The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPLN 02-15 e Report to Planning & Development Committee ICKERING Report Number: PLN 02-15 Date: May 11, 2015 From: Thomas Melymuk Director, City Development Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans City of Pickering Comments on the First Round of Consultation File: D-1000-019 Recommendation: 1. That Report PLN 02-15 of the Director, City Development, regarding comments on the first round of the Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans be received; 2. That the comments in Report PLN 02-15 on the Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans be endorsed, and that the Province be requested to: a) incorporate the recommendations provided through the Durham Region Greenbelt Plan Review study, in particular: • that the provincial plans allow for stand-alone agricultural supportive uses in prime agricultural areas (such as grain elevators or food processing operations); • that the provincial plans provide opportunities for rural economic diversification in terms of cultural, educational, recreational and eco-tourism uses and value added agricultural uses which complement farming and the health of rural settlements; and • that the Province establish new, more effective separation distance policies to provide an appropriate buffer between new residential development and farmland to protect the viability of farm operations and avoid land use conflicts; b) provide direction for the planning of infrastructure beyond the 20-year land use planning horizon, by extending the population and employment forecasts to at least 2051, and adjusting the Places to Grow Concept and Forecasts accordingly, to allow for the timely and transparent planning of long term urban infrastructure; c) provide stronger policy direction on implementing affordable housing, in terms of type and tenure; d) provide the opportunity to redefine the Greenbelt and/or Oak Ridges Moraine boundaries to allow for minor expansions of hamlets, subject to the completion of a municipally led hamlet boundary review; 17 Report PLN 02-15 May 11, 2015 Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 2 e) identify provincially strategic employment lands within the Growth Plan, such as the Seaton Employment Lands, and actively facilitate the marketing, servicing and development of those lands in concert with other development contemplated by the Growth Plan; and f) allow for minor expansions for existing businesses in the rural area; 3. That the Province consider the implementation strategies, plan coordination measures, and financial tools and incentives as summarized in Appendix I; 4. That comments received at the Town Hall Meeting held by the City of Pickering on April 13, 2015 regarding the Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans, as set out in Appendix II be forwarded to the Province; and 5. Further, that a copy of Report PLN 02-15 and Pickering Council's resolution on the matter, be forwarded to the Region of Durham, other Durham Area Municipalities, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Food. Executive Summary: On February 27, 2015, the Province began the first round of consultation on the Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans: the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; the Greenbelt Plan; the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan; and the Niagara Escarpment Plan. To help guide the first round of consultations, the Province released a discussion paper entitled "Our Region, Our Community, Our Home". The purpose of this report is to provide formal comments to the Province on the coordinated review prior to the May 28, 2015 date. Financial Implications: The recommendations of this report do not present any financial implications. 1. Background On February 27, 2015, the ministries of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) and Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF), announced a Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans: the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; Greenbelt Plan; Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan; and Niagara Escarpment Plan. These plans govern land use planning in Ontario, and provide the long-term planning framework and direction on how to manage growth, protect agricultural lands, preserve the natural environment and support economic development within Ontario's Greater Golden Horseshoe. The coordinated review includes two rounds of public consultation. During the first round, the Province is seeking input on all matters associated with the four plans, to inform the Province's understanding of how the plans can better meet their individual and collective objectives. The 90 day public review and 18 Report PLN 02-15 May 11, 2015 • Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 3 commenting period ends in late May. All comments received prior to May 28 will be considered as part of the decision-making process by the Province. Details on the second round of consultation are not yet released, but it is anticipated that the focus will be on the specific amendments to the four Plans. To participate in the first round of the Provincial review, comments can be made by: • emailing the Province at landuseplanningreview(c�ontario.ca; • writing to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing at: Land Use Planning Review Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing Ontario Growth Secretariat 777 Bay Street Suite 425 (4th Floor) Toronto, ON M5G 2E5 • submitting comments through the Environmental Registry- EBR posting 012-3256 • participating at the Provincially-organized Regional Town Hall meetings Regional Town Hall meetings are being held across the Greater Golden Horseshoe, from late March to early May 2015. Regional Town Hall meetings were held in the Town of Ajax, on April 20th, and in Newcastle on May 4th. Since a Town Hall Meeting was not scheduled in Pickering, City staff coordinated a meeting on April 13th at Pickering City Hall. 2. Discussion Paper - Our Region, Our Community, Our Home To help guide the first round of consultations, the Province released a discussion paper entitled "Our Region, Our Community, Our Home". A copy of the discussion paper can be found at http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=10759. This discussion paper provides background information on Ontario's planning framework including the four provincial plans, and asks a set of questions to focus the discussion on the following six goals: • Protecting agricultural land, water, and natural areas • Keeping people and goods moving and building cost-effective infrastructure • Fostering healthy, livable, and inclusive communities • Building communities that attract workers and create jobs • Addressing climate change and building resilient communities, and • Improving implementation and better aligning the plans 19 Report PLN 02-15 May 11, 2015 Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 4 3. Expert Advisory Panel To support the coordinated review, the Province has appointed a panel of six advisors to develop recommendations on how to amend and improve the four provincial land use plans. The advisory panel members are: • David Crombie, former Federal Cabinet Minister and Mayor of Toronto (Chair) • Keith Currie, Vice President, Ontario Federation of Agriculture • Rae Horst, former Chief Administrative Officer, Credit Valley Conservation Authority • John MacKenzie, Commissioner of Planning, City of Vaughan • Leith Moore, Senior Vice President, Urban Fieldgate Homes, and • Debbie Zimmerman, Chief Executive Officer, Grape Growers of Ontario The advisory panel is expected to deliver a report to MMAH and MNRF by September 1, 2015. The Province has indicated that it anticipates the coordinated review will be finalized in the fall of 2015, with final recommendations on amendments to the Plans ready by early 2016. The Province's process and timeline are also intended to inform the review of The Big Move (Metrolinx's regional transportation plan). 4. The Provincial Land Use Plans The responsibility for long-term planning in Ontario is shared between the Province and municipalities. The Province sets ground rules and directions for planning through the Planning Act and the Provincial Policy Statement. Additional plans, such as the four under review, are created as needed to provide more detailed and geographically specific policies. The following discussion provides an overview of the four plans, and an outline of how the City has taken steps to conform to these plans. In recognition of the complex and interconnected nature of these four plans, the Province is seeking public input through a coordinated review of all four provincial land use plans. 4.1 Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act, 2001 and the accompanying Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) came into effect in November 2001. The ORMCP is an ecologically based plan that provides land use and resource management direction for the Oak Ridges Moraine. The vision for the Moraine is that of"a continuous band of green rolling hills that provides form and structure to south-central Ontario, while protecting the ecological and hydrological features and functions that support the health and well-being of the region's residents and ecosystems." The City amended its Official Plan to conform to the ORMCP, through Amendment 15, which was approved by the Province on August 30, 2007. 20 Report PLN 02-15 May 11, 2015 Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 5 4.2 Greenbelt Plan The Greenbelt Act, 2005 and the accompanying Greenbelt Plan came into effect in December 2004. The Greenbelt Plan identifies where urbanization should not occur in order to provide permanent protection to the agricultural base and the ecological features and functions occurring on this landscape. The Act requires a review of the Greenbelt Plan to be carried out 10 years after the approval of the Plan (February 2005), in conjunction with the reviews of the ORMCP and Niagara Escarpment Plan, in order to determine whether comprehensive revisions are needed to these Plans. As part of the ongoing review of the City's Official Plan, the City undertook a Countryside and Environment Background Study in 2010. This Study provides the foundation for an official plan amendment that will implement the Greenbelt Plan, in addition to other Provincial legislative and policy changes, updated natural heritage systems mapping, watershed studies and Conservation Authority regulations. The Countryside and Environment Official Plan Amendment will be brought forward for Council consideration later this year. 4.3 Niagara Escarpment Plan In 1973, The Niagara Escarpment Planning and Development Act established a planning process to ensure that the area would be protected. From this emerged the Niagara Escarpment Plan, which serves as a framework of objectives and policies to strike a balance between development, preservation and the enjoyment of this important resource. Since the Niagara Escarpment does not extend into Pickering, the City has not made any related official plan amendments and will not be providing comments on the Niagara Escarpment Plan. 4.4 Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe The Places to Grow Act, 2005 became law in June 2005, while the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (the Growth Plan) came into effect in June 2006. The Growth Plan is a framework for implementing the Province's vision for • building stronger, prosperous communities by better managing growth in the Greater Golden Horseshoe region. Similar to the Greenbelt Plan, the Growth Plan is due for a legislated review 10 years after its approval (June 2006), to determine if revisions are needed. The City initiated a Growth Strategy Program to implement the Provincial Growth Plan in 2010. The City's strategy was divided into two phases: the intensification of the City Centre; and the intensification of the South Pickering urban area outside of the City Centre. In March 2014, the Ontario Municipal Board approved Amendment 26 addressing future growth and development in the City Centre, and staff are now concentrating on moving forward with the South Pickering Intensification Study for lands beyond the City Centre. The latter study will 21 Report PLN 02-15 May 11, 2015 Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 6 determine the appropriate locations for intensified development, establish guidelines that will ensure transitions to established neighbourhoods, and provide recommendations supporting a sustainable Pickering that promotes walkable neighbourhoods, accessible parks, public transit, and unique and distinctive communities. 5. Durham Region Greenbelt Plan Review In preparation for the legislated 2015 review of the provincial plans, the Region conducted the Durham Greenbelt Plan Review in 2014. The Review captured the perspectives of a broad range of stakeholders across the Region with respect to the Greenbelt Plan and ORMCP. The City actively participated on the project working group, attended the Public Consultation session in Pickering, participated in focus group sessions, and submitted comments on the review. The review identified eight general directions, representing a set of key issues that the Province should consider during the coordinated plans review; and, nineteen related recommendations, representing a range of potential solutions and approaches to addressing the issues raised (see Directions and Recommendations from the Durham Region Greenbelt Plan Review, 2014, Attachment#1).• 6. Community Engagement • 6.1 Pickering's Town Hall Meeting On April 13, 2015, the City hosted a Town Hall Meeting to solicit input from the public and community stakeholders on the coordinated provincial plan review. Twenty six members of the public attended and a summary of the comments received is contained in Appendix II. Some of the key messages offered at the Town Hall Meeting are provided below (not all messages are consistent): • maintain the Greenbelt/Oak Ridges Moraine and current boundaries of the Hamlet of Claremont • allow changes to the Greenbelt/Oak Ridges Moraine to enable the expansion of the Hamlet of Claremont • expand the Greenbelt around Greenwood • address flooding, drainage and other climate change and environmental impacts • support sustainable initiatives and programs • protect natural heritage features and functions • stop urban sprawl • strengthen the rural economy/agricultural industry • allow more uses on Greenbelt lands 22 Report PLN 02-15 May 11, 2015 Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 7 6.2 Province's Town Hall Meeting in Ajax On April 20, 2015, the Province hosted a Town Hall Meeting in Ajax to solicit input from the public and community stakeholders on the coordinated provincial plan review. Approximately 140 members of the public attended. Some of the key messages offered at the meeting are provided below (and again, not all messages are consistent): • a tribunal should be established to address boundary disputes • in terms of Infrastructure provision, the impact assessment should not be limited to environmental features but should also address impacts on agricultural lands • a broad-brush approach to draw lines should be replaced by a more detailed scientific analysis of agricultural lands and environmental features • there needs to be a proper assessment of the economic output/yield of the lands within the Greenbelt • identify and service strategically located employment lands • buffer planning is needed to protect farm operations from urban development • terminology used in Plans should be consistent • no Pickering airport—airports are major contributors to air pollution • the Greenbelt and Oak Ridges Moraine should be protected at all costs against urban development, like the proposed plan of subdivision for over 70 homes at Claremont • farmers and rural communities should be allowed to grow, diversify in order to remain viable • strengthen Building Code in terms of climate change resilience • protect our water sources - lakes and Oak Ridges Moraine • greater control is needed over fill operations 7. Comments on the Six Theme Areas The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, the Greenbelt Plan, and the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe detail the Province's interest in land use planning and provide direction for the development of the Official Plan policies. In large part, the provincial plans have set a clear course for: containing growth and creating complete communities, and protecting rural resources. Although each of the provincial plans were developed and approved independently, it is appropriate that a coordinated review of the plans is now being undertaken. Through this review, the Province will be able to establish consistency between the plans, and to ensure that the plans are aligned with the new Provincial Policy Statements approved in 2014. The following paragraphs contain staffs comments and recommendations on the six theme areas. Key recommendations are shown in bold and additional directions are summarized in Appendix Ito this report. 23 Report PLN 02-15 May 11, 2015 Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 8 7.1 Protecting agricultural land, water, and natural areas Collectively, the provincial plans identify valuable agricultural lands, water resources and natural areas and systems, and protect them for the long term. The plans recognize that the agricultural lands, which feed communities in our region and beyond, are finite resources, and that rivers, lakes, woodlands, wetlands, and other water resources and natural areas provide irreplaceable ecological and hydrologic functions. However, development pressure continues on agricultural lands, water resources and natural areas, particularly near major urban settlements, and to address this matter it is recommended that: a) The Province consider the recommendations provided through the Durham Greenbelt Plan Review study, in particular: • that the provincial plans allow for stand-alone agricultural supportive uses in prime agricultural areas (e.g. grain elevators or food processing operations). • that the provincial plans provide opportunities for economic diversification in terms of cultural, educational, recreational and eco- tourism uses and value added agricultural uses which complement farming and the health of rural settlements. • that the Province establish new, more effective separation distance . policies to provide an appropriate buffer between new residential development and viable farmland to protect farm viability and avoid land use conflicts. b) The Province undertake an area-wide agricultural assessment in support of the food production role that the Greenbelt plays, to gain a better appreciation of the needs of future generations. Currently, environmental conditions are considered through watershed and other natural heritage studies and strategies, and the extension of urban boundaries and the designation of urban lands are examined through growth plan conformity exercises. However, there is no comparable agricultural assessment undertaken to assess how agricultural lands are best protected and promoted. The current focus of.Provincial efforts has been on restricting further fragmentation of rural properties. However, there has been little investigation into how the nature of farming operations are changing, and the policies that should be put in place to accommodate and grow this important industry. c) The Province provide for, and promote, improved management practices and new technologies that will lead to greater diversification of production, and maximize crop yields (e.g. the intensive use of greenhouses), while minimizing the environmental impact of such uses (e.g. surface water quality, stormwater runoff). While the plans have gone a long way to protect 24 Report PLN 02-15 May 11, 2015 Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 9 environmental features, the primacy of agricultural lands and activity within the Greenbelt must be encouraged and supported equally as natural heritage features and systems. d) That the Province provide further tools and incentives aimed at enhancing the natural heritage system and environmental health, and advancing agricultural best practices in the Greenbelt and Oak Ridges Moraine (e.g. stewardship programs, conservation land tax incentive, ecological gift programs, long-term securement programs, etc). 7.2 Keeping people and goods moving, and building cost-effective infrastructure Growth needs to be supported by well-planned infrastructure, including transit, roads, sewers, water and other utilities. The plans seek to ensure that growth is initially focused in areas that already have infrastructure in place. However, major infrastructure projects are complex and can take decades to plan and build. Planning ahead by protecting lands and corridors, and examining the social and economic impacts of these future uses in advance needs to take place, and can go a long way towards ensuring such projects are delivered in a timely and cost-effective way. Accordingly, it is recommended that: a) The Province encourage, and provide direction for, the planning of infrastructure beyond the land use planning horizon, by extending the population and employment forecasts to at least 2051, and adjusting the Places to Grow concept and targets accordingly, to allow for the timely and transparent planning of long term urban infrastructure. This would allow for corridors to be protected for future use, would minimize potential retrofit situations, and would ensure the wise use of infrastructure, both now and in the future. Within a two tier municipal planning environment, this objective could be achieved by affording the upper tier the opportunity to plan to a longer term horizon (e.g. 2051 and beyond) to protect for future servicing needs, but restricting lower tier plans to a shorter land use planning horizon (e.g. 2041). This phased approach to planning would offer greater certainty to the agricultural community regarding the timing and expansion of development and infrastructure, if required, into whitebelt lands. b) The Province ensure that the reviews of the Growth Plan and the Regional Transportation Plan —the Big Move result in a consistent vision and direction for transportation planning. The Big Move is currently being reviewed by Metrolinx. Differences between the two plans with respect to matters such as Mobility Hubs and Transit Station Areas need to be reconciled. c) The Province move forward with the development of the Transportation Planning Policy Statement outlined in the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority Act, to clarify the role of the Big Move in relation to the Growth Plan, and to provide direction for the development of transportation master plans. This would help ensure that transportation infrastructure planning and land use planning are better coordinated. 25 Report PLN 02-15 May 11, 2015 Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 10 d) The Province provide municipalities with new financial tools to enable the early implementation of transit and other alternative modes of transportation. This should include re-investigating the tools put forward by Metrolinx and the Toronto Board of Trade in 2013 (e.g. parking space levy, fuel tax, sales tax, payroll tax, vehicle kilometers travelled tax, highway tolls, development charges, land value capture, property tax, development charges, fare increases, etc). 7.3 Fostering healthy, livable, and inclusive communities The plans require that growth be accommodated through complete communities, meeting the daily needs of residents, and providing a convenient mix of jobs, services, community infrastructure, transportation options, a range of housing, and vibrant public spaces and streets. The plans recognize that complete communities can include different elements depending on their locations —from busy urban downtowns, to new developments, to towns or villages and smaller rural centres. However, there are some aspects of complete communities where the plans could provide more detailed direction or respond to emerging issues, and it is recommended that: a) The Province provide stronger policy direction on implementing affordable housing, in terms of type and tenure. Soaring house prices make housing less accessible to low income families. With rental housing in Durham representing less than 1% of new housing units built between 2000 and 2009, stronger provincial direction is required to provide affordable housing options. This may include measures that require affordable housing delivery within residential development proposals of a certain scale or size, and within certain strategic locations (such as within transit corridors or major transit stations). b) The Province provide the opportunity to redefine the boundaries of designations within the Greenbelt and/or Oak Ridges Moraine to allow for minor expansions of hamlets, subject to the completion of a municipally led hamlet boundary review. Currently, the provincial plans only provide for intensification, infill and minor rounding out (for example, the addition of 2-3 lots). The opportunity to consider additional growth in hamlets should be facilitated through a hamlet boundary review. The hamlet boundary review should only be initiated by the municipality (not a private landowner) and should include extensive public consultation to ensure that the interests of the municipality are addressed and the relevant objectives of the local, regional and provincial plans are met. • 26 • Report PLN 02-15 May 11, 2015 Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 11 Such a hamlet boundary review would address: • the merits and appropriate scale and form of development • the protection and enhancement of key natural heritage features and environmental functions • the impact on agricultural lands and agricultural operations • soft and hard servicing needs, constraints and solutions, and • the rationale for any changes to the hamlet boundary c) The Province provide direction for the protection of higher density residential lands that may not be absorbed within the current time horizon of the Growth Plan. Attaining densities at the levels required to meet the intensification targets in the Growth Plan, and to prevent jeopardizing such opportunities, may require stronger planning tools. This could include measures similar to those imposed on employment lands or restrictions on appeals. 7.4 Building communities that attract workers and create jobs Workers and their employers are increasingly drawn to high-quality, healthy communities that are walkable and offer interesting retail opportunities, cultural activities, green spaces, vibrant public spaces and streets, and transportation choices. The plans recognize that land use planning can facilitate regional and local economic development through the creation of places that are attractive to live, work and play. However, the projections for the growth plan for Durham continue to show that the ratio between residents and jobs will continue to widen, impacting opportunities for creating stronger live-work relationships and the development of complete communities. As such, it is recommended that: a) The Province identify provincially strategic employment lands, such as the Seaton Employment lands, and actively facilitate the marketing, servicing and development of those lands in concert with the Growth Plan. The Province should play a lead role in combating regional disparities in job growth by advancing development in strategic locations. For example, the Province should work collaboratively with the City to secure high-tech, knowledge based employment and prestige office uses within Seaton, as part of the first phase of development within the community. b) The Province examine incentives to attract and retain workers and businesses to achieve the growth plan targets and to foster the development of balanced communities. For example such incentives could include: investing in, or subsidizing, training programs that will ensure that municipalities have the resident labour force to attract new businesses in targeted sectors; eliminating or reducing tolls for trucks on Highway 407 making the highway a more attractive goods movement corridor and promoting further employment growth in the 905 Region. 27 Report PLN 02-15 May 11, 2015 Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 12. 7.5 Addressing climate change and building resilient communities Climate change is one of the most significant challenges facing society. The Province has indicated that it is committed to mitigating climate change through reduced greenhouse gas emissions and increased resiliency of infrastructure. Land use planning has a major impact on the amount of greenhouse gas emissions produced. Where people live and how people move between their homes and work or school are significant contributors to Ontario's emissions, and as such it is recommended that: a) The Province coordinate the development of a provincial climate change plan with the ongoing review of the provincial land use plans, to improve awareness and understanding of limiting emissions and the role of adaptation and resiliency can play in addressing climate change. The Ministry of Environment and Climate Change initiated discussions with community stakeholders in March 2015 on the implementation of climate change initiatives. Many of the initiatives identified in the Province's discussion paper and at the consultation sessions focused on land use planning measures that should be included within the provincial land use plans. b) The Province provide direction for the implementation of adaptive measures, including changes to the Ontario Building Code. Adaptation refers to actions taken to respond to the impacts of climate change by taking advantage of opportunities or reducing the associated risks. Examples of adaptation actions include modifications of development to account for rises in water. levels, provision of heat refuges during heat waves, planting hardy native plants, and dealing with increases in erosion. 7.6 Improving implementation and better aligning the plans Decisions at every stage of the planning process, from official plan conformity to the approval of individual site plans, are considered part of the implementation process. To ease and facilitate the coordinated implementation of the plans, it is recommended that: a) The Province provide improved technical training to municipal and other pubic agency representatives, to ensure consistent implementation of the provincial land use plans. b) The Province provide education on best practices for agricultural practices and environmental stewardship to community stakeholders. c) The Province p rovide new financial tools and/or incentives to assist municipalities and other stakeholders in achieving the objectives of the plans. d) The Province develop a consistent framework and set of key performance indicators for monitoring the policy performance of all the provincial land use plans. 28 Report PLN 02-15 May 11, 2015 Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 13 e) The Province develop further guidelines and best practices to assist the implementation of key elements of the.plan. 8. Conclusions and Recommendations The foundation of the provincial land use plans provides a strong framework for . land use planning in Ontario. However, further policy guidance and tools need to be provided to municipalities and other agencies to ensure compact growth and intensification of urban communities, and the continued protection of natural heritage and rural systems. The recommendations offered through this report provide a broad range of potential directions that the Province should investigate. Staff will continue to keep Council informed as the Province moves toward the second round of consultation on the review of the plans, and the development of amendments to each of the plans. Appendices Appendix I Detailed Recommendations for Financial, Coordination and Implementation of Provincial Plans, Appendix II Comments Received at the April 13, 2015, Pickering Town Hall Meeting Attachments 1. Directions and Recommendations from the Durham Region Greenbelt Plan Review, 2014 2. Written Comments received from the Public (B. Welsh) 3. Written Comments received from the Public (J. Alati) 4. Written Comments received from the Public (Concerned Residents of Claremont, Ontario) 5. Written Comments received from the Public (J. Laffier) 29 Report PLN 02-15 May 11, 2015 Subject: 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Page 14 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: eJ obs, MCIP, RPP Catherine Rose, MCIP, ' PP rincipal Planner- Policy Chief Plann ,,e, vriN\ Jeff Brooks, MCIP, RPP Th mas Mel muk CIP, R Manager, Policy & Geomatics Director, City Development DJ:dp Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council CP/tei) Z7, ZoiS Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief.Administrative Officer • 30 Appendix Ito Report PLN 02-15 Additional Detailed Recommendations from the City of Pickering regarding the Province's Consultation of the 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans • 31 Additional Detailed Recommendations from the City of Pickering regarding the Province's Consultation on the 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans In addition to the key recommendations highlighted within Report PLN 02-15, it is recommended that the Province pursue the following matters with respect to the implementation of the provincial plans, the co-ordination between the provincial plans and other provincial initiatives, and the development of supporting financial tools and incentives to advance the Province's land use objectives: Protecting agricultural land, water, and natural areas 1. undertake an area-wide agricultural land assessment in support of the food production role that the Greenbelt plays to gain a better appreciation of the needs of future generations; 2. provide for, and promote, improved management practices and new technologies that will maximize production/crop yields while minimizing the environmental impact of such uses; 3. provide further tools and incentives aimed at enhancing the natural heritage system and environmental health, and advancing agricultural best practices in the Greenbelt and Oak Ridges Moraine; Keeping people and goods moving, and building cost-effective infrastructure 4. ensure that the reviews of the Growth Plan and the Regional Transportation Plan — the Big Move result in a consistent vision and direction for transportation planning; 5. move forward with the development of the Transportation Planning Policy Statement outlined in the Greater Toronto Transportation Authority Act; 6. provide municipalities with new financial tools to enable the early implementation of transit and other alternative modes of transportation; Fostering healthy, livable, and inclusive communities • 7. provide direction for the protection of higher density residential lands, that may not be absorbed within the time horizon of the Growth Plan; Building communities that attract workers and create jobs 8. examine incentives to attract and retain workers and businesses to achieve the growth plan targets and to foster the development of balanced communities; Addressing climate change and building resilient communities 9. coordinate the development of a provincial climate change plan with the ongoing review of the provincial land use plans, to improve awareness and understanding of limiting emissions and the role of adaptation and resiliency can play in addressing climate change; 32 10.provide direction for the implementation of adaptive measures, such as changes to the Ontario Building Code; Improving implementation and better aligning the plans 11.provide improved technical training and workshops to municipal staff to ensure that the objectives of the provincial land use plans are implemented in an effective and consistent manner; 12.provide education on best practices for agricultural practices and environmental stewardship to community stakeholders; 13.provide new financial tools and/or incentives to assist municipalities and other stakeholders in achieving the objectives of the plans; 14.develop a consistent framework and set of key performance indicators for monitoring the policy performance for the all of the provincial plans; and 15.develop tools, best practices and guidelines to support the implementation of the provincial plans. 33 Appendix II to Report PLN 02-15 Public Comments from Pickering Town Hall Meeting regarding the Province's Consultation on the 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans 34 Public Comments from Pickering Town Hall Meeting regarding the Province's Consultation on the 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans All waterways and watersheds should be protected in full, from source to output. Add Carruther's headwaters area to the Greenbelt. This will ultimately increase water quality, protect biodiversity and mitigate climate change impacts. Design ecological features like bio-swales, meadows and forests as green spaces with ecological value, to encourage livable, healthy communities; design communities for high walk scores and with access to food, recreation, housing and work. Put more focus on smaller, sustainable communities (rather than large dense cities like Toronto), with less reliance on transport and single occupancy vehicles, resulting in reduced carbon dioxide emissions. More specific studies needed to determine regionally specific climate mitigation techniques (for example, maximize existing ecological structures like Carruthers Marsh). Reduce need for commuting by increasing local business and job opportunities. Travelling to Toronto for work is detested, and a shorter commute to a local job opportunities is much rather preferred. Address increased flooding issues with contaminated runoff, due to climate change. Acquire flood prone lands for ecological services and to avoid flood damages. In terms of connectedness, nature corridors serve as ecological connections. They mitigate development impacts, limit habitat fragmentation, and create opportunity for trails/pathways. The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) and the Greenbelt Plan should be combined/unified for better understanding. Provide more housing options for varying incomes. As a young adult, I see myself and peers willing to sacrifice space (yards) and house size to be part of a more sustainable community. Support long-term agricultural lands — Do not allow development by Geranium Homes on farmland in Claremont, as this is rare Class 1 agricultural with 50 continuous acres. In terms of creating more liveable and healthy communities, the development 70 homes in Claremont will reduce the attractiveness of the hamlet, and adding 20% of housing in Claremont is not a "rounding out" or minor adjustment but a devastation of its boundaries. In term of addressing climate change, leave rural areas rural. Develop city lands, not Claremont. To improve plan implementation, the protection of the Oak Ridges Moraine (ORM) and the Greenbelt must be vigorously stood by and not given to developers. Page 1 of 5 35 Public Comments from Pickering Town Hall Meeting regarding the Province's Consultation on the 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans If boundaries are set then they should be kept. Don't allow development on protected land —we have Class 1 farmland. We should use the farmland — it saves the air if we can grow food on it. The provision of northbound transportation routes relieves the pressure on existing roads. Protect our green spaces at all cost. No more monster homes for a minority of the community. More tree planting needed. Do not remove trees at the expense of future generations. Urban sprawl increases obesity and pollution —stop urban sprawl. Important to engage schools to participate in sustainability programs and initiatives e.g. recycling and environmental programs. There needs to be a greater focus on and investment in renewable energy to reduce pollution and mitigate climate change impacts. Concerned about the flooding impacts the volume of stormwater runoff from farmland and the poorly designed conveyance system along Franklin Road in Claremont have on property values and the health and safety of residents. Supports the conclusions of a report dated May 2014, prepared by a Claremont Community Working Group to expand the hamlet boundaries (to restore it to its original limits along the Brock Road by-pass as per the 1988 Claremont Development Plan) in order to accommodate a proposed residential plan of subdivision that could potentially provide benefits to the community, such as: • solving the long standing drainage and flooding issues at no incremental cost to the tax payer; • better water management and environmental control; • resolving long time boundary issues including adjusting boundaries for houses whose septic systems encroach onto adjacent lands;. • Creating an additional 4.5 acre park which would connect new and older homes with safe and walkable streets and trials around water retention . ponds; and, • Increasing the hamlet population, which in turn could potentially benefit the economy and local businesses, service churches and clubs, recreational activities and facilities for the youth, creating a more viable student body and resources for the local public school and a stronger voice for the community. Note: For more information on this submission, (from B. Welsh) see Attachment#2 to Report PLN 02-15 Page 2 of 5 36 Public Comments from Pickering Town Hall Meeting regarding the Province's Consultation on the 2015 Coordinated Review . of Ontario's Land Use Plans Geranium Corporation is seeking the restoration of the historic settlement boundaries of the Hamlet of Claremont to allow development of Phases 1 and 2 of the subject lands, which would: • redress flooding and drainage problems in the hamlet and save the tax payers in Durham approximately $5 million; • be consistent with the historic intent of Claremont to develop the lands; • be in keeping with the Greenbelt Plan and ORMCP in that the proposal will direct growth to the right area, allowing limited growth of the hamlet. The development company's client engaged in a working group process with a Claremont Community working group to discuss ways to solve flooding and drainage problems in the hamlet, and the working group supports the inclusion of the lands into the hamlet boundary. Note: For more information on this submission, (from J. Alati) see Attachment#3 to Report PLN 02-15 Opposed to a development concept by Geranium Homes to develop 70+ homes in the hamlet of Claremont that would require a rural settlement boundary expansion either through an amendment to the ORMCP or as an outcome of the legislated review in 2015. A petition with 186 signatures of Claremont residents opposing the proposal was sent to the relevant Provincial Ministries. The Geranium Homes proposal does not represent "minor" rounding out; the community working group that was established does not represent the hamlet community; there is concern about the potential precedent-setting of an amendment to the ORM by expanding the boundary of Claremont, or other hamlets; concern about the impact development may have on wells, quality of drinking water and the environment; the flooding problems in Claremont do not impact all parts of Claremont. Note: For more information on this submission, (from "Concerned Residents of Claremont, Ontario") see Attachment#4 to Report PLN 02-15 Supports petition of 186 signatures opposing Geranium Homes development proposal at Claremont. Reiterates the importance of the ORM, in that it contains areas of high aquiver vulnerability and sources of drinking water, was established to prohibit urban development and to protect the rural integrity and agricultural lands. Opposes the Geranium Homes proposal. Is of the opinion that: • the stormwater problem in Claremont is something that must be addressed by the Region of Durham and the City of Pickering and it is not the responsibility of a developer; • the Community working group and its recommendations do not represent the Claremont community; • the development proposal would have negative impact on wells, aquifers and septic systems; and • the proposed subdivision for 70+ homes would change the character of the hamlet. Page 3 of 5 37 Public Comments from Pickering Town Hall Meeting regarding the Province's Consultation on the 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans The Provincial Plans should embrace and protect the diversity of landscapes e.g. green space, rural and farms lands, urban areas, and create proper linkages where appropriate. Bring Agriculture and industry together to strengthen the rural economy. Cap and trade opportunities, e.g. buying carbon credits from the agricultural industry, should be considered. Better linkages need to be established between agricultural lands and natural areas, and models should be developed on how farming can be supported/optimized; Safe north-south cycling linkages need to be established in Pickering to improve access to trails and nature. The Greenbelt boundaries should be expanded to include, all of Greenwood. More research and programming, of which the city may take advantage of, is needed to support the agricultural industry. Praises to the Provincial government for establishing the Greenbelt Plan; requests further expansion of the Greenbelt to protect farmland and the natural environment for future generations. The Plans should protect Pickering's unique urban and rural characteristics and the attributes of our natural environment and farming activities. • Concerned about the amount of trees that are being removed to make way for new plans of subdivision — it has a detrimental impact on water retention and increases flooding. Concerned that any further urban development at the Hamlet of Greenwood, south of Highway 7, would potentially contaminate groundwater, and interfere with groundwater levels and wells, and with the cold water function of the Duffins Creek and the warm water function of the Carruther's Creek downstream. Pointed out that the hamlet of Greenwood sits in part on a drumlin containing 3 aquifers that seep into the Duffins Creek. Concerned that any further urban development on the drumlin would have a detrimental impact on the water resources system and function of the Greenbelt. Request that the whole drumlin area be included in the Greenbelt to protect it from urbanization. Concerned that the Greenbelt Plan does not provide an efficient way to revise the Greenbelt boundaries—either to capture more land within it or to release small parts from it. _ Municipalities should be enabled to do small or minor adjustments to boundaries, subject to meeting certain strict requirements e.g. Smart Growth principles. Concerned about the impacts a growing population may have on the Greenbelt and our ability to raise animals and grow crops. Provincial Plans should look at ways to better,promote healthy and balanced lifestyles for residents. • Planning and development should be combined with mental health and well- being research, since mental health is a concern across Canada. Page 4 of 5 38 Public Comments from Pickering Town Hall Meeting regarding the Province's Consultation on the 2015 Coordinated Review of Ontario's Land Use Plans Municipalities should sustain farms and the environment and promote a healthy community by introducing steps such as: creating and mapping sports and nature trails; provide more opportunities for outdoor educational camps for children; promoting small business development in rural settlements to stimulate tourism and local economic development; and allow for the re-purposing of old farm houses and farms to be used for bed and breakfast establishments. Note: For more information on this submission, (from J. Laffier) see Attachment#5 to Report PLN 02-15 Allow more uses on greenbelt lands; the Greenbelt Plan has taken away the value of land in the rural areas. • Page5of5 39 • i�C��t r s' GSidJ c� - i Sy Directions and Recommendations from the Durham Greenbelt Plan Review, 2014 Direction 1: Introduce increased flexibility for municipalities and conservation authorities to interpret and apply the Plans' policies on a case-by-case basis at the site-level. Recommendation 1: Provide municipalities and conservation authorities the latitude to interpret and apply natural heritage protection policies in a way that upholds the intent of the policies, without unduly restricting low-impact activities or requiring overly burdensome technical studies. Direction 2: Beyond protecting the agricultural land base, ensure that the Plans support agricultural viability. Recommendation 2: Increase flexibility to allow municipalities to permit larger standalone agriculturally supportive uses in prime agricultural areas where these uses: can demonstrate strong demand and clear economic benefits, are located on lower quality or less viable agricultural land, are compatible with and do not hinder surrounding agricultural operations, and continue to comply with natural.heritage policies. Recommendation 3: - Allow municipalities and conservation authorities the flexibility to exempt or reduce the scope of extensive hydrological studies required by ORMCP major development policies for agricultural buildings larger than 500 square metres, so long as these buildings comply with other natural heritage protection policies. Recommendation 4: Consider new, more effective separation distance policies to provide an appropriate buffer between new residential development and viable farmland to protect farm viability and avoid land use conflicts. Direction 3: Ensure that the Plans support the viability of rural communities. Recommendation 5: Allow municipalities greater flexibility to permit new or expanded cultural, recreational, and tourism uses, including country inns, restaurants, ski areas, golf courses and other similar uses. Increased permissibility would need to consider the appropriate scale and location of these uses, and ensure that they clearly advance Plan objectives and continue to comply with natural heritage and agricultural protection policies. 40 Rink P .. . _ Recommendation 6: Allow municipalities greater flexibility to plan for their long-term viability by permitting necessary servicing infrastructure and community facilities within the Protected Countryside of both Plans, provided no other options are available and this expansion does not conflict with natural heritage or agricultural protection policies. Direction 4: Provide additional resources and direction to ensure effective implementation of the Plans. Recommendation 7: Provide increased direction and support to municipalities and conservation authorities to assist with Plan implementation, possibly including improved technical papers, • workshops, policy interpretation statements and/or more opportunities for specific communication directly between the Province, the Region, and area municipalities. Recommendation 8: Prioritize the alignment of regional and area municipal plans and regulations to optimize implementation, including permitting agriculture-related, value-added and secondary uses in municipal zoning by-laws (e.g. farm gate sales, food processing, farm-related home businesses and agri-tourism uses). Recommendation 9: Create a public information package that clearly delineates the hierarchy of different plans, the roles of levels of government and how to contact agencies that can provide assistance with navigation and interpretation. Recommendation 10: Consider piloting a range of tools that can further advance Plan objectives related to enhancing natural heritage features/systems and trail creation, including tax credits or other forms of compensation for trail easements and the use of ecological best practices. Recommendation 11: Ensure that monitoring efforts anticipated by the Plans are pursued and that implementation progress is transparently shared with the public. 41 RL=V-:t - P1. n L. - 1s Direction 5: Ensure consistency and clarity between the two Plans, and between the Plans and other Provincial legislation. Recommendation 12: Review, clarify and align definitions, designations, policies, technical guidelines and overarching policy objectives between the Greenbelt, ORMCP, and other related Provincial Policies. Direction 6: Ensure that potentially impactful activities are effectively regulated. Recommendation 13: Consider how to best balance Plan objectives related to infrastructure development and protection of the agricultural land base and natural heritage systems, to minimize any impacts associated with infrastructure projects. Recommendation 14: Identify new ways to integrate the Plans with related Provincial and municipal policies to ensure timely remediation of aggregate operations and effective regulation of potentially impactful activities, including water takings, commercial fill and other significant site. alterations. Direction 7: Establish a process to consider limited refinements to the boundaries of the Plans. Recommendation 15: Provide municipalities and conservation authorities with the authority to allow qualified staff to confirm the presence, nature and extent of natural heritage features, and identify a simple process to correct Plan designations and mapping accordingly. Recommendation 16: Where individual properties can clearly demonstrate that their inclusion within the Plans is inaccurate at the site-level, allow a review of these properties through a municipally- led process to consider minor boundary revisions. Recommendation 17: Create a clearly defined process to allow municipalities to request minor revisions or rounding out of the Plan areas as part of each Plan review. These revisions should not be permitted to result in a net loss of protected area; should clearly demonstrate that they achieve efficient use of land that advances municipal and Plan objectives; should comply with natural heritage and agricultural protection policies; and should require Regional and area municipal council support. 42 . • • Direction 8: Ensure that the upcoming 2015 Provincial Review process proceeds in a fair, accountable and transparent manner. Recommendation 18: Clearly define and share the structure; scope, goals and objectives of the 2015 Provincial review well in advance of the review process, and ensure that the process meaningfully responds to the feedback received from Durham and other Greenbelt stakeholders. • • • • 43 ATTACHMENT#_Z TO REPORT 0 PL- ■f 02-15 • 1762 Joseph Street Claremont, ON April 13, 2015 The City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1 V 6K7 Dear Mayor and Members of Council: Re: - Pickering Town Hall Meeting, April 13, 2015 2015 Coordinated Review of Provincial Land Use Plans Thank you for the opportunity to make this submission. My name is Brian Welsh and I have resided at 1762 Joseph Street in Claremont since September 1999. I have spent most of my life living in Pickering having moved here from Scarborough in 1968 with my parents. My career in Ontario Hydro/OPG took me to the Bruce Nuclear Plant during the 1990s and on my return to the GTA we choose Claremont to settle in because of its unique character. A small hamlet, surrounded by farmland, but a short drive to amenities in neighboring towns and the City. I retired from OPG in 2008 as an Operations Director in the Inspection Division, but spent much of my career in Engineering and Technical Support roles to Procurement. I have been on the Executive Committee of the Claremont & District Community Association (CDCA) since 2012 and am currently the Acting President. I am here to speak to you once again about the flooding that regularly on Franklin Street in Claremont. Myself and many fellow residents have been concerned about flooding and inadequate draining in our area for many years and I have been personally involved in exploring ways to address this since my home was severely damaged by flooding in July 2000. My house has been flooded by runoff from the Ward farm (Cairo Holdings) a total of 8 times since I first purchased it in 1999. Homes to the south of me have also been severely damaged. The volume of runoff from this farmland is a safety concern and based on the test results from water samples of my dug well, it is also a serious health.concern. Neither the City of Pickering nor the Region of Durham have taken responsibility for a poorly designed conveyance system that has been confirmed to be inadequate to deal with the runoff and homes continue to be flooded on a regular basis. 44 • ATTACH MENT# 2 TO REPORT 1/ 1' 62-15 On learning of a proposed 27-lot development on a part of this property and a planned information meeting in November of 2012 by the developer, I attended the information meeting in Claremont where I expressed my concerns with the developer, Geranium Homes. Many residents of Claremont expressed the same concerns with flooding and many were shocked to see the photographs I presented that night. Enclosed are some of those photos. .Followings that meeting I made a delegation to the Executive Committee of this Council on the 5t of December 2012 as part of the Planning and Development portion of the • meeting. Once again I showed many photographs of severe flooding on my property, along Franklin Street and onto other resident's properties to the south. I had reviewed • the storm water management plan produced by the developer in support of their 27-lot application and found that it could not address the historic flooding problem, a concern shared by the 50 or so Claremont residents in attendance that night, including the President of the Claremont and District Community Association at the time. At the conclusion of my delegation Council asked me to work with the developer and city staff on a storm water management plan that would satisfy the residents' concerns with the flooding problem in Claremont which I agreed to do. Following the planning meeting I met with the Mayor, Councilor Pickles and the President of the CDCA, Mr. Jim Doyle, regarding the best way to approach the task. It was agreed that the CDCA would sponsor a Community Working Group and work with the developer to solicit input regarding all issues with the proposed development, including flooding and to report back to council with.a recommendation. The CDCA put out a call to all residents of Claremont to participate on the Working Group. Thirteen residents expressed an interest and all were invited to participate. The Working Group, chaired by Mr. Jim Doyle, held five working sessions over the period from December 2013 to May 2014. The Report of the Working Group was tabled in May, 2014. A copy of the full report is enclosed. Below are the conclusions of the Working Group. `The Community Working Group recognizes that the following approval processes must take place before any development can take place: • Firstly the Provincial Government must decide whether to amend the designation of the land under the ORMCP from ORM Countryside to ORM Rural Hamlet and if the village boundary on the East side should be restored to its previous position along the by-pass • Secondly the City of Pickering would have to change the City Official plan to show the new boundary. 45 I TTACHI,.■ENT# 2 TO r;EPOR i PLN} 02-15 • Finally, Geranium would have to submit a formal application under the City's Planning Regulations. All of these processes allow for extensive private and public input and consultation. The Community Working Group believes that should the development,proposed by Geranium, be allowed to proceed it will provide benefits to the community including: • A speedy solution to the long standing drainage and flooding issues at no incremental cost to the taxpayer; • • Better water management and environmental control; • Some long time boundary issues would be resolved including adjusting lot level boundaries for houses whose septic systems encroach onto the development and protection of existing boundary trees with the associated benefit for wildlife; • The creation of an additional 4.5 acre park which would connect the new and older homes in the community with safe and walkable streets and trails around the water retention ponds;and • An increase in population would be good for: o The economy of Local businesses o Service Clubs and churches o Recreational activities and facilities for our youth o More yiable student body and available resources for the local public school o A stronger voice for the community". It was the conclusion of the Working Group and I personally agree that adjusting the Hamlet boundary to its original location is the best and most cost effective way to solve the'identified problems; does it bring benefit to the developer? Yes, of course. Does it bring benefits to the community, and at no cost to the existing taxpayers? Yes. It is a win-win solution. I must state for the record that I am not a supporter of large scale development and urban sprawl on sensitive lands, however; I fully support logical, well thought out solutions to identifiable and quantifiable issues. I do not support downloading the costs of previous engineering failures on the parts of the City of Pickering and the Region of Durham on taxpayers as an assessment. As a resident and member of the Community Working Group tasked with exploring solutions to the flooding problems in Claremont, I endorse the Storm Water Management Plan prepared by the developer for the Phase I and II lands, which will 46 • ATTACHMENT# 2 TO REPORT f P?z.N Oz-I5 • solve the historic flooding problem in the community, and recommend to Council that the subject lands be returned to their original status within the Hamlet boundary in order to facilitate this solution. Furthermore, I recommend that Council take whatever actions are available to it to expedite a timely resolution, including asking the developer to implement the stormwater management strategy as soon as possible. Resp ctfully submitted, • t 61k_ W • Brian Welsh Encls. Copy: Catherine Rose, Chief Planner, City of Pickering • • • 47 Y - • t `y �r` :e ' TAChMElT TO REPOR i # -- •- 'r - m, xw' t' wF . l I l) II, f,7ali t1 t I s // ' II .. $ ,• • 'i 11 ..t ,s' •fill i , 'I r • s '-:11® a-= . \ , f :11:4'.•^. 1 i I, l� I 1 . i t t b y s . I f ' 1. ,1+ '`. ` * Ii 161' 11 , ; - I fit' pa4t r. lr '_; .1 1! h.,, -r t " -� l,- • r 'Si 4 t I rt' 1sI" � ti a s s, f, � q 't�t + u wt.,J 4 , a t o *r `' s j - 5::' 1 j y y ''+ })-. '4, ! -424' '' , t n a . bt 1..JI i 4I7 4-K' ; -4: 3' • r i vi k �, t. ` I ra K1 . ' S I *"' I•i 4 .l,'!I�I y i,1I�II i ;A ct ,.~• ' ' y, I . 1 1 l II 4;1./,Iul ,J iz f -Rfibts;-'Jt 1:U cP`- I1 I �; i1r` � • •- -1 ' I I I e ''`!v; ,-., • � 1 S Yl-: \J ,.1 -I•i,III!mi • • -� -r,; I d - 'tit,h:$^>L' � �ti- ar�'1• I III ,'•ii.'1,:)111,19! h • _‘7:411.,•t•;,k ' !t I� �` v - . . . -. . $q'. 1 • i' ,';,,11119 ''� 1 I -! .'�4' �� 4�•Y uS a — i. I11 I o;;141'..''+vk41• r• ....4..-1.i.:;•=47',1-r).7, ,= �\ 'i I -'aIII �r , •i'�: _ (�..,, 1 I• Iii �� , �� g 't ill Gt t :�I� tt11 ;, ,• u Si '11 - II '1l 1,'F alp .-.".,-"-,14-,;'', :i, �4. _,z l "�.'It-r 1 i.1 t �.jK` 'il '1,a f--� 1 ' E — ' ' r' +14 U r� '., I '.11lu t :11 J al 2:::/.,.;;,.... ,a 1 p +1 �L • r • .n . 't I±ha,;�t } t-' 1, 1i''!!ill"{, 3 ',41, ..t I' ' 1 i?.. `f { , I„ �.., n-i x., 0 =. ��, I l e •� . �\e iq: ,. ^.• ■ r: ?Yj:.j;., .._4; 1,1" .t ^'ti ., *� k '� l:F= ..; -• a' X T _ I � .0 4 • fr ,� yA. ItCJ i t -i. I e is Tls j er ice ` ¢ tr• .~'1€ P j ;grc ,�S+S• '°fiF�S -._:k..,, � VT �•M �t `.: . ti '_ tt • - A '-t? J s I -- 1.440:;1-::.:k 1 S 1 r e,:5,-" 5: �.r. 17 era 4 . ry J {y��pg -v rqx rt J.1 I(:i±Jr�: i _ � �t i f 1�11r,{ }J,..,--^' 4_ _ - - � t uq�, � ;"• -1, r �tl'i !r t •`p1 �,•�� '+�' Via{)� f.r`}�1<�� !I f' I � ,— •••..i.:- ,F.� 7..,�� x•'- - t - I tl. •I i r 1 + F n It E it t''1 ��'7R� I,I,I x x• r 1, I y1, I,i, 7 �' .m ,;JY11 11 1 ' %,„Lill I .T"}ll1 r t Pik `'ai �` •7iJJ; -i� itti'1�'-7f'I;��,i1 — }111' iIf ' r} �S>, -• • j• p�!,1 • nl' llii. , 1••••,":*;,-',.: -1/1 1 ill .,•• . ,•-, ��qq S 1 •,, •i , 1111.i� r 1,.. - 4;t• as -• it 1 1Atc 1,I I 1 ,�� f Atyy • iiti,f,- S l''',--.''' _ E it - i- .III \,t tt 11,:1 1�l + I '7.. x y a • I• i – "� I v' – r — • I ,y • r �: !_ ...�.-...._ ,..:ate. .. _:R _ 1 a„. si .t REPORT#ti a �� ,k• 7 , , :v.:.4.'„---- ••'..4-4, .. , : , . ,,.. ,...,. _,,. ... k. -.7,--.7.,;.-4.:.___ CV 4 1 1 ... '*° Jr.., ix j. � 7 :, ''mot i S! -,-.sa t t \,. y ^;• LL \ k-�•r E t,r / —i 1 p �. . _ 1 „� � •t.. k¢ t t7 e_ Re" F - �G... `.r y1.1Jt...119,41'"-'117-41. ..t,(---,744.,;.::../..1.,:.:;:;-_,„-- '4k tt4� .. _-� 1g. '�pper~�•. t` '4. St 2 '+3,i " zi, - �tK t � ,:."'''''''.',1`.',,9'yY�}, �. •- , r ' l ;S:* "'Yom,'•," 9 i..4.. 3n _ i• _.. i t ;!-•.• .,c._ ' 1s_±3..� l 7R . t ` r t 'L ,tv: . r s i"''. 1.17 y" �s ;` 7 a�. i =._ .,Q: j " x 'i` i L �. r•, " � 4y 4' • 7 s.W i Tf° _ 5 �� e - $y_ ,y et y l`l � '-‘A a r Ai K �-��:::+++��A . it Alt. ..Y� " y�, H f ' ! `^s1 F'}J`^ # - x> -.. �. - 1, - 1-.-.'!.,-:,' t',"s. _ ; Wit'- -•—ri-,',.:-.,..--...-..-.r..--.-,---,—.....,.--.-;-',T';.-,:--f-:. S i ��sii... -f, V ,.:1 —a r 0 .._:, • • U- _-,x•;,>s,., � �a" F Cli.V.1% (..,b,,'.. .1.;t:''121:7--';''14:''''':- 4 ' ,,,,.,,,..., , ,.,..,,,,, -----‘\,.-...„..'-:-..'-- !` s ' �. 4t r}.C x :_s '-,,e,. ; _ . yi, y� .,4 stsr ;y,_ -.s4 .s cir . :�__,acE _. ��+ £� . .4,..10WW..1"7.!;.:;..S.:-•'•I --"'"---.-,r79*;'..•'74:Erigc•n7 1.7_'r-'',\----" ..4";;•"4-Z.7.•,. --.'-•_ __._ _ _------- -f,,,,•_.-_-.. .i 1 ,, ,......-.r..._!„....._?„...i.f...',....--.i.„... :.. ,•41s ,.: - .-t, ,...,-,...`,1;77"--. .:4„..-7-',".-:•-",-,- •-•.. - , :i I ---.;--•=4----4-i------;-7.....:•••-,•'="7--,--;,- -,-- •-'• - • r ''''' ' • ATTACHMENT.#4____TO :- L G2-15 , • „ . .. REPORT# 1''':;:';;''''.7-=-1. ,,.. . , 'f--.P.- . • . ., • . . , , . 2. ''-.',•-•--'-'-•-..-'1"-•--; '-/-4.----:---2- )‘ir-. . ..3 '•' -f' ' "...„---''',1,,,.:-.--=-4 .'./'''-*,- 14 . • ._,.-., ,••••••- ,,,....-;,-,.. ,.......__•--- .,-.....„-_--_ i I i....-7-,;,_:--,-,;•.,-.v,-I•iff i ---• ,1 i .•f...,-'., . ..1 •-,,-;..,'-1"------ ' tit,:- . • . • . . • -,.. ..,i•. ,_•-: , -.-- 3-1;-7:::::-,.11k1..:•/•;4 '•- --./•.! -i • . -•• .i.-, r'•_ •1• -.• • 11'-'■"...; - -•••-.,N . . . : -. • .;•-•• -,ir fi....; ;.' ''''• ---.` -.'••i."•-• ':- . •7 -Y --+-;"">4-:Ntl:::---e->r.'4ii\ -..b,.:`'.1--'-'=-V-.-,1••.-: i' - ' )l't. ,. . .".,....t..,-• • '. .-- • • •-; • "- . ..• ._.. .. .::..-• ... ,..• ..._ ,-...,!--->,-„,...,,4'" •.. '', •• :- .. T..';2■ :-l:,.4..-•-; ... :?,.::::':;_.,•-,.-•-:;.::'2::. -:77:.1Z•7","..•€.-7.74,--=.-1-Z"1-7-:.=.1-,.;,1:r.'.7-,t.j.-:-.• -/-.7./.--,;/,,,..i ili1li P1 t•i 1Vl *-7--A-,,.,."-'-::',:7--,•1,-.,',•::_,:.!-:-...'./'.- ",• „."'.-..- -„,•,-_:-,-:7..i t.".”'i'...4..-;.:-..".'.',,,,.t*-,4.-.-:1-'--;....■1-....t4.4 r.--y-'---N 2-.4.-,..k_„.:7_4..*'2_---,''..,,.7-,-.:-",4.-'.'--,r.N•-.•:,'..9.'.-.z".....'-1e';- -:•;"--.1.- , ,-,-1, 14,-;- ;•.:r,---:,•• : . . • -.-,•:-••4',•; ft.",i-1',' 1.1, • • . • - ..-:`-.1:.-.--"---:'..-i-""..., ----,..--f;:-31--.-:?-,'"---7,...%,;-..:7-74, 12:4,ii,4'.:,,=;,,f;.,..,_....;,-, '.,i.. i. .1 , t ir ,i'''''' • . . ,.‘ .1 • ii . ., '''''::::'::: :r;i:', ..:..r4.1+.'; :t":* 1:.!1'''''AI K''';'. ' * .''' ' ' . ..:'.';' ::i' ' ' ''7 ",:. ;',',..7. '..:,- .•?.F',:\.::.?,1 ,,::i. ....,t7: ...Z.. F7::•: 741.1.4 trE4N4'1..?,V- ' 1 ' ‘ .' ' '' . Ar •"P.- '"-7. •7',...•..NZ - - --'. - . '-'7---r---'''"41 .-'-7--'771-1 li:;--', IA--" . . - - -,,-:- . ..-.=. ,.:s•-• - 'C'-'' ....4,-- .- .• ... • ..:--..,!,-. f - ... , „..-.,...,-....ro . . , .... " _,-, _-,n,-.2,./...:i.-.-,...:..f.!•.,-,,,-- -zy.:7:4,7,:..-,_--•,-----..-=- -.7,•-•,_-41,..,zoi-.,.. ; ,•=1.•• - •. .--•:,.•-•,,-..,..,--t., ,r, 07,--1',-, :.,.4-xvi.:;;..,---:.---, ,-. ,,. ,-.-.--.!..-- ..---;-c-,...--,;,....:.--:77„1,,,),7...,•.7.:.:7-_-. -•,:.E- 7,--;_-••1-.-_-,-,-:.:..•.:-,..,,--',•.;-_-.4"-,1):1::;•.7-4..,.-),-4,'-: I •:- - ... -•.--,.,:‘,-,--• -,-;-=•-•,_,.,;-4,ar-----r-f•-z,,,,._z,-.-:,-p,„,..-- .-- • - . . .. . . - .•. -1:-:--,-,:-.-•,•--,..-.5..:-.:::::,::;:=:-..:7,,,- ;";c:..,-:-=;.:f-'":•.., -7'--- -.-'f4-:' 1'' - ";. , '..,.'..".f.-':.;;:i-;/71' i.'•--.5)11;-/01- -&-,.,:;-',. .,-,c,'",....--tt":''' ' ,,_.- .---=,---.-,7-:4.,:-.---`,----"--17>'------- ----,.--7------ •-.it,,- , .. , ' . ., _..., ' CI -5':, ,t/i•L•-• ' :4.'4i , • .."..' • . - -, ,:..,..,2•,---,,....,-. ,..7s.;.7.z.,.:-.•....7: -.-f..-„;.,:`•::•,-;••_:.- 1 i.-.1--',,., ., -,...--: • -- ,,-/,.. .,- , .1.;•--.•., 'N- • i . , - • i „f. ., , ,i, ,.,-,,,,-,.:7„..7,1.,..:-.;,',;_nr-i7•,:=_-,,.. -1,-,,,,I..17,,..:...t.,-"''',1,„,,,j,',:,'-i.-'S •-',-.',..,-; ", - -,-71,.1..,'2''1'1' ..-.'''''' 'i<-'44.3'');.-7,'.-' -'---1. 7.,,: ...sH, --•-1,..1.'-1 . . e".e:,. s.f .. , :,..."-‘...::,:_:,7-5,7--g....,5:ir,..,:;;;,Vj7-Lq.:'5...i.,Z;f,-±"c.:- ...;1:,,i - ; ' ..tr,''..1-'.:c;.-_•',,.:::-,,::-°;-,4';‘,'.... 47--,-=.4::'..5.71 ...'.--:'- '.••-•- -''''.;' •. • 0: , 7- 2- ;"7-"-- ;/"°3;.7-*:•.:'',-.A -•-i."4-7 ,':','"..75•'-,:.1-c -;-.1 1.-:, -...-;11 ,...-•:-..',.',-,_;',44... -7,-,-...-_,..,:-,,----:: .i-Z-,..-•--. • • ,•.•••• • • . - . •• — ," ,..16, .-- ••- 7.:,:l.:-.-',-,.:77-!..- -ti4-"... :,..:- .4X;I:AC,77 :77,-,4g7;_'tj.t.44,4 .•'•-•f --. .....'..-' '' '.', i.i:1: :-;:- '..,(1,',I• ..:4141---.!-,-7 -,,-.-..----izf. •...-- . . • . J..---'„.,:.- . , .1- '.-..',. !__.';'-:.---,..":.".J.7. -:.?-;:=.i?- -::- ----.- - `--,"--7.--",___,„,.-='-.."---,_••-tz.:ft., ,f-f, ‘.. ,,,.-. .._,..••;,..:-..,.,,,L--,- 4.,v --,,_- i, ,, „ . A. -v. . i - „_-,:.--...._.,7-2,..„....„......2-...,-,.:•-r-r_.--,F,_te.-4"". .7-,:;:',"-•=sa.---..."-",,-7.14 . .".- ' . it. 1:• - .... 4•4 , .--, s _ 15,-,f_...*;,.„-,f..4.:-..-..:;,,-":„--..7- ..r...„-,%,......,,,-..•,-,_.`;'.,=.-:-- /1"--'_ ...,..'-.- -.-.!, ;.--...--".- '-_-..,'..".'.-"i.,-2,'P 1-.. -- .;..... .,-.-„•=1 ,...".• . ,,: .:- • ' —r. - .....__: :____::--..;7-z-?tc,',:,',.:1 ,"-t:-.5-,:,..37-1,7:-:4;--;54.- -?.:5:;',.- _-_-.N. ,.4!-.,:.,---t;''''-'3,;-73 ,[-I rj- .:',•' '-...r'''.••.'.‘..51;.!'t4:4 ,•''.. V4-2---7.1-k:.} -0 „._ .,,k.,„.,.,,,1.,, r. •, .7'.'... • ,. .:.).: 1,1.,_.. ' .:'.,',,,,' ''''..4. . . ...:,,:y§-.....r.'s----.',:-_ ,:-,.:_4±;,:g--,-.,-:>...,:j:vg:, :; -..: 17..4.t.„:: ::„:7--,., ..•,*--,647.....7,...,,....i ,Arik .. . . 1 , •• • , ,. , :,..,..;1, _,...-:,•,_,T.. .1,,........„.,„. „._;,,,c.„—:--;•_,..,.:•.,.4....._,4:K !..r±A....., ;,..A.„ .,.._-... -1..■•:::,,,,r;„:,'.+,,,k•.,,i,L,,,,:it,'..,,,t),. ›.,,,,._._ : ... .. ,., .: . 1 - .1 .. . . :•:',., mi „ • 1',,, 1.7::=5:',"_.1,,Ili..;i---..:.:,,t-•-,',7:-.:47;÷`.7.7,-,.'_.7,. .1 -5''':;:t:,'..',;,--L--- ,-,-, .1115;1;,-;;;;ZIS1,;, .:;,;:::,.. 1-,';•■ .. rj;;;:,"At'..-:W:, 'i'd't: .„...Y5.--"",.. ;-!•, -,„..'75,,'' . -': .■..5. . -. , :It,. , -• • .. ;,.7.V,.:-,-;-,,!,,c,,,77,-,-,,,.&.:Li?,....,,:,:,;,.:•••,:i.,4:‘,:.5,.::::•,-..:,,,TaS•,, ,,_.,,-75,...,,,m-t"" ':•-• V.r,•.,4s;,5,-4::,`-',..., i.,'1 ,-',"- r,•3`,..,;:,_'1,71'5,,,,X f" '..-.,'.---7 ri=,.,-difilt,L...,,..-74', ,• ...,:,.:1.:(.,.;•,.,.• . •, . 1, ..;‘,.‘'‘... ., .-...-" .. f',.1:7,--,,H•J:'-..".-:,:'!--' ''',:7,-,---- '''',;;:i. ... .'"c--i---:-;„. .r:i,%",i,'",!. ,-'''-'4 . ':2-:_a'-I=4'.• . . . , • ,. .,•::•:,:•:•••'; .1-=:•.:7)>-':-4--L.:===:. "."-----,t -- - .T-_,"-.V -- 'IP-0 1''-'.!. ';-,F•.:';';'i ,. -d : . • ; . .• ,-",...,L4-:%-1,-,.•...1:---- -'•-;----".;-.."27. -•-t'i- el-•" ;,..,.. ..e-•,...V!`•••;."-1.'":.,--"A r • -- •' ' .-'11.,"•;11,4"."`"- ifq ,./•t-"' 1 . r .'-'• . . • . .. -.: .; I. , •••-": ' i..1.'•'-,'".7,--'•;-';'.)".7z•_•,.:-:•-_.:-_--..i',.::?-'.".:".7.',--.1-;;-_ -:---",5:7-,-_-'zr.--1 ../..,"4:!";_,,,,i4.,..it:1 -:',,, 'iii.'t,3eL,-ir"'4.' 4:-141:: '--..;■• - ' •;t- ' •....'. • - ...-.4,:-,:',...:•-•:"."-., •.:,-..--_y-..--..--,i7-,R,----/ ...--,--t..:•.,--,• • ••.,,,,.,-,,',••,,,,..11._.,_..__:,- - - .-- ..- . --•:2„:4.....1-- 1,4",-., Oki„-.!.-.7,...,.,-,4',-,..4.,--":_•-s_ .. •''''''',',,,i'f,-•.-. _." _ .....rt ,.. --. . -.4:-'4,-":: ::.,::.'":,-..•-,:-..,-,3..--•-".;;',4,,*;•••■: -."-:-7-•"-.••.' •••••---1. 'r-,=1.i•'4.4,,,,_%:?',V,.7--,:1.'•'• • ...>----- " 1,--g-.4'7'1 ---" -, ---4'.:-"!--i7-"1"-‘-■77" ' -----'"7-'4..."-,,'^,--,..;2;.*--■.,- --..--.F:-7•Z'..77.'fF-.^Z-L'3e- c . ' '.,:-...4V:iL..44,pg:1:-;;;;::':' -:'-'' ." 1 r': •• : • i i nt, , '_.-__•-;_------77.,.•;:-1.17::..a.-- ttr;ttlit:',I:4;tivii•77-.•'--.,?!.4;-••it44,11- ..,,,,Kiw.,...;._, ij , • .- '''Sli:''':._. '.,A.,:'6 't!1. ''• ;.',.,••;,7-Zt•it 116 .•,' ' '''t- ._;'`--- ', ';' l' jt 46- - ..1,2 ..---. "- — . - - -,•- '•-; -.WI!' • _• - - '.'''=.,E'.,,-.-:-•• ". ._,_-.4-#7 ;i.;,,, '_ .1•41;_-.':.-_-•,,,-..A.,L,-,_E.., -- -- , , .- - ;.i.;-••,.,.. • - .-..,-;f,..-,-.r. •I••A.,- tV^..k.'-..-"1"--00.?:-'•. : .• • • ••,.' '...._ - •• 'ii...,•2 0:- _ - APJI • _ . . --,--..• ,-, •,-..,'•„.:K.k.:-.:)1 _ -,•'7".e..-....-4.--'- • :.7f 77,:*".•;:'. ;. '''L',.:,_ . • ...... -- •-g...-I:,•-•-•'-‘'-'••••••-P- ""•''•'•")-,...-.4••4‘',,,,>-- -"`x---oo•-,-,,,::--- ,___.,• -7-,-- ,,,, • - ••••-•-...._,..,,.........,-,21-,;,,,•,--,..„„w-, f'-) .1, , .• • - • •re ill . • o ' • •-•'•• '•••-q "•-•:: --- "..i-TIF•1,,. •- '',.•:-.=,' -7-4v ' _? .Z.7.1 '4\.;•••• .i.,,, ,,...,1.1.,...1 :. f•A.14.-.-71 't 1,',:...11°':..,;17).•."' r 0 _ • -.‘4•OP • V., ' '• ••'.'' ;•:-.i.:41'"•1,•.'.....:1',1•`,.•(!-. .A\"...• + .' . ,4'17. •-:. ‘,A-•', .-t'_...r:•' ''''-1 ,'" •• . ..-, I i - ' - ...1.-.,.,-- ., ;:-.,,,,_,-, ISN.!1-.,-!..-.:,-,-,;-47.11"t.4.4.--°-•,---7: ...-..., .,. ._1 , , , -,..„-- ,.';3`—, . •e,-.. „..-t44,...'-' •-;'7,47- --;.''',,,. `.i'l,i•- '0'.i;t;-, q`,5•,,,,-.4 -,.,' . Alicio.V7:1-0-:.qt,11,-!,', ',--, .,„„4.,.AO.. •;.-".1,,;,,,,.-..'•;:•'.:••:A--e-:•;',.,:- .,4,--•, ,..t.. -• t• 1-•; -. ' tiif• . ..,::,----,-,•,------.-..- • -, ,... . ,A,,..,.,-J,,11,14-•,/,;•; ,':',-,...,;'.•4 xi,,,x,,x4 4 1-4_,.--t. ,i,...,,,:,,1,,,,,-,-...l:,-,,`4,,,,-0%,'_!,.?A• •-,,• .. ,.... .„. -.4.--..., . , .;,,:-..-:%-ri•p;,,,..1.4:7•:44:p'-,..,•,..Ark ,'-•:;3rile.45-. l 1.I.-Pri.-4')•r'•`•' --•'• ..°. • -).-.4 „&,...'. '•••_: _•:,--,-,-,q(1.,71/4gA.:=.-.;;;;Itl,•:,,---P/ii.!„ 1_,..'',r.::.11111101,t;,,,--.,.,:i.4 r:r.41!......•,-.. Ns.‘:,.!.,1,11-,4) *411,1_„,..••■*.'.L.7.- . J'-I . • •4..,r':'," . • / i - -.-.-..._ ,g,i,f1.4t4i51,1111,..1,;.it;:s r..;',..-r.','f:%!;:r.,A,P,X;,.7',.:;•••ki..-4..V12..-4 -•-'r:. ..,*". " 11:-.-'-'r- 1:- •. ' • - ,.Q1 ( --:';•114"..::'....:1.-''- -----".- _ ' fl•-•1`. ...5:"-'P...-43 -.--jt!•-:7.-4- -V•f`4.';'11■7''-/-'41%4410.:".'',.'.1i'-V"V11?;----',..--e-'--"..!'"X-W, 4;...--"`-;_' -i-f411,7 1"' ''''',•‘'..,, - 4, ,..,:-.. 7 0-'4,...;,,;.-.}.;7.;.:,:;,•-f-- Tz._.,..,,..„.,!..„....4,t,p,-,----.-14- --_=.-S...,,,..,=:-. ..-.--,:•.P..r.,,,ilte,.•-•, ....-,.••,z...:*;:.f,,Ari-•,:;.:•ik,•::-ci,..,:., •,--z:/:••-•..: ,•ttr•--•:,:-.-.14-•:--.7:-"::-.1z-1--oir ..--,...-6,,7-----.. i ..g.;••;.si,T,-,122'...,l)V1.1.,31,',..;;.:,%, --.: .,,,,,-..::2-7:----:-.-,..1,1t.-7.47.`,.. ..1)-'p i7.r.i..t.;•e;0•!,.,..,4!..,''.'.:::,i.i.,,,':.:/,' ''-'-'..1.*ti;■,`.51:.i.,)11,;'=:±1;,'..ti,...,:614,',.,..11,--,.1- .,,,!:4■■• .7,.:..",•:,,,..4.id;.::*,..s.,,7:!::.:=,.1. 1.t.'-;.":.,:.,'-t-,.... .....f..5 .z... 4.:•:"-",:-..:Pli,_!:VA-71:t.zp..1.;..t..1ri-,4:„:-'1.11:'....i ..v4.',',.'F''.3(,W-r,'•'-'''.....L.r;iir:-.' ,,C.ti 't., ,. k ''',',.'i L'' --,ar: .r.''..,11.i-r' •f= .\ . _ ,1 -2,.rr .:%,;:,17-7,4_,±. ..L:-:,---:_ll.-.--A•,:77,;-.c-1)4',',:if,,,t•-'-','', '-;::-.-..1.:- .:' '..'.1.,'-t -'7-"-?9,'';';')V1.111'-'7'4-4.:`':Vs .4 ' ' ,-,'•1.f.. .,.,,,..,..Lii,i,*,ri ,„"v:-.:*2•,-;„-3z-,,,,..,:,_:.:_-=...:,-.1,,,•-..,;_zt.,,,,,..77._•.-zi__ ...„__,.3.,:,,,,_.:::._,..„.. ,‘ :, ••••144•,rNi.1.1 .17.-,1•`,`.;.:. 1'•,.i":..3. ;..-!.4;,,..,e,,i.,.ri,•,,,,,,,,,,.._. 1•,i',1 ' k.-r 1 7:.7--"•-•-'4-7.---4347••=1"'":-= :e:;'•:.-/7ii•-••,•--n.-'•-•••-•: ---71'71--?----4--•=2-t•-'1,- .'''1- •;:k:\ "4,1#0;•'14••'".... ''-'•••■•:','-!'--:::!,,.4'.!:r...•-z•L sf:.i,f4:;:i:::(•-,.,',.-.-,,. ,,,,,,yi,,1•41,.0.7.'- s v 1 :. - \ , . •‘_-4...,;;•:-,--,17.,.:::,24,i-:t-,-,•••;--,--........2,.L-r.5t,. -_-.- - -:,.--„,-.---__:.,__•---.r.-•.••:,p.181),,,I•I•i-7.,,..,1:1Aii.,,11:.r.,,./...:,;.4.-1.y,,,,f,..;:zo.,t-i3,..-,,..A..„-,it....1. .1.1......iefTt: • •. ..1 .4.... ..,,,. 6, ..... - ,....Q.„,?::,?4,-„,-...:„.„,,,,__.,.... .,:i7,-.,..,,, ...,,,....:-.,._, --_-_-,,,.--Itr-,:-.,,1 ,A.,!;•;-!2",,-.!""•(2,11•!•,-)1rAti'i;:.::•::::Z•4‘•!Ailirli,tr 4", ■',11.,..4'.2:-+.F-.-owl,-""1-r.;vi via 11-;.... _1,--,.• -, !1 4. . • 1.,,.., 1: - k.----•2i-,,-..--- -:,r,:=-__.. ...:,..."-:'_:!,,,.._;=..4.1--:"---:..-:-..-,..:,,-.,.. ..----- 17.1.;:2-7,7-A-.,''",'. j " -'21.?,9"-.7'.;::-',,,i4.';,4'6...!t.,141--,,,,.:1 jr.y.akt-.... „fi'lj,'--' ..1.-;-4.. • ' ' . -r,, ,'. .-- ,II, i.:51-1,,,----:-.4..."- -•:----...._:-,A7rcL, '--:=:,--7-- ..-Cv-,--"'".*---..-r..----- '''',--,1'.:;.'•'.......?" •:•)'-'•;!,-171MP..g.-glurq?V-. il:',,,‘',,Ng ,,,h;:.'4,1.,:,“,.. ':r.;.., •, ' . ' .„ • i •'1T-'i,.A .1,t-,_■,.117,;:-.7_,-,1..,,,,-.-..-----,-:,:::--:__-,,-,,,,...:.-...,.---L'=--;-2,:=`--: . .0,01*efrirlt, * .t.--....:.‘,11,1,,,,.:v.,A , ,. ,.. igi ,, •, k• '•-"-'....---4:-.4,-} t.--•77 --.Z.-•---•':;'-‘-':".-'-'''''''7.----:"-1:- ,.....k...,S..--'''..\,,_- , !-,,,,S• .i.::,,.‘+,1 .,„-...11 Its,k,-„,h• 'W.*.'-.4.1 ,,, ,,1/2-•-'" ''' " I 1..,;-',r,f,t,.../_:,... ..-,,,,....,,,,,,--....--,..,:,-j.:-.,.-z:-..._'„,-,•,.:"•,:-..-_-.-:-,`,'::•."`-'="----- 7-;-:,-•-• - ,"••••?....t.,.•-..--', 1,4.• •-..h...-i'..,-.t...14. 41.! ,J0,4,2.- 11','-',1`.'.,',. l'j, •,4... • ,- ' . s . ' i■ .. ..,,.!..,,, . . , .,..7,1:,{rc.,..::,::z.-. .,,,,L...-......., .. ■-:,,,!:11..,,,-s...LL......-. -- :,..11iii,• .-r.,-& ti :........,..,..7.:,,._......-,-.-.77..-4.-„4...=,.1-1;-:.--,,,-...:-,.:::-...•---4,- --,-----,-Nt.-k,•4111'.01X:•,,,tici-i•VP-17"p' i.or.,,,,•\-wtit- ... 'a--P '.."-'--, ' . .. :Alf ',-,4r .4.,.,•.`, -.,e1\,1'.-- -'4,-•,-;:-7-7..--,--,-=---:::-.:-.--,---z--:,-,--,-.;,---:,,-_,,,=---f-7-:,..,.----zz,,,...7,-2- orri..--_,1...ir..,,,,,,,,-..6..,'.L.'..-. lo..1,.v,-,.3.)44--.,,,,,,,,-. --...,., • ! •4:se7-1-1.-<,i -...' ....;'-,-,"Zi-..--i_.----r",_-1;-2--•j,:r,.`-j-:,": :•_77.7"-c=1.,' ,'Z'.;.--:.;;L":-:=1..4.4•::--;• •1:11zi'•:iliV,.1.,',0,ii''41.41.‘e'*.ti oiii&..Z%ttle-';'- 1 V 4..;.,....,i,. .. 4,--,..--,-•• ii:-:'-.-,2-j','-•-'-'.•L..`::'i;'-''',. ----:-.::-.75.:- .1..-:,;--=',`±- ,r;=='-4 .1t1,4K,',.;;:,,V.r4 ;;Ovil.aql\itiv.,, '' ''‘V'iii-, •:=', ..c.4 . ---11-1 . ),, . ...i ,,..0....,,.,..... . , .? ,41,,,,r .1 . ii16,,. . „Is,..........„7„,f‘....,,,,_,1_...,-.,-,„:-._-:;-.,.-....,,_,,;-..,:_-_,. .m/,,,A;;:\:i,..i>-.1 4-s•,-= l'n .'i ii, il '-,4,.6,.,,,,..fii,... ...r , ... ., o ,:,...:. ,,•_ .1,0_,.•;,....,„,,,c______:_,...„_„:„...__ __,.:-•-,.._,-____.,__,_..,,.„L.,,,,_3„-___.4-....,-4.,..t. ,„,.,,,,,„.. . ,,,, ..c.,.,t ,t,\,,,,t .1:3 11 , :',.' s■"4,114,` • 1 ' 1 pi.:fr.-::::-,:.,it ,_ ' ,i,.'4, , •; 1 7.,/.s.:1.: . ' ,;:...- '. ,. •,::".1,,,Ly:-.,;-.;':'::1.77-4'v‘.-i7-----'''''''.--7''.-.1- :'-=. ..i.i....1.-1,\• lik'''.'...i.tr--,'''' "; i.'in% ,,,I,S\ ,..11 Val,( .z.”4,,■. ,}`..„• ,i 4,-....,4- ;:' `-,;'''''P--,12:7'' ' '-':-------..r.,..''''':-':'''''---:.--."'I'-t-3----;.:-•:'i'-7.,..5-.;:i:--;•----'--q---4- 11,',7!„.,7-\t.i..,V.,:il';'-'47.•■: kr..,,,I.1,-.1'. ihl„it)1A"1,:‘,C, ''1.„;?.%^‘•7_4,,"*"---;-1?-r*,'4" ••••:._ ''‘`,.,7-,..11,1.1_. ... , '"2..•_ •....,:i ... ••••:-.,..-.••*_,...)•_,,-.,- --.., .•_ .,---:::.,_.:.L...-•:,,-...:.-:f;.-;.,_.-,,,'_...,:,-?_._-,77,--..--2----,--,-._-,.--,_:,.'- .7-••-••-• '1..7.*-;''tr 1=''';',"-L''',,,..} ..13;.V.;. -l'i-alif i i 11.,1;2(4,"NAV•I'Vt.' ''''''X'-1-; ' :' . : , ... ^,, ..,_I.' _,C.r.:-,'4. ..,'''':''.,1:."::'!=. - '77 -'"-.-,' 7.I'El--'7'.2-.r..7-i".. :'''''...::-:::;.--=':11;i'%_ .-'14.',-;_:-;1.t'- '-?`,;'.-Y!,..1.)'11;'''._'-.'it'''.4.'P3‘I'N'',IiiiIP'k,■11',4'...-ail'f4011litia'..".A4tit'-'1 I \% 1 . . 1'--'1-'?../ '..'='''",•-',tie'-',.:i'.-.- '.. . --:. '■',';.'-_-;.;-.;:-"rft-;-;-.-z- `,---:=Z-7.±.-.4i-.-.-,''-`:.s---2--45-'-•.?::'&-:!-(,-(-.0(.,-:::" ''..-%4 ' c-"'-'44.‘":11--"rck'''''.4--V.','■:{';.41n.,-1:•44q kit-'1r4q-A-4.xt' ;-' , , _-:'.',...,:-:-.." . .. -...■--.-.. " , ./.,,:,„;,„..:-.,,-.,•..e.,4.,.6.?.{:-, • - " ,..;,,....7. -f="---"--7;,..‘,..'•,-;.',•::•!,..-;`,,, .'.-i47-.. ,i,,,:-',---"T.E.7.'"--Zi.. -.;,-,,'"--■-■-.. Lg.', - .,1,:::".::,,_-0,01',Y,_e I,'...-.VI:, ',`.0i-e..ic:e4;:,s,,,,,s,,til,..fl t prw.,Epr 4. !II, '`. % . '•. ;.*-t.-1„4,/,_,_...:,"--7,'_kt.4 '._..,,,11,t. „.. :-.1--:.:',--.-,-7,-,-;",:i..-*"..L.f.,71, .---.-,-,;:''';',6.-,TZ;•.------ ,i;!--S3--.. ..7•1,1,1 ‘i",f•;,..4‘,1,•:-'41..:-.'.;i'.-.1‘.31.:',..1,_..A',,,t111,,,,4■',-i••,,,,,..•A.,Z,4.1 j Alci,?r,:.,,,,k,.4„,,i,„),a , ,. ::,._ _...., y If;'-±,-..•,•r:::.i,;.1.,,"r• ,•",-,:,11-.4 Net,',..,..-._"--....-.:-7`.:;"-C•?...•.7--a7"•-•":"..-n:---,,,-,..`:,1"-:•:-.72:-.:.;4:,•„,..".2';'_,••'!•237,..._.74,:•,','2'',,c, ',I.■••,•.'";:i-:,-.1%,i,",-....-.--.-.:;.......i:P...!".0",-,f1;tall...!?.?•:•;-1",ci-V4-(1-71'..,..1-11r,_Ais.%••,-: •., t '•• - - 'i. .• --.. •-:'4•i'''1:-.1 fl- ••''.:•'7.•.'';`-A.I'i -.•; "--...,--7.72-.'..,--;•--7---7---77--;"•*---,.I::::`,...7:-,----"7-77"-;-..-..€•,.-i"-7..:''.%;;V0fr,_....1i1 i ir',".•:',N.:'i!'7-,,i'l,1,,"."..':i",.;';:.,;,.i1;.,iiiie..'' ,:4•-.-'io.-.7•_•:••*„.;;;:. ; ' , , •,.. .... ..: -... . .t... '-7:-' :•••tA .,i.,',•..:T....,.. ...=.2.-...:,• -:--,' -,....-"•.-.--tr••:"..-=.._•\‘,:.•.-. -L•••-•_'.;"..;;-,A..!."."-.;',--t=r:1- 1,,-;•"-,%"'• -•,i-A,".--.-'!i,:.,:if7',. ',...i•-,"+,.*).,k1,'•'1.41-',',I,.., `1...-','-'2,:,`--....j::;:•f"-f,..f"....,-,_r, 7 - .. . ,•• h - - .,,,,..__ ,t;:. -- • • :..,2,•-..-___ ,-, •.'...•,--'-‘----=7-%•- ,,,"="'r 41 •''5' ,•-.: l'$*I'Ll,‘,`-..'it.0411-\\•iik,-h'•- .•,'qt',■.,....1.,,,,-1,,-.....it.'-,f '. '•• ' •'.( - ..,.. -. .- . ..„- 1.4,./.1, . 4. 4toif,:,.7.9-1.::: -,...... '7:,._ ....,.:7:7,_...:-_,-...:'r".::-.:...,,.,7'..,..:7,-::3.±.. .I i....._,,,,,,, ' '"1...1,-1110 ,$."..,-,:ti",'.41%,,i-'..,, ',...;:: :.,4,,1/.....,,,,1;,1:..y.,:l 1 hil:' , . ' ..;... 1 . ,' ... ' .-'k".14. • ;.-..r'....- '- .--- --'''':!--...• '.1`r:...7,-"7.-.---=,-:77;.---;:-P.::....".,Vi- ., irt‘-MIti.,Sr.',.::-.'--,-,l'i..,,,e3.,„' ..- '.- • , I .7 4..r'. r .-•. '.•,,--...: --.-.Z.T.',..,--:-71'..:;','1,t,-,',;.*-1.. .1--7_,7;-j?...-::a'','". '-A' , .:AV14' l'-:!;:i..r.:;41 tfr"..tVff'.'" 4..1''.1'. 1''''';'' '-7'----- --- ... 1-,. ':J:■';',' -.! -1",- "-.,,,.a._---.- ". - --.-.--'1,---,.--.1:- .,--=.,..;=:". ....rs"-; '' 'rj:-..J.el_ -:.4.1.11- -.: ...,,-,-._,_.';= :..';‘7*-'`.ir.'.,•M,t,.:-.--:" , ii...11 , ..:7'.'..'..-.C.41t...4.' , 7=.■':. .:1'... .71i,',: \:.'.■-: ''t.:...ki...,.7 1/.''' 'l'4 •i,.', ''Itt;..‘,.'6'''4,:li'..': ......',..t:). 7:7 ,j 2'.. ,..:',A.'.,::,..'.j'.1,-:11Fi,'''''.' '1''..t":::''r? r;,'''*:".-L::7.7:;771:T.%4i,'14.1q. '11...k; t :; ,f.:4...r;.7 :„.•,.., -;:. i A.,O, _ •..12,44F,t..,,1::' '-.,,..1.c,'',"- L--- `i,••' ":' ',.,'.7,...",, ,.",.-';1.1...,,--:,'.'•-".:_::'.;;:::- --2-5--.2"-likl•,•''' ' :': 't.::'''t• ):'- '',-;:' '''.' ..' 's . ''i'.-1';''''';'-:;''''''.--2*e.--'(- ;". - ,--".".'‘,.--',;.•'-,,-•".-4„.".:.• 4 1.-..•-- • --;=;•/;' ' ----,:?::;-'.1•:s•-•;-••‘''Z.:.t-- ;?•-lr.r:.:-'i.7.:--,,-. ...37-ff...,,, J,,-__ , .: l l'; (4•,:Ate-tV.'.‘' :', - ...,,-. ztf,_:,1• ,.*-,:", _, 7. • - .•"i • •••••- ''1•_' -)T", ,.",-.:',",-1,-".z.... ,k...., -.-- ••-'-' -_,..,-,- __ ..-..., .,... ,_ ,_ ., -,■• , ,, - ,t .,- • ••,-,,,...-,,..• - •-•,-, 1-•1' - :..•..' ...; I ,r,.-1, '':,...p:„..4. .-'''.;. ..4-t,-,' , , L....,..__,._:_. •-„_•":".',4\11-'''-'17-:■:--‘-:''it',.,...-....--"',..,•-2'---Ti.''7_.---:•-•'15-i---t ---Z•1 ° '1 '-'A ili-•°;W ...k.:. ..-A t.--t-- .- ------.''.'-- —f 4, ; ,■ ', , .e.••., -• - ,-I sti , .•, •,,-. ,.,, -•...: -4-:,- .....ti.'4„.„,,It,-,-,;'-'.i.-t- ........-,:,=-,,,j",--7-7:-,..-.--,-,f,h.:::,:..-f-,r-;-.7:1,-..-s:,..,EL,::::::::,..;.:.-.T.;::-::?-- kti-.'---p•:- I 1, .,',1...,.., k.:: ---•'' * ' " ' ' ej • . ........ ..' I . .'r . VD.',..‘i.,,..r. 7- ,Ar,.,, i.., , _,.•. 1,....,.,,,...,.?,,,,f__,, • -,ri.:,r-%.r.--...7.,:;;.:.'k,„.Nr. .t:,-7...-:,-,-.7,-._.;.;2_,..„....,,,:,-.„2,-_,1.....-;,- -..„..„-,:-.7-,r-i-,-.,-,,,_- -..-411 -• • - .: --. 7 I •-•.'-• - ". . 111('..:•-:- '.... -cf '2",".,;•-1";:e.b".• ,' • y yy r y+�t r � 7 qi `trCy` g i fl ' • �' '�.'a ATTACHMENT — — .Y7•� '1'i� Airt2j i*76 4 .-:-..z.,:,-...., -,.,„, . . ( , '- `=,-.tS` .T- - �• I :, y Sd _ •t r +Cb a: 1 ;v r ^3ti . i 1 15f€: ,s 1 a....—' ...�— -- • - r y 1 I. 'j a�'^ _�V 1 'nV>j y. !. }y 7 } _ __ '— _—^ \\\\ i a - i1'.`' ;.1'i . ..,1t,,,.,:',..2.1 1,t I :7 }'r t -cat -1 ! _ p 1$ 11 � h 1 iS p ! • /�^ I \' Ir ii - ' '4j�74�Ewhf I7 ay t #C.Y _�t� �r a . � , ti C " ., ,,s,,, ] '.i -��'G- �5�.`. 3, 1 ,9 1 ],a1 _ � �':� _'!^' "� 'a ] S '''4,1•7;,::•_._ �' '.�-,ysi 1,1- r' �i� �� ,t�t�ff Iz'" _ s i T ,a s •.•• / - r ft W tk` y 3� k w` r r -' y 1 ,� �� { ___._ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _:„.. .______:•. ... " _ : . : . . crj,.- :' ---..,,,T - 0 . .. _ ; jt '' S 3 L'1 y' xr rssee' } `tc ,c- ]�• �'+- -I P. �+; i i q' 3 7 - � /1. '� ! 1 I C ill;I -'P ktr 5: 7e 4 ,*:;!� i 3} __ i.�l t- - iZ�t1 - 111 � aro , J . I 'i {,t , ' ti,`1• k a I •rl I ,, ?,..,',= 47316. 4.., s.Jd* .Oat 1 t c 11 f .1,:'-'4'.'•p 7 .044—+ r-�f ' 4 Ii F _ `.I �Fmn_,� 1} :.yI I > � •�s: + A "e� ,I 1 f,..,:.;'..; - 1 -,t 1-4f:-...4...-teft• t ,�� I� II ':r`� I+ :]r. .•'• }i ��rt�.,� d, .S ,N4,4,'4.-4. .,+Sjk I _' yam-!'• / J . -_....- J TTt�R ,. �..1! 1 P �7 .. _ ,�', y 1 3 ,!). t-� U• - _ ._ - + u, 741 +1 .. ,,"�a �i �1 i` I,�' I�,I i ,•� .• t{ +. �• • 3. 4�� rr� 1 \ }a 3 -E 7( _ ._ 'a' 11}t :;,70,1.1,,, ,.-f \ 4- - e '4 �k 1"• et -r�,.t.�°rx N i''�1��+• t <<i1•'7� �� ? p� i �.x+'E v�,ti7.: '▪r ,'+' •1 't• u.a.1t�' ` •''7 I},{.a it ,� i• a-< u• rs.c;^ r 1 .I.1-• 4.z. .ices r. ±, 0�` • r- r4".a,ri.�' ` n�t .L"r . - -...... - 1�� ;:�i i, � 'F�-t !,€:: a • w1 ;47.'::'-'t':...14-'4.4, r % , Er= �• 'iY -T� ,, ?( \ xr(f`t -_,,ate "4: • . L.f1"S';;;6.,; _ r ...vt� rip` - . -//• t \�:, . -4- C,, �i sE\-'•C 1 ,�. �' rte`: �:•'• \ � t 1 �i - `,I•t-1'*� 7 /��111(�.- 1st t �g,,� 17.• li'1`�.� 'Jt 14 ' 'l �_-T c s y�•Y i'1\' J •1111\„1` �, ' "dam i -P,I.' `4. yi. II 0{ i` _r _ •is Z i i_{ 4:161,15----'' .,'1 / 1�'r.� > ±jg c° i4T ` .'7y1. �`heat= y7s • 14::-.7..i—=:4 'i, 91 3�# -;•N‘, {'�D +::+r j �r.�a. 1 l+'s.t'� x 1.,,,,...--„,.:,-� ' . II ;•� r ° r �w is i F� ... `,,,, �yy 14 �3- ...,:•;'''.....2.1t: , jj'i t = M'R -b.-SL° ' ,-•:,3^ �'. ,,"�Ci r tf•A X1.7 -,;..;; {. P'y`5 • - ice. ,� ,k'^c td '”�'�`x""�3_. p •s�\C �`1• li -• f I a ".1; . ''i �'c ,-.? 1• y c d ;r �r� t..�iR. 3q:- fit k1 „r- E t �y 1.r. p K i y ` r x '; ' , , ; ATTACHMENT# TO • y, 1 1' '' F v t_.< • !,-..".4) -,-,,',,,.....-< r . i • ,t ' e• , rF ;f , rte`!' I ';I r` '3nT `phi. - '4 ,'' S y'..,. xt1 4 5 .. r �pjr�• '•'.._ ,Y� r......r._____. t rl''t;• t r 14 r4, tr I1/ r f��IRrt .� � J+ • i� 11 11 I rIV °i- j� i. •v sue: 4�o:iY I { 1 fa ! y. + ; S I'))I I I I•11r ti I } S' st' , - _ I'• ''s 4 �rf�.s Cc: Is 11_„.4 I,(, a I "F: i ° f!10-,- � L _ I 9 hC LJ�II� U11 ll � �"• :1'..-..,-•: t E+ V.;;.. ..-.:".' I , ' , '• I 0,�1 € g t t $' r r •< .�' ; . c' s `` rrl 2 i�.:' r .' tl Y�(a F• fl 1 , ,I _'. -"( v.d {2,l V�t t , Ix. s•'` m •� eT �, L CF , M1t1' �� 1 • I>I i"derC'.,.: � !_...„..„2-;_....,„... l I. 4 M :i F r F- a U t.,, 1 >,-140?.. _1 y l II, '-. `.. :r 1!...%--`t,l. # 1 °k;i, - `�i tli• •.,,,..' I' •• `•rip4� ys 'UN' �I.x� + '' i �1� :II I• 1 I I.1 1. r�� rYl it f,•.14 I t 0 'pit.el ' {IFilf�t • t. dr.f.i....7,,,...-.,. .) If �s�`4�t. I ''` r --':1:e ' I I� j p?".1 :`i� 1 to(( 111�t"txAS § f l , J�••.,,-,,,,,,;--,••..:{- , , ��' II 11 1 'A)}' A,-..,.::_7'i„,... _S` +"t{. I, 'F: .` . ,-11 :T111 J', • _ \ '•�1`: I II 1: • tl � +1(fflYU'i,- l' rt > '4....71' \ 5 ' '� r(1 . Ldp zi S_14 -`ttr f i(' .--r.,''.{i- 1 t,A1)if , I I 3 t .�1��1•�.. ?F s''':' 1 r.� �'-• --_�'� n I e' d I.; 2 :rA rtp ', s a ''A -•v .,, : J 1}Y. I. 41 f ` !4y "- x111 a li •/tr��fi i' rr r r :•• 'r r,f''. 4 •In fp_11111,j Ail „(f 1 7a 1t' g I C 1,,5�^' ,f Y i r '4` ` .' a- - . - . S i:_ '.:� L'� �� -..----4'' 1 ,,,ti ,yam,c 14114.1 , - Y_ kF are Y 1 r •r3 • �.. e f i,' �f1 LIT-imk- I1n Y,. -g ic1Y`V`- pII � � 1 "�. .•r . rat �� I; ! '41 ai )1 11� 1 i # �-:''''''`231'..,..7.1. Fd 'z , _ 1� 1 •loll s f ,y II, �it?'��I I,.! , _ > 2„,..,„.. 1' t II r,• 4 •• 1'r� •. I,' ;., i+.ff' , t >j i�X11 1��. `t I�,a•_.,' -', N ,1 ) i' -,13:•`• 1.n24 p. P- �s ''llam-' _�-�''"- g{ ,�`<1 I;t;"11 t3 E it 1, ,aItis , `-6°;1!r ', 4� �el"• ,t - ' ` ��I(S-• '��..-.�-r- .JY-. :as--2,•-t`-':° :ti 1f+ 1�Y :"If-''''' 4,1,1i-,(4- 1-;rvt' } {. ,�F�'r,+ 1 r [fit: ,'�e, 1z -'.i .1 �I.rr s'F r 9 1 4`t + " try 1, i 4:,,,t , I r' 1 t, m S'. • llr` '6 l - t� r '''0.'•1 �;:{ `pJ.. ,£`pt4'l'-- _ti I.1 F ;r ,t ..-yyyA L:lu F ;r it -r 1�' '`, 1a_' gl 11_ a d .r# [ fYT i(!a 1+ i rl q f1.!t I I }� I! -x I,' • f, �i .t•It l f, t -'i -1 1 I• 'll l� 1,,r11.4.-,..,........f.- �O f, [ 1: .',44 I II!!I{ t 4 ^` k 1 - ' �I'i • • 1_ j ", �F"• (4,llt/ Gk �d f �; I f•✓E I' �li��I -t.,-.. i '1"-4J�i . , l - ,:,I �.�"•'.�: '14, I.Ia(F. } -I'-.;z-•,'..:-..,-,,,t it I 11� ;4,,,,40 4 1 6 :..1 _•I r ,..,e),...-..t..,?, .• - -: ., 1. 1' t ri' , - 1••,1 I� 1 1 �, ,{ r 4 ' 0:4111:::z-.,::;-•'. ,I , -_ {', ci� fit, ) xt s , ;. ,ol.t-ers'{g.,i.!. " �rn ,.,-,.....:-.7' " '_'•sit ,. 1(II' :.l �!! II �Ii .i`i3 ', ' t -e.,e,. .}? _ :• '`� .•ti .;•• • ip• i I 11`r ,f y^I ' 'j Mt 'I. El I . j u�� t - + i�T' `I?:; ( 'r r S` < - .G - 1•: I I':F+�' "i i ., 1.i' e?r'Y,' .'-..L;'6'-- , ,1 '. "r°t.-'`' 1` ;F4t °x'.'- -i_r1 6 -;; •in r [ .. ',1.1'e' t.x, l 1 A it - 'ar I'. 1 f....,� :--. • _ !I (1 ), 'f _� ,1 I .r { 4. ”,.401)! 1., IIr 91 ,' � � ...- : I/ i/ ! .. f ".-T• :� _ ' I r' a .3 r. 'Wt 1 r• li:+y�t' >, iti�r I Er '• %.,', .••'.:.---,.=•: !;•-..;‘-i\-.‘It', ��"""'NNN°°°--- ; <1 :. II AI I 1+ r1 rf'.1, I 1 �tt i1. rr- I1 ., .,' :• ,rte I;f. { fi •i[ 1 N,'...,'41_ t ,1 -t s irt��: .4Tu - 4 ) !`. �� A� 1..•I •, j(q ' t 1)., •.`a , .egsr 1 1�i� I•r' I 1 I 1 ' 'li $•i','t• t 1r,, i 11µ,154'4' 1�%1` / 1 +S�•+j.r ) 5 • fl•rl a l( ,II•1 f s li..4 ! V r ”:-1„14Y1i... y, I _ . . 1t I'l ..1,(;),,' 1. '+ , 1 tt 4ni z ! L. ,<Z-. ,rte- t•;"'•:-,....•' _ 1 >j Y I. { .i',16.>In4• I t 0�� ,e,Ai 1'r =S- ,�I' r IF+�1•,:.• •^.,�:- ; `' i giJ‘.1.t(i „I a, s :!" �:1• I i' .fi,l,.4F'0111:,5 -r, n 3 1t ' _ 1 I ! , I� I 144t Itz T i`a,' Y c'Si '.I • '+ X< - 1 1�: �1'I I ti ' (}11��IS < },€I'-::;:!2:.fil `• �' - �' 4 rt 0-1-: :10 lA,i . •!.. .�k� iii 'I,r I e e1 , ' -. r rJ2 ' .+ • _ S y I ({' t(�: -` h s Ii � � I. !(',Yf'(f1 w1j I, r 4 i , • r i/' l4°. t 4 1 441, C rt.:11 • 111 I d ..1 /4 ryli� .,til i � -,:.t,/,�+ 141>�.1 r' iu0 I �'. ' •r(�I/' 1 d1'a t'i 1 G i r '{j ;11 �:14-11,,1- j Af- I •�`•• ;Till 4; -11 } i .i,r ti11 Ij)I �� .f`{ I 1 �i r tl 51 * E'•' /•. � f till S, r rl 1: 4� air, I 9 1 Z$11$I .i 1''' I.�1 I1I j�#1 ,-,..-'41 1:;',..- -%' 1 `• d '( ,Z .^ `f '��y sD • - 1'IM I I'. l i i ,,ir �8 Y 14-11 t l' + i1, ' :, 1 ;.0,:.9),;,,161., t.,•� �Y�+�s?��q*-•,0 1 fr',4 Q[j �;4 , ,i - `k}3-X'4 :1 it••.1111ti.. S. 4•_"f ( -.`•`K', S:fN' y am` 1'S .t - &', :11;k[:;:,. 2.111' I _ L"ir+ ' ',}, t�.49;' � <.r x�r+'�N6 j _ 1 #r• p � � � - Y: .. � _ Fr__',lr' r°��<`�,`�j9V•r�v/� ct .��r rs�.i(�I�r.(') y �I () i t!` `°r � _,�1 gt <rt1fi y ' � Ix' k ,I t ll #( t I' f n .! i>: it 1, r r =`. :I 14;' , r7 %/ ‘It • • -01 t I- •` ,, F ,.•�i1 c i )' ` ;tl. f7Kt'• .,„1. i�,ti�t >{ •.Gl,yf11 'j lVn }.- .;..TJ 111 I 1� '��, t.s , — �` Fit '• i i �. /s rp_'� J17f• .`,,rl.;� • 1,4_ . T.'y `'�' -+Y ��. �"v'�'.'1^C 6- 3 1 . -- . . - ' . • -.; : • ATTACHMENT# 2. V . s . - PLN.02-JO 15 REPORT# _ ...,._...„.F.,.-44-s-mg.y..i",••74-.*.^-,,•-t,-,4,-, • ...7,,--,-,_-..,k:=.`t-.- -":.".! :.,,,-,,,=1;f'-„,.7_,-•,.'';.-..,.---_,,-.,-.---:."..7,- .1-',..-in,-.:21,1„!AT .*-z .. .- -A . '-' `,1,-,-,,':-:-* tli•-•-,,--",,,,'-'1!:::4-i:17;:-:;1!--r,';77.,;'-';'_-.,:--rit.-.;':44-1-f`---T--;'', - --?--&..\"-'i:i7;5-As'-'1.:•• ` 1'* x•--:`:(---r•v-v-A 4.,-.:---,..7.----, 14,: ',..t.&=3-=1.-,r,'=:-"'Z':'*,x, '-"-',..:"-.,.---. .- -4.- ..2,n•,..',._-.;,-,..i.;;;.,--2,,, -.:,41.7.-.,z=-..=,-...,-....,..,:i....v,!,-,,,,,.:44'.-i',, ,• .... _ - e ` .-A , •','.',.„:. ...._.-_, C'-.I.,_.,.;:„... - ..f::::',. -LI.-'r.::;;-,--r.1,.:.'1,-=;-;;'-i'.-'._''.'.'" - •Ile.7:i.• --1.:-4,.•'I_ 'Cll.:7, ..,-=2-1.-,-• . :,-..,'''',..-71",;f4.-.-,,,„'„Iy?,-..-i-1.-ti."-,7:.-:-.1,4i,""1...3.:: ' •..,s7,1!'.„.1,.',;:. '':i:"4...:V. .:-`'..'11„;'''''t 4,t,••;a-'.. ',',::,.":1i."...:t."..c 4:-. : . ' - .v...,..,4,, ..:,,,,,,,...,. ,.. a,:• ,.-,,,:a-!-,,,,1/41,44..,,,,v,i,,,,w,„,-.,,,244.---,,,,,,,, ,,,,,-.....,_., ,-,-- .--'-'-'-g*, -:„.'''''...."'''''' ' a- - •''. ,-...4....e--#-.41_,n,v.;,, , ,, --:..,-,_::1_,, 2,.. , . '-7.:,;'''4,4ZU.-11- 1.-"I'=-'., la".g,tt--•. . ,,,- , ':'-,-, „,,,,L,2`.f.:f.,:_'.:-- ... :.-..t 4'. 4'. ?!::::,;.??.6: yi '1-'''' '''.. '-' ..* ' - 4....--; ..1‘. ,-,,.. ,--; 1 „,.... --, - --- .L.,- 4.--,-,--. .,_-.,..,-. ,,,_.-- --, .,--,-,,,,---- 7:-.;vki.-4'.-:-....: v,pit•-:4;4.X.:1;----'' *'i';''Z1,5-Av v:.-.2'vi.-••: : 1„,„„,„.&..s..1.•-•atry- *;‘,=-_7-1 ---.:',.03' ''.. '• '-'..,'."'' .''. ,.04,44*4.4..,;.„....,..,14.,..*; _ __.,..., 1,,,,. .. , . ,,.,,„45-f„.;'!.,..,!. it,,-,;,,,.:. ..,,,.W::: ,,ft-`,7.21,17„.f;i.,,,7,-V::,;;';,--.*.-• ', '' * -; -.- . i ''5-'7,C$ I.--:fl ' .".,-?..',--`7,,•Tt',4;'-iSeit,7:.4,g,-..Ift,VN'JI'LL.T,...';`,.!*: . .S....,'. ' .. . . - —1-- ...p. .. •LL- .-.:1'-- -i'''-f-',i•-..,--s-i '. ,-.- -.!--iNot-'..7.X1,-,.'-'_--`.„.--. .‘-f.,ititti.V.Z.Nvi-:,,,.;71,....: _ ''''';i4-:r''.4*';'''''4'''''''''; ' '•-• --;.,.''''ai.`"thr--',A1Ati:L:',-4*-,i. '".`i.,',.T".;-!, -":7'`,'4,..e-,,-:':=.-- 7.:'-...-:- :--;;_-'..-7.--,';.,-!-,-*--.t.-41.-:,-44,it,74-1, if;t-:..'e-,,,L.,----4,74----441••4-..N' -----••=-,,'-c13-,.--..••--•;?-1:•---'--'."-- ----- _.'-',---.;.:',-.1--li:TN-564•'--g,ti-it-",1-q-''f.- "•-,,f---`1,{3;4A--', . 'irr:.:tr.A11131- '-,':';''':---c.'''',;;T:.: -• .' ''''' -, ''''' '':-. '-':;-•:•:•7:!..,":3-5:4:-A- "W:- --''.,,:i..7•si;;:'!:--;,: - .. ., .-,,,-,-....,---,„ ;g„.;-.....-44..,.,,,,v1 ,,,-,x.1,'.',---,,- ..'q.,,... ■ 4'• • .4'.''r k • ‘ .._ '' -...-`'''- ....- .,.' ' . ''.:''''''..-':"-,-'''-',...2,•''„.' :.".„"!-'1.,,,,..a:1,..,_*,.. ,..,-''-'-' „'",:ti,-=....,,,i•”' " • , -.:-. `--7..,,'',...:',';■'1---,":"-..-';1..!...4;.--,-;v4,-,...-., -,4--'- —— . ;... .-- . • . .. .. ,-, ....I.-*.-- 1:-.-*v-.'.-r--..'.-f'k-7.-:-Aeivils.7.--;,-.:1-- ir Asko— . • v , ,.•,r--,,,,• ,"v''...!.!,i34,4.,,0'..,'.- ..__ k , -- . ,---• -,7,-..,--,...:_-`...-".‘%...,'-%4-:---.:'4. - .. .,, ._:,,,,i„:',•.,,,-..i„,_',.,..,..,,,,,,,.. :, .-- .._•,..,',.,,.„.„3. ,,,,,i,„:„,,,.-..„,,,,,.--_,,:-.4,,,i-i,„..:--fr.i4..'-_-',':7..-',„,..,1,-.,--oi„,-„,,,..=.7,_:,,-'.::,.,,,z,,,,.-,: _.-.,-- .• : _ . ;.•,,,.,.-„...... :.,... ,. . ., , . .. ...,,.-........:::,_:,,...-,--pe7,..,A,,,.:, , .. _ ,.,-;.---„,..,..:,, :„p„..„ —,•... ,.- ,,•, _:::::.....„:„.....„... t„... ,••••.. •, • , ., .:„..„,...„.„,..„.,,v,,,..,„ t ...... .. .., ., -''-1':::.4 ::-', i-.''■''' ''. . , ...',v.„.:.„',it,t-",,,Z7,-•ZiF - --'''L'- --- '-.--'-',.''-=--v::.-,''''• ..' ' -, -4 ,- .; -.....,:s.,,L,z4k4,g..,,,, ..-i-v: .„-,,,v,„.=--,‘, .,- - . .---A.''1' .'''' ' ' --.---.,'"v., ',:..,,,•!=_,74-E-1,-.1i1,:frig-127. ...,4_,.--„,-. -,,,,;6,...i., . t.:,-.- : .•- — ,7_„„;:-..; "..-7.. ,,,:...,;;;.-...1„--i,-7;,,Vgli.,''..- ''-7-',2.•4.,:k _ „..,. . . __„7,,...4-,4-:„....x,--7-y,..--;:.%.7".f„!,,,-.4-.,'-'.. .;‘,„7-.• "1-,t i.4" --.,..A.si".,: _ , . • ''"-...,- , -.,.... 7`... -..e, ••■ . . . v!.,' '•.,:;,..-'7,-,tkl:tt.4',-... : ' " .--,i;'"•:,..1" ,...''.' --7.,-4,,,,,:,---,,,-4, ---„...4:.,. .- . . . 7v:,;' -]--,•"'-`- -ff-7. ,-' -.• -. ----tr'ItZ-411;::-.,---;t'):'"''----.: • •--- .--- -.- tt.ti!e`:±-14:F,P*7-1,; -$Y-';`7::','-•-'•.-'7'-• - . •• " -,- - „... -, - -,- .• , . - -.:4•'."-='-' - ---,-. , • -•-:';4_-, • ,..'- ',,t.;.■ . .'.- .'-i.---, -„ . ._. „,_ , . :,_ . -4 ' -- ,:e.4-41.,. • . • • I ! ir� j y� s lug 3#�i Y = �'„i1-'I,1, .' ,4:-.44,`,:,'a° "1{ C - 9 ''•1 , , • 1 :[ I 1 t f dtdi kial�i F t , II t I • 1 fi c lIflil , � �, G r• � (il�1� t il�1 3 i 1I1f d k 7 ; f 1 r Y • , 1 :; t � ri,-- � 7�t'd F -z,J Cc 11 ,, 1 � t ill 0, i,„ -i j i,d1 :! t i it, a . � ' �~ sd�,r.r'vi Ir�� + t I � r ��: r 1 1�,�� '`-1•€i ! f 11 1 .1 1 1 - Ey -.4 ¢r��t et it-if 3 a,' ° l 1'44.:,611.tt y !t t .: e,', ,! t �#I...I . E i is f,l'�4'- �� ell 1 a •— ��, .. , .:.,.., ,,_,,,,,t..,,_,. . „. fi ii: + i,.!1 i4,_i I :I',11. �`�'�� d '' . 1 MI 'j IP�!'' i t 4, 1}' , , Il�d�f I� •.1� x�� i t E•r � d Kr 41r `y� li c h I n f $I. .;I I � �'! p t 'Iill+altikl �, dr ' .4.1.. . I (II. 1 ' I ' t f ' : .• �1 ��ii3 �_. ,! X711 } I �ti4l jt�,d;� 4' t � 1 �I '+.. _ - i • �s _ Iii, I_e 1 ! t I. , y, i, }tr ' , .k 4 •Y 11 i �F" r 1 C�r fdp jl R-r -* ' 4 .•i , �to ,Ii "� { 04, � di 111,,1 t ' 1 0 1I 3' 4 '” 7 1 11'lid l-x e i� r 'e 1 , ` .Ii I :•' 1, /, l b r s •�� r' '�- fr�d `il r h ;i d..' i II +� ¢ y {� .`, s ,�t .`� S�"d 1 is 111 $ !! �5!� g 4,I 1 .y - '1p. S t I 1 i 'j( j4;• 1J4.iyr i.'° f �' 6 IF 1 '' ' 1 f.' '"i,.y h ,,kk 1 X � � �eL Y,+� ' -��; fI ; p� f(f7. .f o�P' +y-^ ..i IT,(41..1,-;.i.,;;-:-;,-::,,,,,4.1,,, 's'` '' - 1 ' �i 1, tt #� yam-. ��1F �,°�1' d i9; ' 1 i , , 7, 4F -1 4 -} • . tu6` ..e4,„ ,i � ';I J ! I� d� '., �ti .P1, .& :‘,...171.i,11:17,. I o-i ; S ::I y t if ui tl .T1. 4 i (f y L. .Y Y ! dd y1 - t '� •• i 1 S r '11 f d .F , t , ! i f,-46,,•4.',,,f_. 4r • :' - ';` ar '^ � . , [Ali 4, } : i. y11 t, ;) '.1 fi . fE 1 > 7 > l . '. ?il ' fie+ k i� ' il. { d 1 "f j' � "� s f x a s 1 dI I 4 . 4,11i11,i ,+ 1 a .. it -.- =1" t 1-is \-", 1■ b d SSS } TTY' i•e'� ` \')'. • ,K, g y1.'o1 f ry t'-:1,...A.3.1.,- • der . 7 E ,w,' ,i. ii .,, i t tc �x II- tai .3 g 4 y1r F - i ' f,' ;• f• - F g. t, - � .` • 4-— — — ✓_ it ,_ fi ATTACHMENT r t r J�LN U�—/te n REPORT#sn x- - •I _ - -4„ .• - � - 3- � �3 � g .rE� -Ag �a �� , �� $"C' # � � ' �{ � _ T 2 d� t t. '�; nn3 );--.1,... � � C � ' .2-',-;-r:' i' ' 'fg- i +�; iS 1 i 7 --R� y€ �t �" ' d s ,3 .; °� - - 7. S' _ t+.. l { 'K�ri '.!�. 1c Yys zj y �� :t w-,.Y . t �1"...-. 7":: }ms_ : 1 .t a'rk i 1 �, .�t �'�-]- t R# 7 .a 7 C " y- ?' t ! . l ' fr T 4 , "^ 1� ,msi s � v"vt".- t,T+ P f ! � . „-" f- e r r - . i1 2 ta, x o . . S J s ' ;` � $ r , e i - s 3 ,t. . g- k - s• -v r - .: =-- '- '• - ''4-i'.;i- -;:!".37!, -.:t::-.4.4-7-‘-'''ir-41-e, -"54:tit,',:,2V.:;7";1-,:, -i:.:"4";'t,.S..:;„;-� 'i t !4' -Z, 2 - -� rte- r ry t � �3; 7.-.:'� '.�-} �" 1�F'F't 2i' 4 t;p { s _� �� aF �, .�r 'ys tz� 4. r �"^s -. °1 w' e� ,s< ,4 ;Y- e err"` `' ff = ,€s - tax q - - i t "1_7' , -- ' ' ' - V aRU: -- -- = fi: - f Z 4 £a 3 z.. .. _ 4t EF te- _ - - - - . ` 1 ` a •- -`y, mss. ir I - : - .•- --)• -:---z...-,--_e.._-..___,_______ ATTACHMENT# 4.-- TO REPORT# . ..._.s.2..:1.. .._. ,.., _ ..,... — --- __--- ,.... -_-=--.---_-_-_ , .--- . . • . . ... ___ :',-.;....i. _ ...c.z.; „ok.,,,- • - -- - r . ., ,i--..----°- 71-- . _. . ''---7•:-,,-., - '. : 3r'.'''-':..-4 .,- :-. 4•L‘..ern 4.44441,.- le ■ • r - ' '!A "1-- - -.4ilf""•.1(-='f' s-As;t4.* 2- 77 ,.. . A il .. • •"" ' , ■ . 1 .'r n '.. ;Cvet-*"=- •'''. f r 4 ji.- 1. . ' 6 trl. ' - I.' ' 44°' 'f:` , ,''.':,'"'''''Li a , -'.- ■'.-.g ''L ''.1 1. ; ''', ---,=;,.rjr0 -• 4(-, ,...-:-,..-1,'-'"',','-'•.44.--1, ,.„,...,_. -I— 'r I '4'.,r4S '''',1. J 4 s *-* '4 e• 4, e I • , ,-4, ,-4-, -- - .. ,I.A 4 - ,,, -'`.,, ;1`' 1.1. : ' ij4- '‘,..•-:'6't '-' ' '..,' 144, - ..., • . - ,. .= -4.. . - ' .a.,•i e ,;,‘• - I iii z' , .. , .1 1 •'..'• i. ...... 4, ., 1,• ,..., .4' .1..-.i tA+ F.' • ..... ,.. , ,.: et- ; ; ' d 7 • ■'•:; ■ • , 4 ■ '44 4104e- r A-..-1.3:.1.. • iii_.' t' %N.,,;..• 1. ... . .r- ,,,-,.., _ :_ [_-_-:,-1_ r --:•,...6.,,,, r,'rl 'ri•• ' I „ ...-,.... ------,-T.4-4,-,„,,--- ,_.. _ -''k,)-. ' . ' 1 r ' - — -.44t, . t k: i - t r . 1 " • t,,-.- ,•=4 1114-...,-( ''''t gl -- , i4.1-•444 I ,,,L.- . ,,,,r - " . ., it1.4,v,, 1 `.` ifl •tli°°N.' ° ...- ., i b ' j fik;-4t4),,•••• .111 1 • .'-.CL:-" ‘ i. "'IA I rp".1.— M •,. /. t .... r: ., v ,_• '* " • 4 ' 14 '' '''-N P r. ■ :' r , '' , C 4' ' •4 I' • •i;- I f ' i la6. 1:1 --• it il) „:11 .41.:t :• ' Ill d• „, i ' ";” 1 i $..A,44., :-.. • . ,.. ,.•.02.4. A. .,. itt .. , ,. 1.25,1 V. -.: . .1 • -,.. "Eft .., •1 t._'--r,-.. rn 4r _ • ., - , ' '4 r:.•-• -.. - .,4, f.,- .•i If,1 .'WEL'. = '.kt 2--,.-•". .,,,4*.4 ' 4'.;1*" \.'1.4 - , . 7414 . ''• , !:;.1,..7A ts_ ,, '4.- . '-' [ . ''it:-4-' - .4 ..:1.,L: 4.-.,-1:,4.-,...:' .44, ,,, -Ji - ' 1 ' n'-rilt..1 : ';' ....- . , '.. )0 ,I.r...t3 'Ai-if, ,..g.li ,, 11„,,i." ., ,i?r., `..--- ..., - 1 • - - 4,r4vismi; ,....4k -,1. ,,ft-yi ",''''=14 0 Ili ■-'/':' - * ..t ‘r:i..`•114 r r*: oci, .,.4 i. . ,...,..._ 0,,, .,... ,-r„.4., ill,r,,,,..-: 4 t • {,ir., : 1 , ,•,.-. 41,,, , , ,,,...! . ,J.L:.L ,.. g:, . 11 ,,,),I i ii;',,) .„, ;eV ,ar'' ...4,1X.:, •rr ---I, I- ' .4" ,I 11,174•Fts; ' 0/ 1.;:. 0..,;;:',.1..1La.rrr?. 1, * 1-7.-----7=GiCil I 1-1,- 'Ei'., ' , - ; ' 7 T,0,.4.%.A; I,,, 2.-.; ;',". -; 'h.--4-17 ' '' ''., f . ■C L.i,E' ._I 1i'f ;--,_g rft -.`i;t)- ''.*4.i'• ' .7 --,;:i ' ''r.t:'' '.!` ly ``v ' 310 .,.';. ,,r,14,.. 0 $ i: 1., , . , 1 ______;:i k.'",-,0„,,,iiiiit'I-73„,:, __.r.L' -4,,,, ., , i It y, . :,...• . , ', . i:•. .:,. ■'14i 1:-,4,:i,:,i-- ; Iiit' ,tr'': , •',- : ,.. , ,, ,..,1,,I; ..i ,.. .,4e f`, 4_44.,4, :('''tr'.'. • , • -, , ,,. i. ,f .t. , : ' c1,. •.. , .• ;A? -0,,.4c ,tt ' 4 .. .--4,1 ' t4t-Y) ye I. .. . ...A1 ' 'II ...r ,.'.hillY1` . i ;', ;'('''•4%, , tik.: . .1 1 _1,-.,.,..!I • f % II t . - ..1..,kk , 11' t:'. ) '4..: zpA . ...„,,,.. ..... . , ...,... .,,,,..4 1-,t,..,, IL' 4-1,... r , rp,llie: '''''.-_:'':" ' , ' l'$!,•'-'''T.:' '''" *••••••!•,.-:„._ =,,'I('r f ' ■ „l• „ . , tivo . .,li.4.-.1...., ,, 4. i-...tr . 4 ,)I •1,,, I Or it 4, -, •.._ A:.,.. ..--1,1" 4••. ,,, -It" F , 9 i -,-.. 1 .-" -... . t- il 41, . '';'i i r' .;• , I .---0„ pf --440— ..ze _ _ . - ,,,,,u,, ; .* - - -_,I 4,.— ,..,,,t.--5.,. „.. ,,,e.,'A .*AlVi, .** 4 ' ..- . 'tl.h.i'.411 ---.-.w--_-.-- ----4-4.--_ . - , ' I.' Z ;,).11.‘ Lir ' ''. --- • • _r- „. _ e,, 1: '” ,il •..,---- :* ---1't ; - _. =,- _L ' -.7.,- II, .--,' *-•' It' ,--,--_--7" :.' rr ---._Z,. • .-''----'7 -7-,..--f,-- - '-i--- I1 'c.--i - - --',4------ -..-..}.-.' ' P '- t ;I r:,_ _,;.. _. ...r._...,, %:‘_"" -7---__ --7,,-- ,,-- —7,, -E- , 14 ,:c,,, 4 .-- %..-• • -..-... , ki - ... • Pi --ki, - i4.4 4- .:.tre %•,_._,_,..,---,.--- - ,_ 4.,__. — , 1=TTACtfMENT TO rEE'ORT I, ?c-N- .b2-I5 SON T•per tre* 19:0 '''1111010‘r,r4 DED • 1.S5 CLAREMONT COMMUNITY WORKING GROUP REPORT GROUP MEMBERS: Jim Doyle, John Hickman, Cheryl Ann Colvin, Steve Watts, Julia Watts, Brian Welsh, Craig Wilson, Dean Evans, Nina Ogaard, Scott Ginther, Rod Voss, Aleta Voss, Jess Couperthwaite, Toni Doyle, John Muller. • • • Issued: May 2014 CLAREMONT COMMUNITY WORKING GROUP REPORT CONTENTS: • 1. Summary of report 2. Brief History of Property Zoning and Development Proposals 3. Community Working Group Creation, Process and Results 4. Table of Identified Issues,Responses and Proposed Actions 5. Conclusions 57 A r cHM R PD ° . '%�.NI CYZ 1. SUMMARY OF REPORT: This report briefly details the history of the subject lands,their zoning and previous development • proposals. It also documents the process whereby a Community Working Group(CWG)of volunteer residents was established and the results of the discussions that took place. During these discussions the group identified all of the known issues and concerns associated with the proposed Geranium development.They also identified all the opportunities from a community perspective. Finally the report concludes that the CWG made an informed decision that the proposed development will provide benefits to the community. 2. BRIEF HISTORY OF PROPERTY ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS: The Claremont Development Plan was approved in 1988,and later updated up to Edition 5 prior to being incorporated into the City of Pickering Official Plan. In March 1990,Toko Investments Ltd. submitted Zoning By-law amendment(A 9/90)and Draft Plan of Subdivision (18T-90016)applications to the Region of Durham and City of Pickering to develop a 27 lot detached residential subdivision on approximately 10 hectares of land on the subject lands.The original application proposed a minimum lot area of 0.3 hectares and minimum lot frontage of 34 metres;two roads were proposed that would extend Franklin Street and provide access to future development in the north.An existing barn and home were located on two lots on the west side of the property;preservation and severance of this area was being considered at the time. It has been confirmed by planning staff that the files remain open and active at the City of Pickering.A public meeting was held and comments were received on the submission. • In 1990,Toko also filed an application to zone the remainder of the property for residential use.The remainder of the property was designated Residential—Phase II in the Claremont Development Plan (the planning document that preceded the Town's current Official Plan.)The zoning amendment application for the Phase II lands was withdrawn in 1994 as Toko was not prepared to complete the . studies required at the time.The application was deemed premature until the studies had been completed. In 2001 the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act and Plan were enacted,delineating the Settlement Area Boundary to exclude the Phase II lands on the subject property. In August 2012 Geranium Corporation submitted a revised application for Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning Bylaw Amendment to proceed with a modified plan.Through a voluntary public information session in November 2012 and later at a statutory public meeting held at the City in December 2012 concerns related,to flooding and other matters in the existing community were raised.Geranium Corporation and its consultant team have been exploring opportunities to address these matters through discussions with the community,as well as City and Regional staff. Meetings with the study team, Durham Region and City staff have been held throughout 2013 and 2014 to explore potential solutions. In September 2013 a Community Working Group was established,see 3 below. Currently slightly less than the 10 hectares(on which the 1990 applications, revised in 2012,continue)is within the Settlement Area designation in the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and City of Pickering Official Plan.To realize the stormwater management solution and resolve outstanding 58 -TAr ir._VriT{` L property boundary issues of adjacent residents,together with other community design features proposed by the study team,an Amendment to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan,Durham Region and City of Pickering Official Plans is required to restore the former Hamlet boundary to include the Phase II lands of the subject property in the Settlement Area Boundary for an appropriate form of development. 3. COMMUNITY WORKING GROUP CREATION, PROCESS AND RESULTS: At the December 3,2012 meeting of the Pickering Planning and Development Committee seventeen residents,identified their issues and concerns relative to the proposal;the main issue being the history of drainage problems and flooding in the hamlet. During that meeting Council asked Brian Welsh if he would work with Geranium and city staff to identify all of the issues that would be associated with any development of the Ward farm.A subsequent meeting was held between David Ryan, Mayor of Pickering, David Pickles,Ward 3 Local Councillor and Jim Doyle and Brian Welsh from the Claremont and District Community Association(CDCA).At that meeting the Pickering officials asked the CDCA to work with Geranium on developing a process whereby all of the issues could be identified and explained including potential remedial actions.In the summer of 2013 meetings were held with staff from Geranium to develop a process to fully understand the important issues facing the community and how any development could impact or help solve these issues.The executive of the CDCA agreed to establish a Community Working Group(CWG)to help identify all of the issues. In early September 2013 a notice was sent by mail to all the homes and businesses within the Claremont Hamlet boundary asking residents to become a volunteer member of a Community Working Group.Through a series of workshops and working in concert with Geranium,the developer,they would identify all of the known issues and concerns relative to the proposed development. It was understood that this was a volunteer process with no legal status and was not part of any formal planning process. It was also understood that the CWG was not speaking on behalf of the whole community and that the whole community will have many other opportunities to voice their opinions should any proposal go forward for approval. In response to this request 20 people volunteered to join the group.The group represented a good geographic and demographic distribution.The first group meeting was held on December 13, 2013.At that meeting each member identified all of their known issues and these were documented in the notes from the meeting.Of the 20 people who originally volunteered 3 did not attend any of the meetings and 2 subsequently resigned from the group,so they have been removed from the group list.At the second meeting of the group on February 3,2014 Geranium'and their expert consultants provided responses to most of the issues and presented three options for the layout of the development and the group identified one of the options as being the best of those presented.At the third meeting of the group on March 3,2014,the group agreed to hold a public meeting so that all the Hamlet residents would see the development proposal and have an opportunity to identify any other issues and concerns that may have been missed by the Working Group.Approximately 170 residents attended this open meeting on March 19,2014 and 23 residents came forward and identified their concerns,also some other residents chose to submit written questions.Only two additional issues were brought forward at this open meeting by 59 < <ACI;PA I .# - 2- u_r e: 7E P=ORT{f FLN 04-1 5 the residents that spoke and the submitted questions;the issue of the impact on property taxes and car headlights negatively impacting adjacent residents. The CWG planned to meet again on April 23, 2014 and before that date the Community Working Group was informed that a group of residents had met and discussed their concerns about the development proposal and the process used by the Community Working Group. In response to this information an invitation was presented to this group to send two people to the next planned meeting of the CWG so that they could express and identify their issues/concerns.They chose to not send anyone. At the April 23,2014 meeting the CWG reviewed all of their work to date and decided that all of the issues had been identified and that a report on the process and the results should be prepared and presented to their Local Ward 3 Councillor David Pickles for further action,as originally requested.This report would complete the work of the CWG. 4. TABLE OF IDENTIFIED ISSUES, RESPONSES AND PROPOSED ACTIONS Below is a table of all of the issues identified by the CWG and other residents along with the responses and proposed actions from Geranium and their expert consultants.The detailed planning and engineering reports are included in the binder in the Claremont Public Library. ISSUES AND CONCERNS RESPONSE AND ACTIONS Planning Why are you proposing to remove. The land will stay within the ORM.Only the designation the land from the Oak Ridges under the ORM will change from ORM Countryside to Moraine?(ORM) ORM Rural Residential Why do you want to change the At public meeting for original draft plan application, village boundary? community requested we look at how to address existing issues in Town related to stormwater management (SWM). Expanding the hamlet boundary would include development lands and additional lots to finance cost of larger SWM facilities to divert 98%of existing flows away from existing community Number of Homes Development area grew from 27 to 70 to address Community request to deal with comprehensive SWM solution; • Additional population will support community amenities and clubs Will this open the door to new Pickering is tasked with responsibility of managing development beyond the . boundary,and growth of Claremont • . contemplated boundary expansion? Storrnwater Management Who will maintain the SWM City of Pickering will be responsible once ponds assumed facilities? Will these promote mosquitoes? Certain species of Mosquitos lay their eggs in standing water. Stormwater management ponds typically have enough movement on the water surface due to wind action that mosquitos prefer stagnant water sources in enclosed 60 ; TTACNi'•a=iti if 2 t:,O .yy containers or small trapped pools of water. How will the development improve 98%of existing stormwater volumes and drainage area ' the current flooding issues in which currently flow down Franklin Street,through Town? Claremont system(which is grossly undersized)to ultimate discharge point would be diverted to an oversized' system away from existing Claremont,thus decreasing flooding downstream Will lot level stormwater Yes,LID technologies will be implemented throughout the management techniques be used? development,and lot level controls will be employed Low Impact Development(LID) where/as appropriate technologies? Water Supply What impact will 70 new wells have In accordance with Ministry of Environment(MOE) on my water supply and quality? guidance,new developments must not result in negative water quantity interference with existing well supplies or cause unacceptable water quality degradation What will happen to my shallow New wells in the development are proposed to draw water dug well? from a deep,confined(the"target")aquifer,about 65 m below typical shallow dug wells. Use of the target aquifer is not expected to result in negative water quantity interference with shallow dug wells. What if there is a future impact to A groundwater monitoring program will be implemented my well? •by way of a sentry well network,which will monitor for potential impacts from the development. Proposed Septic Beds ' Will the addition of 70 new septic In accordance with MOE guidance,new developments systems increase groundwater must not result in unacceptable water quality degradation. contamination or impact my well? The proposed sewage disposal systems will be equipped with tertiary treatment,which means the effluent from the new beds will have less impact than the existing beds in the community. The lot sizes are also large and the overall impact of disposal systems will meet MOE guidelines that are protective of private water supplies. Traffic Increase in traffic flows along Old Traffic study confirms adequate capacity to accommodate Brock Road development related traffic including background growth; . character of road will be maintained Potential for access to Brock Road Feasibility subject to review of horizontal sight lines and approval by Durham Region Traffic calming measures along Assessing turning circle and all way stops as well as other Old Brock Road measures including textured features,lane re-directions within existing Right of Way(ROW); Speed bumps unlikely but to be discussed with City vis a vis emergency vehicles • 61 l P.F1 Ceti-a:Orr yip PE KM Vehicles headlights at entrances Buffering will be addressed as part of draft plan to ensure onto Old Brock Road headlights will not negatively impact adjacent residents Increased traffic on Lane Street Traffic study confirms minimal increase in traffic on Lane/Franklin due to addition of 8 additional homes; Character of road will be maintained Property Boundaries Septic Systems of Lane Street Septic systems which encroach onto the development lands will be preserved,and lot level boundaries adjusted to accommodate and ensure lots are legal Tree line abutting property limits Tree lines(hedgerows)will be preserved adjacent existing residences,and adjacent Brock Road. The tree lines will be enhanced where practical Pedestrian Connection from draft Trail in southeast corner of development lands will be plan to lands at Brock/Central discussed with adjacent residents,to address concerns associated with vandalism,increased traffic vs.community amenity and connection with existing Claremont. This trail could be moved to the other'side of the pond(closer to Brock Road)and lead to the Claremont Community Gateway. Development Potential of adjacent In accordance with Planning Act,the development of the properties within new boundary subject lands cannot limit future development potential of other lands within hamlet boundary. Access to these other lands must be confirmed and accommodated, notwithstanding property owner's intent. Property Taxes How will this affect existing Existing property taxes are related to existing individual resident's property taxes? property values and the municipally determined mill rate and should not increase as a result of the proposed Geranium development.If the new Geranium homes have higher market values they will be taxed at a rate that reflects those values.MPAC would not use"builder sales" transactions to calculate the current value assessment for the existing neighborhood for the next re-assessment cycle. However,when you eventually have re-sale transactions from the new homes,there is the possibility that the"re-sales"when considered along with other • property sales could have some influence that might increase or decrease the current value assessment for properties in the existing neighborhood.If higher value homes are introduced into the community the overall assessed value of properties across the community(in aggregate)would increase.This could afford the municipality an opportunity to reduce its mill rates and correspondingly there could be a reduction of taxes paid by existing community residences. The five factors that can influence a home's value are: 62 krfACHT,,ILIFf _TO P-iaPoA: PL OZ-i5 • Location • Lot Size. • Home Age • Home Size • Construction Quality According to MPAC,these five factors are reflected in 85% of the home's value. Pedestrian Connectivity Where will sidewalks be provided? Sidewalks will be provided throughout the proposed development in recognition of the community nature of • Claremont,and walkability needs Sidewalks lead to destinations within the site(i.e.parks, open space,SWM ponds etc.) and provide multiple pathways that link to other community amenity destinations(i.e.the commercial core). Design Principles Homes should be compatible with Homes,lot layout and landscaping elements will draw the character of the community upon character of existing Claremont,and tradition of organic growth Architectural elements will be inspired by the existing traditional built form found within the hamlet Park facility sized for community Park amenity was designed to connect proposed and use existing Claremont through a pedestrian network,with substantial size to accommodate soccer pitch and another open play area.(Sentence shortened) Trails in Woodlot to North Trails were removed due to prohibitions on site alteration in Natural Core area. Views to the woodlot from the street are maintained. Cash in Lieu of Parkland Alternatively could,instead of providing large park facility within development,provide cash-in-lieu to enhance existing park amenities within community Lot size Lot size will range from o.75-1.25acres in compliance with MOE reasonable use standards,and Region of Durham standards Preservation of existing heritage Existing home on Old Brock Road will be retained as is house on Old Brock Road Lighting in Park Would be incorporated into any park facility subject to Municipal approval Construction Mitigation Noise,dust A Construction Mitigation Plan will be required as part of the development approval process with the City of Pickering- Construction access to No construction access from Lane/Franklin; development Discussions and agreement needed from Durham Region about temporary access road from the bypass • 63 rt CH,'crr,T .{ Time frame for complete Subject to market response development 5. COMMUNITY WORKING GROUP CONCLUSIONS: The Community Working Group recognizes that the following approval processes must take place before any development can take place: Firstly the Provincial Government must decide whether to amend the designation of the land under the ORMCP from ORM Countryside to ORM Rural Hamlet and if the village boundary on the East side should be restored to its previous position along the by-pass Secondly the City of Pickering would have to change the City Official plan to show the new boundary. Finally, Geranium would have to submit a formal application under the City's Planning Regulations. All of these processes allow for extensive private and public input and consultation The Community Working Group believes that should the development, proposed by Geranium, be allowed to proceed it will provide benefits to the community including: • A speedy solution to the long standing drainage and flooding issues at no incremental cost to the taxpayer • Better water management and environmental control • Some long time boundary issues would be resolved including adjusting lot level boundaries for houses whose septic systems encroach onto the development and protection of existing boundary trees with the associated benefit for wildlife • The creation of an additional 4.5 acre park which would connect the new and older homes in the community with safe and walkable streets and trails around the water retention ponds • An increase in population would be good for: o The economy of Local businesses o Service Clubs and churches • o Recreational activities and facilities for our youth o More viable student body and available resources for the local public school o A stronger voice for the community • 64 ATTACHMENT# 3 TO REPORT# 62-/5 h(r=, Please refer to John M.Alati e-mail: johna @davieshowe.com direct line: 416.263.4509 1.7„ '° i File No. 702475 Davies Howe April 13, 2015 Partners • L L p By Hand Delivery City of Pickering Town Hall Meeting on Provincial Land Use Review Lawyers One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario The Fifth Floor L1V 6K7 99 Spadina Ave Toronto, Ontario M54` 3F8 Dear Sir/Madam: • T 416.977.7088 Re: Pickering Town Hall Meeting F 416.977.8931 2015 Coordinated Review of Provincial Plans davieshowe.com Restoring the Historic Settlement Area Boundary—Hamlet of Claremont We are counsel to Geranium Corporation, who has an ownership interest in a 38.25 hectare property located on the north side of Concession Road 9 (Central Street), between Old Brock Road and Brock Road, in the Hamlet of Claremont, City of Pickering (the "Subject Property"). The Subject Property is divided into two "phases". A portion of the Phase I lands is presently designated "Hamlet Residential" and located within the Settlement Area Boundary (the "Hamlet Boundary"). The Phase II lands were historically located within the Hamlet Boundary, but were excluded from same following the City's Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan conformity process. Our client is seeking an amendment to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Durham Region and City of Pickering Official Plans to include the Subject Property in the Hamlet Boundary. Doing so would allow for development of the majority (Phases I and II) of the Subject Property, which would redress flooding problems in the Hamlet of Claremont. Please find enclosed our client's submission to the 2015 coordinated review of provincial land use plans, prepared by Malone Given Parsons Ltd. The coordinated review is the appropriate process through which to consider settlement boundary expansions and minor "rounding outs" to the boundaries of hamlets. Our client's proposed plan is a modest rounding out and extension to the existing boundaries of the Hamlet of Claremont. 65 • ATTACHMENT#___,___3 T� . REPORT# P��TOZ-/S Page 2 A. Davies Restoring the Claremont Hamlet boundary and returning the Subject Property to H o w e the Hamlet would be consistent with the historic intent of Claremont to develop the Partners L L P lands. The lands that our client seeks to have returned to the Hamlet were originally included in the Hamlet Boundary, and were part of the Claremont Development Plan (the predecessor to the Town's current Official Plan) dating back to 1988. In 1990, the then-owner of the Subject Property filed rezoning and draft plan of subdivision applications for the Phase I lands and a rezoning application for the Phase II lands. The rezoning application for the Phase II lands was withdrawn in 1994, but the applications for the Phase I lands remains open. In March of 1997, the City of Pickering adopted a new Official Plan, which was approved by the Region of Durham the same year. Appeals to the Ontario I Municipal Board were resolved in 1998. The Claremont Development Plan was incorporated into the City's new Official Plan, but all Phase II lands were excluded from the Hamlet Boundary. There are sound and compelling reasons, both historic and practical, for restoring the previous boundaries of the Hamlet. In particular, doing so would solve an ongoing flooding issue in the Hamlet, which has caused significant property damage and plagued residents for many years. In 2012, our client initiated discussions with the City and Region to develop the Phase I lands. In the process, it learned that there are serious flooding problems plaguing parts of the Hamlet that could be solved by designating the Phase II lands as "Hamlet Residential" in order to permit development, which would include modern, state-of-the-art stormwater management facilities. In 2013, our client engaged in a lengthy working group process with residents of the Hamlet and their Community Working Group to discuss the potential development and ways to solve the infrastructure deficit that currently causes periodic flooding. The Claremont Community Working Group supports including these lands within the Hamlet Boundary, and has communicated that position to Pickering Council. The cost of building the necessary infrastructure to solve the flooding and drainage issues in the Hamlet is estimated to be approximately $5 Million: This cost has not been budgeted by either the Region or the City. 66 -------- . .. . .. ATTACHMENT# 3 TO REPORT# PP'-r 62-15 Page 3 F Davies Our client proposes to build an appropriately-scaled development that would be Howe complimentary to the historic character of the Hamlet of Claremont. This Partners P development would involve the necessary infrastructure work to remedy the long- standing flooding issue. The cost of this much-needed infrastructure would be provided by our client, at no cost to the City or Region, if and when our client receives development approval. Our client's development, including the proposed infrastructure works, can only proceed if the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the City and Regional Official Plans are amended to include the Subject Property in the Hamlet Boundary and designate the Phase II lands as "Hamlet Residential". Our client looks forward to continuing discussions with the City, Region and Province to resolve infrastructure issues in the Hamlet of Claremont. Yours truly, DAVIES HOWE PARTNERS LLP 4hnM. Alati VJMA:ak end. copy: Client 67 ATTACHMENT# 3 TO • REPORT# PziN1 0.2.-i f° Submission to City of Pickering Comments for the 2015 Coordinated . -Review of Provincial Land Use Plans 5113 Old Brock Road, Hamlet of • Claremont, City Pickering C , Cit Y J " ' � ice_ a , .y./��J + , { a ! 11�L , I 1 ! , - t' / - et ,i,`•t.` \ CI - • . ` LEGEND < ' •.;'� y Subject Property •� .� •: T la Phase I Lands _1= ,:e?: ' : !: i, ••••— Phase II Lands. w1 - --,"`r7. ; 4 j ^°^ •-- ■ ,#t N.1 = l L ! 1.I • i� , t .r ¢ ! •...j . :i_' 0=i 3=C• es�so Road.9 _ • �_ _ ,. :- tCentr-al,SiMr-_ ;4:sa .- - _ "" y Prepared By: WsAMALONE GIVEN • PARSONS LTD. . Prepared For. Geranium Corporation April 2015 68 • ATTACHMENT# 3 TO REPORT# CZ-45 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS 5113' OId Brock Road, Hamlet of Claremont, City of Pickering Prepared By Prepared For: Geranium Corporation (Prime"R"Management Inc.) 3190 Steeles Avenue East,Suite 300 Markham,Ontario iL3R 1G9 ll? Matthew Cory, Don'Given, MCIP,RPP,PLE,PMP MCIP,RPP,PLE Malone Given Parsons Ltd. 140 Renfrew Drive,Suite 201 Markham, Ontario L3R 6B3 April 2015 12-2110 • MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 69 ATTACHMENT# 3 TO REPORT# f-A 62-15 GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING APRIL 13,2015 • COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS • • • MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. n 70 ATTACHMENT # 3 TO REPORT# r� dZ-15 GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13, 2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 1.0 INTRODUCTION TO SUBJECT LANDS 4 1.1 Subject Lands 4 1.2 Current Land Use 6 2.0 HISTORY OF PLANNING OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY 7 2.1 Applicable Planning Policy 7 2.2 Chronology of Planning of the Subject Lands 12 3.0 REQUIRED AMENDMENTS AND NEXT STEPS 18 3.1 Need for Amendments to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, Durham Region Official Plan, City of Pickering Official Plan 18 4.0 PLANNING OPINION 20 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1-1:Location of Subject Lands within Overall Property 5 Figure 2-1 Subject Lands and Claremont Development Plan 8 Figure 2-2 Toko Investments Ltd.Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision(March 1990) 9 Figure 2-3 Subject Property and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan 10 Figure 2-4 Subject Lands and the City of Pickering Official Plan,Schedule I,Land Use Structure 11 LIST OF TABLES Table 1-1:Legal Description of Subject Lands and Overall Property 4 MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 71 ATTACHMENT# 3 TO REPORT# PL/' 02.-L5 GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING • COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS • • • MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. iv 72 ATTACHMENT# TO REPORT DZ 45 GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A unique opportunity exists to restore and round out the hamlet boundary in Claremont to its original configuration in order to rectify a long standing flooding problem plaguing residents in the hamlet, by building modern stormwater management facilities as part of the development of those lands for a small amount of residential development that is in keeping with the character of the community. The development would round out the hamlet and address a serious flooding concern to the community. This submission provides the basis for an amendment to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, Durham Region and City of Pickering Official Plans, to mitigate historic flooding problems in the Hamlet of Claremont through the careful development of the subject property, excluding and protecting any natural heritage features. • Background In March 1990, the previous owners, Toko Investments Ltd. submitted Zoning By-law amendment (A 9/90) and Draft Plan of Subdivision 18T-90016 Y ( ) ( ) applications to the Region of Durham and City of Pickering to develop a 27-lot detached residential subdivision on approximately 10 hectares of land on the subject lands(the"Phase I lands"). The original application proposed a minimum lot area of 0.3 hectares and minimum lot frontage of 34 metres; two roads were proposed that would extend Franklin Street and provide access to future development in the north.An existing barn and home were located on two lots on the west side of the property; preservation and severance of this area was being considered at the time. It has been confirmed by planning staff that the files remain open and active at the City of Pickering. A public meeting was held and comments were received on the submission. As described later in this report, application was also made to rezone the remainder of the property in 1990. The remainder of the property was designated Residential — Phase II in the Claremont Development Plan (the planning document that preceded the Town's current Official Plan.) The zoning amendment application was later withdrawn as a result of comments received from the Province in 1994. The comments indicated required studies would have to be completed to confirm the Phase II lands in the Hamlet Boundary. In 2001 the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act and Plan were enacted delineating the Settlement Area Boundary to exclude the Phase II lands on the subject property. MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 1 73 ATTACHMENT L_...11) REPORT# P-M OZ—i5 GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME"R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13, 2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS In August 2012 Geranium Corporation submitted a revised Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning Bylaw Amendment to proceed with a modified 27-lot plan for the Phase I lands. Through a voluntary public information session in November 2012.and later at a statutory public meeting held at the City in December 2012, significant concerns related to historic flooding in the existing community were raised. Geranium Corporation and their consultant team have been exploring opportunities to address this concern through the development process. Meetings with the study team, Durham Region and City staff have been held in 2013 and 2014 to explore potential solutions.A Community Working Group was convened in late 2013 to work directly with community members to understand their concerns and work towards a solution. Based on the collaborative efforts of all stakeholders the study team has proposed a solution that would reduce 98% of the 100 year peak flows and runoff volumes from the site to Franklin Street, thus addressing and rectifying the current drainage problem. The proposed solution can be achieved through the provision of stormwater management facilities on the larger subject property; to feasibly affect this solution will require the development of the inclusion of the entire landholdings (excluding the northern portion of the site designated Natural Core Area by the ORMCP) for development. There is no other practical way apparent to the study team to correct the flooding. Given that the subject lands were previously part of the Hamlet, and given the urgency to correct flooding issues to prevent further property damage and mitigate risk to human health and safety, we are of the opinion that the expansion is good planning and should be realized as soon as possible. Moreover,this solution would be at no-cost to the Region, City or its existing residents. Currently slightly less than the 10 hectares (on which the 1990 applications, revised in 2012, continue) is within the Settlement Area designation in the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and City of Pickering Official Plan.To realize the stormwater management solution proposed by the study team, the former Hamlet boundary must be restored. An amendment to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, Durham Region and City of Pickering Official Plans is required to include the former Phase II lands(the majority of the subject property) in the Settlement Area Boundary for an appropriate form of development. Geranium homes as indicated that following such approvals they would be willing to expedite and enact the proposed solution in advance of final approval of a draft plan of subdivision. MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 2 74 ATTACHMENT REPORT# GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS The remainder of this submission provides the detailed history of the subject property, basis for amendments to the ORCMP, and Durham Region and City Official Plans to include the majority of the subject lands in the Settlement Area Boundary,and next steps in the planning process. • MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 3 75 ATTACHMENT TO REPORT# PLN OZ-15 • Al (I 0 INTRODUCTION TO SUBJECT LANDS • Geranium Corporation (Prime "R" Management Inc.) is proposing to develop the majority of the subject property for appropriate low density residential dwellings,in large part to deliver a 98% reduction to existing flooding concerns on adjacent properties in the Hamlet. The purpose of this report is to examine the history of the consideration of development of the subject property as a whole and discuss the, need for amendments to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and Durham Region/City of Pickering Official Plans to support the proposed development applications. 1.1 Subject Lands The subject lands are located on the north side of Concession Road 9 (Central Street), between Old Brock Road and Brock Road, in the Hamlet of Claremont, City of Pickering.Table 1.1 provides the legal description of both the area subject to ongoing development applications (Phase I Lands) and the overall property (which includes Phase II lands.)Figure 1.1 provides a context map of the Phase I and H lands shown within the overall property. Table 1-1:Legal Description of Subject Lands and Overall Property Owner Municipal Address Legal Description of Property Lot Area(ha) The Cairo N/A PART OF LOTS 17&18,CONCESSION 9,LOTS 47&48, 10.77 Group Inc. REGISTERED PLAN NO.12,TOWN OF PICKERING,REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM The Cairo 5113 Brock Road PCL 31-1 SEC 12;SECONDLY:PT LTS 17&18 CON 9,OF THE 38.25 Group Inc. GEOGRAPHIC TWP OF PICKERING&LTS 47&48 PL 12 PT 2, 40R14340;THIRDLY:LT 32 PL 12&PT LT 31 PL 12 PT 1, 40R14340 EXCEPT PT 1,40R15816;CITY OF PICKERING MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 4 76 V ATTACHMENT#. 3 TO • PE-?DR1 # < 0 is_ . . GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS Figure 1-1:Location of Subject Lands within Overall Property • I . tI a r,..•`_.r `` ___.-) • -,:.,..,**".......^. v 19 I �t r. ( Via' , t ``r . 'sue` t= t' �t _ • : ,r ,atyCen trai.St �1 L ; tan111 CEi..= Rb d9 ;a.• ac vy :.r . ... yam- `y r-kr • J• t- a — -- i :` LEGEND k�j - ^/;' — Subject Property j it •' 11 Phase!Lands 4. ...,m Phase II Lands Source:Google Maps(2012) The subject lands are adjacent to the existing Claremont community. The community is primarily composed of older single detached residential homes with . several local commercial uses at the intersection of Concession Road 9 (Central . Street)and Old Brock Road.Rural residential and other rural agricultural uses are • found to the west,east,north and south of the subject lands;a CNR rail corridor is located further to the north. MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 5 • 77 To GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS 1.2 Current Land Use The subject lands are generally flat, sloping slightly down from the southwest to the southeast; an existing single-detached residential dwelling and barn are located on the western portion of the property fronting onto Old Brock Road. The remainder of the subject lands are currently being used for agricultural purposes. MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 6 78 i .'o )E"ORT GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS 2 0 HISTORY OF PLANNING OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY This section of the report reviews the existing Provincial, Regional, and Municipal policies applicable to the.Subject Lands,and provides a chronology of planning and development consideration to date. 2.1 Applicable Planning Policy The Claremont Development Plan was approved in 1988, and later updated up to Edition 6 of the City of Pickering Official Plan. The subject lands were designated "Residential Phase I" and "Residential Phase IP" as shown in Figure 2-1. • MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 7 79 .r.....Criii'iii.E T 4 3 d 0 1_,0R7 .. J _ u.2.-)5 GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS Figure 2-1 Subject Lands and Claremont Development Plan i' Hamlet of Claremont .:'''.-- - Imo- "' . DEVELOPMENT PLAN - _ ;1:.:': °-T L-- SCHEDULE •A ' �t; t .. d I I EdiWn No.8 _—_ • 1 i F �i. - -;. Y `' I ' .4 , 1 II ,„.%._ 70,...:, , -,n I ubject , y. / e _ u : 1 ,.,Lands %-�' - 1 „4- rt-. ! ' '- -. - --r ya - Sf �' ,; I - I J -_.. - 3 . ' - %fi �,p�Jj� _ 1 �� 1 111 1 c <". . ,. 1 f _ --- v , I :a ..z42..1 .4 '-- t 3 ' 1 ` ,�,t I 1 _ 1 _`jiu 2 i Concession Road 9- : /+ I.gPnd 4 _ r 4 / `s.4 rwra.wu•Photo a SFl -V - I : t6 a N.Honig atom 1 f moots d ,.t... �' ` ua -/a' I `l£t' Como*1M. ;:- 1:•=mss,."" ;. .r '- ;z i --�MM MYrM010k5OhoKhOo*4 Following the 1988 approval of the Claremont Development Plan, Toko Investments Ltd. submitted zoning by-law amendment(A 9/90) and draft plan of subdivision (18T-90016) applications to the Region of Durham and City of Pickering to develop a 27-lot residential subdivision on approximately 10 hectares of land in the northeast quadrant of the Hamlet of Claremont in March 1990. The original application proposed a minimum lot area of 0.3 hectares and minimum lot MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 8 80 r,,u-v,,,,,, ET#+. T o GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME"R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS frontage of 34 metres;two roads were proposed that would extend Franklin Street and provide access to future development in the north.An existing barn and home were located on two lots (13 & 14). Preservation and severance of this area was being considered at the time. . • In June 1990, Toko Investments Ltd. submitted zoning by-law amendment (A 17/90) to the City of Pickering to rezone the remaining lands as Village Residential (R5) from Rural Agricultural(R). Provincial, Regional and City staff determined that a Settlement Capacity Study was required. The application was closed in December 1994, after discussions with staff, and no draft plan of • subdivision application was filed for the remaining lands. The submitted draft plan of subdivision is shown in Figure 2-2. • Figure 2-2 Toko Investments Ltd.Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision(March 1990) 1 is' Z, ,":7:1,1:7,'1. "'i-.'''''l'ir.-1:"...:il'aall 7 iti4g-rd 4,1„,,, r\ksi. 2•,,,,,,,...ce c 1 4:::,1 1.:i..: OM '.-- 7'9 •)0.-- , f'1.1-. iii I �to i... i i f V' Y ✓ ` /- Remaining �:t� - : .; _L •, Lands?r1 ,4iik . /-:; r._ ° ;_ — _II' 187=90016 //4...--i,.� �I�? j ______..w _ = - A';9/90 � ` - \ --�f-•� jJ l._ A161'onal b!etnalim P..cutrd IbEv _ ` ��Y — . Seto.SI cf R+c Evx.,,:,5 Att.IieY r/1r \ t1I co • __��' -_. _— ;F: �1 , .1 Ai ��'.—.-r _ I^ 1 *54PVCTOIC•5 r.F.S...CAT ` ... aOuMIW In summary,applications for zoning by-law amendment(A 9/90)and draft plan of subdivision(18T-900016) were made by the previous owners, Toko Investments Ltd., in March 1990 for 27 detached residential lots on the southern part of the subject property. A zoning by-law amendment application (A 17/90) for the remaining lands was applied for in June 1990 and was subsequently closed in December 1994. However,the original draft plan and zoning by-law amendment applications on the southern portion (approximately 11 hectares) of the subject MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 9 81 , ATTACHMENT# .3 Tro GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015. SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS property remain active at the City of Pickering, which has been confirmed with City staff. Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP), designates the subject property "Rural Settlement", "Countryside Area", with a small portion in the northeast designated "Natural Core Area". Although partially located in the Countryside Area designation, the active draft plan and rezoning applications submitted in 1990 for a portion of the Phase I lands predate the ORMCP and therefore are required to conform to the relevant transition provisions of the ORMCP.Figure 2-3 shows the subject lands within the context of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. ' Figure 2-3 Subject Property and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan i, 4,, Side � Yry y M 4 �t ��yMyy i _ } jS f * `Yil j 4 r k 4 ., � e f ,- } ,..Y: fa ' -,- ,4 3 '� - end .- i ' ' b -. � _ - }_ A i,a, Q Oak Ridges?tlorai,c(onsereatron Plan Area $ter r --o "rtmA �� rt2"m'wr.N.n.''''ram.'',.. S „,-_-- 1x•: Natural Com Arca z. Natural Lanka ge Area — . RuraF Srnlrmcnt (.mh,fl.yn.,fGo.„rradAr+i Scrtluncnr Area erpccTmr\1 unietpal Boundary ), loner-Tier Munieipal Boundan• >4V Road or iIThnar Fake MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 10 82 ATTACHMENT# - TO REPORT J _,.. L- 17Z-L5 _- GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME"R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS Region of Durham Official Plan Within the Region of Durham Official Plan (2013 Unofficial Consolidation), the j subject property is designated Oak Ridges Moraine Area. Applications for development and site alteration must conform to applicable policies within the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. Natural heritage features, landform conservation(Category 2) and aquifer vulnerability areas have been identified on or adjacent to the subject property. City of Pickering Official Plan The City of Pickering Official Plan (Edition 6, February 2010) designates the majority of the subject property as "Oak Ridges Moraine Countryside Areas". A small portion to the south is designated"Oak Ridges Moraine Rural Hamlets"and falls within the settlement boundaries of the Hamlet. The Official Plan also identifies significant woodlands on the edge of the subject property,high and low aquifer vulnerability as well as Category 2 landform conservation features. Figure 2-4 shows the subject property within the City of Pickering Official Plan, Schedule I Land Use Structure. Figure 2-4 Subject Lands and the City of Pickering Official Plan, Schedule I,Land Use Structure r71-("1 9�� t"�°Sru j ECIIMULEITO TUE I ING I6 �J OFFICIAL PLAN N i∎.,, f EomoNc dill ;. 4 � I_ ry , C r 1 _ r Gy J ____EIIEETI_UF} r `3--I l Isr Y'� I LAUD USE STRUCTURE n , I igd 1.74.1-3 rt ✓ 4� f..Q:5?tLE SS'IEU e 17 L=and a .II Zia go I .__ _T___1 :Y� 1 .3g R .,�` a.r,:L st�T�.•n,sn�i3 - Cruet- fF I d' `w -v J 2�£: wrIce5 n pa 69 E^a ^ --a CF i z .,,C i' �? —rte. / cr fa tp—a-6 Q, f ec�.z...ccccs,pu_ _a 1_,..... I lJ Y-.w 6CA'weGai MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 11 83 ATTACHMENT REPORT# �L OZ 15 GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13, 2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS City of Pickering Zoning By-law - The City hof Pickering Zoning By-law zones the majority of the subject property `Oak Ridges Moraine Agricultural (ORM-A)'. A small portion abutting the existing(developed)Hamlet of Claremont(south of the Lane Street extension and west of the Franklin Street extension) is zoned `Oak Ridges Moraine Hamlet Residential Five (ORM-R5)', and a small portion on the southern edge of the lands is zoned`Oak Ridges Moraine Environmental Protection(ORM-EP)'. 2.2 Chronology of Planning of the Subject Lands The following chronology provides a brief history of land use planning activities in connection with the subject property since the original applications were filed in 1990. History Date 18T-90016/A 9/90 Remaining Lands 1988 The Claremont Development Plan is approved. Subject property is designated Residential Phase I and Residential Phase II. March 6, 1990 Draft Plan of Subdivision (18T-90016) Remaining lands were designated application received by Region of Residential - Phase II in the Claremont Durham. Development Plan, which represents areas where growth would require a Phase I subdivision included 27 lots Settlement Capacity Study with minimum lot areas of 0.75 ac (0.3ha). Lands were designated Residential - Phase I in the Claremont Development Plan. Zoning By-law Amendment (A 9/90) application to change Rural Agricultural (A) to Village Residential (R5) received by City of Pickering. March 16, 1990 Region's Notice of Receipt of N/A subdivision application provided to City. March 21, 1990 Subdivision application circulated by N/A MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 12 84 f?T1CF-Ifv1ENT - T REPORT GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R"MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS History Date 18T-90016/A 9/90 Remaining Lands Region to City for comment. April 19,1990 Public notice of Draft Plan of N/A Subdivision and rezoning (A 9/90) applications circulated by City. June 27,1990 'Hamlet of Claremont Development Plan Review', Public Meeting held by City. Regional Official Plan permitted the inclusion of the Phase II lands through a Settlement Capacity Study. N/A Zoning By-law Amendment (A 17/90) application'to change Rural Agricultural (A) to Village Residential (R5) received by City of Pickering. July 17, 1991 Notice of Public Information Meeting N/A for draft plan and rezoning issued by the City. August 6, 1991 Public Information Meeting for N/A applications held by City. Public Information report prepared including comments received from relevant agencies and the public. Agency and department comments were received from: • Regional Planning Department • Regional Health Department • Durham Board of Education • Durham Region Roman Catholic Separate School Board • Metropolitan Toronto and Region Conservation Authority • Ministry of Natural Resources • Ministry of Agriculture and Food • Ministry of Culture and Communication MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 13 85 ATTACHMENT -�_ REPORT# 54.-174-02-45 GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING APRIL 13, 2015 COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS History Date 181-90016/A 9/90 Remaining Lands • Ontario Hydro • Bell Canada • Pickering Planning Department • Pickering Department of Community Services and Facilities. • Pickering Fire Department • Pickering Hydro Late 1992 City of Pickering begins work on new Official Plan to replace Pickering District Plan (originally prepared in the 1970's and ultimately approved in 1983). January 10, 1994 Letter from M.O.E. to City stating N/A objection to the application until Provincial Interests are addressed. (i.e. ORM,servicing) December N/A Letter from Toko Investments Ltd. to 15,1994 City regarding the closure of File A 17/90. Owners understood that a comprehensive settlement study was required, and due to the length of time and outstanding provincial issues, they agreed that the processing of the application was premature. January 30, 1996 Letter from Toko Investments Ltd. to N/A City (in response to Region's letters regarding inactivity of file) requesting that application remain open. Owners continued to monitor planning changes with respect to the Oak Ridges Moraine; the property was identified within the M.O.E.'s moraine boundary. Until the M.O.E. clarified certain development issues, the owner was - unable to respond to their requests. MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 14 86 ATTACHMENT REPORT# GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13, 2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING. COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS History Date 18T-90016/A 9/90 Remaining Lands March 3, 1997 City of Pickering adopts new Official Residential Phase II lands are changed Plan. It is approved by the Region of to 'Agricultural' designation and are no September 1997 Durham in 1997;September 24, Edition p 1997; longer within the Hamlet of Claremont February 1998 1 is approved in February 1998 by the boundary, however they were OMB. identified as a Rural Study Area. The Claremont Development Plan is incorporated into the Pickering Official Plan. A portion of the former Phase I lands is designated Hamlet Residential, the remainder of the site including all of the former Phase II lands, is located outside the Hamlet of Claremont boundary. November 17, The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act(2001)is enacted and subsequently the 2001 Oak Ridges Conservation Plan(April 2002)comes into effect. March 2006 The City of Pickering adopts Amendment 15 to the Official Plan and Zoning By-law amendment A16/05 to Zoning By-law 3037 to bring the respective documents into conformity with the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. May 11, 2007 N/A Letter from City to Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) regarding City's agreement to list of modifications to the ORM conformity amendment; supports minor rounding out of hamlet boundary. June 28,2007 N/A Letter from MMAH to City regarding minor rounding out of hamlet boundary; MMAH does not agree that it is minor, does not believe that it meets the intent of ORMCP, and notes that the Regional Official Plan requires a settlement capacity study to be completed. MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 15 87 i`iAchmENT# 3 TO ar_„ii!RT ;s L_ 01-15- GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13, 2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS History Date 18T-90016/A 9/90 Remaining Lands Geranium Involvement Commences - June — August A pre-submission meeting was held During the pre-submission consultation 2012 with City staff and commenting meeting, City staff identified flooding agencies, regarding the flooding issues issues in the existing community, in in the existing community and reports part related to runoff from the subject commissioned by the City to lands, as an ongoing issue of study. Our investigated flooding concerns were study team was requested to explore discussed, as well as the potential potential opportunities to help mitigate through the development process to these issues as part of the development explore solutions to improve drainage process. conditions for the existing community. Other items discussed included quality and quantity of groundwater, lot sizes and nitrate dilution, and the list of required updated background studies. Applications were submitted by Geranium (Prime "R" Management Inc.) to revise the existing Zoning By- law Amendment and redline Draft Plan of Subdivision applications. November. 28, Community Open House held where At this meeting multiple comments and 2012 residents expressed concerns regarding presentations were made by residents flooding issues in Claremont. denoting flooding issues in the community. December 3, Statutory Public Meeting held by the Flooding issues remain a prominent 2012 and 01 City on the applications, followed by concern. 2013 comments from the City. Q2 2013 — Q3 Geranium's study team explores potential for resolving flooding issues on nearby 2013 lands through solutions on the entirety of subject site. Preliminary engineering conclusions identify solution involving a comprehensive approach to development and stormwater management facilities on the remaining parts of the subject site. Geranium proposes a Community Advisory group including local Councillor and representatives of the community to discuss solutions. MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 16 88 ATTACHMENT# i i REPORT I 7-rg---6 —/.5 GERANIUM GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME"R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 SUBMISSION TO CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS History Date 18T-90016/A 9/90 Remaining Lands Q4 2013 — Geranium meetings with Claremont Community Advisory group to present the February 2014 technical solution, and explore potential forms of development that may be appropriate for the entire site. Meetings result in a preferred development option to gain consensus in seeking an amendment to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. The process to amend the ORMCP was discussed as one supported and led by the Community and City. MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 17 89 ATTACHMENT#�.--� REPGAT 2-N—c2-15 3 . 0 • REQUIRED AMENDMENTS AND NEXT STEPS This section outlines the requirements for ORMCP and Official Plan Amendments, as well as the next steps in the planning process to continue with a comprehensive development proposal on the subject lands. 3.1 Need for Amendments to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, Durham Region Official Plan, City of Pickering Official Plan Through late 2013, Geranium's municipal engineer (SCS consulting) examined potential solutions on the subject property to mitigate flooding concerns within the existing built up area of Claremont. These proposed solutions have been discussed with City and Regional engineering staff who see the potential benefits of the proposed solutions. There is the potential to reduce flows from the site by 98% and thereby mitigate flooding in the existing community by implementing stormwater management facilities on the Phase 2 lands as part of a larger development plan. • Following the conclusion that a technical solution to flooding concerns can be affected through development of the larger property,preliminary discussions were held with Regional and City Planning staff in late 2013. These discussions focused on the potential to amend the Settlement Area Boundary of Claremont to include the historically considered Residential Phase II lands of the subject property within the Hamlet boundary as formerly designated in the Claremont Development Plan. The general consensus of the planning meetings was that the Region and City staff would consider a request to amend the Durham Region Official Plan and City of Pickering Official Plan to expand the Hamlet boundary of Claremont to include the remainder of the subject property,provided that such an amendment: • includes an appropriate design solution to mitigate existing flooding in the existing area of Claremont, MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 18 90 ATTACHMEI T; _ 3__.- TO REPORT# GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS • • be contingent upon the completion of technical studies required by Policy 9B.2.8 of the Durham Regional Official Plan, where such studies would need to be completed to the satisfaction of the Region and City through a • peer review process. • be preceded by an amendment to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. It is Geranium's intention to continue with the Community Advisory process, and proceed concurrently with the technical studies required to support a Hamlet Boundary Amendment in the Durham Region and City of Pickering Official Plans,while concurrently completing the study work required to support approval of.a Draft Plan of Subdivision and Zoning Bylaw Amendment on the subject lands. Previously, the policies of the Regional Official Plan would have required completion of a Settlement Capacity Study prior to implementing the Residential Phase II lands in the Claremont Development Plan.The corresponding polices in the current Durham Regional Official Plan addressing Hamlet Boundary Adjustments are found in section 9B.2.8, and provide the requirements for consideration of an amendment to the Hamlet of Claremont, • MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 19 91 ATTACHMENT# _ 3 r. REPQfl ft.N Of_6__.__ 4 so 0 PLANNING OPINION This Section provides our planning.opinion' with regard to inclusion of the subject lands within.the Rural Settlement Area of Claremont, and discusses the requirement for an amendment to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. ';,. Our planning opinion is that the subject lands (except for the portion at the north end of the property designated Natural Core Area) can be developed in a manner that is consistent with the Durham Region Official Plan and City of Pickering Official Plan policies related to the expansion of Hamlets. In this regard we are of the opinion that: • Germaine to the most pressing community matter: development of the subject lands would result in the construction of stormwater management facilities that would divert 98% of the flows from the site that contribute to the flooding issues to appropriate controls, thereby greatly alleviating existing flooding issues experienced by adjacent residents. • Based on our initial discussions with the community, an appropriately scaled development based on private services, heritage inspired architecture, and provision of street and trails connecting community amenities in walking distance of new and existing residents can be complimentary to the historic character of Claremont and a welcome addition to the Hamlet. • The inclusion of the subject lands within the Hamlet Boundary would result in a logical settlement area boundary for this part of the Hamlet (Brock Road to the East, Existing Residential and Natural Heritage Features to the North) rather than the existing limit of the Hamlet which terminates in the middle of a farm field. • Locating growth on the subject lands is consistent with the historic intent to develop these lands (per the Claremont Development Plan) and would result in the expansion of this part of the hamlet through a comprehensive MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 20 92 3 !'2 GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS plan for the property, rather than development of a strip of development along a portion of Franklin Street. It is our opinion that such a plan would result in good planning and is in the public interest, particular with regard to fulfilling the historic planning intent for development in the Hamlet, and by affecting the protection human health and safety by mitigating flooding issues. As noted in this submission, development of the majority of the subject lands would require an amendment to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan to • include them within the Rural Settlement Boundary for the Hamlet of Claremont. Such an amendment would logically precede the completion of the detailed studies listed in Error! Reference source not found. required to support the required Regional and City Official Plan Amendments. The section of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan dealing with Implementation addressed amendments to the Settlement Area Boundaries of the Plan,and states that: "Plan Review and Amendment (a) The Plan is a long-term strategic plan that shall be formally reviewed once every 10 years and, if appropriate, amended to: - include new, updated or corrected information; - improve the effectiveness and relevance of its policies; - reflect changed or new priorities of the Ontario government. • (b) The 10 year review cannot consider removing land from the Natural Core Areas and Natural Linkage Areas. (c)A 10 year review of the Plan shall consider: - the need to change or refine the boundaries of the Countryside Areas and Settlement Areas; - the continued effectiveness and relevance of the Plan's vision,purpose, objectives and policies; - the effectiveness of the Plan's policies in meeting the Plan's vision, purpose and objectives; - new, updated or corrected information; - new science, technologies, or practices that shall improve the Plan's effectiveness; - any other matter that the Ontario government deems appropriate. (d) Consideration of the need to change or refine the boundaries of Settlement Areas as part of a 10 year review requires a justification study prepared by the upper-tier or single-tier municipality that comprehensively demonstrates that: - there are not enough lands designated in the official plan to meet the municipality's short-term growth needs; MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 21 93 • `ti: r _✓ !fit FCR 2-r- z-i5 GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS - opportunities for infilling, intensification and redevelopment to accommodate some or all of the anticipated growth in existing Settlement Areas in the municipality have been fully taken into account; - opportunities for Settlement Areas in other municipalities, or for urban areas outside the Oak Ridges Moraine, to accommodate some or all of the anticipated growth have been fully taken into account and do not adversely affect the ecological integrity of the Moraine;. - the new Settlement Area boundary would not expand into or adversely affect any Natural Core Areas or Natural Linkage Areas; - the area proposed to be added to Settlement Areas has been kept as small as possible, by permitting development at densities that promote efficient use of existing infrastructure and minimize land consumption; - water budgets and water conservation plans have been prepared in accordance with PART III(Section 24)of the Plan. (e) A 10 year review may also include an examination of the Plan's policies on mineral aggregate extraction in Natural Core Areas, recognizing that mineral aggregates are a non-renewable resource that are particularly desirable this close,to markets. The review may consider in particular whether to change the policies of this Plan to permit new mineral aggregate operations and wayside pits to be established and existing ones to expand in Natural Core Areas, where the ecological integrity of those Areas can be maintained or improved.For any such policy change to be considered, studies shall: - identibi specific areas such as agricultural area, young plantations, or early successional habitats where extraction could occur without long-term or permanent loss of ecological integrity; - demonstrate that where any natural self-sustaining vegetation needs to be removed for extraction, it shall be rehabilitated to natural self-sustaining vegetation of equal or greater ecological value; - demonstrate that any non-agricultural area extracted shall be rehabilitated to natural self-sustaining vegetation; - demonstrate that the connectivity of key natural heritage features and hydrological features shall be maintained, or improved or restored where possible, during and after extraction; - ident fy operational practices that will minimize possible negative impacts,such as: - phasing extraction to minimize the extent of soil exposed at any one time, - encouraging rapid extraction and rehabilitation, especially adjacent to key natural heritage features and - limiting activities on site to extraction and rehabilitation only and carrying out other activities such as processing,,washing and stockpiling on sites outside the Natural Core Areas; - demonstrate the successful performance of mineral aggregate operations and their rehabilitation in maintaining and improving ecological integrity in Natural Core Areas,Natural Linkage Areas and Countryside Areas since the Plan came into effect. • MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 22 94 ,.. lY.,; e, 3 iiLPO11 i a g-r , 02 15 GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS • (f) It is not intended that the Plan will be amended on a routine or regular basis. However,the Minister may consider amendments outside a 10 year review if: - the amendment would correct major or unforeseen circumstances, or would incorporate or reflect major new Ontario government legislation, regulations,policies, new information or standards; - deferral of the amendment to the next 10 year review would threaten the overall effectiveness or integrity of the Plan; -the amendment would improve the effectiveness and relevance of its policies." The ORMCP came into force and effect in 2001, which would have originally required a 10 year review of the Plan in 2011. However, the Greenbelt Act amended the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act in 2004 to align the reviews of the Greenbelt, Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation and Niagara Escarpment Conservation Plans to occur every 10 years from the date the Greenbelt Plan came into effect—February 2005;the next 10 year review of the ORMCP will not likely commence until early/mid-2015. We believe it is reasonable to consider the flooding issues being experienced in the Hamlet of Claremont as an `unforeseen circumstance,' and most urgently one that has, and continues to cause property damage and pose a threat to human health and safety. The development of the subject lands can deliver a stormwater management solution to largely address these issues.Considering the lengthy time between adoption and review of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (13 years now)and recalling the historic planning intent that the subject lands be used for development, we believe that it is reasonable to consider the inclusion of the subject lands in the Rural Settlement Boundary as soon as possible.In this regard, the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing could consider an Amendment to the Plan prior to the conclusion of the 2015 review given the urgent,unique, and unforeseen circumstances in Claremont. Such an amendment would be a stand- alone amendment to the ORMCP that would deal with the unforeseen and urgent flooding issues and ensure this pressing concern of the community is addressed in the only practical and most expeditious manner possible. • Failing a ministerial amendment, the provisions of the ORMCP anticipate the consideration of such amendments at the time of the 10 year review and we request that the Province receive this submission as a formal request to make such an amendment as part of this process. MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 23 95 ATTACHMENT {_ 3--- REPORT # 02_715......_ GERANIUM CORPORATION (PRIME "R" MANAGEMENT INC.) APRIL 13,2015 CITY OF PICKERING COMMENTS FOR THE 2015 COORDINATED REVIEW OF PROVINCIAL LAND USE PLANS • • MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. 96 ATTACHMENT REPORT# 19/--N 0Z-IS Attention:City of Pickering; April 8,2015 Mayor Dave Ryan • Councillor David Pickles Councillor Jennifer O'Connell Councillor Bill McLean Councillor Kevin Ashe Councillor Ian Cumming Councillor Rick Johnson Principal Planner Melissa Markham and Planning Department Re:Petition opposing a proposed residential development on protected Moraine land in Claremont, Ontario. Attached please find a petition signed by residents of the hamlet of Claremont(City of Pickering). It opposes a plan for a large residential subdivision on 90 acres of Class 1 farmland adjacent to the hamlet and is almost entirely designated as protected rural countryside under the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan.Just a few acres are within the hamlet boundary.The ORMCP allows for only 'minor rounding out'of hamlets.The proposed development would be a great deal more than that. In 2013-14,a self-appointed'working group'consisting of only 15 residents and numerous developer employees/consultants was created. Despite concerns from the community about this group's formation and process a report recommending the development was created by the group (titled The Claremont Community Working Group Report:Ward Farm Development). We believe the report will be used to support the developer's application, possibly during the current review of the Moraine Conservation Plan. We want you to be aware of the flawed process(documented in detail)that led to this report: there was no proper communication with the community,there was no transparency, no members were elected to represent the community,and no one was given the power to vote on our behalf on a precedent-setting issue,or to produce a report under our community association's logo,as if the membership had been party to the discussions,aware of the content,and in agreement with the recommendations—none of which was the case. Therefore,we, 186 residents,request that if this report,accompanies any application or is used in any manner to demonstrate hamlet support for the development it be deemed inadmissible and have no bearing on your deliberations. We believe if this report is used in such a manner,affecting the livelihood for all residents,there are major implications. We hope and trust that you,as our community representatives,will continue to place the preservation of prime farmland and the Moraine over a residential plan that could disastrously weaken the Moraine Conservation Plan and listen to the majority voices of your residents. Thank you for your attention to this matter, - Concerned residents of Claremont,Ontario 97 * ATTACHMENT# 7 TO • REPORT # i t-A Claremont Petition Form and Signatures,March,2015 • Preserving the Oak Ridges Moraine and the Hamlet of Claremont Principles for Petition Residents in Claremont have begun a petition to oppose development in Claremont that would impact the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan,the environment,including our water system,and the hamlet of Claremont.This petition was started in response to presentations.by a development company wishing to have amendments to the ORMCP in order to build 70+homes in Claremont and a report that was written by a self-appointed working group that supported and recommended this.development.The opposition of this development is based on the following principles and facts: 1) The importance and sustainability of the Oak Ridges Moraine(ORM)is paramount to southern Ontario,reaching far beyond the local area of Claremont:This'required and valuable ecosystem'is in need of protection and • is in danger from development.How valuable is the ORM? The Oak Ridges Moraine(ORM)is made,up of thick layers of sand and gravel deposited by glaciers over 12,000 years ago. These deep aquifers are fed by rain and snow and like a rain barrel,hold and slowly release.groundwater to downstream areas. Claremont and other communities on the moraine derive their drinking water directly from the moraine's aquifers. As well the ORM area that Claremont sits on Is the headwaters for the East Duffins Creek that flows south to.Lake Ontario: The moraine's aquifers are particularly vulnerable to potential contamination and as such the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP)has specifically prohibited new urban development in most areas across the moraine,including rural hamlets and villages. Urban development on this sensitive ecosystem has the potential to impact the quality and quantity of water that surrounds us and that we rely on in Claremont 2) The potential and critical precedent-setting action of an amendment to the ORMCP to expand the boundary of Claremont could trigger future development for many other small communities from Newcastle to Uxbridge • to Palgrave: In 2015 the ORMCP is mandated for a formal review by the provincial government Currently, the ORMCP envisions no new lot creation except for"minor infill and minor rounding out"in moraine villages and hamlets(aka Rural Settlements);any changes to this before the 2015 review would require an amendment to the plan. Another avenue for allowing Rural Settlement boundary expansions would be through policy changes made during the 2015 Review;likely this would be triggered by behind-closed door negotiations between industry and government. There are valid reasons for the current policy of no expansions to Rural Settlement boundaries;protection of quantity and quality of groundwater, maintenance of rural character of these villages and protection of agricultural land. 3) The process undertaken by the self-appointed working group titled 'Claremont Working Group'was inadequate and does not represent the . majority perspective: • 98 • . ATTACHMENT# TO REPORT # PLrI 01-15 • Claremont Petition Form and Signatures,March,2015 • The working group members were not appointed by the community, it was not • clear to the community that a final report would be written and used to support development in Claremont residents'concerns and oppositions through emails and the one hamlet meeting were-ignored,some working group • members resigned due to concerns about the process, and information was not shared openly and timely with the entire community throughout this process. • Based on these flaws a small group of residents(14)cannot speak for.all - residents and make a recommendation that has such impacts on a community and surrounding environment. Therefore,based on these principles and facts a large group of residents have signed a petition to oppose the development plans and the Claremont Working Groups final report supporting the development.Support for any future development in Claremont should be a • community decision where all residents have proper information and a voice.This petition will be sent to the City of Pickering,relevant Provincial Ministries,and other relevant parties to.protect the rural character of Claremont and the ecological and hydrological • health of the Oak Ridges Moraine. • • Thank you for your support and concern for this beautiful Hamlet. • • • • • • • • • 99 • T/CHMENT# . t . Claremont Petition Form and Signatures,March,2015 • • Preserving the Oak Ridges Moraine and the Hamlet of Claremont We,the following, reject a current report that supports the development of 70+homes in the Hamlet of Claremont, ON.that would require a rural settlement boundary expansion either through an amendment to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) or as an outcome of the legislated review in 2015.We are concerned about the potential impacts to our water systems and to social and environmental impacts on the future of our hamlet. We do not support large scale development in Claremont, nor support the written report titled'The Claremont Community Working Group Report: Ward Farm Development:May 2014'by the self-appointed'Claremont Working Group'and have signed this petition to oppose such initiatives. NAME: Please print name then sign below ADDRESS:Full address To date 186 residents have signed this petition. 0 A hard copy of signatures has been sent to the necessary Ministries such as the Ontario Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Further copies will be sent to necessary parties. • • • • . 100 ATTACHMENT# .5 T0. REPORT# ?LN ©Z-/5 City of Pickering,Best Use of the Land Proposal by Jennifer Laffier Please accept this proposal for review of the Greenbelt lands for your current review. The following are ideas and suggestions based on research,current trends, and personal views of what the City of Pickering can do to grow,be sustainable and honour the environment at the same time. The City of Pickering: A Place to live or visit for a balanced and healthy lifestyle As the nation grows and concerns about food, agriculture,the environment,mental health and physical health grow the City of Pickering can find a way to address this and become a national leader in promoting a healthy and balanced life for residents and visitors. This will make the City of Pickering unique and innovative: balancing growth and prosperity while keeping the environment and healthy lifestyles a focus. The City of Pickering can be a leader in combining planning and development with mental health and well-being research.Mental health is a concern across Canada; a healthy community can be more productive,happier,have less crime, use less health care resources and city amenities such as ambulance or police,have less conflict, and have healthier schools and children. The Province does not need another city with `rows of subdivisions'. The City of Pickering has a unique opportunity to put itself on the map and market itself like no.other! How can the City of Pickering do this? Honor the environment as an attraction and selling feature for visitors and locals. If the city of Pickering had a balance of urban areas,business and nature/open spaces it would attract; a) people wishing to live in an area with openness and close to nature,b)people in the city wishing to live in a more child friendly and mentally healthy environment, c)visitors from the city looking to get away for fresh air,enjoy the countryside, and small villages, d)visitors that are sports and nature lovers, e) schools looking for outdoor programs, f) researchers, g) academic students working on projects,and henceforth. The ideas in this proposal would create jobs,bring in revenue for the City of Pickering, attract national and international attention and recognition, sustain farms.and the environment, and promote a healthy community. This unique City would include the following 10 ideas: 1. Sports and nature trails—biking,hiking, snowmobile, snow-showing, etc. These trails can be marked and maps can be created for locals and visitors. Associations could be created that send part of membership fees to city of Pickering for the trails. We could market ourselves as a leader in trails like Uxbridge has done. These trails could be advertised nationally and internationally attracting visitors from all over. This would create jobs and revenue. 2. Outdoor education camps for children- outdoor education has become a key priority in education and promoted and supported by research related to child development and education. Outdoor education camps can be organized by the City and/or in partnership with schools,universities and child research centres. Such camps would attract tourists, 101 ATTACHMENT I 5 TO REPORT# ?GN ©Z-15 people to move her looking for unique opportunities for their children, and researchers. Money could be generated through memberships, fees, research funding. Jobs could be created; especially jobs for young youth(research shows there is a lack of jobs for our youth). Pickering could be a leader in these camps such as Thunder Bay has done recently. 3. Partner with Universities and colleges specializing in areas of agriculture,planning, engineering,business, and education to develop research projects and apply for major funding. This will bring in money to the City and give national and international recognition. For example,research projects could review the impact of outdoor education camps,trail use,the mental health of residents, impact on resident happiness,community development,planning, etc...The research projects would create job opportunities for local residents. 4. Education programs for kids related to farming- children could visit working farms, complete,co-op hours, internships;outdoor education camps. This would promote and sustain our local farmers. • 5. Small villages with quaint shops- cafes,markets, crafts, etc. would draw people from the city for tourism.Example-the city of Picton has rejuvenated itself with this approach. More and more people are looking for the small town experience and this could be.a major tourist attraction.North Pickering can focus on this. The land is used wisely and • sparsely while still bringing in revenue and visitors. 6. Farm to table restaurants-•a popular movement in the culinary world and urban cities according to several recent city reports and magazines. These restaurants could set up in the areas and use food from 100 miles grown on local farms. They would sustain local farms, create jobs,and bring people in to the City. 7. Natural parks for children and water parks- small parks focused on`natural design' would create jobs and bring in revenue while still honouring the environment. Research promotes natural parks more than structured parks (play theory). 8. Gardens-the creation of gardens could be a tourist attraction. People could come and visit the gardens,pay fees to enter. Contests could be created, attract national recognition, promotion in magazines, annual events. Sponsors could support the gardens. Jobs could be created and revenue brought in for the City. 9. Beds and breakfasts in old houses and farms-this would ensure the preservation of old farms and houses,honouring history. Bed and breakfasts are desirable to urbanites and would attract people from the city and tourists nationally and internationally. The unique setting of the B&B's would draw people. This would create jobs. B&B association memberships would bring in revenue for the City. 102 ATTACHMENT# 5 TO REPORT# i UZ-l5 10. Create research partnerships with Universities and Colleges to look at these initiatives and the impacts on child development,play,resident's health and happiness, the economy,use of health services, etc. The City of Pickering could capitalize on a partnership with the new Centre for Health and Community Centre by Durham College, Trent University and UOIT. Funding and grants could bring revenue,research money and jobs to the City of Pickering. Publications on the research could attract national and international attention for the City of Pickering. All of this equals to `Not your average City!' There is a unique opportunity here for the City of Pickering to market itself quite like no other city. I thank you for giving us the opportunity to share ideas for future uses of the land and the outcome of our communities. Sincerely, Jennifer Laffier Jenlaffier37 @gmail.com- • 298-928-3055 • 5279 Old Brock Rd. Claremont. ON. • 103