreation Complex - Tender No. T-18-2009 - File: A-1440-001-09 Recommendation: 1. That Report OES 51-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the replacement of the Air Handling/Air Conditioner Unit at the Pickering Recreation Complex be received; 2. That Tender T-18-2009 submitted by Plan Group Inc./ACE Services at a cost of $74,025 (GST included) be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $84,525 (GST included) and a net project cost of $80,500 including the tender amount and other associated costs be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) the amount of $80,500 as provided for in the 2009 approved Capital Budget for the Pickering Recreation Complex, to be financed through Federal Gas Tax funding; b) the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary in order to affect the foregoing; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: The replacement of the Air Handling/Air Conditioner Unit at the Pickering Recreation Complex was approved by Council in the 2009 Capital Budget for the total amount of $100,000. Bids have been received and acceptance of the low bid submitted by Plan Group Inc./ACE Services is recommended. Report OES 51-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Replacement of Air Handling/Air, Conditioner Unit Page 2. 225 Financial Implications: 1. TENDER AMOUNT T-18-2009 $70,500 GST 3,525 Sub-Total 74,025 GST Rebate (3,525) Total $70,500 2. APPROVED SOURCE OF FUNDS Operations & Emergency Services Department Capital Budget Location Project Code Source of Funds Budget Required Pickering 5731.0903.6178 Federal Gas Tax $100,000 $80,500 Recreation Complex FUNDS AVAILABLE $100,000 $80,500 3. ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTING SUMMARY T-18-2009 $70,500 Tender & Miscellaneous Costs 2,000 Construction Contingency _ 5,000 Consultant Fees 3,000 Total Project Costs 80,500 GST 4,025 Total Gross Project Cost 84,525 GST Rebate (4,025) Total Net Project Cost $80,500 Project Cost under (over) approved funds by $19,500 CORP0227-07/01 revised Report OES 51-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Replacement of Air Handling/Air Conditioner Unit 226 Page 3 Sustainability Implications: The existing air handling unit has reached the end of its useful life cycle. Replacement of the unit will result in higher efficiencies and thereby lower energy costs, in keeping with the City's sustainability mandate. Background: Bids have been received to the tendering call, which closed on Wednesday, August 26, 2009 for the replacement of the Air Handling/Air Conditioner Unit at the Pickering Recreation Complex. An advertisement was placed in the Daily Commercial News and on the City's website. A mandatory site visit was held on Tuesday, August 11, 2009 and ten (10) bidders attended of which seven (7) bidders responded and submitted a tender for this project. The low bid was submitted by Plan Group Inc./ACE Services. This company's references have been checked and are deemed acceptable by the Division Head, Facilities Operations. . The Health and Safety Policy, Clearance Certificate issued by Workplace Safety and Insurance Board (WSIB), the WSIB Cost and Frequency Record and Certificate of Insurance as submitted by Plan Group Inc./ACE Services have been reviewed by the Coordinator, Health & Safety and are deemed acceptable. In conjunction with staff's review of the contractor's previous work experience and bonding available on this project, the tender is deemed acceptable. Upon careful examination of all tenders and relevant documents received, the Facilities Operations Division recommends the acceptance of the low bid submitted by Plan Group Inc./ACE Services for Tender No. T-18-2009 in the amount of $74,025 (GST included) and that the total net project cost of $80,500 be approved. This report has been prepared in conjunction with the Manager, Supply & Services who concurs with the foregoing. Attachments: 1. Supply & Services Memorandum dated August 27, 2009 2. Record of Tenders Opened and Checked ~I CORP0227-07/01 revised Report OES 51-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Replacement of Air Handling/Air Conditioner Unit Page 4 227 Prepared By: Approved / Endorsed By: Tony revedel Everett sma Division Head, Facilities Operations Director, Operations & Emergency Services Gillis Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Vera A. Felgem cher C.P.P., CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M., CMM III Manager, Supply & Services TP:mld Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City un T J. Quinn, MR C M III ie Admini raf a Offic CORP0227-07/01 revised I 'I AT i NCHMENT## TO REPORT S/-6q ~of 228 PICKERING MEMO To: Tony Prevedel August 27, 2009 Division Head, Facilities Operations From: Vera A. Felgemacher Manager, Supply & Services Copy: Subject: Tender No. T-18-2009 Tender for Replacement of Air Handling/Air Conditioner Unit - Pickering Recreation. Complex Closing Date: August 26, 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. Eight (8) bidders picked up tendering packages. A mandatory site visit was held on Tuesday, August 11, 2009 and ten (ten) bidders attended 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 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. All deposits other than the low three bidders may be returned to the applicable bidders as provided for by Purchasing Procedure 'No. PUR 010-001, Item 10.03(w). Three (3) bids have been retained for review at this time. SUMMARY PST & GST included Bidder Total Tendered Amount After Calculation Check $ Plan Group Inc./ACE Services $74,025.00. $74,025.00 Prairie Plumbing Ltd.. $75,614.70 $75,614.70 Mack Mechanical Solutions Inc. $108,150.00 $108,150.00 -Royal Windsor Mechanical Inc. $120,750.00. $120,750.00 Canadian Tech Air Systems Inc. $145,405.05 $145,405.05 Bird Mechanical $147,000.00 $147,000.00 Nekison Engineering $163,081.00 $171,150.00 TO REPORT #4LL5/-0G of r2 229 Pursuant to Information to Bidders Item 21, 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 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 or approved alternative form shall be completed by the bidder's agent, broker or insurer; (e) list of all equipment, manufactures and quantities who will be carrying out any part of this Contract in accordance with GC Item 22, (page 17) (f) list of sub-contractors in accordance with GC Item 26, (page 18) In addition, a request to acknowledge by signature the City's Accessibility Regulations for Contracted Services and request to provide their Accessibility Training Policy if available. 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 Plan Group Inc./ACE Services 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 Plan Group Inc./ACE Services 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. r If y u require further information, please feel free to contact me or a member of Supply & Serv ces. VAF/jg. Attachments August 26, 2009 Tender No. T-18-2009 Page 2 Tender for Replacement of Air Handling/Air Conditioning Unit - Pickering Recreation Complex 230 U) A'>0**"tS NT w 0 EJ Z_ .N. Z ~ - Q55 E U) O U ui i c E o o g CL Z, X' O v Q y D ¢ Y i= o ' p X11' W :D 2 m rn U e CD .o fV Z co to a (7 Q = N Z m z 0 Q = 3 W Z c D w Y W c Q oQ 2 U CL ~ Q H Cn o a) O W U c o Q me Q) 0 U W. a) a i- Q LL E O U 0 Obi n >1 a w p p c i +a\ ` CI\ ` O N Czl co r 0 p O Z a~ Q) :E > to m u, U) N cn m _0 a) CD (D a) a) cu d } } } } } Q a) F C Q) ci LlZ C = U ~ ) C N i v7. U ui O U \ N a m U) LL Z U) O s -6 W U) U Q _ a) J a L U. U C U U) (D co m U E `O C F co L "O E ' uj C: V C D U o o o a ~ U O ca O cB Z U m 0 . CiN co REPORT TO COUNCIL 1 KERI Report Number: CS 31-09 Date: September 21, 2009 231 From: Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Subject: Revised Proposed Sign By-law - File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report CS 14-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer,, included as Attachment 1, be received as information; 2. That Report CS 31-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 3. That the proposed sign by-law, included as Attachment 2, providing regulations for signs erected within the City of Pickering, be enacted; and 4. Further, that the appropriate staff of the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: At the June 8, 2009 Executive Committee meeting, Council requested several changes to the proposed sign by-law relating to the sections regulating flags, election signs, and portable signs. These amendments were incorporated into the draft by-law before Council on July 13, 2009. At the July 13, 2009 Council Meeting, the provisions regarding portable signs were once again discussed by Council and Report CS 14-09 was referred back to staff for further investigation and clarification specifically relating to the portable signs section. The proposed by-law attached to this report returns to the original portable sign provisions contained in the Report to Executive Committee CS 14-09. The original provisions maintained a balance of the City's goal of providing reasonable opportunity for business owners to erect temporary signage for special events, while at the same time exercising fair and consistent controls to reduce the visual. clutter these signs create. The portable sign provisions were designed with the intention to provide modest sign fees and easily understood regulations which would also be manageable to administer and enforce. Report CS 31-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Revised Proposed Sign By-law Page 2 i~ 232 -Financial Implications: The portable sign provisions outlined in the proposed by-law attached are not anticipated to generate the need for additional administrative support or enforcement. However, should amendments be implemented which create more complex or repetitive permission arrangements, costs for administration and enforcement will be greater and the associated fees for permits should be reviewed to provide increased revenue to cover the associated costs. 'Sustainability Implications: The proposed by-law will encourage the incorporation of temporary business information into permanent ground signs rather than individual portable signage. This reduction in signage is in keeping with reducing the consumption of resources for this purpose, improving the City's public spaces and promoting sustainable signage initiatives. Background: At the request of Council, the proposed portable sign provisions were reviewed by the City Solicitor, Planning & Development, and Municipal Law Enforcement Services. Discussions were held regarding the previously proposed amendment which increased the number of portable sign licenses individual businesses could have in a calendar year. It was determined that this amendment actually created potential discriminatory issues, as tenants operating out of multiple tenanted buildings would have fewer opportunities for portable sign licenses than businesses operating from properties with 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 other tenants in the same complex would utilize the remaining licenses. In addition, regardless of the number of signs permitted per business each calendar year, there will still be properties which will have a portable sign in place for more than six months of the year due to the number of tenants utilizing portable signage. However, increasing the number of portable sign licenses to two or more per business per calendar year will establish at least 22 properties which may have portable signage all year long as they have six or more tenants. In the opinion of all staff participating in the review, the portable sign regulations as originally drafted represent an appropriate middle ground between the City's competing goals and avoid potential discriminatory impacts. The proposed by-law attached returns to the provision of one sign per business per calendar year for not more than 30 days. The report and proposed sign by-law have been reviewed by the City Solicitor. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report CS 31-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Revised Proposed Sign By-law Page 3 233 Attachments: 1. Report CS 14-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer 2. Proposed Sign By-law Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Kimb rly Thom son, CPSO, CMMI Debi A. Wilcox, CMO, CMMIII M ger, By-law Enforcement Services City Clerk Tim AA Gillis Paterson Chief Building Official Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Copy: Chief Administrative Officer (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Co - it /L Tho Quinn, D R, C Mill Chief Administrativ fficer CORP0227-07/01 revised Cary REPORT TO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE .DICKERING Report Number: CS 14-09 2 3 4 _ Date: June 8, ?qp9 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. r i Report CS 14-09 Date: June 8, 2009 Subject: Updated Sign By-law Page 2 235 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 23 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: Kim er Thompson, CPSO, CMMI Debi Wilcox, CMO, CMMIII Manager, By-law Enforcement Services City Clerk r Tim L)eK, 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 Thomas inn, R R, CMM III Chief Administrative Officer . l Draft - September 21, 2009 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING 237 BY-LAW NO. /09 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. i S gy-law No. XXXX/09 Page 2 Definitions 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; i Sign By-law No. XXX)U09 Page 3 "licence" means a sign licence required by this by-law; 239 "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. 1 Sign B -law No. XXXX/09 Page 4 References to Legislation 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. XX)OU09 Page 5 PART II - PERMITS 241 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. i No ft law No. XXXX/09 Page 6 19. Every permit application shall, (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. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 7 Heritage Properties 2 4 3 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 m? 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. i Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 8 2 4 16) 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 mz 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. i Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Pag pp L 't (9) A wall sign erected on the highest storey of a building that is more than 2 storeys above grade shall only contain the buildin identification, corporate logo or similar content and shall not exceed 6 min 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. XX)OU09 Page 10 L. ) 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". i Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 5 1- 7 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. i Sign ftlaw No. XXXX/09 Page 12 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 m2 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. i Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 13 Billboards 249 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 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. i Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 15 Open House Signs 251 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. i Sign By-law No. XXX)U09 Page 16 25~ 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. i Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 17 Development Sales Signs 253 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. i Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 18 254 (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. I (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. i Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Pager1 J (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. Flags 64. (1) No person shall erect a flag other than a flag bearing the crest, emblem or insignia of any corporation, federal, provincial and municipal government agency, or religious, charitable or fraternal organization. (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. (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. i Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 20 25q4) 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 "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. i Sign By-law No. XX)OU09 Page 21 Gas Station Canopies 2 J 7 70. (1) No person shall erect a sign under a gas station canopy that is more than 1.0 m2 in area. (2) 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 (i) within 15 m of a traffic light; (j) 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; i Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 22 25$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 frailer that is parked or located for the primary purpose of sign display. 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. i Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 23 Vacant Properties 2 5 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. 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. 1 Sigp,f ytlaw No. XXXX/09 Page 24 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. 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 i Sign By-law No. XX)OU09 Page 25 (c) the sign is not located within a Special Sign District. 2 61 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; (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. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 26 2 6 ~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 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. Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page ,~7, 3 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. 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 September, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk 1 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 28 264 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. 1 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 29 SCHEDULE "B" - SPECIAL SIGN DISTRICTS 265 Schedule "B1" Liverpool Road Waterfront District Schedule "132" Whitevale District Schedule `BY Greenwood District Schedule "134" Cherrywood District Schedule" 135° Green River District Schedule "136" Claremont District Schedule "137" Brougham District Schedule "138" Kinsale District Schedule "139" Balsam District Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 30 266 SCHEDULE B1 LIVERPOOL ROAD WATERFRONT DISTRICT I I I I I I I I I I ~-1 I I 1 I I I 1 COMMERCE ST EET OMMERCE STREET ~ I I i I I I I I I I I -_1--] I W 1 I I I I I I F-- --T-- ii _ ckf c I I I I I I I I I I I I OADVIEW STREET a Q I I I I I I I I- Z (n I 1 I I I I I I I IL I _ Z WI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ~~~1 Q. T 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 'I ~I I I I I I I ANNL ND STREET I I I I I I I I 1 I I I ~ ~ I JI J I I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I ~ ~ I C~ I 1_~--r I I 1 I 1 I 1 I I 1 I I 1~J~ l I I I I I I I I i 1 I I ~I I I I I I I r WHARF STREET 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 - , ' ~ I I I / 1 11 1 11 1 - I I I I 1 .1 I _ J 1 III I'lll . 111111.1 = _ , 11-L11.L.11_I TnTI-r - I _ ~ I I IIII _ _ I IIII IIII I i II11 = - I IIII I FRENCHMAN S - I - _ I I' BAY LLJ I J I 11 t _ I 1 If If I I I \ I v I LAKE ONTARIO N SCHEDULE 131 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 31 257 SCHEDULE 132' WHITEVALE DISTRICT I ~ I I I \ I t I I / I I I I I I I r ~ 1 , I I I l I ~ I I I I I WEST o 0 S I 1 I I I I 1 1 51 - - ' , I I I I 1 1 I I I I I ~1 I - . 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 ~ 1 11 I I I I I I 1 I I WHITEVAEE ROAD ' , 11 I I „ , , ~1 I II l l I I I I I I I I, , I II I I I I j-- I 1 1 I 4- , , f o I II 1 1 I I I .I . -1 I 1 I - I 1 I 1 , I 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 , ITEV , E 1 i I a ~ I 1 , 1 , I 1 I I I 1 , 1 , I \ , 1 \ I N SCHEDULE B2 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 32 268 SCHEDULE B3 GREENWOOD DISTRICT F------------- I r- I I I I 1 L_ 1 1 I I 1 ~TI F I I I - I ~0~ I I I I r-~/ - 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I I I TTT1 ' 1 ~ ~ I I I I 1~ I I I I II 1 I 1_ _L}1J J _ 1_4 I 1 l r I ' I I E I r----- _ GREENWOOD . II I I I ~ ~ 1 I I I / ~6 I I 1 , I I ' I I I I 1 - I ' 1 1 - - 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I 1 I I _______________1____ 1_- L__-___- 1 I I tt I - I r I I 1 1 ' I ~ L I I I I I r ' I I I 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 __J 1 I 1 I I I I I N SCHEDULE B3 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 33 269 SCHEDULE 134. CHERRYWOOD DISTRICT I 1 I I I I I I I I o I 0 I I I I I I ~ Y ; z I Q m I I I ; Li I I I - I-----I 1 i c I I I 11 I I-'-'"'1 0 I I° I I 1 I 1 I I I I I , , 1 I 1 CONCESSION ROAD ;.THIRD, 1 I I ~ I I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I I . 1 - I I I I i , Q I I i - I I 1 - O I I 1 I I - f I I I ~ I I I ----I I I ---~CHERRYWOOD m w O T N SCHEDULE B4 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 I Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 34 270 SCHEDULE B5 GREEN RIVER DISTRICT , ( 1 , 1 ~ I I 1 I 1 I I 1 , I . 1 1 1 , I I I 1 , , 1 I I I 1 , ~ I ~ I , I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I\ 1 I I I \ I I I ao I \ 1 I , c I \ ~ 1 I ~ I I I Z I ~ ' I I i I I I I 1 I 0 1 I I I I I , , ' f! u I I i VVV ♦ \ Z I 1 w - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - „ ^ U I I I - lG~l a I I I I I I a ~ I I I Q x a I I , I I I I _J 1 1 I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I , ~ 1 _ I I 1 I I 1 I , I I 11 I ° I ' r 1 I . [IL HIGHWAY ) I I ~ I I , I I I I F-_ I I I , , I 1 I I O I _ _ I I 10REESI 1 --------1 RIVE I I I , , I I I I - I I , 1 - I I , 1 I I 1 I I I \ I' - PY b SCHEDULE B5 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 35 271 SCHEDULE B6 CLAREMONT DISTRICT 40OCr/G1mop Op MIIMMIg z II I 1 I II I II I I ~ II I I II ~ I I II I 1 11 I II I' I ' _ I1. I II I I. II I II I. I 1 11 I I II 1 I _ _ _ ~ II I I II I I II I I ~ , II I I II I 1 ' I II I I -T----- - II I II I I I ~ II I I I ~ I II I I I I II I I II I II I I dI I I I I I I / ~ I ~ II I I ~ I II 1 1 II I ' I 1 i ti' i \ \ 1II I ~i J~ I I I I - I i i i I _ I I ' ~ I I - 1T l II 1 II I I II I I ~ + III I ~ I I / I 11 I - - I II I I A I I - I ' ~ CLAREMONT ' - I I I I \ I I ~ . ~ ( ~ I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 , - ~ ~ I I 11 I I I II ' I I 11 ' ' II I. _ I I 11 ' IF _ 1 I 1 I I I \ I I I 1 I I II ~ I I I --l I . II I I 1 I I II I -1 r------_---I II I I I I I I I I I 1 I . II ' 1 I I N SCHEDULE B6 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 Sign.By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 36 I 272. SCHEDULE B7 BROUGHAM DISTRICT I 1 1 I I I , I I I I r-- 1 1 , 1 I I , I 1 , ~ I 1 , I , I 1 , I J I 0 1 I ~ I I - I 1 I U I I m I BR VGHAM 1 ~'fi - r-_ U I I F ¢ I I I m , I - , I --T- I 1 - r- _ Jr1 TISHA . I I I I r~ I , I I I I I I 1 1 1 I I I .I 1 1 I 1 I I I I ,I 1 i I I . .I I I'I I I I I I I I I I I II I l i 'Ir~ I I I HIGHWAY 7 HIGHWAY 7 1 I I I I 1 I w I I I I I I I I .I 1 I I I I - L, -n I I cT~ 1 1 - I I I T __1. PRING ST. I , I I I I , E I I I I w ' ORCHARD HEIGHTS= ' RI E Z ---1 - ' I ' I I _ JOH I T \ STR - - ~ \ I - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - N SCHEDULE B7 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 37 273 SCHEDULE B8 KINSALE DISTRICT I ~ I i I _ 1 I f~~ I 1_______________ I I ~ I 1 I I I ( I I I \ I I ~ - I r- I _ I I I i I I I I I I I ~ I I ; ~ I I I I 1 I - 1 I I 1 I J I 1 I r~ I I - ; KIN$ALE I ; 1 I _T - -I 1 I I I I 1 ~ 1 I I Q I I I ~ I I I Z I 1 I I Y I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I - - 1 F 1 I I I I ~ I I I I' J I I ~T-- III I I I 1 I I 1 HIGHWAY 7 HIGHWAY 7 1 I I I I I I I .I I I I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I ~ I I I Q I I I I O I I 1 I ~ I 1 } I I W I 1 I 1 ( ~ O I I ~ II 11 1 4 I I 1 I I I I ' ~I N SCHEDULE B8 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 i Sign By-law No. XXXX/09 Page 38 274 SCHEDULE B9 BALSAM DISTRICT I I I I I I I 1 I I I ~ I , 1 I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I 1 I I 1 I I I I I 1 I I I 1 I I 1 I I 1 I I I . ELI 1 I 1 - I I I 1 I I i I I 1 , I I ~ I I 1 I I 1 I I 1 I I I I I I 1, I I REGIONAL ROAD NO. 5 I I I 1 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I 1 . L I I I I - IdJ ' z 1 J I W O (n 1 I I I , I I I I I 1 t I I I i I I 1 I I I , N SCHEDULE B9 TO BY-LAW PASSED THIS DAY OF 2009 I L1 I Sign By-law No. XXX)U09 - ----I r4 Page 39 275 8g \ +LI S - 1 1 1 A \ 1 1 r Ilt - 111 . 1^ - ~ 11 mon Z„P a v ~\1 1 O 0 _ x . D = D r- 1 1 < m rr--~-- f^ O m o . I m l / HYDRO : W o \ :ORRIDOR v/ FFI --1 . \ r- COO I I I L..... NO CD O ~ ~ I I I I; I ~ i i t ~ I I I L l 0 O - ---_I -f-- , m a ~ ~--I ; ~ I I I I I I I I I ~ I --r- arl I I I , rl I II i - D ---o -----------1===== - \ \ i \ 1 \ 1 i of °I I I , I . n 400 G~IGvJ OD G~ C.1dl^QE3 l Call oo REPORT TO COUNCIL r Avg I CKERIN Report Number: OES 47-09 276 Date: September 21, 2009 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Operations & Emergency Services Subject: Tender T-19-2009 - Toy Avenue Road Reconstruction and Toy Avenue Bayly Street - Intersection Improvements - File: A-1440 Recommendations: 1. That Report OES 47 09 regarding the Toy Avenue Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Works, Region Road, Watermain and Traffic Signal Underground Construction be received; 2. That Tender T-19-2009 submitted by Ron Robinson Limited for the Toy Avenue Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Works, Region Road, Watermain and Traffic Signal Underground Construction at a cost of $1,507,841.88 (GST included) and a net cost of $1,436,039.88 be accepted; 3. That the total gross project cost of $1,683,528 (GST included) including the tender amount, the Region of Durham's portion and other associated costs and the total net project cost of $1,603,360 be approved; 4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) that the sum of $700,000 be funded by the Building Canada Fund Communities Component (BCF - CC) - Intake 2 Grant with breakdown as follows; i) $350,000 from the Federal Government ii) $350,000 from the Provincial Government b) that the sum of $175,000 be funded from the Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund; c) that the sum of $175,000 be funded from the Move Ontario Reserve; d) that the sum of $508,770 be funded by the Regional Municipality of Durham; Report OES 47-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Tender T-19-2009 277 Toy Avenue Road Reconstruction and Toy Avenue Bayly Street Intersection Improvements Page 2 e) that the additional sum of $44,590 be funded equally from the Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund ($22,295) and Move Ontario Reserve ($22,295); f) the Treasurer is authorized to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; and 5. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto.. Executive Summary: As part of the 2009 Roads Capital Budget, Toy Avenue, Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Works was approved as a construction project. Tender T-19-2009 was issued on Friday, August 21, 2009 and closed on Wednesday, September 9, 2009 with three (3) bidders responding. This project also includes Region Road, Watermain and Traffic Signal Underground Construction. The total gross project cost is estimated to be $1,683,528 and an estimated total net project cost $1,603,360 (net of GST rebate). The portion related to the Region to be recovered from the Region of Durham in the amount of $508,770 reduces the City's share to $1,094,590 (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-19-2009 $1,436,039.88 GST 71,802.00 Sub-Total 1,507,841.88 GST Rebate (71,802.00) Total $1,436,039.88 2. APPROVED SOURCE OF FUNDS Roads Capital Budget Location Project Code Source of Funds Budge t Required Toy Ave. 5320.0910.1610 Federal Grants 350,000 350,000 Toy Ave. 5320.0910.1623 Prov. Grants 350,000 350,000 Toy Ave. 5320.0910.7505 Fed. Gas Tax 175,000 175,000 5320.0910.7043 Move Ont Reserve 175,000 175,000 FUNDS AVAILABLE 1,050,000 1,050,000 Report OES 47-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Tender T-19-2009 2/8 8 Toy Avenue Road Reconstruction and Toy Avenue Bayly Street Intersection Improvements Page 3 3. ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTING SUMMARY T-19-2009- Tender for Toy Avenue Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Works, Region Road, Watermain & Traffic Signal Underground Constructions City of Pickering Portion 5320.0910.6250 Section 1, City Excavation, Removals, Storm Sewer and Road Building $850,253 Section 2, Storm Water Treatment Unit 77,017 Sub Total City of Pickering Portion $927,270 Region of Durham Portion 3290.0001.0000 Section 3, Road, Watermain and Traffic Signals 508,770 Total T-19-2009R $1,436,040 GST 71,802 Total Gross Tender Cost 1,507,842 Associated Costs Materials Testing 25,000 Utility Relocations 20,000 Consultant Fees 21,700 Miscellaneous Costs 5,620 Construction Contingency 95,000 Sub Total - Associated Costs $167,320 GST - Associated Costs 8,366 Total Gross Associated Costs $175,686 Total Gross Project Cost $1,683,528 GST Rebate (80,168) Total Net Project Costs $1,603,360 Less Region of Durham Portion 508,770 Total Net City Portion Costs 1,094,590 Net Project Costs (over) under Approved Funds (44,590) Report OES 47-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Tender T-19-2009 279 Toy Avenue Road Reconstruction and Toy Avenue Bayly Street Intersection Improvements Page 4 The increase in costs in the amount of $44,590 will be absorbed by the City as it is the City's share of the costs that have increased. As the contribution from the BCF-CC Intake 2 Grant is fixed, the additional costs will be funded equally. by the Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund ($22,29) and Move Ontario Reserve ($22,295) based on the same funding formula on City's share for this.project as was provided for in the 2009 Capital Budget. 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 urbanization of the roadway improving the geometrics and vehicular flow in this area. It will also provide for the necessary platform width required to construct concrete sidewalks for the safe and efficient passage for pedestrians in the area. The new road works will reduce maintenance costs for the next several years. Background: In April of this year Municipal Property & Engineering applied to Intake Two of BCF-CC in which municipalities submitted 420 project applications and 183 projects were approved. The City's application was successful in obtaining $700,000 of funding towards this project. This additional funding will allow the project to move forward without having to resort to debt financing. As part of the Roads Capital 2009 Budget, Toy Avenue, Road Reconstruction and Storm Sewer Works was identified as a construction project. Tender T-19-2009 was issued on Friday, August 21, 2009 and closed on Wednesday, September 9, 2009 with three (3) bidders responding. The total gross project cost is estimated to be $1,683,528 for an estimated net cost to the City of $1,094,590 (net of GST rebate). Ron Robinson Limited has previously worked for the City on Tender T-04-2000, The Realignment of Pickering Parkway, a reference check has been completed and is deemed acceptable by the Supervisor, Engineering & Capital Works. The Health & Safety Policy, Confined Space Awareness Training and list of employees trained, 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 Ron Robinson Limited have been reviewed by the (Acting) Coordinator, Health & Safety and deemed acceptable. In conjunction with staffs review of the contractor's previous work experience check of references submitted and the bonding available on this project, the tender is deemed acceptable. 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 Ron Robinson Report OES 47-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Tender T-19-2009 2 8 0Toy Avenue Road Reconstruction and Toy Avenue.Bayly Street Intersection Improvements Page 5 Limited for Tender T-19 -2009 in the amount of $1,507,841.88 (GST included) and that the total net project cost of $1,603,360 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 September 10, 2009 Prepared By: Approved / Endorsed By: I ~ Darrell B. Selsky, Everett Buntsma Supe isor, Engineering & 4/pital Works Director, Operations & Emergency Services Vera A. F O emacher Gillis A. Paterson C.P.P., CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M., CMM III Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Manager, Supply & Services 0 Ri and W. H orn, P. Eng. Division Head Municipal Property & Engineering DS:nw Attachments ' Report OES 47-09 September 21, 2009 Subject: Tender T-19-2009 281 Toy Avenue Road Reconstruction and Toy Avenue Bayly Street Intersection Improvements Page 6 Copy: Chief Administrative Officer (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickerin City Council Thomas J. uinn DMR., MM III Chief Administrative Officer I i i L ATTACHMENT# 1 TO REPORT# QE5 -pig. 282 MUNICIPAL PROPERTY & ENGINEERING Attachment for Tender T-19-2009 TOY AVENUE AND TOY-BAYLY INTERSECTION 40~ N`GNW A 0 o Q 0 oP~ 0 a a Q Z 3 w ~1 a ~ m PLUMMER QUARTZ SUBJECT m STREET Y AREA STREET U } 7, Y 0 ° m BAYLY STREET LOCATION MAP PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION INCLUDES: City of Pickering Portion Complete Urbanization of Toy Avenue which includes; • Installation of shallow storm sewer system for road and boulevard drainage only, complete with an Oil-Grit Separator • Installation of a new and wider road, complete with concrete curb and gutter, new granular base (heavy duty) and base asphalt • Installation of concrete sidewalk (west side) Region of Durham Portion Proposed Intersection Reconstruction (at Bayly Street and Toy Avenue); • Installation of a wider road intersection, complete with concrete curb and gutter, new granular base (heavy duty) and base asphalt • Reconstruction of the raised centre medians Installation of storm sewer basins for road drainage • Installation of additional water services Proposed Installation of traffic signal related bases, conduit, and other related infrastructure Page 1 of 2 ATTACHMENT#pl_;_ TOREPORT# CStS ~7-0/ L*tq 00 of 2 e 283 Proposed installation of a traffic control signal (following reconstruction - under separate contract) • Road line painting and intersection. marking Replacement and extension of Regional Infrastructure (on Toy Avenue) which includes; • Replacement of the existing 200mm watermain (on the east side of the road) with a new 300mm watermain including hydrants and domestic services to property line Complete boulevard restoration to all areas affected by construction (fine grading and sodding where required) i Page 2 of 2 ATTACHMENT #Z-.- TOREPORT# bCs of ICI . I I PICKERING M E MO 284 To: Richard Holborn September 10, 2009 Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering From: Vera A. Felgemacher Manager, Supply & Services Subject: Tender No. T-19-2009 Tender for Tender for Toy Avenue Reconstruction and Toy Avenue - Bayly Street Intersection Improvements Closing Date: September 9, 2009, before 2:00pm (local time) Tenders have been received for the above project. Thirteen (13) companies were invited to participate. An advertisement was placed in the Daily Commercial News and on the City's Website. Eight (8) bidders picked up tendering packages. A mandatory site visit was held on Tuesday, August 11, 2009 and ten (ten) bidders attended of which three (3) bidders 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. All deposits other than the low three.bidders may be returned to the applicable bidders as provided for by Purchasing Procedure No. PUR 010-001, Item 10.03(w). The three (3) sole. bids have been retained for review at this time - copies attached. SUMMARY PST & GST included Bidder Total Tendered Amount $ After Calculation Check $ RON ROBINSON LIMITED 1,507,838.33 1,507,841.88 MIWEL CONSTRUCTION LTD 1,675,949.17 1,675,949.17 ELIRPA CONSTRUCTION & 1,759,630.09 1,759,630.09 MATERIALS LTD BRY RON CONTRACTING UNABLE TO BID I ATTALHME~lT#? TOREPORT# G 4?- a` o{ 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. 285 a) Proof of compliance with amended Confined Space Entry Regulations (September 30, 2006). Copies of certified Training and Procedures to be used on this, project; b) a list of employees trained in the confined space entry procedure who will be working on this project; c) a copy of the Health & Safety Policy to be used on this project; inclusive of the roles and responsibilities of all persons involved in the project, or sign off on the City of Pickering's Heath'and Safety Regulations; d) 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); e) a copy of the current Certificate of Clearance issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board; f) a certificate of insurance completed by the bidder's agent, broker or insurer (City form is attached); , In addition, a. request to acknowledge by signature the City's Accessibility Regulations for Contracted Services and Accessibility Training Policy (if available) and to provide their Waste Management Plan for evaluation. Include the following items in your Report to Council: (a) if items (a) through (f) noted above, are acceptable to the Co-ordinator, Health & Safety (b) any past work experience Ron Robinson Limited, 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 Ron Robinson Limited 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~you require further information, please feel free to contact me or a member of Supply & S rvices. F, Attachments September 10, 2009 Tender No. T-19-2009 Page 2 Tender for Toy Avenue Reconstruction and Toy Avenue - Bayly Street Intersection Improvements City 00 ICI I I PICKERIN September 21, 2009 NOTICE OF MOTION Councillor O'Connell and Councillor McLean gave notice that they will at this meeting of Council be presenting a motion as follows: a) YORK/DURHAM ODOUR CONTROL FACILITY WHEREAS the Region of York has recommended a site under the Environmental Assessment Act to construct an Odour Control Facility (OCF) on the York/Durham Townline south of Concession 5; and WHEREAS the Region of Durham has passed by unanimous vote that the OCF be moved out of Durham; and WHEREAS while recommending the construction of the OCF to the West Side of the York/Durham Town Line the Region of York has failed to address the impacts that the OFC on the Pickering community and has failed to address both the location and impacts of the proposed infrastructure fans with-in boundaries of Durham and specifically the urban envelope of Pickering; and WHEREAS the recommended location for the OCF and its infrastructures will negatively impact the sustainability of Pickering and it's residents; and WHEREAS the City of Pickering is opposed to any location and it's infrastructure where it continues to impact Pickering residents and our sustainability; and WHEREAS residents of Pickering have raised concerns through petition, letters and presentations opposing any facility that may impact their quality of life, social, environmental and economic; and WHEREAS in bringing forward their recommended location for.the OCF, York Region failed to consult and seek input from impacted community members; and WHEREAS the Region of York failed to expand it's study area for the purpose of consultation to include additional communities who may be impacted by the OCF and it's supporting infrastructure; and WHEREAS prior to submitting its final recommendations, the residents of Pickering, through their Elected Officials at the City level and the Regional level where not afforded an opportunity to discuss and comment on the what York Region was recommending; and 287 WHEREAS the recommended route and location of the OCF fails to address the concerns raised by the Rouge Park Alliance, which the City of Pickering and Durham Region are both members of. As well the concerns raised by the City of Toronto have also yet to be addressed; and WHEREAS York Region entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to recognized the need for all parties to act in the interest of their respective Municipalities; and WHEREAS by entering into this MOU, York Region committed to the following: • Well mitigation for Pickering residents and compensation for adverse impacts • Full and timely communication with residents on all project issues • Restoration and/or resurfacing of local roads damaged during construction • Landscaped and enhanced lands in permanent shaft locations • Realignment and enhancements to the Waterfront Trail within the limits of the Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant; and WHEREAS York Region has failed to fulfill the conditions and intent of the MOU with the City of Pickering. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED the Council for the Corporation of the City of Pickering direct our staff to commence legal action against York Region for: (a) Breach of conditions set out in the MOU; (b) Failure under the Environmental Assessment Act to ensure and carry out "full and timely communication with residents on all project issues" prior to submitting a' recommended plan to the Minister for consideration. . AND THAT staff report back to Council on the status of all actions that have been taken consistent with this resolution. AND THAT a copy of this resolution and it's attachments be sent to Durham Regional Council, Ministry of the Environment, Rouge Park Alliance, City of Toronto Council, MPP Wayne Arthurs, (Scarborough/Pickering) and MPP Joe Dickson, (Ajax/Pickering). Attachments: (a) Copy of the MOU as adopted by Pickering Council in 2005; (b) Copy of the City of Toronto legal opinion as presented at the Rouge Park Alliance Meeting of May 29, 2009; (c) Copy of the Rouge Park Alliance meeting minutes of May 29, 2009. 288 Councillor Littley and Councillor Johnson gave notice that they will at this meeting of Council be presenting a motion as follows: b) SOUTHEAST COLLECTOR (SEC) TRUNK SEWER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (EA) & ODOUR CONTROL FACILITY That the Council of the City of Pickering request that the Provincial Minister of the Environment not issue any decision on the Final (Amended) Southeast Collector (SEC) Trunk Sewer Environmental Assessment (EA) Report currently under review until an acceptable location has been found for the Odour Control Facility in York Region; and Further, we request that in order to determine an appropriate location the Minister instruct York Region to expand the study area to include the urban areas south of Finch Avenue in Pickering to assess potential health and social impacts to area residents from the proposed Odour Control Facility and its infrastructure on the Pickering community; and That this resolution be forwarded to the Minister of the Environment John Gerretsen, The Regional Municipality of Durham and The Regional Municipality of York. ..0'~'- , JOY L. HULTON, Regional Solicitor Legal Service; Branch 'c Corporate Semicer Department 289 July 4, 2005 'Ices JUL BY COURIER Mr. Everett Buntsma 'y TO: (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer UNCiL City of Pickering ~G.~ c~ ARK iNaNCE Pickering Civic Complex C r,-,Ara R>s f' One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1 V 6K7 -4' Dear Mr. Buntsma: Re: City of Pickering Invoice No. 4799 Your File No. A-2600-001-05 Further to Dan Kuzmyk's letter to you dated June 29, 2005, we enclose two fully executed copies of the settlement documents with respect to the above matter, consisting of the Full and Final Release, together with the Memorandum of Understanding dated June 28, 2005. Sincerely, i t Jlulton [y Ile keg~ional_ Solicitor / JHim f I r Attachment Copy to: Bill Fisch, Regional Chair and Chief Executive Officer Michael Garrett, Chief Administrative Officer( The Regional Municipality of York, 17250 Yonge Street, Newmarket, Ontario L3Y 6Z1 L, Tel: 905-895-1231, 1-877-464-YORK, Fax: 905-895-3768 Internet: wwu:region.york.on.ca • Email: joy. hulton@region.york.oit.ca 290 FULL AND FINAL RELEASE BETWEEN: The Corporation of the City of Pickering ("Pickering") - and - The Regional Municipality of York ("York Region") Re: The Corporation of the City of Pickering Invoice No. 4799, dated November 12, 2004 to The Regional Municipality of York IN CONSIDERATION of the payment of the sum of Three Hundred and Seventy-One Thousand Nine Hundred and Ten Dollars ($371,910.00) and other good and valuable consideration including, but not limited to the execution by the Pickering and York Region of the Memorandum of Understanding attached to this Full and Final Release as Schedule "A", the receipt and sufficiency of all consideration being hereby acknowledged, Pickering does hereby release, remise and forever discharge York Region, its Chair of Council, Council members, officers, directors, employees, agents, successors and assigns of and from all manner of actions, causes of action, suits, debts, dues, accounts, bonds, covenants, contracts, claims and demands whatsoever which against them Pickering ever had, now has or may hereafter have, or which its successors or assigns shall, can or may have in relation to the recovery of costs incurred by Pickering with respect to York Region's Long Term Water Supply Environmental Assessment for the periods 1999-2004 generally, and specifically in relation to Invoice No. 4799. Page 2 of 2 291 AND FOR THE SAID CONSIDERATION Pickering covenants and agrees: a) Not to make any claim or cross-claim or to take proceedings against any other person, partnership, corporation or other entity who or which might claim contribution or indemnity from York Region, for the matters released herein; b) That it has not assigned to any persons, partnerships, corporations or other entities any of the matters released herein; and c) That it has executed the Memorandum of Understanding attached to this Release as Schedule "A DATED this 28`h day of June, 2005. The Corporation of the City of Pickering David Ry n, .M ~a, homas J. Q Vi Ch ief Admiative Officer York # 131816 v I I 292 Schedule "A" The Corporation of the City of Pickering ("Pickering") - and - The Regional Municipality of York ("York Region") Memorandum of Understanding WHEREAS The Regional Municipality of Durham ("Durham Region") and The Regional Municipality of York ("York Region") co-own and jointly manage the York Durham Sewage System ("YDSS") Primary System pursuant to a Co-Ownership Agreement, and Durham Region is responsible for the operation of the Primary System on behalf of both co-owners; AND WHEREAS the YDSS Primary System consists of the Duffin Creek Water Pollution Control Plant; boundary metre; Regional environmental laboratory; surcharge relief pumping stations, trunk mains and common trunk sewers located within Durham Region, as well as the portion of the South-East Collector Trunk Sewer located within Durham Region; AND WHEREAS the Regions of York and Durham are co-proponents in a Class Environmental Assessment for the expansion of the Duffin Creek WPCP and an Individual EA for the expansion of the South-East Collector between Ninth Line in the Town of Markham and Valley Farm Road in Pickering; AND WHEREAS expansion of the South-East Collector Trunk Sewer, although intended to convey sewage generated in York Region, will provide future benefit to the City of Pickering ("Pickering") in the event of urban expansion; AND WHEREAS York Region wishes to enter into a memorandum of understanding with Pickering to establish a framework of co-operation between the two municipalities in relation to the Duffin Creek plant and South-East Collector projects; 1 Page 2 of 3 293 NOW THEREFORE the parties agree as follows: 1. Pickering acknowledges the necessity and benefits of the expansion of the South- East Collector and Duffin Creek WPCP, and supports these projects. Pickering agrees to work co-operatively in good faith with the co-proponents in support of these projects during the Environmental Assessment process, and to facilitate the construction of these projects in the normal course, such as: o Timely site.plan and building approvals; o Timely approvals required for construction, including but not limited to traffic detour plans, haul routes for soil removal, tree preservation and removal plans, and topsoil stripping; o Permission for temporary road closures and exemptions to noise and load limit bylaws to facilitate construction; o Relocation and site plan approval for heritage building; and o Co-operation to relocate Squires Beach residents 2. York Region acknowledges that Pickering and its residents should be treated fairly and that it has a responsibility to property owners and residents who may be directly impacted by the construction of the South-East Collector and Duffin Creek WPCP expansion. York Region agrees to provide mitigation and/or. compensation to Pickering residents and property owners to the same level provided to residents of York Region, including but not limited to: o Well mitigation for Pickering residents and compensation for adverse impacts; o Full and timely communication with residents on all project issues; o Restoration and/or resurfacing of local roads damaged during construction; o Landscaped and enhanced lands in permanent shaft locations; o Realignment and enhancements to Waterfront Trail within the limits of the Duffin Creek WPCP; and o Compensation to land owners for loss of developable lands that may be required for permanent sanitary sewer right of ways. 3. Pickering will not seek community benefiting projects or other similar forms of compensation from York Region in respect of the South-East Collector and Duffin Creek WPCP expansion except as identified in paragraph 2. i 294 Page 3 of 3 DATED this 28th day of June, 2005. Authorized by Resolution ) The City of Pickering No. 94-05 of the Council ) of the Town of Pickering ) on June 6, 2005 ) David y ayor ) /Tkomas J. uinn Chief Administrative Officer Authorized by the Private Report ) The Regional Municipality of York of the Finance and Administration Committee dated March 30, 2005 ) J adopted by Regional Council on ) Bill Fisch, Regipal Chair and April 21, 2005. ) Chief ExecuWle fficer a Michael G tt Chief Administrative Officer York # 129015 v I i I I f~f}achrnenf - ~ b,~ 1• 2 9 5 Nofi m o p M&"& ,Fl MTOROMO Anna Kinastonski, B.A., L.L.B.* City Solicitor Legal Services Metro Hall, 26th Floor, Stn. 1260 55 John Street Toronto, ON M5V 3C6 Tel. 416-342-8047 Fax 416-397-5624 • Certified by the Lam, Socien, as a Specialist in Alunicipal Law.- Local Government/Land Use Planning & Development Reply lb: Brendan ('Callaghan file No. Tcl: 416-392-7786 Fax: 416.397-5624 E-Mail: bocallagamonrnto.ca VIA - E-i<4AIL & REGULAR MAIL January 22, 2009 Ministry of Environment Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency EA and Approvals Branch 55 St. Clair Avenue, East, Suite 907 2 St. Clair Avenue West, Floor 12A Toronto, ON, M4T 1 M2 Toronto, ON, M4V I L5 Attention: Ms. Charlene Cressman Attention: Louise Knox Re: Environmental Assessment of the York Region Sewer System, Southeast Corridor I am the solicitor with the City of Toronto who has carriage of the above-noted matter and I am writing to you with the City of Toronto's comments on the above-noted EA as required by the EA timelines. The City of Toronto Council has had a long standing concern over the quality and quantity of water in the rivers and tributaries which flow through the City and into Lake Ontario. Because of this concern Toronto City Council, at its meeting of October 2005; authorized the City Solicitor to, among other things, convey Toronto City Council's concerns about the above-noted project to the Ministry of Environment. One longstanding concern which the City of Toronto and others have had with this project is with York Region's refusal to treat the Big Pipe project as a single undertaking with regard to the EA process, which it clearly is. Over the many years that this project has been undertaken.by York Region the approvals process has been inappropriately broken up into smaller components or piecemealed sous to avoid scrutiny as the very substantial undertaking that it is. This behaviour has made the undertaking much more difficult to assess and for interested parties to understand the potential full impact. To date the Big Pipe undertaking has been broken up into fourteen different projects some of which had additional individually assessed phases. As all of these individual projects are clearly parts of the same single undertaking, there is no question that they should have been assessed as the same scheme. Individual undertakings should only be considered separate projects if they are initiated to solve- distinctly different sets of problems and if the resulting works are stand alone facilities which do i Page #i2 6 2 96 not require further components to complete them. That is clearly not the case with the fourteen separately assessed components of the Big Pipe which is really just one project and which should be assessed as a whole and be subject to the most rigorous assessment requirements. A second concern which the City of Toronto has is with York Region's neglect in its obligation to maintain its existing sewer line which is being twinned with the new Big Pipe proposal. Internal monitoring of the existing sewer line confirms that a lack of maintenance has resulted in very substantial leakage of existing area groundwater into the current sewer line. This existing area groundwater, once it seeps into the sewer is transported to the sewage treatment plant. This lack of maintenance of the existing sewer, therefore, results in four separate but equally negative ecological impacts. Firstly, the seepage serves to lower the water table in the vicinity of the pipe which reduces flow into area streams and rivers (many of which flow into Toronto). This lowering of the water table also results in a loss of pressure and water volume in area wells. Secondly, this seepage has the effect of removing clean groundwater from the soil and area aquifers and mixing it with sewage, all of which is then treated at the sewage treatment plant, thereby resulting in a net loss of clean groundwater. Thirdly, the seepage has the effect of transferring water from the Lake Simcoe basin area to the Lake Ontario basin area, a practice which is discouraged by the Great Lakes Charter and MOE policy. Finally, substantial seepage of clean groundwater into the pipe results in clean groundwater displacing capacity which should be available for its intended use of transporting sewage. In other words, if the existing pipe were to be repaired and properly maintained, there would be far less need for a new Big Pipe altogether. In addition to the City of Toronto's-concerns about the process (piecemealed) and the lack of maintenance on the existing pipe outlined above, the City also has concerns that legitimate alternatives to both the proposed route of the pipe and alternatives to the necessity for the pipe altogether, have not been adequately canvassed. Firstly, the City of Toronto has concerns with the proposed route of the pipe in that it is proposed to be routed through existing groundwater aquifers which immediately raises two specific problems. Firstly, the construction process will require significant dewatering of the construction area which will serve to temporarily lower the water table within the construction zone for the duration of the construction. Secondly, the introduction of the new pipe itself will create the opportunity for interbasin groundwater transfer which is currently being caused by the, existing sewer pipe. The City's second main concern regarding- the consideration of alternatives is the lack of consideration which seems to,have been given to the necessity for the Big Pipe at all. Other jurisdictions have had substantial success with modern and enhanced treatment options for sewage which result in more useable water being reclaimed through the treatment process. Furthermore, other jurisdictions have also had real success in reducing the volume of clean water inflow which ends up in the sewer and which becomes commingled with sewage. The consideration and implementation of some of these more current mitigation measures which have proven to be successful in other jurisdictions may eliminate the need for the Big Pipe altogether. The following City of Toronto Council requests to the Ministry of Environment were adopted in October of 2005 and remain valid and current. Page #3 2 9 7 1. The City of Toronto apposes the current proposed design and construction of the York Durham Sanitary Sewer trunk services and associated de-watering practices. 2. The City of Toronto requests that the Province of Ontario, through the Minister of Environment: (a) defers approval'of the 19'x' Avenue sewer which traverses the Oak Ridge Moraine and sensitive aquifers and that alternatives and local sewage solutions be explored as per the Minister of Environment's list of conditions; and; (b) refer the Big Pipe Project to the Federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans for an assessment under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act. 3. The City of Toronto requests the Federal Minister of the Environment and Federal Minister of Fisheries and Oceans, to issue an order to stop the massive de-watering and - require Fisheries Act authorizations; and that a full Federal Environmental Assessment for current and proposed construction related to the York Durham Sanitary Sewer be conducted for all sections of the project; and that alternative ways of providing sanitary services be examined without contravening the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act, without massive groundwater removal from beneath the watersheds flowing south from the Oak Ridges Moraine into Toronto, and without installing trunk sewers directly into underlTound aquifers. The City of Toronto's reasons for making the three above-noted requests are as follows: I. The Southeast Collector EA by itself is not adequate to properly assess the cumulative impacts of the entire Big Pipe proposal as the various assessments have been proposed and undertaken on an entirely piecemeal basis. This has resulted and will continue to produce, an inaccurate picture of the cumulative impacts of the entire project. In the absence of a full Canadian Environmental Assessment Act evaluation, the cumulative impact of the undertaking on the Oak Ridges Moraine aquifers, Toronto area rivers streams and fish habits and Lake Ontario water quality will never be considered or assessed and understood. 2. The current interbasin transfer of groundwater from the Lake Simcoe Basin to the Lake Ontario Basin is contrary to the provisions of both the Great Lakes Charter and MOE policy. The added potential for even more substantial transfer with the addition of a second pipe is an added concern. York Region needs to provide accurate and up to date information on the volume of this current transfer so that the implications may be properly assessed. 3. The EA's consideration of within region treatment options is inadequate as it has focused on older more traditional treatment technologies and has not considered the most recent developments of treatment, implemented with great success in other jurisdictions. 4. The current volume of clean groundwater which is being permitted to infiltrate into the existing sewer is not acceptable. This infiltration results in both lost capacity in the existing pipe as well as the wasting and transporting away of a substantial volume of clean groundwater. York Region should be required to repair and rehabilitate its existing l Page #4 2 9 8 sewer pipe to reduce or eliminate this infiltration. 5. The City of Toronto has concerns that the construction of the proposed additional sewer capacity will only serve to encourage more inefficient suburban style development which will consume precious areas of land and increase pressure to develop portions of the Oak Ridges Moraine. 6. The City of Toronto is concerned that all sewage proposed to be transported in the new pipe will end up in the Duffins Creek Sewage Treatment plant which discharges effluent into Lake Ontario. The City of Toronto has not been provided with any assurances that the water quality along the Lake Ontario shoreline will not be negatively effected by this proposed increase in effluent discharge. The City is not aware of any study which York has undertaken which assesses the impact on lake water quality of the proposed increase in effluent discharge. These are the City of Toronto's concerns based on the somewhat limited information that has been made available to us as of today's date. The City may have further concerns once some of the requested information has been provided. The City looks forward to a thorough and positive response to its concerns and recommendations within the context of;- Ontario Government's Review and of the Southeast Collector Environmental Asse pi~ ~'t ~f you have any questions with regard to the above, please do not hesitate to contac ' nde igned at 416-392-7786. Yours ver - , ri O'Callaghan, Solicitor Plan = and Administrative Tribunal Law c.c7 Councillor Glen DeBaeremaeker Ms. Ulli S. Watkiss, City Clerk Mr. Mike Guthro, City Legal Ms. Anna Kinastowski, City Solicitor i f~tfnc~►rnerf- L -l"o 2 9 9 /vc7/-i c~ of /')'lafi'o n ROUGE PARK ALLIANCE MINUTES - SPECIAL MEETING #4/09 - May 29, 2009 Rouge Park The Rouge Park Alliance met in the Main Boardroom of the Toronto Zoo. Alan Wells, Chair, welcomed everyone and thanked Calvin White, Toronto Zoo, for hosting the meeting. The Chair called the meeting to order at 9:10 a.m. PRESENT Members: Alternates: Alan Wells, Chair Ian Buchanan, Region of York Hon. Michael Chong, MP, Government of Canada Brian Denney, Toronto & Region Conservation Authority Councillor David Cohen, Town of Richmond Hill Ron Dewell, Toronto & Region Conservation Authority Glenn De Baeremaeker, Save the Rouge Valley System Inc. Jim Robb, Save the Rouge Valley System Inc. Markham Deputy Mayor Jack Heath, Region of York Debbie Pella Keen, Province of Ontario Dr. Helena Jaczek, MPP, Province of Ontario Carolyn Woodland, TRCA Regional Councillor Bonnie Littley, Region of Durham Councillor Ron Moeser, City of Toronto Peter Evans, Toronto Zoo Councillor Erin Shapero, Town of Markham Councillor Jennifer O'Connell, City of Pickering Gerri Lynn O'Connor, TRCA Councillor Clyde Smith, Town of Whitch urch-Stouffville Calvin White, Toronto Zoo ABSENT Alternates: Members: Councillor Raymond Cho, City of Toronto Councillor Paul Ainslie, City of Toronto Nestor Chornobay, Region of Durham Hon. Pauline Browes, Waterfront Regeneration Trust Corp. Mayor Wayne Emmerson, Town of Whitch urch-Stouffville Tom Farrell, Province of Ontario Adele Freeman, Toronto & Region Conservation Authority Mark Graham, Save the Rouge Valley System Inc. Sue Gunton, Toronto Zoo Councillor Logan Kanapathi, Town of Markham Keith Laushway, Waterfront Regeneration Trust Corp. Councillor Chin Lee, City of Toronto Tom Melymuk, City of Pickering Staff: Bob Clay, Manager, Ecological Restoration Vicki MacDonald, Biologist Michelle Holmes, Communications Specialist Maria Papoulias, Manager, Natural Heritage Doreen McCarty, Administrative Coordinator Lewis Yeager, General Manager Observers: Observers (Continued...) Ted Bowering, Toronto Water Marvin Macaraig, Dept. Of Geography, U. Of T. Gail Crossman, Transport Canada Rick Nicolussi, Cherrywood Resident Jennifer Draper, TRCA Brendan O'Callaghan, City of Toronto, Legal Dept. Lilli Duoba, Town of Markham Dan Orr, MOE Bob Goodinigs John Presta, Region of Durham Daniel Kostopoulos, Region of York David Szeptycki, Region of York 300 ROUGE PARK ALLIANCE Page 2 of 3 MINUTES of Meeting #4/09, May 29, 2009 CHAIR'S REMARKS Alan Wells, Chair, welcomed everyone. He introduced Peter Evans, the Acting CEO for Toronto Zoo, who will be replacing Calvin White. Calvin White will be retiring at the end of June 2009. MINUTES OF MEETING #3/09, MAY 1, 2009 MOTION: Moved by: Ron Moeser Res. #36/09 Seconded by: Calvin White THAT the Rouge Park Alliance approve the minutes of Meeting #3/09 held on May 1, 2009. CARRIED PRESENTATION/DELEGATIONS Daniel Kostopoulos, Environmental Services Dept., Region of York Daniel Kostopoulos presented the history and evolution of the York Durham Sewage System (YDSS), and updated the Alliance on the Southeast Collector truck sewer (i.e., the preferred route endorsed by the Regions of Durham and York Councils in 2007; submission of the IEA to the Ministry of the Environment in November 2008; odour control facility; enhancements in Bob Hunter Memorial Park and Rouge Park, etc.). Currently there is a "time-out", to resolve issues regarding the location of the odour control facility. Brendan O'Callaghan, Legal Dept., City of Toronto Brendan O'Callaghan circulated a letter dated January 22, 2009 which was addressed to the Ministry of the Environment and the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency, regarding the Environmental Assessment of the York Region Sewer System, Southeast Corridor. He discussed the letter which outlined the City of Toronto concerns regarding the York-Durham Sewage System project. The following motion('Res. #31/09), was deferred at the Rouge Park Alliance meeting on May 1, 2009 and this special meeting (May 29, 2009) was requested to deal with the motion. MOTION: Moved by: Glenn De Baeremaeker Res. #37/09 Seconded by: Jennifer O'Connell THAT the Rouge Park Alliance requests that York Region further consider an alignment of the York- Durham Sanitary Sewer along 9`n Line and Steeles Avenue to avoid piping raw sewage through Bob Hunter Memorial Park and to comply with the Greenbelt Act's direction that infrastructure should be concentrated along major inter-regional corridors such as Steeles Avenue. CARRIED Councillor Jennifer O'Connell requested a recorded vote. YEA NAY Hon. Michael Chong X Dr. Helena Jaczek, Province of Ontario X Markham Deputy Mayor Jack Heath, Region of York X Councillor Erin Shapero, Town of Markham X Councillor Jennifer O'Connell, City of Pickering x Councillor David Cohen, Town of Richmond Hill X Glenn DeBaeremaeker, Save the Rouge Valley System Inc. X Councillor Ron Moeser, City of Toronto X Calvin White, Toronto Zoo X Gerri Lynn O'Connor, Toronto & Region Conservation Authority X Councillor Clyde Smith, Town of Whitchurch-Stouffv.ille x 6 5 6 YEAS and 5 NAYS - Motion was Carried. 301 ROUGE PARK ALLIANCE Page 3 of 3 MINUTES of Meeting #4/09, May 29, 2009 Glenn De Baeremaeker requested that the letter dated January 22, 2009, from Brendan O'Callaghan, Solicitor, City of Toronto, be brought back to the Rouge Park Alliance. • - Letter to be brought back to the Rouge Park Alliance. Alliance members requested: (a) technical report from the City of Toronto regarding their concerns, (b) information on inflow and infiltration into the YDSS from York Region. Councillor Moeser requested a presentation on "Smart Growth" and its impacts on municipalities. Gerri Lynn O'Connor expressed, on behalf of the Alliance, a special thank you to Calvin White, representative for the Toronto Zoo, for all his dedicated work and commitment to Rouge Park over the past years. Glenn De Baeremaeker also thanked Calvin White for everything that he has done for the Rouge Park Alliance and the Park. Mr. De Baeremaeker also expressed a special thank you to Lois James for her continued dedication and commitment to Rouge Park. 1. Correspondence MOTION: Moved by: Ron Moeser Res. #38/09 Seconded by: Jennifer O'Connell THAT the Rouge Park Alliance receive the following correspondence: 1. Email dated May 8, 2009 to Lewis Yeager, Rouge Park, from Kathleen MacCarthy, re: Illegal Hunting of Deer in Rouge Park. 2. Letter dated May 2009 to Lewis Yeager, Rouge Park, from Bill Fisch, York Region, re: IEA for the SEC Trunk Sewer Project - Odour Control Facility. 3. Letter dated May 1, 2009 to Alan Wells, Rouge Park Alliance, from Kimberley Kitteringham, Town of Markham, re: Rouge River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide. 4. Letter dated May 12, 2009 to Alan Wells, Rouge Park Alliance, from Kathy Stranks, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, re: Royal Rouge Trail Erosion Control Project, City of Toronto - Class Environmental Assessment. 5. Letter dated May 19, 2009 to Alan Wells, Rouge Park Alliance, from Patricia Newland, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, re: Nos. 30-48 Royal Rouge Trail Erosion Control Project - Class Environmental Assessment. CARRIED Deputy Mayor Jack Heath updated the Alliance on the following correspondence: 1.1.1 re: Illegal Hunting of Deer in Rouge Park - that Markham Council dealt with this issue and passed a resolution to deal with it further in September 2009. - 1.3.1 re: Rouge River Watershed Plan Implementation Guide - that the issue had gone to staff and will be going to Council to finalize its position. TERMINATION ON MOTION, the meeting terminated at 12:00 p.m., on May 29, 2009. Alan Wells Lewis Yeager Chair, Rouge Park Alliance General Manager, Rouge Park Citq O~ 3©2 :P!l Ca-KERI September 21, 2009 BY-LAWS 6965/09 [By--law referred from the July 13, 2009 meeting of Council] Being a by-law to regulate signs in the City of Pickering. [Refer to New and Unfinished Business pages 237-275] 6980/09 Being a by-law to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for the purpose of enforcing parking restrictions on private property. (By-law attached) 6981/09 A by-law to authorize a Franchise Agreement between The Corporation of the City of Pickering (the "City") and Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. (Previously approved through Resolution # 92/09) (Copy attached]) 6982/09 Being a by-law to amend the Responsible Pet Ownership By- law. (By-law attached) 6983/09 Being a By-law of The Corporation of the City of Pickering to Establish the 2009 Final Property Taxes and Due Date for the Commercial, Industrial and Multi-Residential Tax Classes. [Refer to Executive Pages 44-45] 6984/09 Being a by-law to designate the property and buildings at 3540 Westney Road, N Y2 Lot 11, Concession 5 (Greenwood Schoolhouse) as being of historical and architectural value or interest. (By-law attached) 6985/09 Being a by-law to dedicate that part of Lot 3, Plan 505, Pickering, being Part 5, Plan 40R-25976, as public highway. (By-law attached) 6986/09 Being a by-law to dedicate that part of Block 45, Plan 40M- 1507, Pickering, being Part 27, Plan 40R-14939, as public highway. (By-law attached) 6987/09 Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering District Planning Area, Region of Durham in Part of Lots 1 - 3, Plan 505, Part of Block 165, Block 166, Lot 67, 40M-1810, Part 1, 40R-19732, Part 2, 40R-19734, Part 1, 40R-20042, Part 2, 40R-20043, in the City of Pickering (A 11/09) (By-law attached) I - 3 0 3 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. 6980/09 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) 1000/1400 The Esplanade David Lindsay 1530/1540 Pickering Parkway, 1525/1535 Diefenbaker Court John Murphy b) 1467 Whites Road, 1345 Altona Road and 1048 Toy Avenue Daniel Fernandes Gary Heads 1048 Toy Avenue Paul Smith Anand Ally Jey Manikasingam Ryan Shanks Chris' Dimovski Maurice Wilson Mile Tasovski Steven Leech Richard Torraville c) 1300 Kingston Road, 1360 Kingston Road and 1105 Finch Avenue Dennis Lemick 1 304 By-law No. 6980 /09 Continued Page 2 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 1a) ceasing to be an employee of G4S Security Services or upon G4S Security Services ceasing to be agents for 1000/1400, 1530/1540 Pickering Parkway and 1525/1535 Diefenbaker Court, 1b) ) ceasing to be an employee of Knights on Guard or upon Knights on Guard ceasing to be agents for 1467 Whites Road, 1345 Altona Road and 1048 Toy Avenue,.1 c) ceasing to be an employee of Steele Valley Developments Limited or upon Steele Valley Developmnets Limited ceasing to be agents for 1300 Kingston Road, 1360 Kingston Road and 1105 Finch Avenue, whichever shall occur first. 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 21st day of September, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk 0 Schedule D Pickering Civic Complex City o¢~ One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario f ''I Canada L1V 6K7 ' I Direct Access 905.410.4660 PICT ERIN G Toll Free 1.8erin .com K 111\VI cityofpickering.com CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Clerk's Division Division 905.420.4611 Facsimile 905.420.9685 clerics@dty. pickering.on.ca Certified true copy of an excerpt of the minutes of the April 20, 2009 meeting of Council Dated this 22nd day of April, 2009. 8. CORR. 47-09 MICHAEL WAGLE, P. ENG OPERATIONS MANAGER, ENBRIDGE 1350 Thorton Road South Oshawa, ON L1J 8C4 Resolution # 92/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That CORR. 47-09 from Enbridge Gas Distribution advising that on October 9, 2010 the Franchise Agreement between the City of Pickering and Enbridge will expire. In accordance with the Municipal Franchise Act, the following resolution is hereby approved; 1. That this Council approves the form of draft by-law (including the franchise agreement forming part thereof) attached hereto and authorizes the submission thereof to the Ontario Energy Board for approval pursuant to the provisions of Section 9 of the Municipal Franchises Act; and, 2. That this Council requests the Ontario Energy Board to make an order dispensing with the assent of the municipal electors of the attached draft by-law (including the franchise agreement forming part thereof) pursuant to the provisions of Section 9(4) of the Municipal Franchises Act. CARRIED i I J Debi A. Wilcox, CMO, CMM III City Clerk THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING 306 BY-LAW NO. 6982/09 Being a by-law to amend the Responsible Pet Ownership By-law WHEREAS on October 15, 2007 the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering passed By-law 6811/07 to regulate pet ownership; and WHEREAS Council wishes to amend By-law 6811/07, to provide for leash free areas;. NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Section 1 of By-law 6811/07 is hereby amended by adding the following definition: "leash free area" means an area designated by the City where dogs are not required to be on a leash but must be under verbal control of an owner; 2. By-jaw 6811/07 is hereby amended by adding the following sections: 49(3) Sections 18 and 19 shall not apply to leash free areas. 3. This by-law shall come into effect on the day of its passing. BY-LAW read a first, second and. third time and finally passed this 21st day of September, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING 1 307 BY-LAW NO. 6984/09 Being a by-law to designate the property and buildings at 3540 Westney Road, N Y Lot 11, Concession 5 (Greenwood Schoolhouse) as being of historical and architechtural value or interest. WHEREAS authority was granted by Council to designate the property and buildings at 3540 Westney Road, (Greenwood Schoolhouse) as being of cultural heritage value or interest; and WHEREAS the Ontario Heritage Act authorizes the Council of the municipality to enact by-laws to designate real property, including all the buildings and structures thereon, to be of cultural heritage value or interest; and WHEREAS the Council of the City of Pickering has caused to be served upon the owners of the land and premises known as 3540 Westney Road and upon the Ontario Heritage Foundation, Notice of Intention to designate the property and has caused the Notice of Intention to be published in a newspaper having a general circulation in the municipality as required by the Ontario Heritage Act; and WHEREAS the reasons for designation are set out in Schedule 'A' to this by-law; and WHEREAS no notice of objection to the proposed designation was served upon the Clerk of the municipality. NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. The property at 3540 Westney Road, more particularly described in Schedule `B' is designated as being of cultural heritage value or interest. 2. The City Solicitor is hereby authorized to cause a copy of this by-law to be registered against the property described in Schedule `B' to this by-law in the property Land Registry Office. 3. The City Clerk is authorized to cause a copy of this by-law to be served upon the owners of the property at 3540 Westney Road and upon the Ontario Heritage Foundation and to cause notice of this by-law to be published in a newspaper having general circulation in the City of Pickering as required by the Ontario Heritage Act. By-law No. 6984/09 (Continued) Page 2 308 BY-LAW read a First, Second and Third time and finally passed this 21st day of September, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor I Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk By-law No. 6984/09 309 ~ Schedule 'A' Reasons for Designation Greenwood Schoolhouse 3540 Westney Road The Greenwood schoolhouse is probably the best preserved of the old one-room schoolhouses in Pickering. While similar in style to other buildings of its type in the province it maintains its classical proportions and fine workmanship combined with local variations and local materials. Restorations have been carried out sympathetically and it is a landmark for the community. Historically the schoolhouse has been associated with a number of persons of note, especially "the Chief', John George Diefenbaker, the. 13th Prime Minister of Canada. Cultural Heritage Value ,Several persons of further note, locally and even nationally, have been associated with this Schoolhouse: Donald Beaton, long time clerk of Pickering Township; Arthur Johnson, noted area stock breeder and importer; John Williston, newspaper editor and biographer of Sir Wilfrid Laurier, 7th Prime Minister of Canada; and especially John George Diefenbaker, 13th Prime Minister of Canada. The Schoolhouse on Lot 11, Concession 5 was built in 1860 during, and due to, a period of national economic prosperity fed by the Crimean War and the American Civil War. Exports of Canada products, especially wheat and lumber,, were in high demand during the 1850s and 1860s, which benefited the farmers, prompting many to build homes on their properties. The economic boom also prompted the erection of many public buildings and coincided with the promotion of new functional and substantial schoolhouses for the townships under the regime of Egerton Ryerson as Superintendent of Education. This Schoolhouse and property are associated with the colonization of the area in an agricultural/rural context. Local farmers joined in the profit-sharing of the economic boom time and used part of that wealth to invest in their children's future. Heritage Attributes: The Schoolhouse is classical in design in accordance with the educational plans of the era as established by Superintendent of Education, Egerton Ryerson, and his deputy, J. George Hodgins. Restorations in 1980 preserved the classical design elements and fine workmanship of the original. It is an excellent example of the Victorian-era one-room schoolhouses in Ontario. It follows a standard plan with variations and using local materials. The Schoolhouse is of a local, red pressed brick with beige brick arches over windows and doors and a beige brick, four course plinth. The bricks came from a brickyard just a few miles away in 3 O Salem. The classically proportioned wood windows are very finely detailed, of incredibly delicate muntin bars that all appear to have survived 148 years of .weathering and use. The builder was R.T. Manuel, probably following some of the general schoolhouse designs provided by J. George Hodgins, Deputy Superintendent of Education. Sympathetic renovations were completed in 1980 by the firm of Lett/Smith of Peterborough. The Schoolhouse is prominently sited on the top of a hill above the hamlet of Greenwood. It is a well-known landmark. The Schoolhouse is sited close to what was once the crossroads of the 6th Concession Road and Sideline 10. Highway 7 now by-passes the hamlet further to the north of the school, while the old road runs through the hamlet. Sideline 10 is now named Westney Road (after a prominent local farm family). The Schoolhouse maintains the character of the agricultural/rural surroundings. This building would constitute a familiar building in the community, being highly visible. i 3 By-law No. 6984/09 Schedule 'B' Legal Description Greenwood Schoolhouse 3540 Westney Road N Y2 Lot 11, Concession 5 31 2 PICKE ING MEMO To: Debi Wilcox September 14, 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: Cedaroak Development Corporation .Part Lot 3, Plan 505, Pickering, being Part 5, 40R-25976 (Rosebank Road) File: Roadded.513 One of the conditions of Land Division Applications LD 062/09 and LD 063/09 is for the Owner to convey land for road widening purposes along the open end of Rosebank Road to the City. As the Owner has conveyed Part 5, Plan 40R-25976 (road widening block) to the City and as it has now been constructed to standards sufficient to permit public access, it is appropriate to dedicate it as public highway. Attached is a location map and a draft by-law for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for September 21, 2009. DB:bg Attachments 1 31 3 NT7 DETAIL INSET 1 SCALE N.T.S. r. r,- COURT CRESCENT CHARNWOOD -ITr C3 M M M ;:3 ERE zD 0 o TONA FORE T `vE ASHFIELD ~R CRT. PUBLIC SCHOO o PART5 40R-25976 ARK IM \y Q < s~ W DRIVE 0 T. ELIZABETH SETON 0 SEPARATE SCHOOL n ~~~C)J DS LANE F HIGHBUSH PUBLIC SCHOO > Q L CC ~ W W O fr W U z Cl- H _ A EA } W cn K w ENE cW[ o PARK w ROSEBANK RESERVOIR BRAEBURN z SUBJECT LANDS n 5 SEE INSET MAP z r w > DRIVE ¢ z U; m FOX WOOD FOXWOOD' BRA z a m w UI WMARK PINEVIEW LANE PLACE w SQUARE U AUTUMN CRESCENT URIER C.N.R. ~ ILI City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PT LOT 3, PLAN 505, PART 5,40R-25976 007\ OWNER CITY OF PICKERING DATE SEPT. 2, 2009 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. ROADDED. #513 SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY DB N oTeranatrcEnterprtsea Inc. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not a plan of s„rva,.. PN-11 2009 MPAC antl Its a licra. All rl hts Raserved. Noi a Ian of Surva . 314 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. Am AV, IF Awwo, Jr VK-.J Being a By-law to dedicate that part of Lot 3, Plan 505, Pickering, being Part 5, Plan 40R-25976, as public highway. WHEREAS The Corporation of the City of Pickering is the owner of that part of Lot 3, Plan 505, being Part 5, Plan 40R-25976, Pickering and wishes to dedicate it as a public highway. NOW THEREFORE, the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That part of Lot 3, Plan 505, Pickering, being Part 5, Plan 40R-25976 is hereby dedicated as public highway (Rosebank Road). BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 21 st day of September, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk Roadded.513 CLtq O~ PICKERING MEMO To: Debi Wilcox September 14, 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 Part of Block 45, Plan 40M-1507, being Part 27, 40R-14939 (Butternut Court) File: Roadded.512 I When Plan 40M-1507 was registered, Block 46 was reserved for the future development of 4 quattroplex units and a road providing frontage to them (now Butternut Court). That development was completed pursuant to a Development Agreement dated August 5, 1993. It has been determined through the assumption process that when Butternut Court was constructed and dedicated as a public highway, the dedicating by-law inadvertently excluded the lands comprising the turning circle at the north-west limit of Butternut Court (Part 27, 40R-14939). Accordingly as Part 27, Plan 40R-14939 has been constructed to standards satisfactory to permit public access and as the Municipal Property & Engineering Division concurs with its dedication, Part 27, Plan 40R-14939 should now be dedicated as a public highway. Attached is a location map and a draft by-law for the consideration of City Council at its meeting scheduled for September 21. 2009. rDB:bg Attachments I i 316 DETAIL INSET 1 SCALE N.T.S. m Q ~Jk PINE GROVE T 27 <40R-14939 w > 0 BUTTERNUT COURT SBRQOK TRANQUIL CRT. y • W W U UARE ul. w O ~ c I.J D W'ESTCRFEK DRIVE w Q 0 0 WESTCREEK ALLEYVIE- rr PUBLIC SCHOOL PARK SUBJECT LAN S PROHILL ST. SEE INSET MA BUTTERNUT CRT. z STREFF T rr w z > M `YO STR0ij6S a cxr O O 1- LANE W w z 0 J ' J ¢ LANCREST ST. > << T~. w w ~nQ I- GATE 0 w WILCt ~'T o 0 L CQC/~T STARVIEW CRT. STREET m w w n O 0 ry. Q O N gRT. LAWSO 0 STREET w City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PART OF BLOCK 45,40M-1507, BEING PART 27,40113-14939 OWNER CITY OF PICKERING DATE SEPT. 1, 2009 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. ROADDED. # 512 SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY DB H oTeranetroEnterprlses Inc. and its supPllers. All rights Reserved. Not a plan of survey. PN-5 2005 MPAC and (ts s tiers. All rl hts liese-.d. Not a Ion of Surve . 31 7 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. r Being a By-law to dedicate that part of Block 45, Plan 40M-1507, Pickering, being Part 27, Plan 40R-14939, as public highway. WHEREAS The Corporation of the City of Pickering is the owner of that part of Block 45, Plan 40M-1507; being Part 27, Plan 40R-14939, Pickering and wishes to dedicate it as a public highway. NOW THEREFORE, the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That part of Block 45, Plan 40M-1507, Pickering, being Part 27, Plan 40R-14939 is hereby dedicated as public highway (Butternut Court). BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 21 st day of September, 2009. off AWA David Ryan, Mayo Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk Roadded.512 i 31 8 ;;01 a~ PICKERING MEMO To: Debi A. Wilcox September 15, 2009 City Clerk From: Ashley Yearwood Planner Copy: Director, Planning & Development Manager, Development Review Subject Draft Plan of.Subdivision SP-2009-10 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/09 Part of Lots 1, 2, & 3, Plan 505, Part of Block 165, Block 166, Lot 67, 40M-1810 Part 1, 40R-19732, Part 2, 40R-19734, Part 1, 40R- 20042, Part 2, 40R-20043 City of Pickering Amending By-law # 6987/09 Statutory Public Meeting Date June 1, 2009 Planning & Development September 8, 2009 Committee Date Purpose and Effect of By-law To permit the creation of a maximum of 22 lots for single and semi-detached dwellings, with lot frontages ranging from 7.5 to 16.5 metres Council Meeting Date September 21, 2009 Note This memo is to be a part of the September 21, 2009 Council Meeting Agenda. The proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision was reduced from a maximum of 27 lots to 22. The reduction of lots was created through the applicant willingness to sever out 5 properties (which are to provide frontage along Foxwood Trail) from the existing draft plan; those properties underwent a series of Land Division applications (LD 062/09 to LD 067/09). Despite the revised draft plan boundaries, the original boundaries established through the Zoning Amendment application remain the same. AY: xx I:ayeamood\RezoningT007W13-07Wmending draft by-law chart Attachments By-law text By-law schedule p.d.f. 31 9 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. 6987/09 Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering District Planning Area, Region of Durham in Part of Lots 1 - 3, Plan 505, Part of Block 165, Block 166, Lot 67, 40M-1810, Part 1, 40R-19732, Part 2, 40R-19734, Part 1, 40R-20042, Part 2, 40R-20043, in the City of Pickering (A 11/09) WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to permit the development of lots for detached and semi-detached dwellings on the subject lands, being Part of Lots 1 - 3, Plan 505, Part of Block 165, Block 166, Lot 67, 40M-1810, Part 1, 40R-19732, Part 2, 40R-19734, Part 1, 40R-20042, Part 2, 40R-20043, in the City of Pickering; AND WHEREAS an amendment to By-law 3036, as amended, is therefore deemed necessary; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. SCHEDULE Schedule I attached hereto with notations and references shown thereon is hereby declared to be part of this By-law. 2. AREA RESTRICTED The provisions of this By-law shall apply to those lands in Part of Lots 1 - 3, Plan 505, Part of Block 165, Block 166, Lot 67, 40M-1810, Part 1, 40R-19732, Part 2, 40R-19734, Part 1, 40R-20042, Part 2, 40R-20043, in the City of Pickering, designated "S-SD-4" on Schedule I attached hereto. 3. GENERAL PROVISIONS No building, land or part thereof shall hereafter be used, occupied, erected, moved, or structurally altered except in conformity with the provisions of this By-law. By-law No. 6987/09 Page 2 320 4.. DEFINITIONS. In this By-law, (1) (a) "Dwelling" shall mean a building or part of a building containing one or more dwelling units, but does not include a mobile home or trailer; (b) "Dwelling Unit" shall mean one or more habitable rooms occupied or capable of being occupied as a single, independent, and separate housekeeping unit containing a separate kitchen and sanitary facilities; (c) "Dwelling, Single or Single Dwelling" shall mean a single dwelling containing one dwelling unit and uses accessory hereto; . (d) "Dwelling, Detached or Detached Dwelling" shall mean a single dwelling which is freestanding, separate, and detached from other main buildings or structures; (e) "Dwelling, Semi-Detached or Semi-Detached Dwelling" shall mean one of a pair of dwellings, such dwellings being attached above grade by a common,wall connected by an attached garage, an attached dwelling or both which extends from the base of the foundation to the roof line of a garage and for a horizontal distance of not less than the length of an attached garage attached to the main building; (2) (a) "Floor Area - Residential" shall mean the area of the floor surface contained within the outside walls of a storey or part of a storey; (b) "Gross Floor Area - Residential" shall mean the aggregate of the floor areas of all storeys of a building or structure, or part thereof as the case may be, other than a private garage, an attic, or a cellar; (3) (a) "Lot" shall mean an area of land fronting on a street which is used or intended to be used as the site of a building, or group of buildings, as the case may be, together with any accessory buildings or structures, or a public park or open space area, regardless of whether or not such lot constitutes the whole of a lot or block on a registered plan of subdivision; (b) "Lot Coverage" shall mean the percentage of lot area covered by all buildings on the lot; (c) "Lot Frontage" shall mean the width of a lot between the side lot lines measured along a line parallel to and 7.5 metres distant from the front lot line; By-law No. 6987/09 Page 3 321 (4) "Private Garage" shall mean an enclosed or partially enclosed structure for the storage of one or more vehicles, in which structure no business or' service is conducted for profit or otherwise; (5) (a) "Yard" shall mean an area of land which is appurtenant to and located on the same lot as a building or structure and is open, uncovered, and unoccupied above ground except for such accessory buildings, structures, or other uses as are specifically permitted thereon; (b) "Front Yard" shall mean a yard extending across the full width of a lot between the front lot line of the lot and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (c) "Front Yard Depth" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a front yard of a lot between the front lot line and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (d) "Rear Yard" shall mean a yard extending across the full width of a lot between the rear lot line of the lot, or where there is no rear lot line, the junction point of the side lot lines, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (e) "Rear Yard Depth" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a rear yard of a lot between the rear lot line of the lot, or where there is no rear lot line, the junction point of the side lot lines, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (f) "Side Yard" shall mean a yard of a lot extending from the front yard to the rear yard, and from the side lot line to the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (g) "Side Yard Width" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a side yard of a lot between the side lot line and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (h) "Flankage Side Yard" shall mean a side yard immediately adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a street; (i) "Flankage Side Yard Width" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a flankage side yard of a lot between the lot line adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a street, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; Q) "Interior Side Yard" shall mean a side yard other than a flankage side yard. By-law No. 6987/09 Page 4 322 5. PROVISIONS (1) (a) Uses Permitted ("S-SD-4" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "S-SD-4" on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (i) detached dwelling residential use (ii) semi-detached dwelling residential use (b) Zone Requirements ("S-SD-4 " Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "S-SD-4" on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building except in accordance with the following provisions: (i) LOT AREA (minimum): A for detached dwellings: 250 square metres B for semi-detached dwellings: 225 square metres (ii) LOT FRONTAGE (minimum): A for detached dwellings: 9.0 metres B for detached dwellings located within the area hatched: 8.5 metres C for semi-detached dwellings: 7.5 metres (iii) FRONT YARD DEPTH (minimum): 4.5 metres A despite Section 5.7(b) of By-law 3036 as amended, uncovered and covered platforms/porches attached to a main dwelling may provide a front yard depth of 3.0 metres. (iv) INTERIOR SIDE YARD WIDTH (minimum): A for detached dwellings: (1) for lots not within the areas hatched; 1.2 metres one side, 0.6 metre on the other; By-law No. 6987/09 Page 5 323 (11) for lots within the areas hatched; - 0.6 metres on both sides. B for semi-detached dwellings: minimum 1.2 metres except that, (1) where dwellings on abutting lots share a common wall, no interior side yard shall be required adjacent to that wall on either lot; (11) where dwellings on abutting lots share a common wall and one of those dwellings has an extension of that common wall that extends along the common interior side lot line, no interior side yard shall be required adjacent to the extension of that wall upon which that dwelling is located; or (III) where dwellings on abutting lots share a common wall and one of those dwellings has an extension of that common wall that does not extend along the common interior side lot line, the following shall apply: minimum 0.6 metre interior side yard shall be provided adjacent to the extension of that wall on the lot upon which that dwelling is located if an abutting interior side yard is provided on the other lot. (v) FLANKAGE SIDE YARD WIDTH (minimum): 2.7 metres A despite Section 5.7(b) of By-law 3036 as amended, uncovered and covered platforms/porches attached to a main dwelling may provide a flankage side yard width of 2.0 metres. (vi) REAR YARD DEPTH (minimum): 7.5 metres A despite Section 5.7(b) of By-law 3036 as amended, uncovered and covered platforms/porches attached to a main dwelling may provide a rear yard depth of 6.0 metres. (vii) BUILDING HEIGHT (maximum): 12.0 metres (viii) DWELLING UNIT REQUIREMENTS: maximum one dwelling unit per lot and minimum gross floor area residential of 100 square metres. By-law No. 6987/09 Page 6 324 (ix) PARKING REQUIREMENTS: A minimum one private garage per lot attached to the main building; any vehicular entrance of which shall be located not less than 6 metres from the front lot line, and not less than 6 metres from any side lot line immediately adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a street; B maximum projection of the garage front entrance from the wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit shall not exceed 2.5 metres in length, whether or not such garage has a second storey, except where a covered and unenclosed porch or veranda extends a minimum of 1.8 metres from the wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit, in which case no part of any attached private garage shall extend more than 3.0 metres beyond the wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit. (x) SPECIAL REGULATIONS: A semi-detached dwellings are permitted only within the hatched area on Schedule II; B for lot frontages less than 10.0 metres, the maximum width for a garage attached to a main dwelling shall be no more than half the width of a dwelling; C despite Section 5.7(a) of zoning by-law 3036 as amended, bay windows, sills, cornices or other similar features below or above grade may project a maximum of 0.6 metre into a front, rear or flankage side yard; D despite Section 5.7(b) of Zoning By-law 3036, as amended, uncovered rear decks less than or equal to 0.6 metre in height for detached dwellings with a lot frontage less than 9.0 metres or semi-detached dwellings located within the hatched area may have a minimum side yard width of 0.3 metres; By-law No. 6987/09 Page 7 ?S 6. BY-LAW By-law 3036, as amended, is hereby further amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as it applies to the area set out in Schedule I attached hereto. Definitions and subject matters not specifically dealt with in this BY-law shall be governed by relevant provisions of By-law 3036, as amended. 7. EFFECTIVE DATE This By-law shall take effect from the day of passing hereof subject to the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board, if required. BY-LAW read a first, second; and third time and finally passed this 21St day of September, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk 47 326 .11, 00 00 20.6m 1 \ \ I I ' , \ E 1 1 i ~ \ \ ~ i i 1 G 1 ,.._-_1_T____~ I 8.6m \ 1 1 I 1 I I v 1 1 I S\S D\,-4 z 1 PART 1, 40~-19732, PAT 2, 40R-19734 Q PART 1, 40 -20042, PAT 2, 40R-20043 -----''ART, --O€-LOTS 1, 2, 3, ~b LAN 505 ^ W BLOCKS 165, 166, LOT 67, 40M-1810 PINEVIEW LANE i O E i I 00 I 57.4m I j I I 1 I I I I I - I I I - 1 I I I 1 cn JE 3 1 I I 1 I I 1 I 38.Om I I I 1 I 1 I I I 1 I I I I I I I I i I ; i 1 I I I N SCHEDULE I TO BY-LAW 6987/09 PASSED THIS 21st DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2009 ~(:)Oo i N1I I N ~I Lo~ i Yl I I I \ ~ i 1 I 1 \ \ I I I 1 1 I 1 \ j I I I i \ ' I I I \ I I \ 1 I 1 I \ Z I I 1 I \ I I 1 I \ I 1 I \ PART 1, 40~-19732, PA T 21 40R-1 .734 Q PART 1, 409-20042, PA T 21 40R-20043 ----PART-Of-LtOTS 1, 2, 3, LAN'505-' W BLOCKS 165, 166, LOT 67, 40M-1810 PINEVIEW LANE 0 C~ ' n v 1 I \^l I 1 I I 7 1 I L 1 I 1 j - 1 I I I I I 1 I ' 1 I I I I i I I I 1 1 I 1 I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I 1 1 I I I. I 1 I I I 'I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I 1 I I I I 1 1 I I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I SCHEDULE H TO BY-LAW 6987/09 PASSED THIS 21 st DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2009 City 00 Minutes / Meeting Summary. Sustainable Pickering Advisory Committee i i May 26, 2009 PI rKERING 2:00 pm Main Committee Room Attendees:. Jennifer O'Connell, City Councillor, Ward 1 (Vice-Chair) David Pickles, City Councillor, Ward 3 Tom Melymuk, (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Lynn Winterstein, Manager, Marketing & Business Development Chantal Whitaker, Coordinator, Sustainability Jack McGinnis - Durham Sustain Ability Marla Shim, Executive Assistant, Council (Recording Secretary) Absent: Doug Dickerson, City Councillor, Ward 2 (Chair) Item/ Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) 1. Welcome Councillor O'Connell welcomed everyone and passed regrets from Councillor Dickerson. 2. Eastern Power J. McGinnis reported that he has not received any recent Revise the letter to communication from Eastern Power. Eastern Power indicating concerns and It was discussed and agreed that the letter being sent to request to be kept Eastern Power should specify the reasons that we are not informed. supporting the project and indicate the concerns, lack of project clarity and therefore consensus to support the project. Post on website and The letter to Eastern Power will be posted on our website and email to resident emailed to residents that have contacted us about the project. contacts for this project. 3. Green Energy The Act was passed two weeks ago; therefore, an audit is no Send comments to longer mandatory. Ministry of Energy & Infrastructure. L It is the first act in North America to model after the German legislation. J. McGinnis to assist in finding the addressee of Page 1 CORP0228-2/02 Letter will focus on the proposed regulations instead of the the letter. overall Act and provide comments. Planning & Development staff to provide updates to Sustainable Committee. 4. Sustainable Pickering Day, M Challen a and'Website The focus this year is on taking the Challenge and community involvement. • The first 100 people to sign up for one of the programs will receive a free t-shirt and will be entered in a draw • Investigating the cost of hiring a videographer • Many groups such as the Library, Ajax Pickering Board of Trade, Museum, Evergreen and Sustainable Pickering will have display booths • OPG, Enbridge and Veridian are also confirmed to have displays • Advertising program includes multiple facets such as media releases, posting on websites, e-bulletins, SNAP, Retail Pages and News Advertiser • Large display banners will be set-up at the Recreation Complex, Central Library and Pickering Town Centre • Pre-launch initiative will include a display in the Civic Complex lobby to encourage staff to sign up for the Challenge • Students volunteers from Dunbarton and Pineridge schools will be assisting Construction of the website has been completed and will be launched on Sustainable Pickering Day. 5. Clean' Air` Commute Scheduled for June 22"d to 26tH I • Staff will be encouraged to take public transit, bike, walk, telecommute, carpool or drive a hybrid to work • It is a nationwide initiative and Pickering also participated last year • Will send email messages and posting on staff bulletin boards • Participants will have an opportunity to win one of three GTA-wide grand prizes • There will also be a draw for staff to win a mountain bike and movie tickets • A bike repair Lunch and Learn is being held on June 24th Page 2 CORP0228-2/02 6. Other Business Councillor Pickles informed members that he received a letter J. McGinnis and C. from a resident complaining about the lack of recycling bins in Whitaker will prepare a Pickering businesses. letter to the Region • It was agreed that we will look into encouraging the private requesting support to sector to participate in recycling lobby for better waste • Look at ways of encouraging participation such as diversion within the identifying restaurants that recycle and recognize by business community. posting their names on our website • Look at Starbucks in Toronto (cup recycling) as an example • Solicit Durham Region support and lead by example ourselves, by expanding recycling in plazas and parks. T. Melymuk introduced Bill Wong of SAIC Canada who provided a detailed overview of their thermochemical storage of solar energy system. • Looking for the Committee's support for Pickering to participate in a demonstration project using compact seasonal storage • Potentially a marketable product in years to come. • A renewal energy source that captures solar energy and stores heat in the summer, for use in the winter • University of Toronto Institute of Technology and Nelson Industries are interested in participating in the project • Good chance of receiving government funding if we prepare a solid proposal • City may have an opportunity to apply for a FCM grant for B. Wong will provide Pickering to host a field test, or demonstration project wording for proposal. • There is an interest in using one of the City's buildings for the demonstration project, possibly the heritage house on the waterfront (relocated as part of the Sewage Plant expansion) • The Committee will be kept apprised as work on the project continues T. Melymuk advised that an email was received from the L. Winterstein and C. World Wildlife Fund regarding their "Share It" program, Whitaker to investigate. which is geared to promote the use of reusable bags. 6. Next Meeting Wednesday, September 16th at 2:00 m. Meeting Adjourned: 3:50 pm Copy: City Clerk Page 3 CORP0228-2/02 I Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes City o~ AL A'at, i Wednesday, June 17, 2009 7:00 pm PI Main Committee Room PRESENT: Kevin Ashe David Johnson - Chair Eric Newton - Vice-Chair Keith Wilkinson ALSO PRESENT: Ross Pym, Secretary-Treasurer Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer ABSENT: Susan Kular (1) ADOPTION OF AGENDA Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by. Keith Wilkinson That the agenda for the Wednesday, June 17, 2009 meeting be adopted. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (II) ADOPTION OF MINUTES Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That the minutes of the 7th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, May 27, 2009 be adopted. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 1 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes CCtq o~ Wednesday, June 17, 2009 7:00 pm I Main Committee Room (III) REPORTS 1. (Deferred at the May 27, 2009) 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. 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. Correspondence received from Penny Whitehead 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. 2 Committee of Adjustment City Meeting Minutes o~ Wednesday, June 17, 2009 7:00 pm PI _ Main Committee Room 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. Kelly Greene explained they had an opportunity to meet with the neighbours and meet with Committee members on-siteto further outline the application. In response to a question from a Committee member Kelly Greene explained the intent of the building will be storage for a vehicle, large trailer, garden supplies and will not be used as living space. Moved by Kevin Ashe Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 20/09 by S. & K. Greene, 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 partially erected in the side 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: 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 3 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Citq iii JL A&, Wednesday, June 17, 2009 7:00 pm PUC~YT/ERNG Main Committee Room 2. P/CA 22/09 - B. & G. McCusker 836 Hillcrest Road (Lot 125, Plan M20) City of Pickering The applicants request relief from Zoning By-law 2520 as amended to permit a replacement deck around an above ground pool in the rear yard having a side yard width of 0.1 metre side yard depth and a 0.1 metre rear yard depth, whereas the By-law requires accessory structures to be set back a minimum of 1.0 metres from the side and rear yard lines. The applicants request approval of these variances in order to obtain zoning compliance and 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 stating all existing drainage patterns need to be maintained. Betty & Gerard McCusker, owners, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application'. Gerard McCusker explained the application. In response to a question from. a Committee member Gerard McCusker clarified the fence is a solid wood fence. Moved by Kevin Ashe Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That application P/CA 22/09 by B. & G. McCusker, be APPROVED on the grounds that the request to permit an accessory structure having a side yard width of 0.1 metres and rear yard depth of 0.1 metres 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 condition: 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed replacement deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plan and sketches with this application. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Citq o~ vlna Wednesday, June 17, 2009 7:00 pm PICKE Main Committee Room 3. P/CA 23/09 - M. & S. Enright 285 Whitevale Road (Part of Lot 33, Concession 4 Part 1, 40R-19536) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 2677/88 to permit to permit a front yard depth of 6.7 metres to a proposed two- storey addition to the existing dwelling, whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 12.0 metres. The applicant also requests relief from the by-law to recognize the following attributes to three accessory structures: Setback from Building Building Zoning Requirements Front Lot Line Height Location Barn #1 2.4 metres 12.0 metres front & side minimum 9.0 metres front yards yard depth Barn #2 N/A 7.0 metres side yard maximum accessory building height of 3.5 metres Barn #3 N/A 7.0 metres N/A all accessory buildings shall be located in the rear and 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 tabling until the applicant receives heritage consultation as a Heritage Permit is required for the proposed two storey addition. Written comments were also received from the City's Chief Building Official indicating the applicant to consult on the design of the proposed two storey addition to ensure compliance with the Heritage District. Michael & Sara Enright, owners, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In response to a question from a Committee member, the Secretary-Treasurer ryexplained the Heritage Committee is appointed by Council. 5 Committee of Adjustment Citq Meeting Minutes o~ A-Mial Wednesday, June 17, 2009 i 7:00 pm Main Committee Room PIC <EMNG Moved by Kevin Ashe Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 23/09 by M. & S. Enright, be TABLED on the grounds that the 6.7 metre front yard depth to a proposed two-storey addition to the existing dwelling and the accessory building located in the front and side yard, accessory building height of 12.0 metres and 7.0 metres, and the front yard depth of the accessory building to be premature since the property is located within the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District and therefore recommends that the applicant receives heritage consultation as a Heritage Permit for the proposed two storey addition will be required. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4. P/CA 24/09 - P. & L. Clarke 1470 Finch Avenue (South Part of Lot 21, Concession 2) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, to permit a detached garage to be located in the front yard, whereas the by-law requires all accessory buildings to be located 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 indicating approval should be conditional of the septic system being rectified. Written comments were received from the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority indicating no objection to the application. Written comments were received from John & Marilyn Metcalfe of 1462 Finch Avenue in objection to the application. Written comments were also received from the Region of Durham Health Department. recommending the application be denied unless the subject property is serviced by municipal sanitary sewer or a new private sewage disposal system that adheres to Part 8, OBC is installed. 6 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes City o~ Irma Wednesday, June 17, 2009 7:00 pm PICKE Main Committee Room Paul & Lorraine Clarke, owners, were present to represent the application. Abbas Alzubaidi of 2002 Bloomfield Court, Roger Moteelall of 2004 Bloomfield Court, John Metcalfe of 1462 Finch Avenue and David & Laura Mount of 2006 Bloomfield Court were present in objection to the application. Lorraine Clarke outlined the application, advised the Committee she is aware a new septic system is required and has been in contact with the Region of. Durham Health Department. Lorraine Clarke provided a picture of the proposed detached garage to the Committee and explained it will blend with existing dwelling and streetscape. In response to a question from a Committee member Lorraine Clarke indicated they are in agreement with staff recommended the maximum height limited to 4.5 metres. Abbas Alzubaidi expressed concerns with the height and location of the proposed detached garage. Roger Moteelall expressed concerns with the height and the possible conversion of the two storey garage into living space. John Metcalfe outlined the correspondence and expressed several concerns with location of the proposed detached garage in relation to the property lines, the possibility of the proposed detached garage being converted into living space, the replacement and location of the septic system, and the landscaping around the proposed detached garage. Requested the property be formally surveyed prior to an approval. David & Laura Mount expressed concerns with the height, the possible conversion of the two storey garage into living space and the flooding problem currently on the subject property. Moved by Kevin Ashe Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 24/09 by P. & L. Clarke, be APPROVED on the grounds that the proposed detached garage to be located in.the front yard 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 detached garage, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans with this application. 2. That the maximum height of the proposed detached garage be limited to 4.5 metres. 7 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Wednesday, June 17, 2009 PI 7:00 pm Main Committee Room 3. That the applicant contacts the Region Health Department in order to review the functioning of the septic system on the property to the satisfaction of the Region of Durham. 4. That the applicant submits an application review fee of $200.00 payable to the Region of Durham Health Department for their review of this application. 5. 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 5. P/CA 25/09 - Pickering-Brock Centre 1755 Pickering Parkway S. Part of Lot 17, 18, Concession 1 Now Plan 40R-20443 Parts 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 6549/05 to permit a maximum aggregate floor area of 4,850 square metres for retail stores between 100 square metres and 1,400 square metres in size, whereas the by-law permits a maximum aggregate floor area of 4,570 square metres for retail stores between 100 square metres and 1,400 square metres in size. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit to convert one existing retail unit into two. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Harry Froussios, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Keith Wilkinson Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 25/09 by Pickering-Brock Centre, be APPROVED on the grounds that the proposed increase to the aggregate floor area to 4,850 square metres 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: 8 Committee of Adjustment CMeeting Minutes ~tcj o~ ai Wednesday, June 17, 2009 T 7:00 pm 1 Main Committee Room 1. That the applicant obtains a building permit for the proposed building changes within one year of the date of this decision, or this decision shall become null and void. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 6. P/CA 26/09 - Michael Nufrio 1478 - 1480 Highbush Trail (Lots 116 and 117, Plan 816) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, to permit a reduced lot frontage of 8.5 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to facilitate an associated Land Severance application that will result in conveyance of lands providing the applicant with direct access onto Highbush Trail. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Michael Nufrio, owner, was present to represent the application. Wayne & Penny Purdon of 1476 Highbush Trail were also present in favour of the application. Moved by Kevin Ashe Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That application P/CA 26/09 by Michael Nufrio, be APPROVED on the grounds that the proposed establishment of a reduced lot frontage of 8.5 metres 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 the applicant obtains and finalizes a land severance within two years of the date of this decision, or this decision shall become null and void. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 9 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes C1~ o~ 141 Wednesday, June 17, 2009 7:00 pm Main Committee Room I P~~ ING 7. P/CA 27/09 - B. & N. Gray 708 Front Road (Part of Lot 46, Plan M-90) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, to permit a front yard depth of 0.0 metre,, a maximum lot coverage of 39 percent, an accessory building north side yard width of 0.8 metres and a lot coverage of 8.3 percent for an existing shed, whereas the by-law requires a front yard depth of 7.5 metres, a maximum total lot coverage of 33 percent, a side yard width of 1.0 metre for accessory buildings and a lot coverage of 5 percent for all accessory structures. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit for a proposed one storey 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. Written comments were also received from the City's Engineering & Capital Works Supervisor indicating an encroachment agreement is required to recognize existing porch on a municipal boulevard (Front Road). Ben & Nicole Gray, owners, was present to represent the application. Lee & Jane Gray were also present in favour of the application. Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Kevin Ashe That application P/CA 27/09 by B. & N. Gray, be APPROVED on the grounds that the front yard depth of 0.0 metre, a maximum lot coverage of 39 percent, an accessory building north side yard width of 0.8 metres and a lot coverage of 8.3 percent for an existing shed 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 existing buildings and proposed addition, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans with this application. 10 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes C[tq oo - Wednesday, June 17, 2009 7:00 pm PI Main Committee Room 2. That the applicant enters into an encroachment agreement with the City to recognize. the existing covered porch within the municipal right-of-way (Front Road) within one year of the date of this decision, or this decision shall become null and void. 3. That the applicant relocates the steps to the existing deck on the southerly portion of the subject property to ensure they comply with zoning requirements. 4. 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 (IV) ADJOURNMENT Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That the 8th meeting of 2009 the Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 8:03 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, July 8, 2009. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY r 20,01 Date r_ r L Chair Assistant Secretary-Treasurer 11 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Ccfq ao - ii Wednesday, July 8, 2009 7:00 pm PI Main Committee Room PRESENT: " I Kevin Ashe David Johnson - Chair Susan Kular Eric Newton - Vice-Chair Keith Wilkinson ALSO PRESENT: Ross Pym, Secretary-Treasurer Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer Bill McLean, Regional Councillor -Ward 2 (1) ADOPTION OF AGENDA Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That the agenda for the Wednesday, July 8, 2009 meeting be adopted. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (II) ADOPTION OF MINUTES Moved by Susan Kular Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That the minutes of the 8th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, June 17, 2009 be adopted. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 1 Committee of Adjustment City Meeting Minutes ~ A Wednesday, July 8, 2009 Pit ~ 7:00 pm Main Committee Room (III) REPORTS 1. P/CA 23/09 - M. & S. Enright 285 Whitevale Road (Part of Lot 33, Concession 4 Part 1, 40R-19536) City of Pickering Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That application P/CA 23/09 by M. & S. Enright, be lifted from the table. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 2677/88 to permit to permit a front yard depth of 6.7 metres to a proposed two- storey addition to the existing dwelling, whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 12.0 metres. The applicant also requests relief from the by-law to recognize the following attributes to three accessory structures: Setback from Building Building Zoning Requirements Front Lot Line Height Location front & side minimum 9.0 metres front Barn #1 2.4 metres 12.0 metres yards yard depth maximum accessory Barn #2 N/A 7.0 metres side yard building height of 3.5 metres Barn #3 N/A 7.0 metres N/A all accessory buildings shall be located in the rear and i 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 also received from the City's Chief Building Official indicating the applicant to consult on the design of the proposed two storey addition to ensure compliance with the Heritage District. 2 Committ ee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes CCtq O~ - ~i Wednesday, July 8, 2009 7:00 pm PI Main Committee Room Sara Enright, owner, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In response to a question from a Committee Member Sara Enright explained the Heritage Committee has no concerns and explained the Heritage District boundaries. Moved by Kevin Ashe Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 23/09 by M. & S. Enright, be APPROVED on the grounds that the 6.7 metre front yard depth to a proposed second-storey addition to the existing dwelling and the accessory building located in the front and side yard, accessory building height of 12.0 metres and 7.0 metres, and the front yard depth of the accessory building 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 apply only to a second-storey addition to the existing dwelling and to the existing accessory structures on-site. 2. That the applicants obtain 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 29/09 - P. Watson 864 Kingston Road (Part of Lot 27, BFC 3, Now Part 1 40R-15822) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, to permit a detached garage in the side yard, whereas the by-law requires all accessory buildings to be located in the rear yard. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit. 3 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Citq Wednesday, July 8, 2009 7:00 pm PI Main Committee Room 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 and Durham Region Health Department both expressing no objections to the application. Patricia Watson, owner and Mark Senior, agent, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Patricia Watson explained the detached garage will be on the existing foundation, smaller than the original garage and being replaced for safety reasons. Moved by Kevin Ashe Seconded by Susan Kular That application P/CA 29/09 by P. Watson, be APPROVED on the grounds that the proposed detached garage located in the side yard 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: i 1. That this variance 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 and/or services are permitted within the proposed detached garage. 3. That the applicant submits an application review fee of $200.00 payable to the Region of Durham Health Department for their review of this application. 4. 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 Committee of Adjustment CCtcj o~ Meeting Minutes Wednesday, July 8, 2009 7:00 pm PI Main Committee Room. (IV) ADJOURNMENT Moved by Susan Kular Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That the 9th meeting of 2009 the Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 7:13 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, July 29, 2009. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Date ` Chair Assistant Secretary-Treasurer t 5 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes C[tq o~ Aga, Wednesday, July 29, 2009 7:05 pm PICKEMG Main Committee Room PRESENT: Kevin Ashe David Johnson - Chair Eric Newton - Vice-Chair Keith Wilkinson ALSO PRESENT: Lynda Taylor, Manager, Development Review Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer ABSENT: Susan Kular Ross Pym, Secretary-Treasurer (1) ADOPTION OF AGENDA Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That the agenda for the Wednesday, July 29, 2009 meeting be adopted. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (II) ADOPTION OF MINUTES Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That the minutes of the 9th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, July 8, 2009 be adopted. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 1 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes ~Ctcj 00 Wednesday, July 29, 2009 7:05 pm I Main Committee Room JL %.~B G (III) REPORTS 1. P/CA 30/09 - J. Hoover 1938 Calvington Drive (Part Block 6, 40M-2339, Part 12 & 13, 40R-25465) City of Pickering The applicants request relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 6585/05 to permit a 0.3 metre west side yard width and a 3.8 metre rear yard depth to a proposed raised deck, whereas the by-law requires a minimum side yard width of 0.6 metres and a rear yard depth of 6.0 metres. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit. The Manager, Development Review 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. Jay Hoover, owner, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Kevin Ashe Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 30/09 by J. Hoover, be APPROVED on the grounds that the 0.3 metre west side yard width and the 3.8 metre rear yard depth to a proposed rear yard raised deck, 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 apply only to the proposed raised 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 2 I Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Citcj a~ i Wednesday, July 29, 2009 7:05 pm PI Main Committee Room 2. P/CA 31/09 - OPB Realty Incorporated 1355 Kingston Road Part of Lots 21 and 22, Concession 1 City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036 as amended by By-law .5994/02 to permit the construction of a first phase of the proposed office development to be located entirely outside of the "build-to-zone' whereas the by-law requires a minimum of 70 percent of the length of the building to be located within the "build-to-zone". The applicant requests approval of this variance to obtain Site Plan approval and building permits. The Manager, Development Review outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. The Manager, Development Review also advised the Committee that the Site Plan Advisory Committee requests that this application be deferred until the site plan review process has been completed. Written comments were also received from the City's Development Control Manager, expressing no concerns and the City's Coordinator, City Development Office of Sustainability in support of the application. In correspondence received from the Coordinator, City Development Office of Sustainability indicates the delaying the second phase of the building will provide the applicant time to find a tenant, and the opportunity to design the structure in accordance with the tenant's needs. The detailed design of the additional commercial/retail/restaurant space (and surrounding landscaped area) can be better coordinated with the design and planning of other adjacent projects, namely the Pickering Pedestrian Bridge and possible redesign of Pickering Parkway. Diana Schlosser, agent, and Bruno Bartel of 20 Vic, were present to represent the application. Jerry Terpstra of 1360 Glenanna Road was present to advise the Committee of his concerns. Diana Schlosser explained the application and presented a layout of the first and second phase of the subject property. In response to concerns Bruno Bartel explained that the parking reduction has already been approved by the Committee earlier in the year and traffic studies will be done and addressed though the site plan process. 3 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes C-itq Wednesday, July 29, 2009 7:05 pm PICKERING Main Committee Room Jerry Terpstra expressed concerns with increased traffic along Glenanna Road and Hwy 2 and the decrease in parking availability resulting in an overflow onto City streets especially through the Christmas season. Moved by Eric Newton Seconded.by Keith Wilkinson That application P/CA 31/09 by OPB Realty Incorporated, be APPROVED on the grounds that the request to permit the construction of a first phase of the proposed office development to be located entirely outside of the "build-to-zone" 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 office development, as generally 'sited and outlined on the applicant's plans submitted with this application. 2. That the applicant obtains Site Plan approval and a building permit for the proposed construction within one year of the date of this decision, or this decision shall become null and void. 3. That the approval to permit the construction of a first phase of the proposed office development to be located entirely outside of the "build-to-zone" be temporary in nature and be limited to a period of three years only from the date of the decision, whereupon the decision shall become null and void. . CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 3. P/CA 32/09 - Met-Star Holdings Limited .1211 Kingston Road (South Part of Lots 23 & 24, Concession 1) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 6112/03 to permit one take-out restaurant for the immediate consumption of food off the premises with a maximum gross floor area of 82 square metres, whereas the by-law only permits a restaurant Type B which are defined as eat-in restaurants. 4 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes CCtq o~ a i Wednesday, July 29, 2009 7:05 pm P Main Committee Room The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit. The Manager, Development Review 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. R. Bhaloo and M. Bhaloo, agents, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Keith Wilkinson Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 32/09 by Met-Star Holdings Limited, be APPROVED on the grounds that the request to allow the proposed take-out restaurant 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 commercial unit (Unit 14), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans with this application. 2. That only one take-out restaurant for the consumption of food off the premises only is permitted within the commercial plaza. 3. That the maximum gross floor area of the take-out restaurant is 82 square metres. 4. That the aggregate gross floor area of all restaurants Type B and the accessory take-out restaurant will not exceed 700 square metres. 5. 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 5 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes C-itq o~ Wednesday, July 29, 2009 7:05 pm P1%C1r=-.iuR1NG Main Committee Room 4. P/CA 33/09 - Kiya Development Ltd. 1500 Old Forest Road (Lot 124, Plan 816, Part 1, 40R-25484) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036 to permit a maximum lot coverage of 39 percent, a flankage side yard width of 1.2 metres to the proposed covered porch and a front yard depth of 5.5 metres to the proposed dwelling, whereas the by-law requires a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent, a minimum flankage side yard width of 2.7 metres and a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres. The applicant requests approval of these variances in order to obtain a building permit. The Manager, Development Review outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending approval for the proposed dwelling and recommending refusal for the proposed covered porch subject to conditions. Written comments were also received from the City's Development Control Manager indicating a 2.7 metres flankage side yard width on lots adjacent to the road allowance ensures suitable sightlines are maintained and the geometrics of the intersection of Sheppard Avenue and Old Forest Road are such that suitable sightlines would provide a safer intersection, the reduction should not be approved. Lucky Dutt, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Lucky Dutt presented and explained photos of the subject property and surrounding area. Lucky Dutt also indicated there would be no blockage of sightlines from the proposed covered porch and that it would maintain openness and streetscape character. In response to a question from a Committee Member, the Manager, Development Review explained the zoning by-law provisions applicable to an uncovered porch. 6 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Citq el Wednesday, July,29, 2009 7:05 pm Main Committee Room PIC <ERNG Moved by Kevin Ashe Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 33/09 by Kiya Development Ltd., be APPROVED on the grounds that the request to permit a maximum lot coverage of 39 percent, a front yard depth of 5.5 metres to a proposed dwelling and a flankage side yard width of 1.2 metres to the proposed covered porch 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 conditions: 1. That these variances applies only to the proposed two storey dwelling, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans with this application. 2. That the covered porch shall not be enclosed. 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 (IV) ADJOURNMENT Moved by Keith Wilkinson Seconded by Eric Newton That the 10th meeting of 2009 the Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 7:42 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, August 19, 2009. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Date Chair Assistant Secretary-Treasurer 7 Committee of Adjustment City o~ Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 19, 2009 7:00 pm PICKEPUNG Main Committee Room PRESENT: Kevin Ashe David Johnson - Chair Eric Newton - Vice-Chair Keith Wilkinson ALSO PRESENT: Ross Pym, Secretary-Treasurer Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer ABSENT: Susan Kular (1) ADOPTION OF AGENDA Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That the agenda for the Wednesday, August 19, 2009 meeting be adopted. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (11) ADOPTION OF MINUTES Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That the minutes of the 10th meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, July 29, 2009 be adopted as- amended. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 1 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes C[tq o~ Wednesday, August 19, 2009 7:00 pm P Main Committee Room (III) REPORTS 1. P/CA 34/09 - HMQ / ORC Vacant Lot Fronting onto Taunton Road (Part of Lot 16, Concession 3) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, to permit a lot frontage for a future development block of 0.0 metres, whereas the by-law requires a minimum lot frontage of 60 metres for residential uses in an agricultural zone. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to complete a land severance application Region of Durham File Number LD 123/08, to sever the subject property for the purpose of creating a future lot. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Lynn Collins, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Keith Wilkinson Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 34/09 by HMQ / ORC, be APPROVED on the grounds that the creation of a proposed future development block that does not front a street resulting in a lot frontage of 0.0 metres 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 severed lot, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans with this application. 2. That the applicant finalizes the associated land severance application LD 123/08 for the proposed severed lot or this decision shall become null and void. 3. That no building or structures be permitted on the proposed lot until the lot abuts a municipal road. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 2 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Citq Wednesday, August 19, 2009 7:00 pm PICKERING Main Committee Room 2. P/CA 35/09 - Frank D'Amelio 1020 Rouge Valley Drive (Block 41, Plan 40M-1309, Block 67, Plan 40M-1306) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036 as amended by By-law 1675/83 to permit a maximum lot coverage of 41 percent to permit the construction of an enclosed addition to the rear of the existing dwelling, whereas the by-law permits a maximum lot coverage of 38 percent. 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 also received from the City's Development Control Manager expressing no concerns. Teresa & Frank D'Amelio, owners, were present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Kevin Ashe Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 35/09 by Frank D'Amelio, be APPROVED on the grounds that the request to permit a maximum lot coverage of 41 percent 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 enclosed addition to the rear of the existing dwelling, 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 3 i Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes CCtr~ o~ Wednesday, August 19, 2009 7:00 pm I Main Committee Room 3. P/CA 36/09 - D' Angelo (P&G) Homes Limited 933 941 Dillingham Road (Part of Lot 19, Broken Frontage Concession Range 3 Part 2, Plan RD 139) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, to permit an existing auto body repair shop with a maximum gross floor area of 220 square metres within an existing building, whereas the by-law does not specifically permit an auto body repair shop in the "M2" zone. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain zoning compliance. 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 GTA Industrial Properties Inc. of 940 Brock Road indicating the application is unacceptable. The written comments indicate the subject property's overflow of parking is taking place on their lot. Rosanne Parete, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Rosanne Parete explained the application and indicated the subject property has an oversupply of parking. Moved by Keith Wilkinson Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 36/09 by D' Angelo (P&G) Homes Limited, be APPROVED on the grounds that the existing 220 square metre auto body repair shop within an existing building 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: 4 i Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes City o~ iii Wednesday, August 19, 2009 7:00 pm Main Committee Room P IJA_A,~RING 1. That this variance applies only to the industrial unit (941 B Dillingham Road), as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans with this application. 2. That only one auto body repair shop is permitted within the existing building. 3. That the maximum gross floor area of the existing auto body repair shop be 220 square metres; CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 4. P/CA 37/09 - R. Gosling 425 Whitevale Road (Part of Lot 24, Lots 25 to 27, Plan 2 Parts 5 & 6, 40R-1139) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, as amended by By-law 2677/88 to recognize front yard depths of 4.3 metres to an existing building, 3.3 metres to an existing covered deck & steps and 2.7 metres to an existing _ canopy, whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 9.0 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance 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. Written comments were received from the City's Development Control Manager expressing no concerns. No representation was present in support of or in objection to the application. Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Kevin Ashe That application P/CA 37/09 by R. Gosling, be APPROVED on the grounds that the front yard depths of 4.3 metres to the existing building, 3.3 metres to the existing covered deck & steps and 2.7 metres to the existing canopy 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: 5 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes Caq Wednesday, August 19, 2009 - 7:00,pm rl= pl Main Committee Room 1. That these variances apply only to the building, 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 modification of the site within two years of the date of this decision, or this decision shall become null and void. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 5. P/CA 38/09 - Edita De Los Angeles 1892 Poppy Lane (Part Lot 136, Plan M997, Part 11, 40R-2457) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4325/73 to permit a lot coverage of 38 percent and a rear yard depth of 6.0 metres for a proposed rear yard addition to the existing dwelling, whereas the by- law permits a maximum lot coverage of 33 percent and requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres. 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 received from the City's Development Control Manager expressing no concerns. John Lewandowski, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Keith Wilkinson Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 38/09 by Edita De Los Angeles, be APPROVED on the grounds that the lot coverage of 38 percent and the 6.0 metre rear yard depth to a proposed one storey enclosed addition 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: i i 6 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes caq O~ - Wednesday, August 19, 2009. 7:00 pm PI Main Committee Room 1. That these variances apply only to the proposed one storey enclosed addition, 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 6. P/CA 39/09 - R. Trent 1630 Bayly Street (South Part of Lot 19, Concession 1) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 251. 1, to permit a beauty salon, a hairdressing establishment and a tanning salon (personal service uses) within an existing building as similar uses to those permitted within a "M1" zoning, whereas personal service uses are not specifically permitted uses in the "M1" zone. The applicant requests approval of this.variance in order to accommodate a future tenant within the existing building. 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. Grant Morris, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. In response to a question from a Committee Member, the Secretary-Treasurer explained that only one business is allowed in operation at any given time. Moved by Kevin Ashe Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 39/09 by R. Trent, be APPROVED on the grounds that the specific personal service uses being a beauty salon, hairdressing and a tanning salon 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 1 Committee of Adjustment Meeting Minutes City oo JLA~ Wednesday, August 19, 2009 T 7:00 pm Main Committee Room 1 %.-.,f %-URING 1. That these variances applies only to the existing building, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans with this application. 2. That the maximum gross floor area for a beauty salon, a hairdressing establishment or a tanning salon be restricted to the size of the existing building, as of the date this application becomes final and binding. 3. That a maximum of one establishment be in operation within the existing building at any given time. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 7. P/CA 40/09 - G. Hutchinson & B. Marquis 1173 Tanzer Court (Part of. Block 8, 40M-1281, Part 19, 40R-7881) City of Pickering The applicants request relief from Zoning By-law 2511, as.amended by By-law 1299/81 to permit a rear yard depth of 5.6 metres to a proposed second storey deck, whereas the by-law requires a minimum rear yard depth of 7.5 metres. 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. Paul Lafrance, agent, was present to represent the application. No further representation was present in favour of or in objection to the application. Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Keith Wilkinson .That application P/CA 40/09 by G. Hutchinson & B. Marquis, be APPROVED on the grounds that the 5.6 metre rear yard depth to a proposed second storey deck, 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 second storey deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans with this - application. 8 1 Committee of Adjustment CCtcl co Meeting Minutes Wednesday, August 19, 2009 7:00 pm PICIT/-u Main Committee Room 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 (IV) ADJOURNMENT Moved by Keith Wilkinson Seconded by Eric Newton That the 11th meeting of 2009 the Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 7:29 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, September 9, 2009. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Date Chair ' Assistant Secretary-Treasurer 9 City 00 Minutes / Meeting Summary 141 Aim- Taxicab Advisory Committee i i June 25, 2009 . PICKERING 10:30 am Main Committee Room Present: Councillor McLean, Chair Mohammad Altaf Glen Johnstone Sam Bhardwaj - Durham Rapid Taxi Ian Louden - Blue Line Taxi Margaret Woods Also Present: Kim Thompson, Manager, By-law Enforcement Services Lisa Harker, Recording Secretary Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Ref # (summary of discussion) Status (include deadline as a ro hate 1.0 Welcome & Introductions Councillor McLean welcomed members to the meeting. 2.0 Appeal Hearin - Parm'it Gill The meeting moved In Camera in accordance with the provisions of Procedural By-law 6746/07, as the matter related to personal information about an individual. Refer to the In Camera minutes dated June 25, 2009. [The City Clerk has custody and control of the In Camera minutes]. Further to confidential deliberations, the Committee hereby recommends the following: 1. That Parmjit Gill be granted a two-year City of Pickering taxicab licence; and 2. That the Manager, By-law Enforcement Services give K. Thompson to effect to this recommendation. action CARRIED K. Thompson also discussed with the Committee a City of Pickering taxicab driver. This driver has been charged and convicted with the by-law offence of refusing to accept a disabled passenger and now holds a probationary licence, but is appealing the conviction. A question and answer period ensued. CORP0228-2102 Page 1 i ItemDetails & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items/ Ref # (summary of discussion) Status (include deadline as a ro, riate K. Thompson to re-evaluate by-law stipulations to determine if the K. Thompson to licence can be suspended or revoked. action Meeting Adjourned: 10:50 am Copy: City Clerk i Page 2 CORP0228-2/02 Ctty 00 Minutes / Meeting Summary Taxicab Advisory Committee i July 23, 2009 PI ~KERI N 10:30 am Main Committee Room Present: Ravi Sarda - Durham Rapid Taxi Ian Louden - Blue Line Taxi Mohammad Sultan Margaret Woods Absent: Councillor McLean, Chair Mohammad Altaf Glen Johnstone Carlton McKenzie Also Present: Kim Thompson, Manager, By-law Enforcement Services Linda Roberts, Recording Secretary Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Ref # (summary of discussion) Status (include deadline as a ro riate 1.0 Welcome & Introductions K. Thompson welcomed everyone to the meeting and informed the Committee the purpose of the meeting was to conduct an appeal hearing regarding the applicant, Wajahat Hussain. 2.0 Appeal Hearing Wajahat Hussain The meeting moved In Camera in accordance with the provisions of Procedural By-law 6746/07, as the matter related to personal information about an individual. Refer to the In Camera minutes dated July 23, 2009. [The City Clerk has custody and control of the In Camera minutes]. Further to confidential deliberations, the Committee hereby recommends the following: 1. That Wajahat Hussain be issued a licence for 6 months and upon completion of the required training course, be issued the remaining 18 months; CORP0228-2102 Page 1 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Ref # (summary of discussion) Status (include deadline as a ro riate 2. That the Manager, By-law Enforcement Services give effect to this recommendation. CARRIED Meeting Adjourned: 10: 40 am Copy: City Clerk I i CORP0228-2ro2 Page 2 i qty o¢i Minutes / Meeting Summary Taxicab Advisory Committee i i August 27, 2009 PI ~KERI 10:30 am Main Committee Room PRESENT: Mohammad Altaf Glen Johnstone Mohammad Sultan Margaret Woods ABSENT: Councillor McLean, Chair Ian Louden - Blue Line Taxi Carlton McKenzie Ravi Sarda - Durham Rapid Taxi Also Present: Kim Thompson, Manager, By-law Enforcement Services Linda Roberts, Recording Secretary Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Ref # (summary of discussion) Status (include deadline as appropriate) 1.0 Welcome & Introductions K. Thompson welcomed everyone to the meeting and informed the Committee the purpose of the meeting was to conduct an appeal hearing regarding the applicant, Anthony Jhagru. 2.0 Appeal Hearin -Anthony Jha ru The meeting moved In Camera in accordance with the provisions of Procedural By-law 6746/07, as the matter related to personal information about an individual. Refer to the In Camera minutes dated August 27, 2009. [The City Clerk has custody and control of the In Camera minutes]. Further to confidential deliberations, the Committee hereby recommends the following: 1. That Mr. Jhagru be granted a conditional taxicab licence whereby the applicant agrees to provide a drivers abstract at the end of six months upon completion of the mandatory training course, and again at the end of the first year; and Pagel CORP0228-2102 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Ref # (summary of discussion) Status (include deadline as appropriate) 2. That the Manager, By-law Enforcement Services give effect to this recommendation. CARRIED Meeting Adjourned: 10: 55 am Copy: City Clerk Page 2 CORP0228-2/02 i City o~ Minutes / Meeting Summary 1*1 Site Plan Committee (SPC) Meeting i i July 22, 2009 PI ~KERI 4:45 Tower Meeting Room Attendees: Doug Dickerson - City Councillor - Ward 2 David Pickles - City Councillor - Ward 3 Bill McLean - Regional Councillor - Ward '2 Lynda Taylor, Manager, Development Review Isabelle Janton, Planner II - Site Planning Ron Taylor, Coordinator, City Development Absent: Jennifer O'Connell - City Councillor - Ward 1 Neil Carroll, Director, Planning & Development Tyler Barnett, Senior Planner - Site Planning Status Item % F t%37151-ils &itDiscus`sron & Coriclusion ~~_V.17 clude deadlj Re ummer} V.0, on) f One as iw appropiiate) 1. S11/08 Millennium City Veterinary Hospital Preliminary Proposal 1866 Liverpool Road Attendee(s): Jeff Wormald Dr. Janet Sawyer This application is a preliminary proposal to discuss the plans proposing to convert an existing dwelling into a veterinary clinic. • Isabelle explained that the four parking spaces proposed in the front of the building are acceptable only if a revised grading plan can be achieved that reflects a maximum 2% slope - 6% slope on pedestrian walkway is unacceptable - Applicant's engineers need to re-look, re-design grades and walkway • Councillor Dickerson suggested that final grades be peer reviewed upon completion of development to ensure compliance with approved plans • Jeff - driveway and parking lot to be permeable pavers • Councillor • Isabelle provided required details for pavers Dickerson and • Isabelle - still need proper photometric plan (provided Councillor McLean example of type of drawings required) request to see final • Janet expressed concern with her consultants drawings prior to • Isabelle recommended consultants call City staff for the Director's clarification prior to finalizing new/revised drawings approval (no need to come back to Councillor McLean left meeting Committee Page 1 Rein / ,Details & D~scuss~on Conclusion Action Items /Status r. Ref summary of discussion) (include deadline asor., 2. S1176 (R09-01) Water Pollution Control Plant Region of Durham and Region of York 901 McKay Road Attendee(s): Brad Dobson - Region of Durham (Site Superintendent) Bob Hook - CH2M Hill (Project Manager) To discuss the proposed dewatering and incineration facility. • Councillor Dickerson questioned the function of the fuel caps • Brad - underground storage 5000 gallons each and will replace existing storage • Councillor Dickerson - how does ash thickener work? • Brad - explained function is to remove water and 'send `cake' to St. Mary's • Councillor Dickerson - questioned if the new incinerator is required to accommodate increased treatment capacity related to the Southeast Collector project, and paver details • Bob - confirmed that the incinerator is related to the Southeast Collector project and the pavers are for access • Bob - not sure of around building, he also advised that the dewatering facility details - will check. is to be designed to a LEED Silver standard) and advise staff • Councillor Pickles questioned roof details • Brad will provide • Councillor Pickles - requests to see artist renderings and roof details view corridors from waterfront trail and from McKay and overall context plan • Brad - nearing the end of major development on site for a significant time (designed to accommodate York and Durham growth to 2031) • Councillor Dickerson - requested Brad take political message back to the Region respecting lack of activity on Brad will take the MOU and net community benefits as they are not message to John proceeding in a timely fashion Presta • Ron - the draft MOU from 2007 is subject to three additional conditions added by Council Expects September update to Council Page 2 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) • Councillor Dickerson questioned LEED process and • Continue working requested a site visit to be arranged on Site Plan and • Brad - ready to award contract (subject to some Federal bring back to Site funding being received) (125 million dollar project) Plan Committee • Councillor Dickerson - Regions should consider introducing with renderings and information board and trail ID to inform the public what they views are looking at along Waterfront Trail • Air photo with existing condition and new building was • Ron will forward requested by Councillor Dickerson memo with proposed sustainable initiatives by the Region and Isabelle will forward submitted LEED check list to Councillor Dickerson • Ron will coordinate site visit Item Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) 3. S05/08 (R09) Pickering Town Centre. 1355 Kingston Road Attendee(s): No applicant To discuss the upcoming (July 29, 2009) variance application (P/CA 31/09) and provide updates on the project. • Councillor Dickerson - Concerns with phasing development - No LC to secure 2nd phase is available - Objects very strongly to bridge not connecting to building - Need vision, proposal is not acceptable • Ron explained floor plate design needs of 20,000 square feet floor for market needs for large office needs • Councillor Dickerson -need to look at road alignment and reconsider development options • Ron - 8 storey 80,000 square feet for MPAC and 40,000 square feet 'spec' space Page 3 Item / Details & Discussion & `Conclusion - Action Items/ Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) • Councillor Pickles - should relocate commercial east closer to bridge and shift building into build-to-zone should be similar to Scarborough Town Centre/access 1St and 2nd floor connections from bridge to retail • Councillor Dickerson - applicants should take plans back and redo ' • Councillor Pickles - not seeing full concept (ie. connections • Lynda Taylor to to other buildings and mall), need a larger Pickering Town advise Committee Centre concept plan for entire site of Adjustment of • Committee requested P&D staff advise C of A that site plan SPC position at review process should occur (including consideration by the July 29, 2009 Site Plan Committee) prior to the C of A considering any meeting variances (C of A should defer P/CA 31/09 on July 29, 2009) I i Meeting Adjourned: 7:30 pm J:\MINUTES\Site Plan\2009\03 - July 22.doc I Page 4 Catq o¢~ Minutes i-i Waterfront Coordinating Committee August 13, 2009 PICKERING 7:00 pm CAO Boardroom Attendees: Councillor O'Connell, Chair Councillor Dickerson, Vice-Chair Councillor McLean Craig Bamford Jim Dike Zoia Horne Christian Medy David Steele A. Mostert, Coordinator, Landscape & Park Development L. Harker, Recording Secretary Absent: Mayor Ryan Kathleen Corcoran David Stone Kevin Tower R. Holborn, Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering M. Gadzovski, Stormwater & Environmental Engineer Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items Ref # (summary of discussion) Status " (include deadline as app ro nate 1.0 ` Welcome & Intfoductions Councillor O'Connell welcomed members to the meeting and introduced Darius, the 7-year old drummer who raises money for cancer research and his family. 2.0 A roval. of Minutes Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Craig Bamford That the minutes of the May 21, 2009 meeting be approved. CARRIED Page 1 II Item/ Details &'Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Ref # (summary of discussion) Status (include deadline as a ro nate 3.0 Fundraiser on the Waterfront Councillor McLean provided some background information of Darius, the 7-year old drummer and two boys in the community who are suffering from cancer. Councillor O'Connell provided an overview of the proposed Waterfront event to be held in September. The Committee has expressed an interest in providing a BBQ event on the Waterfront and tying it in with fundraising for cancer research. Suggestions for the event included; • An educational booth on the Waterfront Coordinating Committee to engage residents and to get an idea of their future vision for the Waterfront. • Councillor McLean to evaluate the financial needs of the two boys with cancer prior to allocating any money being raised for them and report back to the Committee. • Councillor Dickerson suggested a hands-on approach, such as a 3D model of the Waterfront for residents to manipulate to show their vision. Councillor O'Connell to contact the Planning & Development Department to determine if this is feasible. • C. Bamford suggested the creation of a questionnaire to obtain a profile of the current users of the Waterfront. • Tentative date for the event is Sunday, September 6th beginning with a BBQ at 4:30 and possibly a movie and drumming act by Darius. • Councillor O'Connell to confirm with Enbridge for their participation in the BBQ and to determine if a movie is fiscally feasible. • As the educational booth will require Committee members to run, members are to advise if they are available on September 6th Page 2 Item / Details' & Discussion Conclusion . Action Items / Ref # (summary of discussion) Status (include deadline as a ro riate • Discussion ensued with respect to whether fundraising on the Waterfront has been consented to by Council. • If fundraising is not permitted on the Waterfront, the Committee will still be proceeding with an interactive BBQ on September 6tn 4.0 -Other Business 4.1) Councillor O'Connell provided an update to the Master Plan. The Committee's comments have been submitted. 4.2) Councillor O'Connell provided an update to the Frenchman's Bay Pier. As per Council's resolution, the EA study will now encompass that both sides of the pier. are accessible. 5.0 Next Meeting Thursday, September 17, 2009, Main Committee Room. Meeting Adjourned: 8:15 pm Copy: City Clerk Page 3 City 00 Minutes / Meeting Summary Meeting Name Thursday, August 13, 2009 RIN 7'0° pm P CKE Pickering Civic Complex, Tower Meeting Room Attendees: Bill McLean, Regional Councillor - Ward 2 Laura Drake, Chair, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Rose Cowan, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Pat Dunnill, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Alan Espenlaub, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Rhonda Lawson, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Paul Savel, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Bill Litton, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Absent: Suzanne Primrose, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Bill Weston, Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Staff Stephen Reynolds, Division Head, Culture & Recreation Present: Marisa Carpino, Supervisor, Culture & Recreation 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 Laura welcomes attendees. Laura congratulates staff for keeping the Pickering Museum Village visible in the community at events like OPG's Tuesdays on the Trail 2. Approval of Agenda & Minutes Motion that the minutes from May 14, 2009 be approved. Moved by Bill Utton Seconded by Paul Savel CARRIED 3. Updates I Foundation Approximate bank balance is $229,981. There are still some expenses pending. Page 1 CORP0228-2/02 Whodunit Profit: $8,223. The profit was not as good as last year. Hotel Meeting was on Thursday, August 13, 2009 • construction progressing nicely • Next Hotel Meeting will be Thursday, September 3, 2009 Katrina, Rose and Rhonda found the following stoves that they feel should be purchased.. • 1840s Box Stove for the Hotel - Tap Room - $650 • 1830s Column Stove for the Hotel - Kitchen - $750 • Flat Stove for the Hotel - Kitchen - $650 - $850 • 1877 Forest Cook Stove for the Miller/Cole - replacement - $1,800 Reg Kumm has offered to deliver all 4 stoves for $200. Katrina to purchase The existing stove in the Miller/Cole is deteriorating and stove. needs to be replaced. This price is excellent, fits the time period for the Miller/Cole better than the existing one. Approval provided to Katrina purchase 1877 Forest Cook Stove in the 2009 current operating budget. Costume Committee Mandy proposed the making of a 1850s Temperance Quilt for the Hotel. Cost including tax is $192.61. Alan Espenlaub Costume Committee to has offered a donation in the amount of $192.61 to cover the make quilt. cost of materials for the quilt. Special thanks to Alan Espenlaub. The making of the quilt will be done by PMV Volunteers. Capital Budget Log Barn • pad poured, concrete cut, still curing Redman House • porch in progress • clean out of septic Site Upgrades • Administration Building, path, lighting, pricing is being worked out Pending Projects • Concrete pad for Collins House, Bible Christian Chapel, Administration Building, Combination Barn, Drive Shed is complete. expected to carry over to 2010. Page 2 CORP0228-2/02 Picnic Shelter Tony Prevedel has asked John Rutledge, Architect for a cost on drawings for a picnic shelter. Foundation feels that $4,500 - $7,500 is too costly for drawings and not necessary. Rhonda asked if we could get As-built Drawings from another place. Pat went on line and found drawings. Shed Man can also build, if they have drawings. Foundation would be willing to give $2,000 towards the picnic shelter drawings. 4. PW Advisory & PMV Foundation Relationship Advisory Laura announces that Carol Brown has resigned from the Advisory Committee. "Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Duties Responsibilities" has been updated from draft given out at the May 14th meeting. Motion that the "Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Duties & Responsibilities" to be in effect with the Committee Term beginning 2011 be accepted Moved by Rhonda Lawson Seconded by Rose Cowan CARRIED Motion that the "Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Duties & Responsibilities" be submitted to the Clerk's Office Moved by Laura Drake Seconded by Rose Cowan CARRIED Pat Dunnill presented for review the "Foundation\Advisory Committee Interrelationship" document • Rhonda Lawson felt that point 6 "like any other group," should be removed. • Rhonda Lawson& Paul Savel felt that point 8 about decision making should be removed. Pat expressed that was not his call and would like to take these removal concerns back to the Foundation members. Pat Dunnill to follow up Page 3 CORP0228-2/02 Collections Sub-Committee The Collections sub-committee has met and will meet again at the end of August. Sub-committee is working on policies and documents to track artifacts. Katrina advised that the City of Pickering did not receive the Federal MAP grant; however, IT is still going to move forward with new software to track artifacts. Anne Sinclair is working to deaccession the items listed from May 4, 2009 meeting. It will take time to complete task. Restoration & Capital Expense Sub-Committee • untitled handout from Rhonda (Workplan) • "The Christian Science Monitor" handout from Allen Special Events/Volunteer Sub-Committee • 2010 & 2011 Proposed Event Line-up handout from Mandy • can we lease land from the City of Toronto if not Councillor Bill McLean acquired from the City of Pickering. Would be great if it Steve Reynolds could be used for Steam up 2011 ? Motion Laura to provide cover That Sub-committee Work Plans for 2009-2010 go to the letter to Marisa. Clerk's Office Marisa to provide Moved by Rhonda Lawson entire package with Seconded by Paul Savel CARRIED letter to City Clerk 5. NewZU- siness & Adjournment Steve Reynolds to review Liability Insurance Coverage with Steve will follow up Corporate services staff for museum volunteers performing duties for off site events, e.g. CNE, Tuesdays on the Trail, j Purplewoods, etc.? Volunteer Fair is taking place on Saturday, August 15, 2009. Cultural Mapping • YDAMA Workshop on October 19, 2009 at Markham Museum at 10am. • speaker from Markham coming to do a workshop, cost $25 Ontario Museum Association Conference will be in Hamilton on October 21, 22 & 23, 2009. Page 4 CORP0228-2/02 6. Next Meetings Thursday, October 15, 2009 at 7:00 pm Pickering Civic Complex (Tower Room) Meeting Adjourned: 9:00 pm Copy: City Clerk Page 5 CORP0228-2/02