HomeMy WebLinkAboutPLN 26-19646/
DICKERING
Report to
Planning & Development Committee
Report Number: PLN 26-19
Date: December 2, 2019
From: Kyle Bentley
Director, City Development & CBO
Subject: Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Study
Intensification Plan and Draft Urban Design Guidelines
Recommendation:
1. That Report PLN 26-19, regarding the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node
Intensification Study, be received for information;
2. That Council endorse in principle the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node
Intensification Plan, dated November 2019, prepared by SvN in consultation with AECOM
and 360 Collective, as contained in Appendix I to Report PLN 26-19, and authorize staff to
initiate an Official Plan Amendment to implement the vision and Intensification Plan for the
Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node; and
3. That Council endorse in principle the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node
Draft Urban Design Guidelines, dated November 2019, prepared by SvN in consultation with
AECOM and 360 Collective, as contained in Appendix II to Report PLN 26-19.
Executive Summary: The purpose of this Report is to present the Kingston Road Corridor and
Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan (Intensification Plan), and the Kingston Road
Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Draft Urban Design Guidelines (UDGs), prepared by SvN in
consultation with AECOM and 360 Collective. A map of the Study Area is provided as
Attachment #1.
The Intensification Plan and UDGs are contained in Appendices I and 11 respectively to Report
PLN 26-19, and available online at https://www.kingstonroadstudy.com/.
The Intensification Plan and UDGs are a result of two years of study and comprehensive public
engagement by SvN and City staff. The Intensification Plan contains a comprehensive framework
for redevelopment and intensification along the Corridor and within the Retailing Node to 2041 and
beyond. The UDGs articulate the vision set by the Intensification Plan and serve as a user-friendly
toolkit for all parties in development projects.
The public engagement process consisted of three focus group sessions, a community
workshop and two community open houses, various one on one meetings with individual land
owners/developers, and meetings with key agencies at key intervals to solicit input and feedback
regarding the development of a new vision, a recommended intensification scenario, an
Intensification Plan with policy recommendations, and Draft UDGs.
PLN 26-19 December 2, 2019
Subject: Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Page 2
Staff is recommending that Council endorse in principle the Intensification Plan and the Draft Urban
Design Guidelines, and authorize staff to initiate an Official Plan Amendment to implement the
vision and Intensification Plan for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. A
City -initiated zoning by-law amendment will follow.
Financial Implications: In October 2017, Council approved the project funding of $223,399.00
and the financing as 27 percent from property taxes and 73 percent from Development Charges.
Funds to complete the Study were carried over in the 2019 Council approved Current Budget for
the City Development Department, Consulting and Professional (Account 2611.2392.0000).
1. Background
1.1
In October 2017, City Council approved the proposal submitted by SvN Architects +
Planners Inc., in association with AECOM and 360 Collective, to undertake an
Intensification Study for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node (see Map
of Study Area, Attachment #1). The study was undertaken over a period of approximately
two years through a highly collaborative process involving City staff, public agencies, key
stakeholders and members of the public, and has been concluded by the preparation of an
Intensification Plan and Draft Urban Design Guidelines (UDGs).
1.2 Public and Agency Engagement and Key Deliverables
The following is a summary of the public and agency engagement process and key study
deliverables:
Phase 1:
• February and March 2018: three Focus Group Sessions were held with the public
(including major landowners, developers and local residents), and a meeting was held
with key public agencies, to share an analysis of existing conditions within the study
area, and to seek feedback regarding existing conditions and a future vision for the
Corridor and Node. The first focus group session targeted major landowners, business
owners and developers within the study area, and groups two and three focused on
residents and the public at large. The comments/inputs from these engagement
sessions were captured in the Background Report, and helped with formulating a
proposed vision for the Corridor and Node.
• August 30, 2018: the consultant released the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty
Retailing Node Intensification Study Background Report, dated July 31, 2018. Members
of Council and the Chief Administrative Officer received an update on the study via a
staff memorandum on August 30, 2018, which included an executive summary of the
Background Report as well as a hyperlink to where it has been posted on the project
website. The Background Report concluded the first phase of the study, and provided
an overview of existing conditions, an analysis of issues and opportunities within four
distinct precincts in the study area, and a proposed vision for the Corridor and Node.
PLN 26-19 December 2, 2019
Subject: Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Page 3
Phase 2:
• September 19, 2018: a community workshop was held to develop alternative
intensification scenarios for the study area, and to obtain final comments on the
proposed vision for the Corridor and Node. The workshop drew 15 participants, and
included a presentation from the consultant regarding the proposed vision for the
Corridor and Node, the approach to develop alternative intensification scenarios, and
roundtable discussions where participants provided comments and suggestions on
different ways to improve connectivity, placemaking and land use/built form within the
4 precincts of the study area.
• November 16, 2018: based on the input from the community workshop, the consultants
evaluated the alternative intensification scenarios and shared their results with key
public agencies, including staff from the City's Engineering Services Department.
Comments received from the key public agencies were used to further refine the
alternative intensification scenarios and to develop a preferred intensification scenario.
• December 6, 2018: a community open house was held to share the consultant's
recommendations regarding a recommended vision and a preferred intensification
scenario for the study area. The open house drew 23 participants and included a
presentation from the consultant, followed by a roundtable discussion where
participants provided comments regarding the preferred intensification scenario. In
addition to the open house, there were a number of individual meetings with
representatives from various major land owners within the study area to consider
challenges, opportunities and design concepts that could potentially enhance the future
development of their lands. Staff also hosted a meeting with key agencies to leverage
inputs regarding the preferred intensification scenario.
• March to May 2019: following the completion of the Phase 2 consultation, the consultant
prepared a Recommended Intensification Scenario Report. The Recommended
Intensification Scenario Report addressed the study purpose and process, the
refinement of the vision, the development and evaluation of the alternative
intensification scenarios, the recommended intensification scenario, and the associated
public engagement processes. The Recommended Intensification Scenario Report
was presented to the Planning & Development Committee (P&DC) of Council on
May 6, 2019 via Planning Report PLN 08-19. A number of representatives from various
major land owners within the study area submitted comments on the Recommended
Intensification Scenario Report at the P&DC meeting. Following the incorporation of
certain minor revisions to the Recommended Intensification Scenario Report (pertaining
to notional building heights), Council endorsed the document on May 27, 2019, and
authorized staff to proceed with Phase 3 of the study.
Phase 3:
• July to September 2019: using the Council endorsed Recommended Intensification
Scenario as a basis, the consultant prepared a Draft Intensification Plan and Draft
UDGs and solicited inputs from key public agencies.
PLN 26-19 December 2, 2019
Subject: Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Page 4
• September 26, 2019: following a review of public agency comments, a community
open house was held where the consultant presented the Draft Intensification Plan and
Draft UDGs for discussion and comments. These documents were also posted online a
week prior to the date of the community open house. The open house drew 28 participants
and included a presentation by the consultant, followed by a question and answer
period. Comments received at and after the community open house were reviewed by
staff and the consultant, and informed further revisions to the Draft Intensification Plan
and Draft UDGs. For more information regarding concerns and key comments received
and staff's response, please see Section 4 of this report and Attachment #2. The final
Intensification Plan and Draft UDGs are included as Appendices I and II respectively to
Report PLN 26-19, and have been posted online at
https://www.kingstonroadstudy.com/.
2. The Intensification Plan
The Intensification Plan provides a framework for the redevelopment and intensification of
the lands within the Kingston Road Corridor and the Specialty Retailing Node. It is a
refinement of the Council endorsed Recommended Intensification Scenario for the Corridor
and Node, and provides direction regarding a proposed land use policy framework, urban
design guidelines and zoning by-law regulations, focusing on the key elements of land use
and built form, placemaking and connectivity.
The Intensification Plan consists of the following sections:
• Section 1 provides the contextual background on the Plan, including a summary of the
study purpose, study process, study area, local and regional context, and the planning
context;
• Section 2 restates Council's endorsed vision, goals and objectives for the Corridor and
Node, and describes the Recommended Intensification Scenario that formed the basis
for the preparation of the Intensification Plan and the UDGs;
• Section 3 provides the framework for intensification, including proposed policy
recommendations for the study area in relation to land use, built form, placemaking,
connectivity and servicing;
• Section 4 describes each of the four precincts in terms of character and anticipated
densities, including key priorities and considerations that have been identified for each
precinct; and
• Section 5 identifies implementation strategies, future studies and strategic capital
projects that should be considered through the development of Official Plan policies and
zoning regulations for the Corridor and Node.
3. The Urban Design Guidelines
The UDGs articulate the design vision for the Intensification Plan, and provide a practical
reference manual for all parties involved in development projects.
PLN 26-19 December 2, 2019
Subject: Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Page 5
The UDGs consist of the following sections:
• Section 1 — Introduction: describing the study area, the vision and objectives for the
Corridor and Node, and a summary of the Intensification Plan;
• Section 2 — Built Form: providing a toolkit of built -form guidelines, addressing matters
such as building placement and orientation, building separation and transitions, access,
parking, landscaping, loading, signage and lighting, materials and facade treatment,
building types, and sustainable design;
• Section 3 — Placemaking: providing a toolkit of place -making guidelines in relation to the
natural heritage network, proposed public and privately owned parks and open spaces,
public art, and identified heritage buildings in the study area;
• Section 4 — Connectivity: providing a toolkit of connectivity guidelines to guide the
creation of a robust, multi -modal transportation system, focusing on pedestrians and
walkability, cycling, transit, as well as the creation of refined network of proposed new
public and private roads and laneways that are integrated with existing public roads in
the study area; and
• Section 5 — Illustrative Blocks: containing illustrative block plans and massing, reflecting
a possible block design applying the UDGs.
The final UDGs will be brought back with the Official Plan Amendment for Council approval.
4. Response to key comments and concerns
Comments received from the public, major land owners and development groups during
and after the last community open house on September 26, 2019 covered various matters
in the Draft Intensification Plan and Draft UDGs, including the following key concerns:
• The application of a 45 degrees angular plane for mid -rise buildings adjacent to
established low density properties is deficient in addressing privacy, enjoyment of
backyards and aesthetic impacts;
• The Intensification Plan states that opportunities for the greatest heights and densities
exist at gateway locations and along Highway 401, as opposed to the proposed policy
recommendations and the mapping that do not reflect such opportunities;
• The identification of preferred office locations within the Brock, Dunbarton/Liverpool,
and Whites Precincts, and setting certain minimum targets for office development have
no basis and have not been substantiated through a market study;
• The proposed policy recommendation that 25 percent of new residential units within
new construction must be affordable to households of low or moderate incomes, can be
misinterpreted as a goal to be met on a site specific basis instead of a City-wide basis;
• The proposed minimum percentages for active ground floor uses along Primary and
Secondary Retail Frontage Areas identified in the Plan are unrealistic and the
associated mapping is too prescriptive;
PLN 26-19 December 2, 2019
Subject: Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Page 6
• The proposed minimum building separation distances for Low-rise and Mid -rise
buildings are called into question and should be reduced;
• The ownership of future streets on the SmartCentres lands in the Brock Precinct
(private vs public);
• The necessity of proposed Primary Public Streets vs Secondary Streets (private
streets);
• The ownership of new parks and open spaces on the SmartCentres lands in the Brock
Precinct (private vs public);
• The implementation of the Intensification Plan could have a detrimental impact on
existing businesses and attaining complete communities;
• The preservation of the Post Manor, the only designated heritage structure in the study
area, needs more emphasis, and language should be included to clarify that the City
would not be supportive of moving or removing buildings of heritage significance without
first studying the properties for their significance;
• The Intensification Plan figures and 3-D model demonstrations and the angular plane
diagrams in the UDGs appear too prescriptive, offering little or no flexibility;
• The language used in the Intensification Plan and UDGs is too prescriptive, and there
should be a degree of flexibility in its interpretation;
• The Intensification Plan lacks direction regarding the maintenance of existing land use
permissions and to permit modest expansion;
• There may be water and sanitary service capacity constraints to accommodate future
growth and intensification within the Corridor and Node; and
• The Intensification Plan should provide direction regarding the need for cost sharing
associated with services and new roads that will be shared, and the sequencing of
development.
The comments in relation to the above listed key concerns and staff's response thereto, are
contained in Attachment #2 to Report PLN 26-19.
Staff, in their review of the submitted comments, noted that various points relate to aspects
that can be more appropriately addressed through the official plan amendment process,
and or the zoning by-law amendment process. Accordingly, such comments will be
revisited when staff prepare the draft official plan amendment and zoning by-law to
implement the new vision and plan for the Corridor and Node.
5. Conclusion
The completion of Phase 3 of the study concludes the study and sets the stage for the
preparation of a City -initiated Official Plan Amendment. Subsequently, a City -initiated zoning
by-law amendment will be prepared. The Urban Design Guidelines will be fine-tuned based
on the official plan amendment and brought back to Council for endorsement.
PLN 26-19 December 2, 2019
Subject: Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Page 7
Staff recommend that Council endorse in principle the Intensification Plan and the Draft
Urban Design Guidelines, as set out respectively in Appendices I and !Ito this report, and
that staff be authorized to initiate an Official Plan Amendment to implement the new vision
and Plan for the Kingston Road Corridor and the Specialty Retailing Node.
Appendices
Appendix I Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan
(November 2019)
Appendix II Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Draft Urban Design
Guidelines (November 2019)
Attachments
1 Map of Study Area
2 Key Comments/Concerns and Staff's Response
Prepared By:
Original Signed By
Dean Jacobs, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Policy & Geomatics
DJ:Id
Approved/Endorsed By:
Original Signed By
Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP
Chief Planner
Original Signed By
Kyle Bentley, P.Eng.
Director, City Development & CBO
Recommended for the consideration
of Pickering City Council
Original Signed By
Tony Prevedel, P.Eng.
Chief Administrative Officer
PLN 26-19 December 2, 2019
Subject: Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Page 7
Staff recommend that Council endorse in principle the Intensification Plan and the Draft
Urban Design Guidelines, as set out respectively in Appendices I and II to this report, and
that staff be authorized to initiate an Official Plan Amendment to implement the new vision
and Plan for the Kingston Road Corridor and the Specialty Retailing Node.
Appendices
Appendix I Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan
(November 2019)
Appendix 11 Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Draft Urban Design
Guidelines (November 2019)
Attachments
1 Map of Study Area
2 Key Comments/Concerns and Staffs Response
Prepared By:
can Jacobs, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Policy & Geomatics
DJ:Id
Approved/Endorsed By:
Catherine Rose, MCIP, R P
Chief Planner
Kyle Bentley, P. ng.
Director, City Development & CBO
Recommended for the consideration
of Pickering City Council
Tony Prevedel, P.Eng.
Chief Administrative Officer
l4vrr- (g , w/q
Appendix I to
Report PLN 26-19
Kingston Road Corridor and
Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan
November 2019
-•_ -
,
Kingston Road Corridor and
Specialty Retailing Node
City of Pickering
Intensification Plan
November 2019
Acknowledgments
The Plan has been developed through a collaborative
process that included landowners, developers, City and
Regional staff and community members, together with
other relevant stakeholders.
The City and consultant team would like to thank all
those involved in the process for their commitment to
making this document a practical and useful tool to guide
the implementation of the Kingston Road Intensification
vision.
City of Pickering
Participating Stakeholders
Landowners
The Public
Agencies
• The Province of Ontario Ministry of Transportation
• Region of Durham
• Parks Canada
• City of Toronto
• Town of Ajax
• Durham District School Board
• Toronto Region and Conservation Authority
Consultants
SvN, AECOM and 360 Collective commenced this
document in May 2019.
The final Intensification Plan will be presented to the
Planning and Development Committee (PDC) at the end
of 2019.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
Table of Contents
0.0 Intent & Structure of 3.0 Framework
Document
1.0 Background and Context
1.1 Study Purpose
1.2 Study Process
1.3 Study Area
1.4 Local and Regional Context
1.5 Planning Context
2.0 The Vision
2.1 Vision Statement
2.2 Goals and Objectives
2.3 Recommended Intensification Scenario
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Land Use
3.2.1 Mix Use A
3.2.2 Mix Use B
3.2.3 Mix Use C
3.2.4 Residential
3.2.5 Transition of Use Over Time
3.3 Built Form
3.3.1 Tall Buildings
3.3.2 Mid -Rise Buildings
3.3.3 Low -Rise Buildings
3.3.4 Gateways
3.3.5 Setbacks
3.3.6 Active Frontage Network
3.3.7 Streetwall
3.3.8 Heritage Buildings
3.4 Place Making
3.4.1 Climate Response and Sustainable Development
3.4.2 Natural Heritage Network
3.4.3 Heritage Path
3.4.4 Public Parks
3.4.5 Public Green Spaces
3.4.6 Public Lookouts
3.4.7 Gateway Plazas
3.4.8 Privately Owned Publicly Accessible Spaces (POPS)
3.4.9 Community Facilities
3.5 Connectivity
3.5.1 Pedestrian Paths
3.5.2 Controlled Intersections
3.5.3 Cycling Network
3.5.4 Transit
3.5.5 Existing Streets
3.5.6 New Public Streets
3.5.7 New Private Streets
3.5.8 New Service Lanes
3.5.9 Parking
3.6 Infrastructure Services
3.6.1 Water
3.6.2 Wastewater
3.6.3 Stormwater
3.6.4 Other
4.0 Precincts
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Rougemount
4.3 Whites
4.4 Dunbarton/Liverpool
4.5 Brock
5.0 Implementation
5.1 Implementation
5.2 Future Studies
5.3 Strategic Capital Projects
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
0.0 Intent & Structure of Document
The Intensification Plan provides the vision and
framework for intensification and redevelopment within
the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing
Node. It is a further refinement of the Recommended
Intensification Scenario and provides direction regarding
the proposed policy framework, urban design guidelines
and zoning by-law regulations.
The intent of the document is to inform Official Plan
policies, the Urban Design Guidelines, the Zoning By-
law amendment, and associated municipal strategies.
The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing
Node Intensification Plan is organized into the following
sections:
Section 1 gives contextual background information on
the plan, including a summary of the study purpose,
study process, study area, local and regional context,
and planning context.
YOU ARE HERE
Section 2 outlines the overarching vision, goals and
objectives for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty
Retailing Node. It also describes the Recommended
Intensification Scenario that formed the basis for the
preparation of the Intensification Plan.
Section 3 provides the framework for intensification,
detailing planning recommendations for the study area
as they relate to land use, built form, place -making,
connectivity and servicing.
Section 4 highlights each of the four identified precincts,
including a detailed description of precinct character.
Key priorities and considerations for each are also
identified.
Section 5 wraps up the document by identifying
implementation strategies, future studies and relevant
strategic capital projects.
1 2.0 The Vision
• Context
Understanding of the site and Understanding of vision and
process and policy background. objectives.
3 O Framework
Review of key features
necessary for intensification
Structure of the Intensification Plan
Annotated Elements in 3.0 Framework
The Framework section provides greater detail on key features identified in the Intensification Plan, with accompanying
discussion and policy recommendations for each. The following example graphic shall guide the reader in identifying the layout
and common elements for each feature.
3.2.1 Mixed UseA�
Mixed Use A (Residential / Retail / Office) features
combination of residential. retail and office uses in mixed
use buildings, or in separate buildings on mixed use
sites. Targeted for significant development, Mixed Use
A areas will have the greatest dens., and represent Me
hignestdntensity uses within the Corridor and Node.
Ofnce uses are encouraged to be located in Mixed
Use A areas, with Preferred Office Locations at major
intersections or gateways where access to existing
and Manned transportation Infrastructure N greatest,
including higher order transit facilities with future
potential M be identified as Major Transit station
Areas. This will allow development to capilalize on the
availability of frequent transit cervices and maximize
opportunities to create high-density employment zones
that enable grea[�e-work opportunities In the City
of Pickering, with 1 and residences located In close
Proximity.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Mad Use p areas I belocaled according to the
Figure 12. Arlscape Daniels faunchped. Tornio
4.0 Precincts
Precinct character, densities
and key considerations.
•
The main header
V identifies the feature.
The symbology used to represent the
feature on maps is identified in the top
left-hand corner.
The policy recommendations
text box provides relevant
policy guidelines relating to
the feature.
The discussion text introduces the
feature, including details on typical
locations and functional role within
the greater intensification framework.
5.0
The accompanying image
highlights relevant precedents
to show real-life best practice
examples of the feature.
Implementation
Understanding next steps,
future studies and strategic
capital projects
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
Background and
Context
1.1 Study Purpose
1.2 Study Process
1.3 Study Area
1.4 Local and Regional Context
1.5 Planning Context
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
1.1 Study ruro•
Study Purpose
The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing
Node Intensification Study represents a further phase
of the South Pickering Intensification Study, itself an
offshoot of the broader city-wide Growth Strategy
Program. The purpose of this overall Program is to
implement the strategic growth area objectives of the
Provincial Growth Plan and the corridor objectives of the
Durham Regional Official Plan within the South Pickering
urban area.
The first phase of the Growth Strategy Program focused
on the City Centre. Upon the conclusion of that phase,
the Program switched focus to examine intensification
opportunities on the remaining lands in South Pickering.
A number of factors led to the identification of the
Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node as
an area for further study of intensification potential.
From a policy perspective, Kingston Road is designated
as a Regional Corridor in the Durham Regional Official
Plan and as a Mixed Use Area — Mixed Corridor in the
Pickering Official Plan. The Specialty Retailing Node
also has a Mixed Use Area designation in the Pickering
Official Plan. Together these designations identify
Kingston Road and the Specialty Retailing Node as a
priority location for intensification.
From a transit investment perspective, Durham Region
is currently implementing transit priority measures along
Kingston Road through curbside bus -only lanes that can
accommodate Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). Further study
will be undertaken by the region to explore a dedicated
median transit right-of-way. There is therefore an
opportunity to plan for redevelopment with a mix of uses
and at densities that would be supportive of this rapid
transit investment.
From a community input perspective, participants in
the South Pickering Intensification Study engagement
process identified the importance of intensification
and higher density development along corridors
such as Kingston Road, maintaining the character of
established neighbourhoods, encouraging the use of
active transportation, and creating vibrant, mixed-use,
well designed, transit -supportive communities. Together,
these community aspirations lend themselves to a
renewed vision for the Kingston Road Corridor and
Specialty Retailing Node that aligns with new policy
direction and transit investment initiatives.
Through the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty
Retailing Node Study, opportunities for intensification will
be identified, urban design guidelines will be created,
and recommendations developed that will be used to
update the in -force planning framework, including Official
Plan policies and zoning specific to the Corridor and
Node.
1.2 Study Process
Phase 1
Develop a Vision
Nov. 2017 - Sept. 2018
Review of Existing Conditions
Develop Vision, Goals and
Objectives
Phase 2
Develop a Preferred
Scenario
Oct. 2018 - Mar. 2019
Phase 3
Preferred Design
Apr. 2019 - Nov. 2019
Develop Planning and Design Guidelines Prepare Intensification Plan
and Criteria Prepare Urban Design Guidelines
Prepare and Assess Alternative
Scenarios
Select Preferred Scenario
Study Process
The Study was undertaken in a three-phase process
over a two-year period from November 2017 to
November 2019. The three phases of the Study
include Phase 1: Develop a Vision, Phase 2: Develop a
Recommended Scenario, and Phase 3: Recommended
Design.
Phase 1 of the Study involved undertaking a review
of existing conditions, an analysis of issues and
opportunities, and the development of a vision and
associated goals and objectives. The vision, goals
and objectives were used as the basis for developing
alternative intensification scenarios in Phase 2 and the
recommended design in Phase 3. Phase 1 concluded
with the release of a background report in August 2018,
which summarized the results of Phase 1 of the Study.
Phase 2 of the Study focused on developing a set
of Alternative Intensification Scenarios with different
arrangements of open space, street networks, land use
and built form. Each scenario was tested against a set of
evaluation criteria based on the Study vision, goals and
objectives. The Recommended Intensification Scenario
was endorsed by Council on May 27, 2019, which set
the basis for the preparation of the Intensification Plan
and Urban Design Guidelines developed in Phase 3.
Phase 3 consisted of further analysis and refinement
of the Recommended Intensification Scenario
to produce the final Intensification Plan and
Urban Design Guidelines. The Plan provides a
comprehensive planning framework and specific policy
recommendations for updating Official Plan policies and
Zoning By-law permissions within the Study Area. The
Design Guidelines set out clear direction on appropriate
and context -sensitive built form, mobility and streetscape
design, publicly -accessible open space, and integration
and responsiveness to natural heritage.
Each phase of the Study involved robust public and
stakeholder consultation with meetings specifically
tailored to solicit the involvement of and input from
local residents, landowners, public agencies and key
stakeholders. This feedback informed key decision
points over the course of the Study.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
1.3 Study Area
The approximately 152 -hectare Study Area is centred
on Kingston Road, which spans the entire width of the
City of Pickering, paralleling Highway 401. The Study
Area generally includes properties that front on to the
north and south sides of Kingston Road, between
Rouge National Urban Park in the west and Pine Creek
in the east. The Study Area also includes a number of
properties that front on to the north side of Kingston
Road west and east of the intersection of Brock Road,
as well as all properties that fall within the Specialty
Retailing Node to the southeast of the intersection of
Kingston Road and Brock Road (see Figure 1).
There are two areas along Kingston Road that are
excluded from the Study Area. These include flood prone
areas to the north and east of the Specialty Retailing
Node and the City Centre, where a detailed planning
study has already been undertaken result in Council -
approved area -specific Official Plan policies, zoning, and
urban design guidelines.
For the purposes of the study, the Study Area has been
divided into the following four precincts:
Rougemount Precinct — extending from the Rouge
Valley in the west to Rosebank Road in the east
Whites Precinct— extending from Rosebank Road in
the west to Fairport Road in the east
Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct — extending from
Fairport Road in the west to Pine Creek in the east
Brock Precinct — incorporating the portions of the Study
Area around the intersection of Kingston Road and
Brock Road and the entirety of the Specialty Retailing
Node located south of Kingston Road, east of Brock
Road, and north of Highway 401
Traffic
Zone A
Traffic Zone B
Traffic
Zone C
Zone D
Traffic
Zone E
Rougemount Precinct Whites Precinct
Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct
Figure 1. Study Area
Legend
—•—• Study Area Boundary
Parks 1 open Space
Rail Corridor
Speciality Retailing Node
1.20 km
Brock Precinct
•
1.4 Local and Regional Context
Kingston Road continues to serve a regional role,
providing connections between Pickering, Toronto,
Ajax, Whitby and Oshawa. It also serves as a connector
between a number of regionally significant natural
heritage features, including the Highland Creek and
Rouge River in Toronto, the Petticoat Creek and Duffins
Creeks in Pickering, and the Caruthers Creek in Ajax.
This regional major link/connection is shown in Figure 2.
The Specialty Retailing Node also serves a regional role,
providing specialty retailing to a broad regional market
with access provided by the Highway 401 interchange at
Brock Road.
At the city scale, Kingston Road is a major east -west
spine with branch connections to important growth areas
such as the Seaton Urban Area. It also connects to
recreational amenities such as the Pickering Waterfront
and Rouge National Urban Park, including Glen Rouge
Campground and its associated trails which are to be
expanded significantly over the coming years. These
city scale north -south major links/connections are shown
conceptually in Figure 3.
At the neighbourhood scale, Kingston Road serves as a
spine for key north -south connections across Highway
401, connecting neighbourhoods in the South Pickering
Urban Area to one another at Rougemount Drive, Whites
Road, Liverpool Road, and Brock Road (see conceptual
major links/connections in Figure 4). Likewise, the
Specialty Retailing Node plays a city/neighbourhood
scale role, providing destination retail and local retail
within its boundaries, serving customers from within the
City of Pickering and the immediate areas that surround
it.
The role the corridor plays at multiple scales
necessitates that the ultimate vision for intensification
contemplate and seek a balance between these varied
functions, through new connections, new open spaces,
public realm improvements, new uses, and new, denser
development.
R4[h
11,11
rouffvllle
a r
Markham
■
1-�
i
1
.+
Figure 2. Regional Context
00....
The Region
Figure 3. City-wide Context
The
eighbourhood
Legend
Major Links and Connections
(at varying scales)
Natural Features
44 Kingston Road
Figure 4. Neighbourhood Context
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
1.5 Planning Context
Intensification of the Kingston Road Corridor and
Specialty Retailing Node is supported by existing
planning policy, ranging from broad direction at the
provincial level to specific guidance at the local level.
The Provincial Policy Statement and the Growth Plan
provide strong direction for increased intensification and
planning for complete communities across the Greater
Golden Horseshoe Region. These policies support the
close integration of transportation and land use planning
through planning for transit -supportive development in
proximity to frequent transit. They also support planning
practices which facilitate active transportation and
provide for a range and mix of uses and activities.
The Regional Official Plan identifies Kingston Road as
a Regional Corridor, which is an area towards which
intensification is to be directed. These areas are to be
planned and developed as higher -density mixed use
areas that support higher order transit priorities and
pedestrian -oriented development, and should reach an
overall, long-term density target of at least 60 residential
units per gross hectare and a floor space index of 2.5.
In regards to regional policy, the Region's Municipal
Comprehensive Review (Envision Durham) is currently
underway and will be brought into conformity with the
Provincial Plans approved in 2017 and with Amendment
1 to the Growth Plan. Envision Durham may provide
more direction regarding densities and built form
objectives along the Corridor.
The City of Pickering Official Plan identifies both
Kingston Road and the Specialty Retailing Node as
Mixed Use Areas where a broad variety of uses are
permitted at a higher density and within buildings
that feature a high quality of design (see Figure 5).
Slappard Mom
I.r.S,
Brock Precinct
Legend
Study Area Boundary
Rail Corridor
Flood Plain Special Policy Areas
Figure 5. Official Plan Land Use
Pickering Official Plan Land Use Structure
Mixed Use Areas
Open Space System
Urban Residential Areas
Employment Areas
Freeways and Utilities
The Rougemount, Whites and Dunbarton/Liverpool
Precincts are designated as Mixed Corridors, and the
Brock Precinct Is designated as a Mixed Corridor along
Kingston Road and a Specialty Retailing Node south of
Kingston Road and east of Brock Road.
Despite this policy direction for mixed use, the existing
land use within the Study Area are defined by retail
uses, with half of all land area occupied by this use (see
Figure 6). Other commercial uses including offices, auto
dealerships and service uses combined with the retail
uses compose nearly two-thirds of all lands within the
Study Area. There are relatively large portions of vacant
lands and educational uses, each comprising almost
10% of the lands in the study area. There are few lands
with medium and high density residential uses, including
single detached residential dwellings.
In terms of the transportation role of Kingston Road, it
is identified as a Rapid Transit Corridor in the City of
Pickering's Transportation Master Plan Update. Kingston
Road, Whites Road and Brock Road are all identified
as Transit Spines in the Regional Official Plan; the role
of these is to facilitate inter -regional and inter -municipal
services along arterial roads and intersect with local
transit services.
These existing uses combined with the transportation
role of Kingston Road play a strong role in defining
the public realm, streetscape character and lot fabric
within the Study Area. There is some variation within the
corridor in terms of these urban design elements, with
some sections exhibiting the physical and functional
characteristics of a major traffic route that connects
neighbourhoods, and other sections exhibiting those of a
main street or "heart" of the community.
The Specialty Retailing Node has a somewhat different
character than the remainder of the corridor given its
orientation to Kingston Road and the predominance
of big box retail uses within its boundaries. Currently,
Development Guidelines designed in the late 1990s
provide high-level guidance on the desired urban design
for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing
Node.
Retail
Open Space - 9.2%
Education - 8.4%
Vacant - 7.5%
Auto - 7.2%
Residential - 6.2%
Other Services - 8.4%
Pfsce of Worship - 3.9%
Offices , 2.3%
Figure 6. Existing Land Use Composition
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
49.9%
2.0 The Vision
2.1 Vision Statement
2.2 Goals and Objectives
2.3 Recommended Intensification Scenario
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanGM
2.1 Vision Statement
During Phases 1 and 2 of the Study, a renewed Vision
for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing
Node was developed. This renewed Vision built upon the
existing vision for the Corridor and Node as expressed
in the City of Pickering Official Plan, the Kingston Road
Corridor Development Guidelines, and the Specialty
Retailing Node Guidelines. The renewed Vision was also
informed by the updated planning framework, specifically
the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe's
increased emphasis on planning for complete
communities and integrating transportation and land
use planning through transit -supportive development.
Lastly, the renewed Vision was developed in light of
the review of existing conditions, analysis of issues and
opportunities and consultation with Focus Groups and
the Public Agency Advisory Committee.
Based on all of the above, the following was endorsed
by Council as a new Vision for the Corridor and Node:
By 2041, the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty
Retailing Node will be...
• A sustainable place that embraces its significant
natural heritage assets, connecting to the valleys
and creeks that the corridor crosses, mitigating
greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to climate
change, and building communities centred on new
public open spaces in both the Corridor and Node
• A walkable place in all four precincts, with safe,
comfortable and green sidewalks and pedestrian
connections on both sides of Kingston Road, and
within larger parcels that are likely to redevelop with
an internal street network, particularly within the
node
• An urban, livable, transit -supportive community, with
a higher density mix of uses, located in buildings
that are pedestrian oriented, and that transition in
height and mass to the scale of adjacent established
neighborhoods, particularly to the north of the
corridor and to the east of the node
• A place that continues to serve as both a destination
for shopping and a place of employment, with retail,
commercial services and offices within mixed use
buildings or on mixed use sites, and generally
fronting directly onto Kingston Road, Whites Road
and onto new internal streets on larger parcels,
to provide active uses at grade that encourage
pedestrian traffic
• A regional and local multi -modal connector, with
regional gateways at Altona Road and Brock Road,
and with gateways to the neighborhoods north and
south of the corridor at Rougemount Drive, Whites
Road and Fairport Road.
2.2 Goals and Objectives
In addition to the above new Vision, a series of
guiding goals and objectives for the corridor and
node were prepared to guide the development of
the Recommended Intensification Scenario and
Intensification Plan.
These goals and objectives are as follows:
1. Advance the concept of place -making and
create complete communities
1.1 Create a distinct character for the Corridor and
Node as a whole while also providing for variation
based on the unique conditions and adjacencies
within each precinct
1.2 Create a strong sense of community, a context
for healthy lifestyles and a high quality of life
1.3 Plan for a full range of housing types and
tenures in a variety of building forms
1.4 Provide for and ensure the accessibility of a full
range of services and amenities for all walks of life
2. Promote sustainability in the design and full life-
cycle of the streetscape, open spaces and buildings
2.1 Ensure that the ultimate streetscape, open
space and redevelopment concepts have capacity to
support growth beyond the horizon of the plan
2.2 Ensure that sustainability principles and green
infrastructure are incorporated as a foundational
element of all streetscape, open space and built form
concepts
3. Stimulate economic growth and vitality
3.1 Maintain space for various sizes of retail
uses and encourage the expansion of office and
commercial service uses
4. Promote mixed used development with an
emphasis on higher density residential and
employment uses integrated within a building or site
4.1 Plan for existing single use sites to transition
over time to a mix of uses, either through full scale
redevelopment or infill on underutilized portions of a
site
4.2 Plan for higher density forms of employment
including office uses, within close proximity to higher
order transit stops
4.3 Plan for the greatest mix of uses and highest
densities within close proximity to higher order transit
stops
5. Design all public roads and private connections
to be complete streets and emphasize transit and
pedestrian oriented development
5.1 Ensure that all users of public roads and private
connections have distinct and delineated spaces to
separate modes of travel moving at different speeds
5.2 Ensure that buildings are located in close
proximity to and are oriented towards the public realm
and provide active edges to create an environment
that encourages walking
6. Improve access management and connectivity
for all transportation modes
6.1 Plan for the consolidation of driveways with
access to and from Kingston Road
6.2 Plan for the creation or enhancement of
internal street networks on larger parcels to provide
alternative routes and new frontages for development
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
7. Encourage the optimization of infrastructure
7.1 Establish a density target for areas or sites
within proximity to higher order transit stops to
optimize transit ridership
7.2 Ensure that intensification can be supported by
existing infrastructure capacity and that additional
infrastructure is phased in step with development
8. Enhance and restore natural heritage features
and functions
8.1 Provide physical and visual connections
between the corridor and the natural heritage features
that it intersects
8.2 Restore natural heritage corridors, ensure no
incremental loss of natural heritage and consider
stormwater management on an area wide basis
9. Support implementation by considering
phasing, flexibility and intermediate interventions
9.1 Ensure that the overall arrangement of streets,
blocks, open spaces and buildings can be achieved in
multiple ways and that sites are designed in a manner
that anticipates change over time
2.3 Recommended Intensification
Scenario
The Recommended Intensification Scenario was
developed through an iterative process whereby a set
of Alternative Intensification Scenarios with different
arrangements of open space, street networks, land use
and built form were developed and tested against a set
of evaluation criteria.
The evaluation and assessment was informed by four
inputs. The first input was consideration of the defined
vision, goals and objectives for the Study Area, which
was used to create a framework for modelling change
and growth within the four precincts. The second
input was a series of key assumptions that were held
consistent across all of the Alternative Intensification
Scenarios, including assumptions around overall
growth, natural environment, transportation, and land
use. The third input was the identification of sites
with redevelopment potential. Finally, the fourth was
feedback from key public agencies and members of
the public through a workshop and open house and a
number of one-on-one meetings with major landowners/
developers; this allowed the community to provide
input into the challenges and opportunities for how
connectivity, place making, and land use / built form
could be improved within all four precincts.
Following the assessment of the Alternative
Intensification Scenarios, these findings were used as a
base to develop a Preferred Intensification Scenario that
was further refined into a Recommended Intensification
Scenario for the overall Corridor and Node.
This Recommended Intensification Scenario included
modelling the potential mix of land uses and densities
for potential redevelopment sites in each precinct
to estimate the level of intensification that could be
achieved in terms of people and jobs.
Within the Rougemount Precinct, the potential mix
of uses and densities would result in a total of 1,991
residents and 236 jobs on potential redevelopment sites,
for a combined 101 people and jobs per hectare and 45
residential units per hectare.
Within the Whites Precinct, the potential mix of uses
and densities would result in a total of 7,622 residents
and 2,536 jobs on potential redevelopment sites, for
a combined 199 people and jobs per hectare and 75
residential units per hectare.
Within the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct, the potential
mix of uses and densities would result in a total of 6,036
residents and 1,274 jobs on potential redevelopment
sites, for a combined 203 people and jobs per hectare
and 84 residential units per hectare.
Within the Brock Precinct, the potential mix of uses
and densities would result in a total of 6,208 residents
and 3,580 jobs on potential redevelopment sites, for
a combined 218 people and jobs per hectare and 69
residential units per hectare.
The Recommended Intensification Scenario was
endorsed by Council on May 27, 2019. For additional
information see the Kingston Road Corridor and
Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Study:
Recommended Intensification Scenario Report from
March 20, 2019.
The report and endorsement has set a conceptual
framework in place to be refined into an Intensification
Plan. Although it has been endorsed by Council, certain
concerns have been expressed from stakeholders,
particularly with regard to building heights, parkland
provision, infrastructure capacity, and road networks.
These were further reviewed and considered through the
development of the Intensification Plan (see Figure 7).
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM
3.0 Framework
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Land Use
3.3 Built Form
3.4 Placemaking
3.5 Connectivity
3.6 Infrastructure Services
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM
3.1 Introduction
Building upon the new Vision and the Recommended
Intensification Scenario, this Intensification Plan provides
a comprehensive framework for future development
of the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing
Node.
This document sets out a detailed plan for desired land
use mix, built form, and area character. It establishes
place -making priorities relating to natural heritage, public
realm and open space. It specifies improvements to the
street, transit, cycling and pedestrian network to increase
connectivity to adjacent areas. It also addresses
infrastructure services relating to water, wastewater,
stormwater and information technology.
LEGEND
Study Area Boundary
Valleylands and Stream Corridors
Regional Stormwater Flood Plain
▪ Existing Park
▪ Buildings To Remain
• Properties of Heritage Significance
LAND USE / BUILT FORM
•
Gateway
_ Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office
0 Preferred Office Location
Mixed Use 13 - Residential/ Retail
Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail
ELIF Residential
1__J Primary Frontage
LJ Secondary Frontage
Existing Development Application
Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative
Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm)
4,i ii„0
The following legend for the Intensification Plan outlines
the key features of the Plan. It is followed by an overall
Intensification Plan (Figure 7) and Intensification Plans
(Figures 8 to 11) subdivided by precinct.
Existing Main Road
Existing Road / Laneways
Existing Cycling Network
Planned Cycling Network
GO Railway
Future & Planned Connection
Subject to EA
PLACE MAKING
0
co
0
Gateway Plaza
Public Green Space
Public Park
POPS
Public Lookout
Heritage Path
Potential Community
Facility
04
0
•
Lot Lines
Developable Lots
Lot identifier
Area Subject to Further Assessment
Existing Controlled Intersection
Bus Stops
CONNECTIVITY
--- j Pedestrian Path
Multi -Use Path
CI Proposed Public Streets
1 Proposed Private Streets
Proposed Cycling Facility
Potential Controlled intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Location Subject to Further
Review
• Indicative Enhanced Boulevard
- P Right -in , Right -out
Access
This page has been Intentionally left blank.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM
Tra ' is Zone A
Tra ' is Zone B Tra ' is Zone B
Altana Forest
Sheppard Ave
aunbarion
Creek Ravine
LEGEND
Study Area Boundary
Valleylands and Stream Corridors
Regional Stormwater Flood Plain
Existing Park
Buildings To Remain
Properties of Heritage Significance
Figure 7. Intensification Plan
Existing Main Road
Existing Road / Laneways
Existing Cycling Network
— – Planned Cycling Network
GO Railway
4
Lot Lines
Developable Lots
s -x Lot Identifier
Area Subject to Further Assessmei
O Existing Controlled Intersection
Future & Planned Connection • Bus Stops
Subject to EA
Tra ' is Zone C
Valley Farm Rd
f• l
Beech lawn
Park
• BnyIySt
iman's Bay
Precinct
LAND USE / BUILT FORM
Gateway
Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office
Preferred Office Location
Mixed Use B - Residential/ Retail
Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail
Residential
Primary Frontage
Secondary Frontage
Existing Development Application
Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative
Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm)
Pickering
GO Station
PLACE MAKING
0
8
0
Sandy Beach Rd
Gateway Plaza
Public Green Space
Public Park
POPS
Public Lookout
Heritage Path
Potential Community
Facility
v0 100 m 300 m 500 m
Broc Precinct
CONNECTIVITY
C
Pedestrian Path
Multi -Use Path
Proposed Public Streets
Proposed Private Streets
Proposed Cycling Facility
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Location Subject to Further
Review
Indicative Enhanced Boulevard
Right -In , Right -out
Access
Rouge Motional Urban Pack
".•..•.•:•:•:•:•:•::•:•:•:•:•:•:•:
•
•
•
Area Subject
El wironmental:•:•:•:•:•:-IC.•:•:::::
Flood Reviery'::•:•:•:•:•:•: .•:•:•.•.• •
, ...•.•'
East 1
woodlands /
Park
........
`sal
Figure 8. Rougemount Precinct Intensification Plan
E.N.I.1 L. Snood
Park
• Planned gi'cting fiIky
type and location to be
determined through
future EA study
OP recommends piping
the creek here
we.•
.::•:•:•:•:N••••••••
• • •
10Orn
!••=,•-!-:. •
if,
us'
,x4Sois.
...
Figure 9. Whites Precinct Intensification Plan
100m
- - / Frenchman's B.
Figure 10. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Intensification Plan
• T..... ---
11u
`•F@@ .
a l0
1109
'arq" .;,MI 1 111 111LA.
11.1 "IQ,* * tra
H le 14
-
Diana Princess
Wake Park
Figure 11. Brock Precinct Intensification Plan
maw
aae
hamar
awe
arak 1
afitai
o
lt Subject LO rota Play .�
• AmerWmenl and ERarnnmen[a,
Assessnaenr Study outcome
ection
un review
under re
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
3.2 Land Use
Key Objectives
• Promote mixed-use development with an emphasis
on higher density residential and employment uses
integrated within a building or site
• Create high-density employment hubs through the
concentration of office uses near higher -order transit
• Build complete communities with opportunities for
live -work within close proximity
Introduction
This section introduces the land use permissions that
will apply to the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty
Retailing Node. They are intended to support an
integrated mix of residential, retail and office uses.
Redevelopment shall seek to accomodate these uses in
a form and scale which is complementary to the vision of
the mixed-use Corridor and Node.
Land uses can be allocated in a number of different
ways. A mix of uses can be accommodated within a
single building; for example, a building with retail co -
located on the ground floor with residential uses above.
A mix of uses can also be accommodated within any
single use buildings on the same site; for example,
a standalone retail store or office building located on
Kingston Road with residential townhomes located on
the same property but off of the main street.
During each stage of the planning process, land
use compatibility must be considered so as to avoid
instances of adverse effect when competing uses
are in close proximity. The location of commercial
establishments with busy evening hours adjacent to
residential homes is an example of where this type of
conflict may arise.
This Plan recommends four land use categories for
the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing
Node: Mixed Use A, Mixed Use B, Mixed Use C, and
Residential. Subsequent pages discuss the following
features, shown in the Intensification Plan and identified
in the legend with the corresponding symbology.
Mixed Use A - Residentiall Retail/ Office
Preferred Office Location
Mixed Use B - Residential/ Retail
Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail
Residential
3.2.1 Mixed Use A
Mixed Use A (Residential / Retail / Office) features a
combination of residential, retail and office uses in mixed
use buildings, or in separate buildings on mixed use
sites. Targeted for significant development, Mixed Use
A areas will have the greatest density and represent the
highest -intensity uses within the Corridor and Node.
Office uses are encouraged to be located in Mixed
Use A areas, with Preferred Office Locations at major
intersections or gateways where access to existing
and planned transportation infrastructure is greatest,
including higher order transit facilities with future
potential to be identified as Major Transit Station
Areas. This will allow development to capitalize on the
availability of frequent transit services and maximize
opportunities to create high-density employment zones
that enable greater live -work opportunities in the City
of Pickering, with jobs and residences located in close
proximity.
Identified on Drawings as:
_ Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office
0 Preferred Office Location
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Mixed Use A areas should be located according to the
Intensification Plan shown in Fig. 7-11.
b. Major office development is encouraged to occur in
Mixed Use A areas. Office uses should be located
at Preferred Office Locations according to the
Intensification Plan shown in Fig. 7-11.
c. Although the Rougemount Precinct does not show
land uses identified as Mixed Use A, office uses are
encouraged to be located in this Precinct.
d. Redevelopment within Mixed Use A areas should seek
to accommodate a minimum amount of office space
as part of the total floor area of buildings on site.
The City of Pickering is encouraged to undertake an
office demand study to determine the requirements
necessary as the area intensifies. An office demand
study may also be requested in coordination with a
development application at key locations.
e. The intent of establishing minimum office space
requirements is to preserve the potential for future
office space at key transit nodes. As current demand
for office space may not match future potential,
provisions for office space can be met through
demonstrating phasing and/or including building
types that can be easily altered or appropriated for
office uses over time (see Section 5.0).
f. The City shall promote the creation of residential
units in conjunction with retail, office, service
commercial and institutional uses in support of
developing complete communities.
Figure 12. Artscape Daniels Launchpad, Toronto
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan48M
3.2.2 Mixed Use B
Mixed Use B (Residential / Retail) features a
combination of residential and retail uses in mixed use
buildings, or in separate buildings on mixed use sites.
Mixed Use B areas will contain a significant proportion of
at -grade retail, most of which will be small- to medium -
scale neighbourhood -oriented businesses to satisfy local
needs.
They are primarily located close to gateways or internal
local streets. These areas will combine street -level retail
and commercial services with medium and high-rise
residential to support higher -density development, local
employment, and an animated public realm.
Identified on Drawings as:
® Mixed Use 13 - Residential/ Retail
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Mixed Use B areas should be located according to
the Intensification Plan shown in Fig. 7-11.
b. Retail and commercial -service uses should be
primarily located on the ground floor. Second floor
retail and commercial -service uses are encouraged.
c. Office uses should be permitted but secondary to
residential, retail and service -commercial uses.
d. The City shall promote the creation of residential
units in conjunction with retail, office, service
commercial and institutional uses in support of
developing complete communities.
Figure 13. Ideal Lofts, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Wikimedia)
3.2.3 Mixed Use C
Mixed Use C (Residential / Retail) also features a
combination of residential and retail uses, with a greater
proportion of residential, and a lower proportion of retail
than Mixed Use B. These represent the least -intensive
mixed use zones within the Kingston Road Corridor.
Mixed Use C areas will include occasional smaller -scale
retail and service uses which are complimentary to
residential uses, reflecting their community -oriented role.
They are primarily located at intersections along
Kingston Road that are not identified as gateways.
Mixed Use C lands are also often located adjacent to
existing or proposed green spaces or community and
institutional facilities.
Identified on Drawings as:
Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Mixed Use C areas should be located according to the
Intensification Plan shown in Fig. 7-11.
b. Retail and commercial -service uses should be
primarily located on the ground floor.
c. Office uses should be permitted but secondary to
residential, retail and service -commercial uses.
d. The City shall promote the creation of residential units
in conjunction with retail, office, service commercial
and institutional uses in support of developing
complete communities.
Figure 14. 270 Rushton, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Josie Stern Team)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM
3.2.4 Residential
Residential features primarily residential uses, generally
in areas that otherwise are intended to have a high
degree of mixed use and where a mix of uses on a
specific site may not be desirable or achievable.
They are located throughout the Kingston Road Corridor
and Specialty Retailing Node, typically adjacent to
existing low-rise residential neighbourhoods.
New residential housing development will support
the achievement of municipal and regional housing
goals, including diversity in housing type, tenure and
affordability.
Identified on Drawings as:
Residential
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Residential areas should be located according to the
Intensification Plan shown in Fig. 7-11.
b. The following residential building types should be
permitted: apartment dwellings of various heights,
townhouses and live -work units.
c. Office and retail uses should be permitted but limited
to live -work units on the ground -floor of residential
buildings.
d. Residential areas are encouraged to achieve a broad
diversity of housing by form, location, size, tenure,
and cost to meet the housing needs of existing and
future residents as they evolve over time, including
affordable, rental, assisted and special needs
housing.
e. A minimum 25 percent of new residential
construction is encouraged to be of forms that would
be affordable to households of low or moderate
income.
fir/
,.••i 11111111i
ITIVFIVat
Figure 15.Regent Park townhouses, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: SvN)
3.2.5 Transition of Use Over Time
As the area undergoes intensification and
redevelopment, uses that are not compatible with
the vision for Kingston Road Corridor and Speciality
Retailing Node will be encouraged to locate elsewhere
within the City of Pickering.
Land uses that detract from walkability and a vibrant
public realm are not considered compatible. These
include gas stations, auto parts repairs, service shops,
car washes, car dealerships, commercial surface
parking, drive through establishments, bottle depots,
car storage, self -storage, warehouses, distribution
facilities, and storage facilities, and any other businesses
requiring extensive parking or outside storage.
The transition of these areas into compatible uses is
encouraged and should be supported, where possible,
through adjacent redevelopment.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Uses that are incompatible with the vision for the
Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node
should be encouraged to relocate. These include new
auto -oriented development and low-density industrial
uses.
b. The expansion of existing uses that require open air
storage should be discouraged and/or encouraged to
provide indoor storage located at the rear of the site.
c. Redevelopment adjacent to incompatible uses should
balance the mitigation of impacts with the integration
and future redevelopment of such sites through
building, site and streetscape design strategies.
d. Larger redevelopment sites should submit a phasing
plan as part of their development application
demonstrating the full build out of the site, including
but not limited to:
i. Ultimate street and block network, including
potential connections to adjacent properties;
ii. Ultimate parks and open space network, including
potential connections to adjacent properties;
iii. Integration of office uses; and
iv. Redevelopment of surface parking lots.
Figure 16. Archimatika's design for a modern office, Kiev, Ukraine (photo credits: Archimatika)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan4IESM
3.3 Built Form
Key Objectives
• Promote higher -density mixed-use development
while respecting the character and scale of
established neighbourhoods through proper
transitioning, and careful building design and
placement
• Introduce an animated public realm through
encouraging active uses at grade and an enjoyable
pedestrian experience
• Retain and emphasize the distinct character of
local streetscapes and precincts, including heritage
protection
Introduction
This section introduces built form policies and guidelines
to promote high-quality urban environments within the
Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node.
The Intensification Plan identifies a more urban
condition, with higher heights and greater densities, than
what currently exists in the area. Heights and densities
are pronounced near transit stops and intersection
gateways as a response to a higher convergence of
pedestrians, cyclists and transit users. Additionally,
priority is given to respecting the character and scale of
adjacent established residential neighbourhoods.
The Built Form policy recommendations aim to ensure
that new buildings enforce a coherent, harmonious and
well-designed streetscape, enhancing the experience of
users in terms of visibility, animation, comfort, safety, and
accessibility.
The Built Form chapter will address heights, gateways,
streetwalls, setbacks, active frontage, heritage buildings
and precinct character. Subsequent pages discuss the
following features, shown in the Intensification Plan
and identified in the legend with the corresponding
symbology.
Gateway
LJ Primary Frontage
1 J Secondary Frontage
Existing Development Application
Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative
Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm)
Properties of Heritage Significance
3.3.1 Tall Buildings
Tall buildings are generally defined as buildings that are
13 storeys or greater.
As intensification occurs within the Corridor and Node,
the number of tall buildings is expected to increase.
Their design and placement should positively contribute
to the public realm and respond to the surrounding
context. The impact of taller built forms on parks and
the pedestrian realm, in terms of sunlight, shadow and
wind tunnel impacts, should also be considered.
Tall buildings should appropriately transition in height to
minimize adverse impacts and create a more human -
scaled pedestrian environment, particularly where high-
rise development is directly adjacent to existing low-rise
neighbourhoods.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Tall buildings should generally be located within
gateways and at the intersection of transit spines and
major arterials, along the highway, and proximate to
highway access. Tall buildings consist of buildings 13
storeys or higher.
b. Tall building towers should be separated from one
another by a minimum distance of 25 metres and
should have a maximum tower floor plate of 750m2.
c. Tall buildings should be located to minimize shadow
impacts and wind tunnel effects on proximate parks,
open spaces, primary frontage sidewalks and existing
low-rise residential areas.
d. The general maximum height of tall buildings should
be no more than 45 storeys. At gateway locations in
the Rougemount Precinct and Dunbarton/Liverpool
Precinct and along the highway in the Rougemount
Precinct, the maximum building height should be 25
storeys to reflect the precinct character.
e. If the general intent of the Intensification Plan is met,
flexibility with massing and height may be considered
on a site specific basis.
Figure 17. Paintbox Condominium, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Lisa Logan)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM
3.3.2 Mid -Rise Buildings
Mid -rise buildings are generally defined as buildings
which are between 5 to 12 storeys in height.
The design and placement of mid -rise buildings should
maintain access to sunlight and extend the length of time
for which the sun will hit the sidewalk throughout the day.
It should also ensure a similar built form and height on
both sides of the road to create a coherent and cohesive
public realm. In Rougemount and Dunbarton/Liverpool,
the design of mid -rise buildings should prioritize
preserving the historic neighbourhoods and local natural
heritage.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Mid -rise buildings are encouraged to be located
throughout the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty
Retailing Node. Mid -rise buildings consist of
buildings 5 to 12 storeys in height.
b. For mid -rise buildings up to 8 storeys, a minimum
separation distance of 11 metres shall be maintained.
For mid -rise buildings between 8 and 12 storeys,
a minimum separation distance of 18 metres shall
be maintained. This may be reduced if there are
no primary windows on the wall facing an abutting
building.
c. On Kingston Road and Brock Road built form should
conform to an angular plane extended at a 45 degree
angle from the front property line, beginning at a
height 80 percent the width of the adjacent right-of-
way.
Figure 18. Cross Roads, Vancouver, Canada (photo credits: PCI Developments)
d. This angular plane requirement applies everywhere
with the exception of Kingston Road in Rougemount
Precinct, and Kingston Road between Dunbarton Creek
and Pine Creek in the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct. In
these areas, built form should conform to an angular
plane extended at a 45 degree angle from the front
property line or R.O.W., beginning at a height 30 percent
the width of the adjacent right-of-way.
e. For buildings along existing north -south public roads
intersecting Kingston Road and buildings along
Pickering Parkway, the front angular plane that applies
to Kingston Road frontage will also apply to the
secondary street frontage.
f. The transition for properties abutting low-rise
residential will include a minimum setback of 7.5 metres
from the property line (or edge of development) and a
45 -degree angular plane from a height of 10.5 metres
g.
h.
above the 7.5 metre setback line. This provides a lower
building and a gradual transition.
Where there is a grade difference between the front
and rear of the property, the rear angular plane should
always be taken from the lowest grade elevation along
the shared property line. This ensures that properties
to the rear are not subject to additional shadow impacts
resulting from changes in grade.
Where shallow redevelopment lots are immediately
adjacent to designated established low-density
residential properties, the City may also consider the
implementation of other regulations to ensure built
form compatibility in addition to the application of the
angular plane.
Figure 19. Cross Roads, Vancouver, Canada (photo credits: Ledcor)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
3.3.3 Low -Rise Buildings
Low -rise buildings are generally defined as buildings
which are 4 storeys or lower in height. The majority of
low-rise buildings within the Kingston Road Corridor and
Specialty Retailing Node are expected to be residential
buildings.
Low-rise buildings must provide an appropriate transition
to existing low-density residential areas and act as a
suitable intermediary between these neighbourhoods
and more intensified areas featuring mid -rise and
tall buildings. They should ensure adequate building
setbacks to provide a suitable transition from the
public realm to the private realm, which allows low-
rise buildings to be part of attractive and cohesive
streetscapes while also minimizing negative impacts
regarding issues with privacy and overlook.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Low-rise buildings are typically located adjacent to
low-rise residential areas and along streets without
active frontages. Low-rise buildings consist of
buildings 4 storeys or lower in height.
b. Low-rise buildings up to 4 storeys should maintain a
minimum separation distance of 11 metres between
facing buildings. Low-rise buildings should maintain
a 8 metre separation distance between the face of
a building containing primary living space, such as
bedrooms and living rooms, and the side of another
building.
c. The City of Pickering is encouraged to develop
dedicated comprehensive low-rise residential design
guidelines to support development of townhomes
and low-rise apartment buildings.
Figure 20. Regent Park townhouses, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: SvN)
3.3.4 Gateways
Gateways are entry points into particular locations, areas
or neighbourhoods, often signified by a distinctive public
realm or built form interventions. They are introduced
by enhanced site and building design, such as greater
setbacks and open space, or taller heights.
Gateways are located at major intersections along the
Corridor and Node. They are identified at locations
of significance to frame street corners, enhance local
character, create landmarks along the Corridor and
within the Node, and act as the principal vehicular and
pedestrian arrival points into individual precincts.
Identified on Drawings as:
Gateway
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Gateways should be located according to the
Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11.
b. Tall buildings should generally be located within
gateways.
c. The diameter of the extent of gateways in each
precinct is as follows:
i. 250 metres in Rougemount Precinct;
ii. 800 metres in Whites Precinct;
iii. 500 metres in Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct; and
iv. 500 metres in Brock Precinct.
The extent of gateways is measured from the center
of the intersection.
d. Building articulation, including vertical projections,
recessions, design treatments and other architectural
details, is encouraged at gateway locations to create
an enhanced visual interest and a human -scaled
environment.
Figure 21. Marine Gateway, Vancouver, Canada (photo credits: Perkins+Will
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
3.3.5 Setbacks
Setbacks refer to the distance between the property line
and the front, side or rear of a building.
Building setbacks help define and transition between the
public and private realm by requiring minimum distances
between the public right-of-way and residential or
commercial uses. Setbacks contribute to the animation
of the streets by drawing commercial activities out onto
the sidewalk and improving the pedestrian experience.
Along Kingston Road, setbacks are introduced in
anticipation of the fact that the existing right-of-way does
not have enough landscaping or a generous enough
sidewalk to support the expected increase in pedestrian
traffic associated with intensification.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. All buildings fronting Kingston Road in the
Rougemount Precinct should be setback 3 metres
from the front property line.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
In all other precincts, all buildings fronting Kingston
Road, Brock Road and Pickering Parkway should be
setback 5 metres from the front property line.
Buildings fronting existing public roads intersecting
Kingston Road should be setback 5 metres from the
property line in the Whites and Brock Precincts and
3m in the Rougemount and Dunbarton/Liverpool
Precincts, or match the setback of adjacent buildings.
In all precincts, all buildings should be setback a
minimum of 2 metres from new public and private
streets that are internal to the development block.
In all precincts, all buildings should be setback a
minimum of 3 metres from parks and open spaces.
Setback areas should be used to accommodate
spill -out uses from commercial activity (i.e. patios,
displays, waiting areas), public landscape elements
(i.e. benches, planters, other amenities), or landscape
elements that provide screening / privacy for grade -
related residential units as appropriate.
All new buildings and additions should aim to keep
front yard setbacks to a minimum so that an urban
streetwall condition can be achieved along all streets.
On larger development sites, phasing plans may show
how infill development can be accommodated over
time to achieve this condition (see Section 5.0).
Figure 22. University Village outdoor shopping mall, Seattle, USA (photo credits: Google)
3.3.6 Active Frontage Network
To help achieve a lively streetscape which generates
continuous pedestrian flows, certain streets are required
to have active uses at grade, with visual engagement
between the street and the ground floors of buildings.
The Plan identifies both Primary Frontages and
Secondary Frontages. Primary Frontages contain a
greater consistency and greater number of fine grain
active uses at grade, such as retail units with glazing
oriented to the street. They are identified as areas
where the highest levels of retail activity are desired.
Secondary Frontages consist of a less continuous
presence of publicly -accessible spaces, or more private
spaces that still have a strong street -related presence.
They maintain high levels of public realm animation
and pedestrian activity, but are less prioritized for retail
activity.
Identified on Drawings as:
LJ Primary Frontage
LJ Secondary Frontage
i _ _i Existing Development Application
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Primary Frontages shall have a minimum of 60% of
the lot frontage of retail uses, commercial -service
uses or consolidated office and residential entrances.
b. Secondary Frontages are encouraged to have a
minimum of 30% of the lot frontage of retail uses,
commercial -service uses or consolidated office and
residential entrances.
c. Development applications which are already
underway along Kingston Road and other major
intersections are encouraged to have active
frontages.
Figure 23. Creekside Community Centre, Vancouver, Canada (photo credits: Paul Krueger)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
3.3.7 Streetwall
Streetwall refers to the front facade of buildings. To
create and reinforce a sense of coherency and enclosure
along blocks, streetwalls should be continuous with
uniform heights and building ground floor heights. This
helps create a cohesive and welcoming public realm,
particularly for pedestrians, and contributes to a sense of
place in local areas.
Regular breaks in the streetwall will contribute to variety
and variation in the streetwall, provide permeability
through development blocks for pedestrians, and
provide opportunities to establish view corridors through
development blocks.
Upper building facades, when stepped back, have less
impact on the streetwall.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. The minimum streetwall height along all public and
private roads should be 3 storeys, with a minimum
ground floor height of 4.5 metres.
b. The podium portion of tall buildings should have a
minimum height of 3 storeys and a maximum height
of 6 storeys.
c. Variety and variation in the streetwall will be provided
through encouraging a fine-grain pattern of retail
units / residential entrances, and the establishment
of facade articulation and rhythm through building
projections / recesses and the use of different facade
materials.
d. Generally, buildings shall have a podium of at
least 3 storeys before any building stepbacks are
introduced. The first stepback for any building shall
not occur higher than the sixth floor of a building.
e. Building stepbacks should be a minimum of 2.5
metres.
Figure 24.Gerrison Woods, Calgary, Canada (Image Credits: Canada Lands Company)
3.3.8 Heritage Buildings
There is one heritage designated building and four
buildings of heritage interest within the Kingston Road
Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node.
The Post Manor located at the north west corner of
Brock Road and Kingston Road is a designated historical
site which was built by mill owner and lumber merchant
Jordan Post in 1841. Sites of heritage interest include
301 Kingston Road, 401 Kingston Road, 1 Evelyn
Avenue and 882 Kingston Road. 882 Kingston Road is
St. Paul's on -the -Hill Anglican Church, a brick church
structure; the other three are historical residences
currently used by local businesses.
Heritage buildings are significant for their role in
preserving local character, celebrating collective history,
building community identity and having educational and
cultural value.
Identified on Drawings as:
Properties of Heritage Significance
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. The identified Properties of Heritage Significance as
identified on Fig. 7 should be studied for heritage
merit and potential designation or listing as
appropriate.
b. Buildings of heritage significance should be
preserved, through methods that are appropriate to
the specific building and surrounding context.
c. Preservation may include keeping buildings in
their existing location, moving buildings to a more
appropriate location on the same site to incorporate
with new development, or replacing buildings with an
urban landscaped feature speaking to its significance
and history (i.e. landscaped area with historical
signage or plaque).
d. A Heritage Impact Assessment is required for
development activity on or adjacent to heritage
properties, as governed by the Ontario Heritage Act.
e. Any redevelopment on or adjacent to heritage
properties should be completed in accordance with
the Urban Design Guidelines.
Figure 25. John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: NADAAA)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
3.4 Place -making
Key Objectives
Key objectives relating to place -making include:
• Advance the concept of place -making and create
complete communities
• Enhance and restore natural heritage features to
strengthen their relation to adjacent uses
• Promote sustainability in the design and full life -cycle
of the streetscape, open spaces and buildings
Introduction
Place -making is all about providing and strengthening
the connections between people and the places they
share. Successful place -making involves incorporating
publicly and privately -owned and accessible features
into an interconnected network of open and inviting
spaces where users can gather, linger and have an
enjoyable experience.
Publicly -owned public spaces include public parks,
green spaces, gateway plazas and lookouts, which play
a fundamental role in creating a vibrant community. In
addition, privately -owned public space (POPS), which
can take the form of linear parks and urban squares,
provide opportunities for private developments to
enhance the public realm.
Natural heritage networks provide residents and visitors
opportunities for rest, recreation and places to connect.
Strengthening the linkages along the Kingston Road
Corridor is a priority to ensure accessibility to the wide
range of creeks, trails, parks, and other natural heritage
features in close proximity to the Corridor. Sustainability
is critical to ensuring the long-term livability of the
Kingston Road Corridor and is addressed through
both natural heritage protection and climate response
measures.
The Place -making chapter discusses the following
features, shown in the Intensification Plan and identified
in the legend with the corresponding symbology. There
is also additional discussion on sustainable development
and the natural heritage network.
Q
0
A
Heritage Path
Public Park
Public Green Space
Public Lookout
Gateway Plaza
POPS
Potential Community
Facility
3.4.1 Climate Response and Sustainable Development
Climate response measures can help mitigate more
frequent and severe weather events, including flooding,
heat waves, and other phenomena which have an
impact on the health and safety of communities.
Additionally, they create a more enjoyable and
comfortable pedestrian environment.
Major improvement of micro -climate conditions can be
achieved through the strategic use of massing. Built
forms should build resiliency into development sites
through building design and the selection of appropriate
building materials.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Development should incorporate building and
landscape design which maximizes sunlight
access and minimizes shadow on sidewalks, parks,
open spaces and other intensively used areas as
necessary to preserve their utility. Development will
adequately limit net -new shadow as measured from
March 21st to September 21st from 10:18 a.m. — 4:18
p.m. on parks and open spaces.
b. Development should incorporate building and
landscape design which protects and buffers the
pedestrian realm from prevailing winds, especially
during winter.
c. Sustainable and Low Impact Development (LID)
measures are encouraged for all development in
order to minimize energy consumption, greenhouse
gas emissions and water consumption.
d. Through the development or redevelopment of
lands adjacent to in close proximity to creeks,
consideration should be given to the impact more
frequent and/or severe storm events may have on
stormwater systems.
Figure 26. Bioswale system within a median, Detroit, USA (photo credits: Aaron Volkening via Flickr)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
3.4.2 Natural Heritage Network
The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing
Node benefits from proximity and access to an extensive
existing waterway system and natural heritage network.
The area intersects with a range of significant natural
heritage features, including Petticoat Creek, Amberlea
Creek, Dunbarton Creek, Pine Creek, Duffins Creek, and
Rouge National Urban Park.
Access points to open space provide direct links
between existing and planned trail systems. Lookout
Points are introduced at natural vantage points typically
present in close proximity to the creeks and valleylands.
Public Parks and Green Spaces, buffer and `link'
development areas and natural heritage features along
the corridor, preserving their ecosystem functions and
ensuring their sustainability for future generations.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Natural heritage areas that bisect or intersect the
Corridor and Node are to be managed as a connected
and integrated natural system, recognizing the
functional inter -relationships between them. Their
continuity, exclusive of roads, railways and utilities,
should be maintained and enhanced.
b. The restoration and rehabilitation of creeks and the
implementation of erosion control and stormwater
best practices through redevelopment of adjacent
lands will be encouraged.
c. The extent of the development at areas identified in
Fig. 7-11 as "Area Subject to Environmental Flood
Review" will require additional studies.
d. Efforts should be made to facilitate greater
connections to the Petticoat Creek. Connections
from the Heritage Trail to Rouge National Urban Park
should be explored pending further studies.
Figure 27. Petticoat Creek, Pickering, Canada (photo credits: City of Pickering)
3.4.3 Heritage Path
The Intensification Plan identifies a new Heritage Path
running through Rougemount Precinct along Kingston
Road, providing an enhanced connection between
Rouge National Urban Park at the edge of the study
area on the western side, the retail along Kingston Road
and the community center and library on the eastern
side of the precinct. By enhancing parts of Kingston
Road and taking advantage of the precincts existing
Heritage Buildings and creeks the Heritage Path will
strengthen the area's historical and cultural memory
while connecting cyclists and pedestrians with Rouge
National Urban Park.
Identified on Drawings as:
Heritage Path
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. The City will work with the Region to implement a
Heritage Path within portions of the new Kingston
Road streetscape.
b. It is recommended that the trail does not stop at
the end of the study area to the west and that it
continues to Rouge National Urban Park, in a manner
coordinated with Parks Canada Trail planning, to
strengthen the connection between the entrance to
the park and the Rougemount Precinct.
c. The Heritage Path is encouraged to include heritage
plaques, directional signage, enhanced planting
enhanced paving materials and moments to pause
and rest.
Figure 28. Indianapolis Cultural Trail, Indianapolis, USA (photo credits: Indianapolis cultural trail website)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
3.4.4 Public Parks
Public parks play a fundamental role in enhancing the
public realm and the physical environments in which
we live. They provide valuable outdoor gathering and
activity space which can be programmed and enjoyed by
all members of the community.
The Intensification Plan identifies several new Public
Parks, which provide open spaces and nature views for
enjoyment and opportunities for tree planting to grow the
urban forest. The proposed Public Parks are strategically
located to leverage and interact with existing green
spaces to form a cohesive corridor -wide green network
which includes parks, squares, trails, lookouts, natural
heritage features and more.
Where particularly intensified clusters supporting future
residential and employment density have been planned,
parks have been integrated in nearby areas to ensure
ease of access.
Identified on Drawings as:
Q
Public Park
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Public Parks will be provided through redevelopment
in the Whites, Dunbarton/Liverpool and Brock
Precincts as shown conceptually through the
Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11.
b. The precise location of the Public Parks within the
development blocks where they are conceptually
identified will be determined through the
implementing zoning by-law. Their exact size,
location and design will also be addressed through
detailed block planning.
c. Public Parks are intended to serve a community
function and will be designed to accommodate
diverse programming throughout all seasons. The
dimensions and configuration of these parks (as
determined by municipal staff) will support this
objective.
d. Through the redevelopment of lands, the design
and development of any public parkland should be
completed in accordance with the Urban Design
Guidelines.
Figure 29. Mekel Park at Delft University of Technology Campus, Delft, Netherlands (photo credits: Mecanoo)
3.4.5 Public Green Spaces
The Intensification Plan identifies a collection of Public
Green Spaces adjacent to the Natural Heritage Network.
Like Public Parks, Public Green Spaces provide areas
of respite, lookouts, and opportunities for outdoor
recreation.
However, they are specifically located with the intention
to buffer and interact with natural heritage features
throughout the Corridor and Node. These spaces should
be protected and preserved to allow the Natural Heritage
Network to thrive.
Public Green Spaces are distributed throughout the
precincts, adjacent to creeks and other sensitive
environmental areas, and help to create trails and a
more naturalized environment.
Identified on Drawings as:
Public Green Space
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Public Green Spaces will be provided through
redevelopment as shown conceptually through the
Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11.
b. The precise location of the Public Green Spaces
within the development blocks where they are
conceptually identified will be determined through
the implementing zoning by-law. Their exact size,
location and design will also be addressed through
detailed block planning.
c. Public Green Spaces are intended to serve
a community function will be designed to
accommodate programming, where possible
and where they do not interfere with sensitive
environmental areas.
d. Through the redevelopment of lands, the design
and development of any public green space should
be completed in accordance with the Urban Design
Guidelines.
Figure 30. Riverwalk, Stratford, Canada (photo credits: Riverwalk B&B)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM
3.4.6 Public Lookouts
Public Lookouts highlight important views within the
urban structure of streets, parks and open spaces.
These are located at natural vantage points typically
present in close proximity to the creeks and valleylands.
Complemented by other placemaking features such as
trails and green spaces, they support a walkable and
connected pedestrian environment.
Identified on Drawings as:
Public Lookout
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Public Lookouts will be provided as shown
conceptually through the Intensification Plan in Fig.
7-11.
`��41I4lI1Llllll I�1 il4lllllliii'�11II1�I�':�.
Figure 31. The Chemin-Qui-Marche Lookout, Montreal, Canada (photo credits: Lemey)
3.4.7 Gateway Plazas
Gateway Plazas highlight important entry points for
vehicles and are located at intersections where there is
either existing public land that can be used to provide
additional amenity spaces for pedestrians or private
land that can be developed as POPS (see 3.4.8) or a
combination of both. The Gateway Plazas should include
amenity for pedestrians such as seating areas, cycling
rings, planters and include larger public features such as
art work, fountains or feature benches.
Identified on Drawings as:
A
Gateway Plaza
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Gateway Plazas will be provided as shown
conceptually through the Intensification Plan in Fig.
7-11.
Figure 32. Berczy Park, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Jeremy Gilbert via Flickr)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM
3.4.8 Privately Owned Publicly -
Accessible Spaces (POPS)
Beyond publicly -owned parks, green spaces, plazas and
lookouts, privately owned publicly -accessible spaces
(POPS) form a key part of the public realm network,
providing valuable amenity space through development.
POPS are owned and maintained by private landowners,
but open to the general public to enjoy.
The Intensification Plan identifies privately -owned
features which may include Parks, Linear Parks and
Urban Squares. These are part of an overall hierarchy
of connected open spaces throughout each precinct.
POPS are meant to be fully publicly accessible with easy
identification and navigation for all user groups.
Identified on Drawings as:
tri
POPS
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. All at -grade POPS should be publicly accessible
unless they are for single-family residential units.
b. The locations of POPS will be identified in the
implementing zoning by-law and their exact size,
location and design will be addressed through
detailed block planning, also to include matters such
as connectivity and cost sharing between multiple
landowners.
c. Private landowners should provide public easements
as necessary over Privately Owned Publicly -
Accessible Spaces to provide access to the general
public. These can include, for condominium
developments, public easements in common element
areas.
d. Private landowners should be responsible for
ongoing maintenance to ensure that publicly
accessible spaces remain in a state of good repair.
Figure 33. Artwork at Daniel's High Park Condos, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Urban Toronto)
3.4.9 Community Facilities
Community services and facilities play a critical role in
providing for complete communities by enabling a high
quality of life for residents, helping grow community
capacity and strengthen social networks.
The Intensification Plan identifies two potential
Community Facilities, with the exact uses to be
determined according to local needs. The proposed
facility in Rougemount Precinct is located adjacent to
the existing community library and the facility in Brock
Precinct is located adjacent to the area's largest green
space; in both cases, they are strategically positioned
to create community hubs by maximizing the site and
coordinating the delivery of services and amenities.
Identified on Drawings as:
HI Potential Community
Facility
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Two Potential Community Facilities will be provided
as shown conceptually through the Intensification
Plan in Fig. 7-11.
b. Community Facilities will be provided through in-
kind contributions through development, municipal
partnership, land acquisition or Section 37 benefits.
c. The delivery of on-site Community Facilities is
encouraged to be integrated into multi-storey, mixed-
use developments (i.e. forming part of the podium of
a residential tower).
d. Community Facilities should be delivered in a timely
manner to support and be concurrent with growth.
Need for these facilities should be studied and
evaluated according to the City's established service
planning processes.
Figure 34. North Toronto Collegiate Institute with community facilities along the street and integrated residential
development by CS&P Architects, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Google)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM
3.5 Connectivity
Key Objectives
• Design all public roads and private connections
to be complete streets and emphasize transit and
pedestrian oriented development
• Improve access management and connectivity for all
transportation modes
• Encourage the optimization of infrastructure
Introduction
Connectivity is all about providing and improving the
number and quality of mobility options available to a
wide range of users. Connections include new public
streets, private streets, pedestrian paths, controlled
intersections, bicycle lands and cycling tracks, and multi-
use paths, which make up the integrated pedestrian,
cycling, transit and street network of an area. New or
improved connections are used to provide alternate
travel routes, break up larger blocks into smaller and
more walkable blocks, allow for smooth vehicular and
servicing access, and provide access to parks, open
spaces and natural heritage features. Improvements to
existing infrastructure help make streets safer and more
comfortable for everyone, particularly pedestrians and
cyclists.
The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing
Node is envisioned as a pedestrian and cyclist -friendly
space where users are able to walk and ride freely
between destinations in a comfortable, safe, well-
connected and visually interesting environment. The
Intensification Plan identifies a pedestrian and cycling
network that is integrated with the wider public realm,
including parks and open spaces, community facilities,
and natural heritage destinations. However, the
Intensification Plan also recognizes the importance of
Kingston Road, Brock Road and Whites Road as major
carriers of local and longer -distance vehicular traffic.
The Plan is also supportive of phased implementation
of higher -order transit on Kingston Road (i.e. dedicated
curbside lane in the short -to -medium term and transition
to a dedicated median right-of-way in the long term).
The Connectivity chapter will make reference to the
following items identified on the Intensification Plan.
Each item is also identified on the top left of the section
in which it is addressed.
< >
4 -
Pedestrian Path
Multi -Use Path
Proposed Public Streets
Proposed Private Streets
Proposed Cycling Facility
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Location Subject to Further
Review
▪ Indicative Enhanced Boulevard
- Right -In , Right -out
Access
3.5.1 Pedestrian Paths
The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing
node is envisioned as a comfortable, safe, and well-
connected area with a coordinated and continuous
pedestrian network.
Each precinct has Proposed Pedestrian Paths, which
provide additional routes of circulation within blocks and
to destinations. These connections help link Kingston
Road to existing and proposed green spaces and
community destinations, enhancing their accessibility.
For example, the two pedestrian paths in the Whites
Precinct help connect Ernie L. Stroud Park and the
existing school to the north to Kingston Road.
The pedestrian connections identified are only some
among many, with a wide range of potential future
connections dependent on future development patterns
and uses.
Identified on Drawings as:
(•••� Pedestrian Path
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Proposed Pedestrian Paths will be provided
through redevelopment within each precinct and
will be located as shown conceptually through the
Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11.
Figure 35. Requalification of Mermoz Avenue, Lyon, France (Image Credits: Gautier Conquet)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM
3.5.2 Controlled Intersections
To improve pedestrian safety, there are a number of
identified Potential Controlled Intersection locations.
These are located at sites where conflicting traffic flows
are anticipated, featuring traffic signals, pedestrian
cross -overs, stop signs or roundabouts, and intended
to provide for safer pedestrian, cyclist and vehicular
movement. For example, the Potential Controlled
Intersection proposed in the Rougemount Precinct is
located at Evelyn Avenue and Kingston Road, offering
a convenient crossing location for pedestrians walking
north along Evelyn Avenue.
The controls chosen for each intersection may take the
form of stop lights or stop signs, and will be determined
based on further technical review.
Identified on Drawings as:
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Location Subject to Further
Review
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Subject to further review, there are five Potential
Controlled Intersections identified in the Plan. These
should be located as shown conceptually through the
Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11.
b. The exact location and design of the Potential
Controlled Intersections will be established in
collaboration with the Region of Durham.
c. On private sites where there are new road
connections and blocks established, pedestrians
should be accommodated and given priority through
appropriate traffic control methods.
Figure 36. Finch and Don Mills Intersection, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Nataliya Pekar - City of Toronto Website)
3.5.3 Cycling Network
Along the corridor there is an extensive existing and
planned cycling network which plays a key role in
enabling multi -modal mobility choices for users.
The Intensification Plan identifies several new Proposed
Cycling Facilities, which would take the form of on -street
bike lanes or in -boulevard cycle tracks. It also identifies
segments that are more appropriate as Multi -Use
Paths. These connect other cycling routes and adjacent
neighbourhoods to the intensification sites, such as
the connection proposed south of Kingston Road on
Rougemount drive to connect the neighbourhoods near
Kingston Road to those south of Highway 401. The type
and specifications of new cycling facilities are to be
determined through further Environmental Assessment
or similar studies.
Identified on Drawings as:
Multi -Ilse Path
Proposed Cycling Facility
Beyond cycling facilities on major roads, opportunities
to create multi -modal internal roads which include cycle
facilities are identified in both the Dunbarton/Liverpool
and Brock precincts. This will draw cycling traffic to these
internal roads, both of which feature retail frontages.
The proposed cycling network on both sides of Pickering
Parkway will also connect to the Pickering GO station
further west, supporting the uptake of transit.
Kingston Road, Altona Road, Rougemount Drive, Whites
Road, Liverpool Road, Brock Road and Pickering
Parkway (from Liverpool Road to Brock Road) are all
part of the Regional Cycling Plan, and all upgrades
to the municipal cycling network should be completed
with consideration of existing and planned regional
infrastructure. Furthermore, the cycling network should
be integrated with Parks Canada efforts to identify new
cycling routes from Rouge National Urban Park.
Figure 37. SvN Landscape Six Points Interchange, Toronto, Canada (Image Credits: SvN)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Proposed Cycling Facilities and Multi -Use Paths are
identified in the Plan. These should be located as
shown conceptually through the Intensification Plan
in Fig. 7-11.
b. Cycling facilities are encouraged within
developments and new public and private streets.
They may take the form of multi -use paths or cycling
facilities, including bicycle lanes and cycle tracks.
The former are more appropriate in residential areas
or as a link between neighbourhoods, while the latter
are more appropriate along busy retail -oriented
streets.
c. Cycling paths should be raised and vertically
separated from the street at an intermediate or
sidewalk level, to create a safe and comfortable riding
environment and adequate buffer between cyclists
and other road users. Where appropriate, they may
also incorporate barrier features.
d. Cycling facilities are encouraged to connect with
crossrides and bike boxes to support the safety of
cyclists at intersection locations.
tip a P.O.W.
2.00 2.00 3.50 2.50 4.00
Sidewalk Landscape Road
Figure 38. Streetscape Cross Section with Multi -Use Path
Two -Way Multi -use Pelh Letwdsg:in
3.5.4 Transit
Kingston Road holds an important role as a transit
corridor with both existing and planned transit routes,
including an active bus rapid transit (BRT) route. Existing
bus stops are identified within the Intensification Plan.
There are two key transit intersections, one at the
intersection of Whites Road and Kingston Road and one
at the intersection of Brock Road and Kingston Road,
with the potential to develop into future Major Transit
Station Areas (MTSA). These intersections occupy
prime locations along a higher -order transit corridor.
Though transit -oriented development is expected to
occur throughout the entire area, these locations warrant
additional consideration as ideal sites for higher -intensity
uses. In particular, employment hubs are recommended
to leverage their location as key transit nodes.
Through the Durham -Scarborough BRT TPAP EA study,
transit stops are being reviewed. Through the review, it
Identified on Drawings as:
Bus Stops
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Council should seek to coordinate the location and
design of proposed future open spaces fronting
Kingston Road and Brock Road, with transit stops.
b. Transit stops should have safe access via sidewalks
and appropriate street crossings, including controlled
intersections where possible.
c. Shelters at transit stops should be designed to
maximize user comfort, including features to
minimize extreme weather conditions.
d. Additional pedestrian and cycling amenities, such
as benches and bicycle storage racks, should be
incorporated into the design of transit stops.
e. The exploration of energy efficient technologies to
provide light and heat at shelters is encouraged.
is likely that there will be fewer stops than current DRT
PULSE stops. As the existing number of stops is limited
and located at major intersections, it is recommended
that additional stops are introduced in areas where new
intersections are proposed, such as Rougemount and
Whites.
Figure 39. Durham Transit, Hamilton, Canada (photo credits: Hamilton Spectator)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
3.5.5 Existing Streets
As the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing
Node intensifies, there are some planned or existing
roadways that require alterations and/or additions to
better reflect the vision of the corridor.
The main recommendation for Kingston Road is to
enhance the public experience through enhanced
planting and safe and comfortable walking and cycling
facilities. Some portions of Kingston Road have been
implemented as shown in Fig. 40, but Kingston Road
is currently part of a Metrolinx-led planning, design and
engineering study for a proposed BRT route between
Scarborough Town Center and Downtown Oshawa.
As part of the Durham -Scarborough BRT TPAP, the
feasibility of cycling lanes moving off road are being
studied along with the median transit construction. It
is recommended that a 2m cycle track and treed and
landscaped planting area be implemented on both sides
of Kingston Road. In the Rougemount Precinct, the
Intensification Plan recommends that a Heritage Path is
introduced along Kingston Road to highlight the district's
historical and natural heritage features (see Section
3.4.3).
At Brock Road in the Brock Precinct, additional
street trees should be incorporated within the existing
0.9 2.2
BLVD BLVD
1.8
SIDEWALK
I I�
STREE LIGHT/HP —
1.50m
CYCLING
LANE
0.6
BUFFER
3.35
THRU
LANE
45.00
Identified on Drawings as:
Existing Main Road
Existing Road / Laneways
4'114 Future & Planned Connection
Subject to EA
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. The City will work with the Region and Metrolinx to
recommend a 2 metre wide raised cycle track with
an enhanced treed and landscaped planting area on
both sides of Kingston Road.
b. Additional street trees should be incorporated within
the existing streetscape on the east side of Brock
Road to provide shade and comfort for pedestrians
walking along Brock Road.
c. Walnut Lane should have an Multi -Use Path trail on
one side to connect to Liverpool Road and provide
cycling access on this more pleasant route to
Kingston Road.
d. The incorporation of a 2 metre cycle track or an MUP
with a minimum landscaped zone of 2 metres should
be encouraged on Pickering Parkway.
streetscape on the east side of Brock Road to provide
shade and comfort for pedestrians walking from Brock
Road and Kingston Road south to the Specialty Retailing
Node. Fig. 41 shows the current condition.
The recommendation for Walnut Lane and its expansion
as part of an EA study in the Dunbarton/Liverpool
Precinct should include a comfortable pedestrian
sidewalk and cycling facility, which can take the form
34.00
Pavement Distance
8.20 8.20
1.55
ISLAND
3.35 3.15
THRU
LANE
LEFT
TURN
LANE
3.50 3.50
7 00
TRANSITWAY
SHY DISTANCE
0.50
I 4.20 3.35
3.35
PLATFORM THRU THRU
LANE LANE
0.6
BUFFER
2.2
BLVD 0.9
1.8 BLVD
SIDEWALK/
11 I
1.50m
CYCLING
LANE
STREETLIGHT
MA
Wa
HP
Figure 40. Kingston Road Cross section - this is only an approximation, the cross-section will be determined through
the Durham -Scarborough BRT TPAP study (photo credits: Region of Durham)
Figure 41. Existing Streetscape along Brock Road
(photo credits: Google Maps)
of a multi -use path to connect the new development to
Liverpool Road. As development on Kingston Road is
located on one side only within this Precinct and runs
parallel to the highway, it is recommended that Walnut
Lane be improved as a key pedestrian route. Fig. 42
shows the current condition along Walnut Lane.
Within the Brock Precinct, enhanced active
transportation infrastructure is recommended for
Pickering Parkway. This could occur through raised cycle
tracks introduced on both sides of the road, along with
a landscape and furniture zone. These enhancements
could incorporate a single lane MUP facility on both
sides or a two way MUP on one side. Fig. 43 shows the
current condition along Pickering Parkway while Fig. 44
shows the proposed cross section through the eastern
part of Pickering Parkway as part of the Notion Road /
Highway 401 Overpass EA.
Figure 42. Existing Streetscape along Walnut Lane
(photo credits: Google Maps)
Figure 43. Existing Streetscape along Pickering
Parkway (photo credits: Google Maps)
HOUSESETBACK
5 ] m OFFSET
EXISTING R.O.W
PICKERING PARKWAY CROSS SECTION
STATION A -A: 10+200
PICKERING PARKWAY
'..,^' ., 26
0
VARIES
,,....
3.50 .0
1 VARIES
=BOULEVARDARD
I WESTABNOUNDL1
f
TURN
ANE
EASTE BOUND
NE
1
BOULEVARD
,-`,
WALK
Dam OFFSET 1D 2% -= "-CONCRETE CURB
EXISTING ROA.
CONCRETE CURB
NORTH
PICKERING PARKWAY CROSS SECTION
STATION B -B: 10+330
PICKERING PARKWAY
26.50
SOOT
0 350
SIDE BOULEVARD
WALK
0
5.00
WESTBOUND
LANE
0.0� 3.00
LEFT
TURN
g LA LANE
3.50 3.50 .0
EASTBOUND BOULEVARD SIDE
LANE WALK
CONCRETE CURB
NORTH
PICKERING PARKWAY CROSS SECTION
STATION C -C: 10+380
Q
PICKERING PARKWAY
26.54
�.0Q 3.00 EASTBOUND 3.50 BOULEV3.50 .0
LEFT ARD SIDE
"' o l TURN LANE WALK
L I LANE
.0 3.50 5.00
SIDE BOULEVARD I WESTBOUND
WALK LANE
CONCRETE CURB
CONCRETE CURB
SOUT
CONCRETE CURB
Figure 44.Notion Road /Highway 401 Overpass EA -
eastern part of Pickering Parkway
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
3.5.6 New Public Streets
The Intensification Plan proposes a series of new
public streets. These roads provide new connections
and consolidate access on Kingston Road, as well
as provide alternative access off Kingston Road. The
Intensification Plan also distinguishes opportunities to
provide permeability within larger sites through new
intersections, mid -block connections and rear laneways
or service roads. The proposed roads provide greater
circulation throughout the precincts and create new
development frontages.
The location of new public streets is key in encouraging
intensification as it not only strengthens vehicular and
pedestrian connectivity, but also establishes the overall
block pattern which guides site redevelopment.
A successful urban environment is one where
pedestrians and motorists will all be able to move safely
and quickly throughout the site. The Intensification Plan
thus recommends that new public streets prioritize
the pedestrian experience, as well as keeping future
roadway expansion possibilities in mind.
The following illustrative diagrams show new
recommended public streets throughout the Kingston
Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node.
Identified on Drawings as:
I Proposed Public Streets
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Development sites will identify lands to be conveyed
as public roads in identified locations as shown
conceptually through the Intensification Plan in Fig.
7-11.
b. The location of new public streets is flexible
provided the overall block pattern is achieved, the
achievement of minimum and maximum block sizes
on the development site and adjacent sites is not
compromised, and appropriate intersection spacing
is maintained.
c. Strong public amenities should be provided,
including sidewalks, enhanced paving in busy
pedestrian areas, cycle paths or multi -use paths, and
landscape and furniture zones.
d. A landscape and furniture zone is encouraged on
both sides of the street to create a comfortable public
realm.
e. The landscape and furniture zone should be able to
accommodate a street tree; typically the minimum
width to achieve this is 2 metres.
Proposed R.O.W.
(17.0 -19.0m)
L
Ota
1
2.00 2.00 2.00 7.00
Sidewalk Landscape bike Lane Road
2.00 2.00 2.00
Bike Lane Landscape Sidewalk
Figure 45. Whites Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New East-West Public Streets
Private
. roperty
Proposed R.O.W.
(17.0 -19.Om)
I�
2.00 2.00 2.00 7.00 , 2,00 , 2.00 , 2.00 1
Sidewalk Landscape Bike Lane
Road Bike Lane Landscape Sidewalk
'resale
Proem ty
Figure 46. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New East-West Public Street
Pd vat^
rop„I, �.
Proposed R.O.W.
(17.0-19.0m)
1 t
A.
i
Proposed Park
and Green Space
2.00
2,00 2.00
7.00
Sidewalk Landscape Bike Lane Road
2.00 , 2.00 , 2.00
Bike Lane Landscape Sidewalk
Figure 47. Brock Precinct Streetscape Precinct Cross Section - New Public Street Linking the North and South
Development Parcels
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
3.5.7 New Private Streets
As with new public streets, the location of new private
streets is key in developing a successful Intensification
Plan as it is related not only to the feature of access,
both vehicular and pedestrian, but establishes the
overall block pattern, which in turn guides development.
Private streets are designed to similar municipal
standards as public streets, but remain in private
ownership. Private streets must provide the same high-
quality public realm and streetscape experience as
public streets, are expected to adopt similar treatments
and aesthetics to ensure that a uniform streetscape
character is maintained across the precinct.
The following illustrative diagrams show new
recommended private streets throughout the Kingston
Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node.
Identified on Drawings as:
1 Proposed Private Streets
a. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
b. Development sites will identify new private streets,
generally as shown in the Intensification Plan in Fig.
7-11.
c. The location of these roads is flexible as the
overall block pattern is achieved, the achievement
of minimum and maximum block sizes on the
development site and adjacent sites is not
compromised, and appropriate intersection spacing
is maintained
d. Strong public amenities should be provided,
including sidewalks, cycle paths or multi -use paths,
and landscape and furniture zones.
e. A landscape and furniture zone is encouraged on
both sides of the street to create a comfortable public
realm.
f. The landscape and furniture zone should be able
to accommodate a street tree, typically a width of 2
metres.
It is encouraged that off street parking and cycling
infrastructure be provided within private properties to
facilitate connectivity.
h. Private landowners should be responsible for
ongoing maintenance to ensure that private streets
remain in a state of good repair.
g.
Proposal RAW.
(15.5 - 17.5m)
2.00 2.00 7.00 2.00 4.00
Slims& Lraissp.
Lstivpa 7NoMey Multi -use Psdr
Figure 48. Whites Precinct, Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct and Brock Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New
Private Streets
Proposed R.O.W.
[24.0m)
t
alb
Pr0pc1.2cl Park
and Grh F:n Spec
, 2.00 2.00 , 2.00 2.50
Sidewalk Landscape Bike Lane Layhy Peking
7.00 2.50 2.00 2.00
2.00
Layby Parking Bike Lane Landscape Sidewalk
Figure 49. Brock Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New Private Street from Brock Road to Beechlawn Park or
other New Private Streets
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
3.5.8 New Service Streets
Service routes support the movement of people and
goods. Vehicular access for loading and servicing are
critical considerations for well-functioning streetscapes,
especially those that host high-density office and retail
uses. They should be designed to minimize adverse
impact on the public realm.
The Intensification Plan recommends that vehicular
access points should be located along streets with low
levels of traffic, preferably on local streets. They should
avoid interface with major public and open spaces such
as parks, public squares, and primary frontage.
Identified on Drawings as:
1 Proposed Private Streets
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Service routes should have a 2 metre sidewalk on
one side of the street.
b. Vehicular access points should be consolidated
to minimize the interruption of sidewalks. Where
possible, shared driveways, parking ramps and
servicing areas between two properties are
encouraged to maximize building frontages and
minimize the number of required curb cuts.
c. The two Private Streets identified in the Rougemount
Precinct can be Service Streets and should follow the
location shown in the Intensification Plan Fig. 8. In
addition since the street only services the north side,
only one sidewalk can be provided on the north side.
d. Private landowners should be responsible for
ongoing maintenance to ensure that publicly
accessible spaces remain in a state of good repair.
-.now nom, 11111011101ir
Figure 50. Lower River Street in the West Donlands, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Google Maps)
3.5.9 Parking
As intensification increases, bringing in greater numbers
of residents and jobs to the area, new arrangements and
strategies will be required to effectively meet parking
demand throughout the corridor.
New development will provide an adequate supply of
parking and loading to meet site requirements while
balancing broader mobility objectives to decrease
reliance on private vehicle use. Reduced minimum
parking standards will reflect the area's compact, high-
density urban form and shift towards a pedestrian and
transit -oriented environment.
Parking spaces must be strategically located to
minimally impact the public realm, refrain from interfering
with active street frontages, and reduce pedestrian/
vehicular conflicts.
Shared parking will be encouraged and implemented in
order to reduce the total number of spaces required.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Off-street parking is encouraged to create a urban
block structure, animate the streets, and facilitate
connectivity.
b. It is encouraged that off street parking and cycling
infrastructure be provided within structured or
underground parking within private properties to
facilitate connectivity and minimize the heat island
effect created by large surface parking.
c. Reduced minimum parking standards are encouraged
to reflect the area's compact, high-density urban form
and shift towards a pedestrian and transit -oriented
environment.
d. Shared parking will be encouraged and implemented
in order to reduce the total number of parking spaces
required. This includes combining off-street on-site
parking between landowners, including consideration
of shared use by different user groups at different
times of the day.
e. Underground parking beneath the City of
Pickering's municipal roads and parks may be
considered, provided that property owners enter
into an agreement subject to terms and conditions
acceptable to the City. In the case of parks, they
should be located in a manner which does not
jeopardize the growth of mature trees or disturb the
function of the park.
+pair , E rTI,
i �' ', ir►a d��M.'.. �kdrNY�
Figure 51. Honfleur Normandy Outlet, Honfleur, France (photo credits: Le Compagnie du Paysage).
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
3.6 Infrastructure Services
Key Objectives
• Ensure planned investment and expansion of water
and wastewater servicing infrastructure is concurrent
with growth
• Implement strategies for energy and water
conservation and water demand management
• Ensure minimal negative impact on the natural and
built environment
• Design a coordinated and context -sensitive
approach to infrastructure services planning
Introduction
Municipal servicing infrastructure includes the water
distribution system, sanitary sewers and storm sewers.
New development must be accompanied by upgrades
and improvements to servicing infrastructure, where
required, to provide adequate capacity.
The following sections identify an approach and
consideration to the planning, design and implementation
of infrastructure needs for the Kingston Road Corridor
and Specialty Retailing Node. It includes assessments
of existing municipal servicing infrastructure, and where
appropriate identifies improvements required in order to
support the growth envisioned by the land use strategy
of the Intensification Plan.
3.6.1 Water
The Study Area is serviced by Pressure Zones 1 and 2.
Pressure Zone 1 services the portions east of Rosebank
Road and Pressure Zone 2 services the lands west of
Rosebank Road.
The Study Area west of the railway overpass on
Kingston Road, including the Rougemount and Whites
Precincts, are serviced by feedermains. The primary
function of the feedermain is conveyance, with service
connections generally not permitted by the Region.
As such, new local 300mm watermain systems may
be required along Kingston Road west of the railway
overpass to service future growth. Separate 300mm
local watermains will be required to service Pressure
Zones 1 and 2, implemented by physically connecting
watermain pipes through a valve that remains closed.
The Study Area east of the railway overpass on Kingston
Road, including the Dunbarton / Liverpool and Brock
Precincts, is serviced by 300mm local watermains. The
existing local 300mm watermains may be sufficient to
service the area, subject to an adequate supply being
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. The preparation of an Infrastructure Master Plan will
be required to ensure a coordinated and integrated
approach to providing water servicing solutions is
implemented, and to guide and inform the preparation
of the future Functional Servicing Reports in
support of individual development applications. It is
recommended that this Plan be collectively prepared
by landowners in the area.
b. Private developers should be responsible for early
pre -consultation with the City and Region to ensure
infrastructure needs for the planned development
can be properly planned, coordinated and integrated
with planned infrastructure improvements and other
development applications.
available and that sufficient looping exists or will be
implemented where opportunities to do so are identified
through the development approval process.
There are two planned watermain projects in close
proximity, as shown in Fig. 52. This includes an
expansion of the Ajax Water Supply Plant (Study Item
100) and a planned Zone 1 feedermain on Bayly Street
(Study Item 102).
Kings -WE Road Carr r
ti-gnclri tonPIal
71171
•
•
r_ •}
Figure 52. Planned Regional Watermain Improvements
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
3.6.2 Wastewater
The Study Area is currently serviced by a combination
trunk sanitary sewers and local sanitary sewers. Sewers
less than 375mm in diameter are considered local
sanitary sewers and sanitary sewers equal to or greater
than 375mm in diameter are considered trunk sanitary
sewers (TSS).
Generally, the Region prefers that new service
connections not be made directly to a TSS. New
development located on the frontage of existing TSS's
should either connect to an existing maintenance hole
on the TSS or a new local collection sewer be designed
to service multiple properties fronting onto the TSS with
a single connection to an existing maintenance hole on
the TSS.
There are several planned sanitary improvements in
close proximity, as shown in Fig. 53. This includes
a planned sanitary pumping station and forcemain
located between the Dunbarton / Liverpool Precinct
and the Brock Precinct (Study Item 102), and a planned
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. The preparation of an Infrastructure Master Plan will
be required to ensure a coordinated and integrated
approach to providing wastewater servicing
solutions is implemented, and to guide and inform
the preparation of the future Functional Servicing
Reports in support of individual development
applications. It is recommended that this Plan be
collectively prepared by landowners in the area.
b. Private developers should be responsible for early
pre -consultation with the City and Region to ensure
infrastructure needs for the planned development
can be properly planned, coordinated and integrated
with planned infrastructure improvements and other
development applications.
twinning of the York Durham Sewage System on the
west side of the Brock Precinct (Study Item 104). Future
Functional Servicing Reports should address the need
for flow monitoring data to assess future estimated spare
capacity.
Study Area: Kingston Road Corridor -
Figure 53.Planned Regional Sanitary Improvements
3.6.3 Stormwater
The Study Area is serviced by seven watersheds. The
implementation of the Intensification Plan will require
stormwater management measures to mitigate the
impacts of development. Impacts include increased
water levels and velocities that can cause flooding and
erosion, and increased water quality degradation at
receiving watercourses.
Previous technical analysis initiated by the Region of
Durham indicates that there is limited opportunity to
implement above -ground stormwater management
facilities as mitigating measures, given the proposed
higher -density land uses and land costs for above-
ground facilities. As such, in ground in line storage for
quality control is the preferred approach to mitigating
drainage impacts for future development. However, LIDs
and other emerging methods of stormwater mitigation
should be explored where possible to minimize the
retention needs of underground facilities.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. The preparation of an Infrastructure Master Plan will
be required to ensure a coordinated and integrated
approach to providing stormwater management
servicing solutions is implemented, and to guide
and inform the preparation of the future Functional
Servicing Reports in support of individual
development applications. It is recommended
that this Master Plan be collectively prepared by
landowners in the area.
b. The Infrastructure Master Plan should investigate
opportunities to correct existing flood conditions
along the Petticoat Creek crossing of Rougemount
Drive located in the Rougemount Precinct. The need
for the investigation is driven by the opportunity to
protect and enhance the development potential of
the precinct and to accommodate for climate change
impacts.
c. The Infrastructure Master Plan should investigate
opportunities to correct existing flooding conditions
along the Pine Creek crossing of Kingston Road
located in the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct. The
need for investigation is driven by the opportunity
to protect and enhance the development potential of
the precinct and to accommodate for climate change
impacts.
Figure 54. Street parking with landscaped buffer, Los Angeles, USA (photo credits: Environmental Protection Agency)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan4E=
3.6.4 Other
The provision of energy and communication service
capacity to support planned growth will require
significant coordination and early planning to ensure
schedule expectations for implementation are
understood and managed.
POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
a. Landowners should coordinate their efforts and
use Regional/Municipal Utility Coordinating Group
meetings as a forum to present development plans,
service demands and schedule information early
in the implementation of the Intensification Plan
to provide sufficient opportunity for energy and
communication service providers to allocate funding
for needed infrastructure expansion, identify access
needs, procure rights of access and address all
regulatory / agency approvals necessary to facilitate
implementation.
Figure 55. Fibre optic expansion in residential neighbourhood, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Toronto Star)
This page has been Intentionally left blank.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM
4.0 Precincts
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Rougemount
4.3 Whites
4.4 Dunbarton/Liverpool
4.5 Brock
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanfiriM
4.1 Introduction
Four distinct precincts have been identified within the
Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node,
based on their relative consistency in existing land uses,
built form typologies and streetscape character.
The delivery of vibrant, mixed-use neighbourhoods shall
rely on establishing clear priorities that respond to the
unique context and vision for each of the precincts.
The following chapters provide a detailed description of
the character and expected density of each precinct, as
well as identifying priorities and key considerations for
implementation. Individual summaries of the precinct
Framework, including direction on Land Use/Built Form,
Placemaking and Connectivity, are included.
Photographs of relevant precedents are used to
highlight what each precinct may look like following
redevelopment and intensification. The framework
descriptions are supported by a series of illustrations and
diagrams, which show overall massing, recommended
built forms, streetscape cross-sections, and prominent
views.
The four precincts and their corresponding extents are
identified below:
• Rougemount Precinct — extending from the Rouge
Valley in the west to Rosebank Road in the east
(Figure 60)
• Whites Precinct — extending from Rosebank Road in
the west to Fairport Road in the east (Figure 66)
• Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct — extending from
Fairport Road in the west to Pine Creek in the east
(Figure 72)
• Brock Precinct — incorporating the portions of the
Study Area around the intersection of Kingston Road
and Brock Road and the entirety of the Specialty
Retailing Node (Figure 78)
4.2 Rougemount
Character
Rougemount is envisaged to carry the feel of a `main
street' on Kingston Road, embodying energetic vibrancy
while also retaining its urban village character. The
precinct will be a well-connected, human -scaled space
that provides an attractive setting for residential and
commercial development. Figures 56 to 59 give a
general sense of the scale and character of the precinct.
Priorities for the Area
The top priority for Rougemount is supporting the
creation of a vibrant 'main street character'.
Key Considerations for the Area
There are both opportunities and limitations for
redevelopment, specifically retail commercial
development. The relatively smaller and shallower lots
may impact the types of businesses that choose to
locate here. To offset potentially weak target markets, a
strong brand and development strategy is recommended
to be put in place.
.ro F5 Streetscape with spill -out usesl
Figure 58. Village -like shopping street
Figure 57. Buildings with primary orientation to the
street
Figure 59. Streetscape with spill -out usesl
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
Paco. Nal lona/ Urban Park
'Area Su bject td::
Environmental:•;•
Flood Revie*:•
East
Woodlands
(<I
Itrir
Park Entrance
Nig
Figure 60. Rougemount Precinct Intensification Plan
EXISTING
Study Area Boundary
Valleylands and Stream Corridors
Regional Stormwater Flood Plain
Existing Park
Buildings To Remain
Properties of Heritage Significance
PROPOSED
LAND USE / BUILT FORM
Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office
Gateway
Preferred Office Location
Mixed Use B - Residential/ Retail
Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail
Residential
�1 Primary Frontage
l�J Secondary Frontage
I__; Existing Development Application
III
Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative
Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm)
Existing Main Road
Existing Road / Laneways
Existing Cycling Network
– — – Planned Cycling Network
GO Railway
R�rrli i:' Future & Planned Connection
Subject to EA
PLACE MAKING
0
Gateway Plaza
Public Green Space
Public Park
POPS
Public Lookout
Heritage Path
Potential Community
Facility
Lot Lines
Developable Lots
I -I Lot Identifier
Area Subject to Further Assessment
Q Existing Controlled intersection
• Bus Stops
CONNECTIVITY
<•••> Pedestrian Path
• Multi -Use Path
I 1 Proposed Public Streets
Proposed Private Streets
Proposed Cycling Facility
•
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Location Subject to Further
Review
Indicative Enhanced Boulevard
Right -In , Right -out
Access
Precinct Framework
Land Use and Built Form
The Plan concentrates a greater mix of uses around the
intersections of Kingston Road and Rougemount Drive
and Kingston Road and Altona Road, with Mixed Use
B - residential with retail on the ground level - proposed
on those parcels in closest proximity to the two gateway
intersections and the Rouge National Urban Park. This
will maintain and reinforce the main street character
of this stretch of Kingston Road and encourage
movement between Rouge National Urban Park and
the Rougemount Precinct. Visitor -related businesses
would be encouraged to locate here to take advantage
of proximity to the park. The greatest levels of density
are located to the south of Kingston Road, away from
the stable residential neighborhoods to the north of the
Study Area. The potential mix of uses and densities
would result in a total of 1,991 residents and 236 jobs
on potential redevelopment sites within this precinct, for
a combined 101 people and jobs per hectare and 45
residential units per hectare.
Placemaking
The Plan features potential gateway plazas on the
northeast corner at the intersections of Kingston Road
and Altona Road and Kingston Road and Rougemount
Drive, establishing public spaces for social gathering
and activity in what is likely to be the busiest pockets
of the Rougemount Precinct. Also, a proposed green
space fronts the east side of Rougemount Drive to the
north of Kingston Road, to provide a stronger "green"
linkage between the natural heritage area west of
Rougemount Drive and natural heritage area associated
with the Petticoat Creek to the east. The encouragement
of primary frontages across nearly the full length of
Kingston Road between Altona Road and the Petticoat
Creek adds to an animated public realm.
To reinforce the precinct's natural heritage assets,
including the proximity to the Rouge National Urban
Park, a Heritage Path is proposed along Kingston
Road. Connecting to existing and planned trails in the
park, the route can include heritage plaques, enhanced
landscaping, and directional signage, encouraging
moments to pause and rest.
Connectivity
To better align with the planned 45 metre right of way
and the ultimate provision of centre -running Bus Rapid
Transit service along Kingston Road, and to make
Rougemount truly pedestrian and cyclist -friendly, the
Intensification Framework is seeking to minimize and
consolidate the multiple accesses off Kingston Road
and to increase the permeability of the precinct by the
introduction of two rear private service streets/laneways
on properties south of Kingston Road. The first of these
service streets runs from the southern end of Altona
Road, east across the southern limit of properties with
frontage on Kingston Road, and then turns back up
to Kingston Road two properties west of Rougemount
Drive. The second commences at Evelyn Avenue,
running west to reconnect with Kingston Road closer to
Rougemount Drive.
To improve connectivity between the properties south
and north of Kingston Road, east of Rougemount Drive,
and to create a better pedestrian connection between
the existing Library and Petticoat Creek to the "main
street" retail, it is recommended that provision of a
controlled intersection be explored at Evelyn Avenue.
In addition, since Rougemount Drive is one of the key
roads crossing the highway and thus connecting the
southern neighborhoods, a new cycling connection is
proposed south of Kingston Road on Rougemount Drive.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
This page has been Intentionally left blank.
4.3 Whites
Character
Anchored by the major gateway intersection of Kingston
Road and Whites Road, this precinct is envisioned as
a 'high street' that functions as a busy employment and
retail hub. A mix of uses and a variety of activities will
be supported in the Whites Precinct, enabling a high
concentration of opportunities for residents to live -work -
play in close proximity. Figures 62 to 65 give a general
sense of the scale and character of the precinct.
Priorities for the Area
The top priority for Whites is developing an attractive
concentration of vibrant primary and secondary
frontages in close proximity to Kingston Road and
Whites Road.
Key Considerations for the Area
To maximize the precinct's potential as a secondary
higher density node, pedestrian -oriented public realm
improvements should be prioritized. Opportunities to
introduce streetscape interventions to enhance the
visual experience along comparatively less pedestrian -
friendly frontages (i.e. offices, auto dealerships) should
be considered, along with opportunities for re -configuring
sidewalks and enhanced boulevards to support spill-over
uses from retail storefronts attracting significant foot
traffic.
Figure 62. Opportunities for office within a podium
Figure 64. Public realm extending from a shopping area
Figure 63. Active podium
Figure 65. Green public spaces for a variety of users
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
Pnr
• Planned cycling facility
type and location to be
determined through
future EA study
OP recommends piping
ifthe creek here
teem
Figure 66. Whites Precinct Intensification Plan
EXISTING
•
Study Area Boundary
Valleylands and Stream Corridors
Regional Stormwater Flood Plain
Existing Park
Buildings To Remain
Properties of Heritage Significance
PROPOSED
LAND USE / BUILT FORM
Gateway
▪ Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office
Preferred Office Location
Mixed Use B - Residential/ Retail
Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail
Residential
l Primary Frontage
t.__J Secondary Frontage
I _ _ J Existing Development Application
Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative
Only (March 21st at 1:OO pm)
4rrrz,r/
Existing Main Road
Existing Road / Laneways
Existing Cycling Network
Planned Cycling Network
GO Railway
Future & Planned Connection
Subject to EA
PLACE MAKING
0
iN
Gateway Plaza
Public Green Space
Public Park
POPS
Public Lookout
Heritage Path
Potential Community
Facility
Lot Lines
Developable Lots
e.r Lot Identifier
Area Subject to Further Assessment
Q Existing Controlled Intersection
• Bus Stops
CONNECTIVITY
<•••-> Pedestrian Path
Multi -Use Path
Proposed Public Streets
Proposed Private Streets
Proposed Cycling Facility
ri
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Location Subject to Further
Review
• Indicative Enhanced Boulevard
Yr Right -In , Right -out
Access
Precinct Framework
Land Use and Built Form
The distribution of higher densities and higher intensities
of uses in the Intensification Framework are intertwined
in the Whites Precinct. The greatest densities as
proposed are clustered in close proximity to the
intersection of Kingston Road and Whites Road, with
additional concentrations within the southern portions
of the parcels to the south of Kingston Road, extending
east and west of the central cluster at Kingston Road
and Whites Road. Similarly, the greatest mix of uses
are located within proximity of this major intersection,
with provisions for higher density employment uses
in the form of Mixed Use A areas (a combination of
residential, retail and office uses in mixed use buildings,
or in separate buildings on mixed use sites) and office/
retail uses. The identification of office uses at this major
intersection stems from the convergence of two rapid
transit corridors, creating greater opportunities for local
jobs and a stronger live -work balance.
Placemaking
The combination of relatively larger parcels and the
intersection of two planned Transit Spines (as per the
City of Pickering Official Plan) on Kingston Road and
Whites Road set the framework for accommodating
a generally higher density of mixed uses within the
Whites Precinct. To support the future residential and
employment population that would result from this
higher density, and to provide moments of respite within
this intensified cluster, the Intensification Framework
proposes a distribution of public spaces that vary in size
and function to ensure ease of access. In addition, a
linear POPS is provided from the existing school site to
the north of the Whites Precinct and Kingston Road to
provide a safe pedestrian link to the existing controlled
intersection at Steeple Hill Road and Kingston Road,
and to future developments south of Kingston Road.
In terms of primary and secondary street frontages,
the Whites Precinct generally concentrates primary
frontages within close proximity to the major intersection
at Kingston Road and Whites Road, with secondary
frontages on Kingston Road at the western and eastern
limits of the precinct. This recommendation allows for
a more compact concentration of activity in an area that
is likely to feature higher foot traffic as a result of the
proposed uses and densities.
Connectivity
The Whites Precinct is typified by relatively larger
parcels with greater depths. As a result, a number of
opportunities for new connections within and through
these larger parcels are proposed, featuring strategies
to provide consolidated access, internal routes of
circulation, and additional frontage opportunities through
new connections.
The Plan features a private mid -block road connection
south of Kingston Road with access points off Kingston
Road at the eastern edge of Petticoat Creek and the
intersection of Kingston Road and Steeple Hill Road.
It also features a potential private road connection on
the south side of Kingston Road, east of Whites Road
with the access aligning with Delta Boulevard. This
configuration would reduce the number of individual
access points from Kingston Road while improving
connectivity and additional access points within the
block.
Lastly, rear private service streets/laneways are
proposed on the north side of Kingston Road, west
and east of Whites Road, with connections to Steeple
Hill Road and Delta Boulevard respectively, meeting
Kingston Road at existing controlled intersections.
These configurations improve connectivity between
the properties on the north -side of Kingston Road, and
reduces the number of individual access points on
Kingston Road.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
Itit
•
v.. - _� '-2 tga
, ,.. a
0_ `_-�
!�Whites.Precinct Overall Massing ' . a.
This page has been Intentionally left blank.
4.4 Dunbarton/Liverpool
Character
Dunbarton/Liverpool is envisioned to develop into a
local community and shopping destination, primarily
dominated by a range of mixed-use buildings at varying
commercial intensities. Storefronts will primarily face
onto a proposed new internal street with enhanced
boulevards, and a collection of internal courtyards and
green spaces will add to the feel of a neighbourhood -
oriented retail strip. Figures 68 to 71 give a general
sense of the scale and character of the precinct.
Priorities for the Area
The top priority for Dunbarton/Liverpool is supporting the
connectivity and animation of neighbourhood -oriented
green spaces and squares.
Key Considerations for the Area
The network of open spaces, distributed along the
proposed internal east -west road parallel to Kingston
Road, is key to realizing the vision of this precinct.
Varying in size and function, these spaces have the
potential to compliment ground -level retail frontages
along the internal road. They will act as multi -use spaces
for community events or weekend farmers markets and
draw in both locals and visitors alike as a destination
point. Careful consideration should be given as to how
engagement with local stakeholders can support a
sustained programme of events year-round.
Figure 68. Pedestrian -friendly streets
Figure 70. Multi-purpose open sl
Figure 69. Opportunities for mixed-use with office
Figure 71. Pedestrian -friendly retail
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
Former VI Rage cf
Dunbarton
j.,
Figure 72. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Intensification Plan
EXISTING
Study Area Boundary Existing Main Road
Valleylands and Stream Corridors Existing Road / Laneways
Regional Stormwater Flood Plain Existing Cycling Network
– — – Planned Cycling Network
131 I GO Railway
Existing Park
• Buildings To Remain
Properties of Heritage Significance
PROPOSED
LAND 115E / BUILT FORM
r;
▪ Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office
Gateway
Preferred Office Location
Mixed Use B Residential/ Retail
Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail
Residential
L�J Primary Frontage
L__J Secondary Frontage
Existing Development Application
1111 Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative
Only (March 21st at 1:OO pm)
41114 Future & Planned Connection
Subject to EA
PLACE MAKING
0
Q
Gateway Plaza
Public Green Space
Public Park
POPS
Public Lookout
Heritage Path
Potential Community
Facility
' Area Subject to
Environmental
Flood Review
ty1111111111TIY}7TUU
Lot Lines
Developable Lots
r-tr Lot Identifier
Area Subject to Further Assessment
Existing Controlled intersection
• Bus Stops
CONNECTIVITY
Pedestrian Path
Multi -Use Path
Proposed Public Streets
Proposed Private Streets
Proposed Cycling Facility
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Location Subject to Further
Review
• Indicative Enhanced Boulevard
zr Right -In , Right -out
Access
VAL
100m
Precinct Framework
Land Use and Built Form
The greatest heights and densities are proposed in
close proximity to the intersection of Kingston Road and
Dixie Road along the Highway 401 edge, with additional
concentrations between Merritton Road and Dunbarton
Creek. Mid -rise buildings are located on the southern
portions of Kingston Road between Dixie Road and
Walnut Lane, creating a gradual transition between the
established residential neighborhoods to the north and
the southern portions of the precinct.
The greatest mix of uses are located within proximity of
the potential gateway at the Kingston Road and Dixie
Road intersection, including higher density employment
uses in the form of Mixed Use A (residential/retail/office)
uses.
Placemaking
The combination of relatively larger parcels, that are not
closely located to existing residential development, set
the framework for accommodating a generally higher
density of mixed uses south of Kingston Road and east
of Dixie Road. To support the future residential and
employment population in the Dumbarton/Liverpool
Precinct, the Intensification Framework contemplates a
collection of open spaces that vary in size and function.
They are distributed along the proposed internal road
running east -west parallel to Kingston Road, and at
the gateway of Kingston Road and Dixie Road. The
open spaces internal to the precinct are seen as having
the potential to act as multi -use spaces for events or
weekend farmers markets.
In terms of primary frontages, the Intensification
Framework focuses these along the new east -west
internal road and the planned extension of Walnut Lane,
creating opportunity for more active uses at grade that
would contribute to a more vibrant public realm within
the centre of the precinct.
Connectivity
The Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct is typified by relatively
large parcels with even greater depths than those found
in the Whites Precinct. As a result, opportunities for
new road connections within and through these larger
parcels are proposed, featuring a strategy to provide
consolidated access, internal multi- modal routes
of circulation and additional frontage opportunities
through new connections. In addition, a new internal
road running parallel to Kingston Road is introduced to
connect Walnut Lane to Dixie Road. It is intended to
create a more pedestrian friendly east -west connection
and opportunities for potential redevelopment with
active frontages through the core of the precinct. The
Intensification Framework also incorporates the planned
extension of Walnut Lane across Pine Creek, of which
the exact alignment is to be determined through
a municipal class environmental assessment. All
proposed roads within the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct
are encouraged to be multi -modal. A pedestrian and
cycling connection is proposed by re -using the existing
rail bridge and underpass over the highway to connect
the neighbourhood to the south, with an eventual
connection to the waterfront trail.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
'
••
1
10 .
iA
.... \►
Figure 7 ; tn. n%Liverq"oo1 Precinct Overall Ma
•77-
This page has been Intentionally left blank.
4.5 Brock
Character
With a large concentration of residential buildings, two
proposed employment hubs, large areas of open space,
and easy access to the Pickering GO Station, Brock is
envisioned a complete community with transit -supportive
densities. The plan emphasizes the strategic location
and function of the Specialty Retailing Node while also
enhancing the liveability of the area. Figures 74 to 77
give a general sense of the scale and character of the
precinct.
Priorities for the Area
The priority for Brock is to improve multi -modal
connectivity to strengthen access points, break up large
parcels, create more routes of circulation off Brock Road
and Pickering Parkway, and open up additional street
frontage. As the area becomes a complete community a
new public park will be key for the comfort, vibrancy and
character of the area.
Key Considerations for the Area
Intensification must consider the interface of retail
and office with residential uses. Care must be given
to ensure that competing uses do not cause any
adverse impacts. Transitions between buildings and
appropriate transitions in height, mass and scale
must be established in response to stable residential
neighborhoods to the north and east.
-,3lElut%., ;!qil
Figure 74. Multi -modal streets
Figure 75. Open spaces for public enjoyment
Figure 76. Opportunities for a variety of retailers
Figure 77. Neighbourhood -oriented retail
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
77,
ti r
• bjecrr OHrcial Plan n -R
Amendment and Enirta nmmrtal
Acsessnrenr Study ourco
Marla ArImEass
Of Wake Park
Figure 78. Brock Precinct Intensification Plan
EXISTING
EEM
•
Study Area Boundary
Valleylands and Stream Corridors
Regional Stormwater Flood Plain
Existing Park
Buildings To Remain
Properties of Heritage Significance
PROPOSED
LAND USE / BUILT FORM
Gateway
_ Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office
Preferred Office Location
Mixed Use B - Residential/ Retail
Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail
Residential
l__J Primary Frontage
L__) Secondary Frontage
Existing Development Application
• Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative
Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm)
•
ormir
Existing Main Road
Existing Road / Laneways
Existing Cycling Network
Planned Cycling Network
i GO Railway
4rr4 Future & Planned Connection
Subject to EA
PLACE MAKING
0
0
ra
0
Gateway Plaza
Public Green Space
Public Park
POPS
Public Lookout
Heritage Path
Potential Community
Facility
•C n
necno
der review
Lot Lines
Developable Lots
d•a Lot Identifier
Area Subject to Further Assessment
Q Existing Controlled intersection
• Bus Stops
CONNECTIVITY
(...>
a
94.1
Pedestrian Path
Multi -Use Path
Proposed Public Streets
Proposed Private Streets
Proposed Cycling Facility
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Location Subject to Further
Review
Indicative Enhanced Boulevard
zr Right -In Right -out
Access
wm
Precinct Framework
Land Use and Built Form
The greatest heights and densities are clustered in
close proximity to the intersection of Brock Road and
Pickering Parkway, with additional concentrations within
the southern portions near Highway 401. The greatest
mix of uses are located within proximity of the Kingston
Road and Brock Road intersection, encouraging the
development of office uses in proximity to higher order
transit. A secondary office hub is located near the
Brock Road and Pickering Parkway intersection, to take
advantage of the easy access from/to Highway 401 and
Pickering GO Station and to create greater opportunities
for local jobs and a stronger live -work balance.
Placemaking
To support the future residential and employment
population that would result from the higher density
proposed in the Intensification Framework, and to
provide moments of respite, larger areas of open space
are contemplated to ensure a sufficient amount of open
space for the increased resident population. In addition,
a series of linear open spaces, acting as connectors
between larger open spaces, are envisioned. One
such connection includes a linear POPS which links
pedestrians from Brock Street to a new internal public
park and to Beechlawn Park, located immediately east
of the node. Furthermore, a potential community facility
is envisioned in close proximity to this chain of open
spaces. South of Pickering Parkway open spaces
are organized along the main public road as places of
respite from the retail activity, and to further the vision for
a more sustainable "greener" community.
In terms of primary and secondary frontages, Brock
Precinct includes two distinct areas, with the first
concentrating primary frontages within close proximity to
Kingston Road, and the second concentrating primary
frontages immediately south of the intersection of
Pickering Parkway and the new internal public road.
Brock Precinct features two gateways: one is located at
Kingston Road and Brock Road, serving as an eastern
gateway to the Kingston Corridor, while the other is
located at Brock Road and Pickering Parkway, taking on
the role of a localized gateway into the precinct and its
related hubs.
Post Manor, the only designated heritage building in
the corridor and node, is located in the Brock Precinct.
Redevelopment of the lands on the northwest corner
of Kingston Road and Brock Road shall seek the
preservation of and incorporation of the Post Manor, a
designated heritage building governed by the Ontario
Heritage Act.
Connectivity
The Brock Precinct is typified by a mixture in size of
parcels along Kingston Road and very large parcels off
Pickering Parkway and Brock Road. There are three
main landowners within the Specialty Retailing Node
Area, and as a result, a number of opportunities for
new connections and public roads within and through
these very large parcels are encouraged. These feature
strategies to provide better access, more internal routes
of circulation and multi- modal routes, and additional
street frontage and activity hub opportunities through
new connections.
The Intensification Framework features a public road
passing through the existing mid -block intersection east
of the Brock Road on Pickering Parkway. The proposed
public road would become a "precinct collector", forming
the back -bone of a more strongly defined internal road
network and improving walkability through the node.
It is recommended to explore needs and justification
for provision of a new controlled intersection where the
private road meets Pickering Parkway at the eastern
edge of the Brock Precinct.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
"7.momNM INCEIr
5.0 Implementation
5.1 Implementation
5.2 Future Studies
5.3 Strategic Capital Projects
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
5.1 Implementation
Development Phasing and Infrastructure Provision
Development within the Kingston Road Corridor and
Specialty Retailing node should be sequenced to ensure
that appropriate transportation, municipal servicing and
community infrastructure are available.
The expansion of the street network into a finer grid of
streets and connections should occur incrementally with
development, with new public streets being secured
through the development application process and/or
through financial contributions towards the acquisition
of land and construction of transportation infrastructure
off-site. Where appropriate and necessitated by timing
considerations, financial front-end loading agreements
should be considered to expedite infrastructure delivery.
Agreements for cost-sharing should also be considered
and implemented where appropriate to facilitate the
provision of infrastructure and allocate the related costs
of development amongst local landowners.
Context Plans
Development applications for large sites should
provide a context plan to demonstrate the full build
out of new streets and blocks within the site, potential
connections to adjacent sites, redevelopment within
all future blocks, and the provision of supporting open
spaces and community infrastructure as required. These
context plans should be accompanied by supporting
Transportation Impact Studies, Functional Servicing
Reports and other technical studies that provide a
level of information sufficient to assess the ultimate
infrastructure and other requirements of full build out.
These context plans will also permit the City to assess
development applications in the short to medium term
that may contemplate improvements to existing uses
and/or partial site build outs rather than full scale
redevelopment. This will provide for flexibility over time,
ensuring that all development will proceed in a manner
that does not conflict with achieving the long term vision
for intensification within the Corridor and Node.
Monitoring Program
The City should consider implementing a monitoring
program that can be developed and undertaken
with landowners to monitor development levels and
travel patterns as the transportation network and
associated improvements are implemented with
redevelopment. This monitoring program can be used
to inform Transportation Impact Studies submitted
with development applications, to ensure there is
sufficient transportation network capacity to support
redevelopment over the long term.
Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing
Node Zoning By -Law
To implement the vision and policy recommendations
contained within the Kingston Road Corridor and
Specialty Retailing Node Framework and Urban Design
Guidelines, an area -specific Zoning By -Law should be
created. This Zoning By -Law should place particular
emphasis on performance-based standards that
articulate a built form and public realm that will create
pedestrian -focused, human -scaled development at a
density and with a mix of uses that support higher order
transit.
This Zoning By -Law should be framed in terms of
delivering design excellence and permit a broad range
of uses consistent with the Framework, built form
standards that focus on the ground level of buildings
and pedestrian experience (e.g. minimum and maximum
setbacks, minimum and maximum streetwall heights,
minimum and maximum stepbacks).
The Zoning By -Law should also include provisions for
implementation and release of Holding Symbols on
certain lands where development within the context of
the Framework is considered premature, subject to the
provision of required transportation, municipal servicing
and/or community infrastructure.
5.2 Future Studies
Parking Strategy
It is recommended that the City undertake a Parking
Strategy Study to help aid in the transition from a
predominance of surface parking to a balance of
structured, underground and on -street parking. This
Strategy should also contemplate balancing the need for
convenience and access to support the retail customer
base of the many businesses that exist today and
will continue to form a strong part of the Corridor and
Node. By examining existing and future utilization rates
(potentially informed by development applications), the
Study can provide a series of broad recommendations
including but not limited to:
• Reducing and / or consolidating parking, potentially
through a municipal parking provider and/or through
public / private partnerships to provide centralized,
structured parking;
• Providing for Low Impact Development measures
within surface parking lots to reduce their
environmental impact;
• Cash -in -lieu of parking to help finance consolidated
parking structures;
• Reductions in minimum parking standards (or the
imposition of a maximum parking standard); and
• Need and justification for a municipal parking
authority to provide and manage public parking at
certain locations.
Business Engagement Program
It is recommended that the City initiate a program to
engage local businesses along the corridor and within
the node to consider matters such as business retention
and expansion needs in a changing retail environment.
Figure 80. Six -Points Intersection, Toronto (Image Credits: SvN Architects + Planners)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
5.3 Strategic Capital Projects
There are three ongoing transportation network
Environmental Assessments (EA) whose outcomes
will play a fundamental role in providing improved
connectivity across the Corridor and alternate routes of
travel within the Precincts. These studies include the
Durham -Scarborough BRT Transit Project Assessment
Process (TPAP), the Walnut Lane Extension Municipal
Class EA, and the Notion Road / Squires Beach Road
Municipal Class EA.
The Durham -Scarborough BRT TPAP is examining
dedicated centre median transit lanes for the exclusive
use of busses across the entire length of Kingston
Road within Pickering. In addition to providing higher
order transit that will help unlock intensification within
the Corridor and Node, boulevard improvements along
Kingston Road provided in concert with new transit will
provide an opportunity to improve the public realm and
pedestrian experience.
The Walnut Lane Extension Municipal Class EA is
examining options for a new connection south of
Kingston Road across the Dunbarton Creek to Pickering
City Centre. This new connection will provide an
alternate route of travel and is envisioned as leading to a
key retail spine within the Dunbarton / Liverpool Precinct
within the Framework.
The Notion Road / Squires Beach Road Municipal Class
EA is examining options for a new north -south crossing
over Highway 401 and the rail corridor. This will provide
a key alternate travel route to balance demand on
Brock Road, and provide further travel options for future
residents and businesses within the Brock Precinct,
helping support the significant intensification envisioned
in this area.
As implementing documents are prepared for the
Kingston Road Corridor and Speciality Retailing Node,
the results of these studies should be used to further
inform the policies and standards that will be developed
to secure the Framework's vision.
This page has been Intentionally left blank.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan
Appendix II to
Report PLN 26-19
Kingston Road Corridor and
Specialty Retailing Node Draft Urban Design Guidelines
November 2019
Kingston Road Corridor and
Specialty Retailing Node
City of Pickering
Draft Urban Design
Guidelines
November 2019
Acknowledgments
These Draft Urban Design Guidelines have been
developed through a collaborative process that included
landowners, developers, City and Regional staff and
community members, together with other relevant
stakeholders.
The City and consultant team would like to thank all
those involved in the process for their commitment to
making this document a practical and useful tool to guide
the implementation of the Kingston Road Intensification
vision.
City of Pickering
Participating Stakeholders
Landowners
The Public
Agencies
• The Province of Ontario Ministry of Transportation
• Region of Durham
• Parks Canada
• City of Toronto
• Town of Ajax
• Durham District School Board
• Toronto Region and Conservation Authority
Consultants
SvN, AECOM and 360 Collective commenced this
document in May 2019.
The Draft Urban Design Guidelines will be presented to
the Planning and Development Committee (PDC) at the
end of 2019.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
Table of Contents
0.0 Intent & Structure of
Document
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Study Area
1.2 Local and Regional Context
1.3 Vision Statement
1.4 Goals and Objectives
1.5 Intensification Plan
2.0 Built Form
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Block Structure
2.3 Building Placement and Orientation
2.3.1 Building Entrances
2.3.2 Building Separation Distances
2.3.3 Building Setbacks
2.4 Grading and Access
2.5 Parking
2.5.1 On -Street Parking
2.5.2 Structured Parking
2.5.3 Surface Parking
2.6 Loading, Services and Utilities
2.7 Landscape Design
2.8 Sustainable Design
2.9 Signage and Lighting
2.10 Transition and Massing
2.11 Materials and Facade Treatment
2.12 Streetwall
2.13 Active Frontage Network
2.14 Gateways
2.15 Building Types
2.15.1 Tall Buildings
2.15.2 Mid -Rise Buildings
2.15.3 Low -Rise Buildings
3.0
Place -making
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Natural Heritage Network
3.3 Heritage Path
3.4 Public Green Spaces
3.5 Public Parks
3.6 Gateway Plazas
3.7 Public Lookouts
3.8 Privately Owned Publicly -Accessible Spaces (POPS)
3.9 Public Art
3.10 Heritage Buildings
4.0 Connectivity
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Pedestrians
4.2.1 Sidewalks
4.2.2 Pedestrian Paths
4.2.3 Pedestrian Crossings
4.3 Cycling
4.3.1 Multi -Use Paths
4.3.2 Bicycle Lanes and Cycle Tracks
4.3.3 Shared Facilities
4.4 Transit
4.5 Street Types
4.5.1 Primary Streets
4.5.2 Secondary Streets
4.5.3 Service Streets and Laneways
4.5.4 New Public Streets
4.5.5 New Private Streets
4.5.6 Existing Streets
5.0 Illustrative Blocks
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Mid -Block Sites
5.3 Intersection Sites
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
0.0 Intent & Structure of Document
This document provides a toolkit to guide new
development within the Kingston Road Corridor and
Specialty Retailing Node, with an emphasis on place -
making and sustainability on a study area -wide scale.
This document further articulates the vision set by the
Intensification Plan and aims to serve as a practical and
user-friendly reference manual for all parties engaged in
development projects.
The intent of the document is to guide readers from
the high-level principles set out in the Intensification
Plan to specific design considerations for elements
of progressive scale: neighbourhood, block, site
and building. Based on best practice standards, this
document has been structured through a principle -
based approach to site-specific design, while providing a
degree of flexibility, creativity and adaptability for future
development.
YOU ARE HERE
1 -o Introduction
Understanding of the
site and the vision and
objectives. Introduction to the
Intensification Plan.
The Urban Design Guidelines will provide direction
and guide the City's review of site-specific
applications within the Kingston Road Corridor
and Specialty Retailing Node, and must be read in
concert with the Pickering Official Plan and Zoning
By-law regulations. The Urban Design Guidelines are
one of the tools to implement the Intensification Plan.
The document is divided into 5 sections: Introduction,
Built Form, Place -making, Connectivity and Illustrative
Blocks. Chapter 5 combines the guidelines found
throughout the document and provides a series of
Illustrative block plans and massing showing a possible
design utilizing the guidelines. The colour attributed to
each section is consistent throughout the document, and
all colour-coded annotations shall guide the reader to the
corresponding section being referred to.
Although the Urban Design Guidelines express the
City's design objectives, they do no preclude alternative
options. As guidelines, they offer flexibility in their
application, provided that the overall intent of the Urban
Design Guidelines is being met.
2.0 Built -Form
Toolkit of built -form guidelines
for intensification.
im
3.0 Place -making
Toolkit of place -making
guidelines for intensification.
Structure of the Urban Design Guidelines
Annotated Elements
Annotations over images identify
best practices illustrated by the
precedent.
Annotated letters on diagrams
within Section 5.0 Illustrative
Blocks refer to the corresponding
guideline.
4.0 Connectivity
Toolkit of connectivity
guidelines for intensification.
a
Im
X
5n Illustrative
• Blocks
Illustrative block plans
utilizing the toolkit guidelines.
This callout type directs
the reader to the
related section and/or
subsection.
see see see
. •
see
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
Introduction
1.1 Study Area
1.2 Local and Regional Context
1.3 Vision Statement
1.4 Goals and Objectives
1.5 Intensification Plan
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
1.1 Study Area
The approximately 152 -hectare Study Area is centred
on Kingston Road, which spans the entire width of the
City of Pickering, paralleling Highway 401. The Study
Area generally includes properties that front onto the
north and south sides of Kingston Road, between
Rouge National Urban Park in the west and Pine Creek
in the east. The Study Area also includes a number of
properties that front on to the north side of Kingston
Road west and east of the intersection of Brock Road,
as well as all properties that fall within the Specialty
Retailing Node to the southeast of the intersection of
Kingston Road and Brock Road (see Figure 1).
There are two areas along Kingston Road that are
excluded from the Study Area. These include flood prone
areas to the north and east of the Specialty Retailing
Node and the City Centre, where a detailed planning
study has already been undertaken result in Council -
approved area -specific Official Plan policies, zoning, and
urban design guidelines.
For the purposes of the study, the Study Area has been
divided into the following four precincts:
Rougemount Precinct — extending from the Rouge
Valley in the west to Rosebank Road in the east
White Precinct — extending from Rosebank Road in the
west to Fairport Road in the east
Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct — extending from
Fairport Road in the west to Pine Creek in the east
Brock Precinct — incorporating the portions of the Study
Area around the intersection of Kingston Road and
Brock Road and the entirety of the Specialty Retailing
Node located south of Kingston Road, east of Brock
Road, and north of Highway 401
Traffic Zone A
Traffic Zone B
Traffic
Zone C
•
Zone D
Traffic
Zone E
10.85 km
169 km
Rougemount Precinct Whites Precinct
Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct
Figure 1. Study Area
Legend
—• Study Area Boundary
Parks / Open Space Speciality Retailing Node
Rail Corridor
Brock Precinct
1.2 Local and Regional Context
Kingston Road is a key connection route at the regional,
city and neighbourhood scale, linking together various
local destinations, neighbourhoods, and municipalities.
Kingston Road serves a significant regional role,
providing connections between Pickering, Toronto,
Ajax, Whitby and Oshawa. It also serves as a connector
between a number of regionally significant natural
heritage features, including the Highland Creek and
Rouge River in Toronto, the Petticoat Creek and Duffins
Creeks in Pickering, and the Caruthers Creek in Ajax.
This major regional link/connection is shown in Figure 2.
The Specialty Retailing Node also serves a regional role,
providing specialty retailing to a broad regional market
with access provided by the Highway 401 interchange at
Brock Road.
At the city scale, Kingston Road is a major east -west
spine with branch connections to important growth areas
such as the Seaton Urban Area. It also connects to
recreational amenities such as the Pickering Waterfront
and Rouge National Urban Park, including Glen Rouge
Campground and its associated trails which are to be
expanded significantly over the coming years. These
city -scale north -south links/connections are shown
conceptually in Figure 2.
At the neighbourhood scale, Kingston Road serves as a
spine for key north -south connections across Highway
401, connecting neighbourhoods in the South Pickering
Urban Area to one another at Rougemount Drive, Whites
Road, Liverpool Road, and Brock Road (see conceptual
major links/connections in Figure 2). Likewise, the
Specialty Retailing Node plays a city/neighbourhood-
scale role, providing destination retail and local retail
within its boundaries, serving customers from within the
City of Pickering and the immediate areas that surround
it.
The role the corridor plays at multiple scales
necessitates that the ultimate vision for intensification
contemplate and seek a balance between these varied
functions, through new connections, new open spaces,
public realm improvements, new uses, and new, denser
development.
Legend
Major Links and Connections
(at varying scales)
Natural Features
F4 Kingston Road
Figure 2. Regional, City-wide and Neighbourhood Context
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design GuidelinesIIIM
1.3 Vision Statement
Throughout the course of this study, a renewed Vision
was developed for the Kingston Road Corridor and
Specialty Retailing Node. This Vision built upon the
existing vision for the corridor and node as expressed
in the City of Pickering Official Plan, the Kingston Road
Corridor Development Guidelines, and the Specialty
Retailing Node Guidelines. The renewed Vision was also
informed by the updated planning framework, specifically
the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe's
increased emphasis on planning for complete
communities and integrating transportation and land
use planning through transit -supportive development.
Lastly, the renewed Vision was developed in light of
the review of existing conditions, analysis of issues and
opportunities and consultation with Focus Groups and
the Public Agency Advisory Committee.
Based on all of the above, the following was endorsed
by Council as a new Vision for the corridor and node:
By 2041, the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty
Retailing Node will be...
• A sustainable place that embraces its significant
natural heritage assets, connecting to the valleys
and creeks that the corridor crosses, mitigating
greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to climate
change, and building communities centred on new
public open spaces in both the corridor and node
• A walkable place in all four precincts, with safe,
comfortable and green sidewalks and pedestrian
connections on both sides of Kingston Road, and
within larger parcels that are likely to redevelop with
an internal street network, particularly within the
node
• An urban, livable, transit -supportive community, with
a higher density mix of uses, located in buildings
that are pedestrian oriented, and that transition in
height and mass to the scale of adjacent established
neighborhoods, particularly to the north of the
corridor and to the east of the node
• A place that continues to serve as both a destination
for shopping and a place of employment, with retail,
commercial services and offices within mixed use
buildings or on mixed use sites, and generally
fronting directly onto Kingston Road, Whites Road
and onto new internal streets on larger parcels,
to provide active uses at grade that encourage
pedestrian traffic
• A regional and local multi -modal connector, with
regional gateways at Altona Road and Brock Road,
and with gateways to the neighborhoods north and
south of the corridor at Rougemount Drive, Whites
Road, Fairport Road, Brock Road and Pickering
Parkway.
1.4 Goals and Objectives
In addition to the new Vision, a series of guiding goals
and objectives for the corridor and node were prepared
to guide the development of the Intensification Plan.
These goals and objectives are as follows:
1. Advance the concept of place -making and create
complete communities
1.1 Create a distinct character for the corridor and
node as a whole while also providing for variation
based on the unique conditions and adjacencies
within each precinct
1.2 Create a strong sense of community, a context
for healthy lifestyles and a high quality of life
1.3 Plan for a full range of housing types and
tenures in a variety of building forms
1.4 Provide for and ensure the accessibility of a full
range of services and amenities for all walks of life
2. Promote sustainability in the design and full life-
cycle of the streetscape, open spaces and buildings
2.1 Ensure that the ultimate streetscape, open
space and redevelopment concepts have capacity to
support growth beyond the horizon of the plan
2.2 Ensure that sustainability principles and green
infrastructure are incorporated as a foundational
element of all streetscape, open space and built form
concepts
3. Stimulate economic growth and vitality
3.1 Maintain space for various sizes of retail
uses and encourage the expansion of office and
commercial service uses
4. Promote mixed used development with an
emphasis on higher density residential and
employment uses integrated within a building or
site
4.1 Plan for existing single use sites to transition
over time to a mix of uses, either through full scale
redevelopment or infill on underutilized portions of a
site
4.2 Plan for higher density forms of employment
including office uses, within close proximity to higher
order transit stops
4.3 Plan for the greatest mix of uses and highest
densities within close proximity to higher order transit
stops
5. Design all public roads and private connections
to be complete streets and emphasize transit and
pedestrian oriented development
5.1 Ensure that all users of public roads and private
connections have distinct and delineated spaces to
separate modes of travel moving at different speeds
5.2 Ensure that buildings are located in close
proximity to and are oriented towards the public realm
and provide active edges to create an environment
that encourages walking
6. Improve access management and connectivity
for all transportation modes
6.1 Plan for the consolidation of driveways with
access to and from Kingston Road
6.2 Plan for the creation or enhancement of
internal street networks on larger parcels to provide
alternative routes and new frontages for development
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
7. Encourage the optimization of infrastructure
7.1 Establish a density target for areas or sites
within proximity to higher order transit stops to
optimize transit ridership
7.2 Ensure that intensification can be supported by
existing infrastructure capacity and that additional
infrastructure is phased in step with development
8. Enhance and restore natural heritage features
and functions
8.1 Provide physical and visual connections
between the corridor and the natural heritage features
that it intersects
8.2 Restore natural heritage corridors, ensure no
incremental loss of natural heritage and consider
stormwater management on an area wide basis
9. Support implementation by considering phasing,
flexibility and intermediate interventions
9.1 Ensure that the overall arrangement of streets,
blocks, open spaces and buildings can be achieved in
multiple ways and that sites are designed in a manner
that anticipates change over time
1.5 Intensification Plan
The Intensification Plan provides a comprehensive
framework for future development of the Kingston
Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. It sets
out a detailed land use strategy to support higher -
density mixed-use development, identifies place -
making opportunities for an improved public realm, and
proposes improvements to the street, transit, cycling and
pedestrian network to increase connectivity.
For ease of reference and to aid understanding of the
overall context, the Intensification Plan (Figure 3) of the
Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node is
presented on the following page.
This is followed by precinct -specific figures, showing
each precinct at a larger scale and with a greater
amount of detail. Intensification Plans are accompanied
by Illustrative Urban Design Plans for each of the
Rougemount (Figures 4-5), Whites (Figures 6-7),
Dunbarton/Liverpool (Figures 8-9) and Brock (Figures
10-11) Precincts.
LEGEND
Study Area Boundary
Valleylands and Stream Corridors
Regional Stormwater Flood Plain
Existing Park 4 P
0 Existing Controlled Intersection
i Bus Stops
These Illustrative Urban Design Plans are used as an
underlay for all maps produced for this document, and
include existing natural heritage features, transportation
infrastructure, and lot boundaries, along with potential
placement and orientation of buildings and potential
location of landscape features in a manner which is
consistent with the Urban Design Guidelines. It is
important to note that the diagrams are illustrative
in nature, and that they represent only one of many
possible built form configurations.
The following legend outlines the features shown on the
Illustrative Urban Design Plans.
Existing Main Road
Existing Street/ Laneways
GO Railway
Future & Planned
Connection Subject to EA
Buildings To Remain
II Properties of Heritage
Significance
s -x
Lot Lines
Developable Lots
Lot Identifier
1 Proposed Streets
lir Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative
Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm)
¶ Landscape - Illustrative Only
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
Tra ' is Zone A
Tra ' is Zone B Tra ' is Zone B
❑unbarion
Creek Ravine
Altana Forest
LEGEND
Study Area Boundary
Valleylands and Stream Corridors
Regional Stormwater Flood Plain
Existing Park
Buildings To Remain
Properties of Heritage Significance
Figure 3. Intensification Plan
Existing Main Road
Existing Road / Laneways
Existing Cycling Network
Planned Cycling Network
GO Railway
Future & Planned Connection
Subject to EA
/0-1
Lot Lines
Developable Lots
Lot Identifier
Area Subject to Further Assessme
Existing Controlled intersection
• Bus Stops
Tra ' is Zone
Valley Farm Rd
Beech Iawn
Park
iman's Bay
Precinct
Pickering
GO Station
Bay ya- .
LAND USE / BUILT FORM
Gateway
Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office
1101
- Mixed Use B - Residential/ Retail
Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail
—1 Residential
l__1 Primary Retail Frontage
ILJ Secondary Frontage
1__; Existing Development Application
Preferred Office Location
ET
i
Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative
Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm)
PLACE MAKING
0
tJ
e
r`rr
Sandy Beach Rd
Gateway Plaza
Public Green Space
Public Park
POPS
Public Lookout
Heritage Path
Potential Community
Facility
0 100 m 300 m 500 m
Broc Precinct
CONNECTIVITY
( Pedestrian Path
Multi -Use Path
® Proposed Public Streets
1 Proposed Private Streets
Proposed Cycling Facility
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Location Subject to Further
Review
Indicative Enhanced Boulevard
Right -In , Right -out
Access
•
Park Entrance
Rouge National Urba n Park
L
a
. • . . .
•
‘.•••••. East '
• • • • •
sa'.. Woodlands i.
's,..... Park
. 4
Area Subjectio
Environmental .
.. - .ibres
Flood Review ,.(1,,, Cdnuno-dry
71417/ - ..' ....--.` WI c'
44.
14
r 4 [
14. •
:• e. • ;„...s.
•
.........
6CA
Figure 4. Rougemount Precinct Intensification Plan
Park Entrance
Rouge National Urban Park
Woodlands I'M
East
/
Park / •
'n4
100m
N ....
1:111.
— • - • r':
: •
•
•
100m
• Planned cycling facility
type and location to be
determined through
future EA study
OP recommends piping
the creek here
Figure 6. Whites Precinct Intensification Plan
Ernie L. Stroud
Park
ShepgrdAe
212_1 L_Ingrt,475.1",7-124,
1
1(
100rd
EM,
Figure 7. Whites Precinct Illustrative Urban Design Plan
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
100m
`-area subject to
ioomental
Review
Former Village of
Denbartan
I(ING�ON$Gr:
icy � J ,♦
Figure 8. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Intensification Plan
f - Former Village of
Frenchmen's Bey
Frenchman's Ray
Figure 9. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Illustrative Urban Design Plan
.1 r
Ssechlswn
PI
1•••
WP_••••••••-
Diana Princess
of Wolos Perk
Figure 10. Brock Precinct Intensification Plan
Subppet to °Nixie! Plan
Amendment and •EnerldnnpeoteriS,
Pariisirreed Study
1
..Cannetrion
ender tevreve
10.0m
Figure 11. Brock Precinct Illustrative Urban Design Plan
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
2.0 Built Form
2.1 Introduction
2.2 Block Structure
2.3 Building Placement and Orientation
2.4 Grading and Access
2.5 Parking
2.6 Loading, Services and Utilities
2.7 Landscape Design
2.8 Sustainable Design
2.9 Signage and Lighting
2.10 Transition and Massing
2.11 Materials and Facade Treatment
2.12 Streetwall
2.13 Active Frontage Network
2.14 Gateways
2.15 Building Types
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design GuidelinesCM
2.1 Introduction
Built form is critical in realizing a high-quality urban
environment that successfully integrates a wide range of
uses and promotes a vibrant streetscape.
These Guidelines will facilitate attractive, efficient and
responsive urban design within the Kingston Road
Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node, helping to support
a diversity of land uses, articulate a clear relationship
and interface between building components and streets,
and enhance the experience of users in terms of
visibility, animation, comfort, safety, and accessibility.
Block, site and building design will determine the overall
expression of both individual buildings and of each
neighbourhood as a whole. Guidelines relating to block
structure, building placement and orientation, parking
facilities, site grading and access, servicing, sustainable
and landscape design, signage and lighting, streetwall,
active frontage, gateways and building types are outlined
in this chapter.
Key Objectives
• Promote higher -density mixed-use development
while respecting the character and scale of
established neighbourhoods through proper
transitioning, and careful building design and
placement.
• Introduce an animated public realm through
encouraging active uses at grade and an enjoyable
pedestrian experience.
• Retain and emphasize the distinct character of
local streetscapes and precincts, including heritage
protection.
The section begins with a description and diagramatic
illustration of the Built Form Plan for each precinct,
followed by design guidelines.
Figure 12. Marine Gateway, Vancouver (Image Credits: Perkins+Will)
This page has been Intentionally left blank.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design GuidelinesCM
Rougemount
There are two gateways in the Rougemount precinct,
located at the intersections of Kingston Road and Altona
Road and Kingston Road and Rougemount Drive.
Due to small lot sizes and the existing scale of the
area, the Rougemount Precinct is characterized by
predominantly mid -rise buildings with some additional
height at gateways and near Highway 401. These
moderate heights help reinforce the 'main street'
character of this stretch of Kingston Road.
Greater heights and densities are located on the south
side of Kingston Road, away from the stable residential
neighbourhoods to the north. The south side is made
up of mid -rise and tall buildings while the north side
includes mostly low-rise buildings, which are massed
BUILT FORM
LJ
LJ
__J
Gateway
Primary Frontage
Secondary Frontage
Existing Development Application
Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative
Only (March 21st at 1:O0 pm)
Landscape - Illustrative Only
and scaled to provide a gradual transition to the lower -
scale residential areas.
Primary frontages are proposed across nearly the full
length of Kingston Road between Altona Road and the
Petticoat Creek. This provides the opportunity for more
street -oriented development that supports a high level
of pedestrian activity. It also creates an attractive and
vibrant route which connects key destinations within and
adjacent to the precinct, from Rouge National Urban
Park in the west to the library and community centre in
the east.
Secondary frontages are located along north -south
streets and along sections of Kingston Road just west of
Rosebank Road.
Ease
Woodlands I
Park
Roupa National Urban Park
Figure 13. Rougemount Precinct Built Form Plan
Whites
The gateway intersection of Kingston Road and Whites
Road is the focal point for the Whites Precinct. The
greatest heights and densities are clustered in close
proximity to the gateway, with additional tall buildings
extending east and west of the intersection at Kingston
Road and Whites Road within the southern portions of
the parcels to the south of Kingston Road.
Low-rise buildings are located along the northern edge
of the White Precinct, including along the northern
portion of Whites Road close to existing community
facilities and east -west along Kingston Road close to the
Amberlea creeklands. This transition in height responds
to the existing low-density residential neighbourhoods to
the north.
BUILT FORM
Gateway
LJ Primary Frontage
1_1 Secondary Frontage
Existing Development Application
Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative
Only (March 21st at 1:O0 pm)
Landscape - Illustrative Only
H
sk
The Whites Precinct is typified by relatively larger
parcels with greater lengths and depths than those
found in the Rougemount Precinct. Primary frontage
is concentrated along both the northern and southern
sides of Kingston Road, centered on the gateway at
the intersection of Kingston Road and Whites Road.
Coupled with increased heights and densities, this
will help to create an vibrant commercial district which
attracts a significant amount of pedestrian foot traffic.
Secondary frontages are located along Kingston Road
on either side of the gateway, as well as along the public
road connection south of Kingston Road with access
points at the eastern edge of Petticoat Creek and the
intersection of Kingston Road and Steeple Hill Road.
Figure 15. Whites Precinct Built Form Plan
It
0I
`�.
hites'recinct Overfill M sSingR
.,
Dunbarton/Liverpool
Due to the relatively large size of parcels and their
location away from existing residential development,
the built form of the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct is
characterized by moderate to significant heights and
densities throughout. A gateway is identified at the
intersection of Kingston Road and Dixie Road, where it
is surrounded by mostly mid -rise buildings.
East of Dunbarton Creek, mid -rise buildings are
proposed along of Kingston Road in recognition of the
low-density residential neighbourhoods to the north.
These mid -rise buildings create a gradual transition
between the established residential areas and the
denser southern portions of the precinct, and help to
achieve a more balanced and responsive streetscape.
BUILT FORM
1 Gateway
1_1 Primary Frontage
1,_J Secondary Frontage
Existing Development Application
LBuildings and Shadows - Illustrative
Only (March 21st at 1:0O pm)
Landscape - Illustrative Only
The greatest heights and densities are located internal
to the precinct along the new east -west street running
parallel to Kingston Road. The street is flanked by
primary frontage on both sides, allowing for the creation
of a double -sided main street running through the center
of the precinct. Additional concentrations of height are
located along the Highway 401 edge.
Additionally, a pocket of mid -rise and tall buildings is
located west of Dunbarton Creek on Merritton Road.
Additional height is proposed here in response to the
railway tracks to the north, which create separation
between the intensification area and the residential
neighbourhoods to the north. This creates somewhat of
stand-alone community that is removed from the rest of
the precinct to the east of the creek. However, it remains
within walking distance to the new internal main street.
. - r .7
KLnGSTOsi BA-'
IFrenthnun's 6.y
Figure 17. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Built Form Plan
Durl rtbn/Liverpool Pteci *t Overalt�M4 ` r , r '1 1..., - ,
,1111 - -4'F.fi ,+ .-t• -`
Brock
Within the Brock Precinct, the greatest concentration
of height and density is found at gateway locations
along Brock Road. The first gateway is situated at the
intersection of Brock Road and Pickering Parkway,
where it takes on a role of a more `localized' gateway
to provide access into the precinct and its related hubs.
The second is located at the intersection of Brock Road
and Kingston Road, serving as an eastern gateway
providing access into the wider Kingston Road corridor.
Additional concentrations of tall buildings exist within the
southern portions of the precinct near Highway 401.
Responding to the adjacent low-rise residential
neighbourhoods, low-rise buildings are located along
the length of the eastern edge of the precinct. This built
form reflects an appropriate transition to the established
neighbourhoods, and also takes into account proximity
to Beechlawn Park, a large park located eastwards of
the precinct area.
Primary frontages within Brock Precinct are distributed
along a series of internal roads, particularly along the
new north -south roads which cross Pickering Parkway.
The most active streetwalls will be within the centre
of the precinct, drawing activity inwards. Secondary
frontages are concentrated at gateway intersections,
along the western portion of Pickering Parkway, and
within blocks that front onto public open spaces.
BUILT FORM
Gateway
1__J Primary Frontage
l_1 Secondary Frontage
Existing Development Application
Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative
Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm)
Landscape - Illustrative Only
Diana Princess
n£ kik Peak
Figure 19. Brock Precinct Built Form Plan
4
4.. v. 140. Ab)1
�l" +•
_trF
•
•
..•��' It•' -A rid
2.2 Block Structure
Block structure plays a critical role in structuring
neighbourhoods and shaping how users experience
the urban environment. Blocks dictate the efficiency of
mobility connections, the expression of neighbourhood
character and the look and feel of the public realm.
Design Guidelines
i. Block lengths should generally range between 100
and 150 metres to promote permeability within the
streetscape, support walkability and increase the v.
ease of pedestrian and cyclist movement (Fig. 21).
iii. A mix of lot sizes, configurations and orientations
should be provided to accommodate a variety
of uses and enhance visual interest along the
streetscape.
iv. Generally, a standard rectilinear lot is preferred to
maximize design and siting options. The traditional
lot shape may be varied to account for irregular
slopes or property boundaries.
Corner lots may require greater widths to account for
increased building setbacks from both the front and
side yards.
vi. Block layouts should be designed to maximize views
and vistas through development blocks and towards
gateways and natural heritage features.
ii. Where a block is longer than 150 metres and shorter
alternatives are not feasible, mid -block connections
shall be introduced through pedestrian paths or
linear parks. Pedestrian -scale lighting should be
implemented along these paths to increase comfort
and safety.
Figure 21. West Donlands, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Google Maps)
2.3 Building Placement and
Orientation
Sensitive building placement helps ensure integration
into the surrounding context and limits negative impact
on adjacent streets and open spaces. To achieve this,
attention should be given to building entrances, building
separation distances, and building setbacks.
2.3.1 Building Entrances
Design Guidelines
i. Entrances should be highly visible, front onto the
public street, and connect to pedestrian walkways or
sidewalks. Entrances should promote visibility and
views between interior and exterior spaces (Fig. 22).
ii. Entrances should be emphasized as focal points in
the building facade and be complementary to the
building's overall articulation and material palette.
iii. Entrances should be well lit. Natural lighting is
encouraged through the use of sidelights, fanlights
or door glazing. Wall -mounted down -cast lighting is
also appropriate adjacent to building entrances.
iv. Patios associated with building entrances should
be consistent and proportionate in scale with the
architectural style and massing of the building.
v. Weather protection features such as canopies,
awnings, overhangs and recessed entrances should
be incorporated, where possible, to provide users
shelter from wind, rain, snow and other harsh
elements.
Figure 22. Paintbox Condominium, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Lisa Logan)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines4112M
2.3.2 Building Separation 2.3.3 Building Setbacks
Distances
Design Guidelines
i. For low-rise buildings up to 4 storeys, a minimum
separation distance of 11 metres shall be maintained
between facing buildings.
ii. For low-rise buildings up to 4 storeys, a minimum
8 metre separation distance shall be maintained
between the face of a building containing primary
living space, such as bedrooms and living rooms,
and the side of another building.
iii. For mid -rise buildings up to 8 storeys in height, a
minimum separation distance of 11 metres shall
be maintained. This may be reduced if there are
no primary windows on the wall facing an abutting
building.
iv. For mid -rise buildings between 8 and 12 storeys
in height, a minimum separation distance of 18
metres shall be maintained. This may be reduced if
there are no primary windows on the wall facing an
abutting building.
v. For tall buildings over 13 storeys in height, a
minimum separation distance of 25 metres shall be
maintained between towers.
vi. A minimum separation distance of 15 metres shall
be provided between facing buildings on sites
with multiple buildings. On multi -building sites, it is
encouraged that buildings are offset or angled away
from each other to maintain privacy between facing
units.
vii. A minimum separation distance of 15 metres should
be provided between adjacent buildings where
windows are proposed within a podium. No side -
yard separation is necessary where a continuous
streetwall is desirable.
Design Guidelines
i. Buildings fronting Kingston Road in the Rougemount
Precinct shall be setback 3 metres from the front
property line.
ii. In all other precincts, buildings fronting Kingston
Road, Brock Road and Pickering Parkway shall be
setback 5 metres from the front property line.
iii. Buildings fronting existing public roads intersecting
Kingston Road shall be setback 5 metres from the
property line in the Whites and Brock Precincts
and 3 metres in the Rougemount and Dunbarton/
Liverpool Precincts, or match the setback of
adjacent buildings. In the case that the two adjacent
buildings have differing setbacks, the new building
setback shall match whichever is closer to the street.
iv. In all precincts, buildings shall be setback a
minimum of 2 metres from new public and private
streets that are internal to the development block.
v. In all precincts, buildings shall be setback a
minimum of 3 metres from parks and other open
spaces.
vi. Where retail and commercial uses are located,
setback areas should accommodate spill -out uses
from commercial activity (i.e. patios, displays,
waiting areas) to improve the pedestrian experience.
These areas should be primarily hardscaped to act
as an extension of the sidewalk and accommodate
for higher levels of foot traffic.
vii. Where residential uses are located, softscape
elements such as plantings should be used in
setback areas to provide screening and maintain
privacy for grade -related residential units. These
areas may also include some public amenities (i.e.
benches, bicycle racks).
2.4 Grading and Access
Site grading is critical to ensuring access within and
between lots. In conjunction with building and landscape
design, it supports the provision of convenient, safe and
integrated development.
Design Guidelines
taken to make the transition walkable for pedestrians
and accessible for cars.
iv. Site grading shall consider facilities designed to
provide access for persons with disabilities, including
the provision of ramp access.
i. Grading between adjacent sites shall be considered v.
during site design. Accesses between sites
should be provided in the form of internal roadway
connections or pedestrian walkways (Fig. 23).
ii. To minimize access off Kingston Road, consolidated
private rear accesses should be provided. These
should be developed with a coordinated approach
across landowners to ensure that clear accessways
are maintained, no properties are landlocked and all
lots have a viable connection back to a public road.
iii. Any redevelopment should seek to remove or
minimize grade differences between its adjacent
lots, including Kingston Road. Where this is not
possible due to site topography, measures should be
Entrances and access points should be integrated
with at -grade design. Informational signage,
pavement markings and soft landscaping can
help to orient users, enhance safety and minimize
confusion.
vi. Where possible, vehicular entrances and access
points shall be located within the centre of the block
and below grade with access from local streets/
lanes. Vehicular access from main streets shall be
limited.
vii. Vehicular entrances and access points should have
minimal impact on walkways and the pedestrian
realm and where possible should be intergrated with
building design.
.'ili la
I►r.lUrlrlulrr111lxlly N� rmr
TTI!*' j
lI.II!I!,IIIIIIIII!
Figure 23. Ulus Savoy Housing by DS Landscape, Istanbul, Turkey (photo credits: Cemal Emden)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design GuidelinesCM
2.5 Parking
As intensification occurs throughout the corridor and
node, changes in parking demand are likely to occur.
This demand can be supported through a range of
parking facilities, including street parking, surface
parking and structured parking.
2.5.1 On -Street Parking
Design Guidelines
i. To achieve a vibrant district and to minimize the
need for parking lots that have greater impacts
on the pedestrian realm, on -street parking is
encouraged on public and private roads in
strategic locations. This includes destinations
such as community facilities, large open spaces,
parks, and grade -related retail streets.
ii. Where possible, street parking should be
separated from the sidewalk by a landscape
buffer to allow for safe loading in and out of cars
without impeding on clear paths for pedestrian
movement along the sidewalk. Landscape buffers
shall also 'green' the streetscape and improve
stormwater infiltration (Fig. 24).
iii. On -street parking on arterial roads should be
reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
iv. The design of each precinct shall accommodate
sufficient parking capacity to support a dense and
vibrant district.
2.5.2 Structured Parking
Design Guidelines
i. Surface parking is discouraged for main street retail,
and high-density residential, office and mixed-use
developments. In these areas, parking shall be
provided underground, behind or inside a structure
on upper floors with appropriate screening, or inside
a building.
Figure 24. On -street parking with landscape, Portland, USA (photo credits: PortlandOregon.gov)
ii. Above -grade parking structures shall be encouraged
to be designed with active uses on all sides (Fig.
25).
iii. The sides and rear of multi-storey above -grade
parking structures facing adjacent developments
shall be screened as to not create blank facades
around the building. They are encouraged to
incorporate glazing, cladding, landscaping, or
exterior finishes to complement the surrounding
streetscape.
iv. At -grade parking structures shall be designed with
active uses fronting the public street and other
pedestrian uses, such as retail or amenity areas.
These should incorporate visually -appealing
architectural and landscape treatments.
v. Access points to parking structures should be
located at the rear or side of buildings, and away
from main streets and intersection corners.
vi. Ground floor frontages may need to be set back
adjacent to structured parking ingress/egress ramps
to provide visibility at the exit.
vii. Structured underground parking is preferred over
surface parking or above -grade structured parking
to reduce the urban heat island effect and minimize
blank walls.
viii. Consideration should be given to charging stations
for electric vehicles and secure indoor bicycle
storage space in the design of parking structures.
ix. Parking structure design is encouraged to consider
flexible designs, including designs which allow for
future conversions into other uses (Fig. 26).
Figure 25. Denver Museum Residence, a `Texas Doughnut' featuring buildings wrapped around
interior parking structure, Denver, USA (photo credits: Google Earth)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
2.5.3 Surface Parking
Design Guidelines
i. New developments are encouraged to reduce or
minimize surface parking on site, in order to reduce
the urban heat island effect and promote more
compact development.
ii. Parking shall be located at the side or rear of the site
where it is neither visible from the street nor blocking
pedestrian access.
iii. In the design of surface parking areas that are
visible from the highway and streets, edges along
parking areas shall be defined and softened through
tree planting, landscape berms, pergolas, and other
similar features (Fig. 27).
iv. Surface parking is discouraged adjacent to at -grade
residential areas. A vegetated buffer should be
provided between surface parking and residential
areas.
v.
A strong integration of vegetation and soil volume
solutions (i.e. large trenches, soil cells) that allow
for large trees to grow should be used in landscape
islands within surface parking lots to provide
proper shade for cars and to increase stormwater
infiltration.
vi. Permeable pavement and/or pavement with good
solar reflective index is encouraged. A combination
of hardscape and softscape elements should be
used to reduce the urban heat island effect (Fig.
26). Bioswales are highly encouraged as a means
of mitigating automotive pollution impacts on water
and reducing stormwater runoff loads on the sewage
system.
vii. Designs that include urban furniture and decorative
pavements are encouraged to support a flexible use
of the area and allow for other temporary uses, such
as social and sport events, where suitable.
Figure 26. Saint Roche Parking Structure built to accommodate future office and residential uses, Montpellier,
France (photo credits: Adria Goula).
viii. The parking lot and walkways to parking lot areas
should be visible from the main entrance of the
building on the site, where practical.
ix. Pedestrian walkways should be developed between
parking lots and the street. These walkways should
be landscaped, barrier -free and lighted to encourage
convenient, safe, and frequent public use.
x. Exclusive pedestrian routes inside parking lots
should also be provided, be clearly marked and be
integrated with landscaping to break up otherwise
large pavement expanses.
xi. When designing rear parking sites, Crime Prevention
Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles
should be applied to the site, where good lighting
and natural surveillance from adjacent buildings may
act as safety measures.
xii. Consideration should be given to charging stations
for electric vehicles and short-term bicycle storage
space in the design of surface parking lots.
Figure 27. Honfleur Normandy Outlet, Honfleur, France (photo credits: Le
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1
Compagnie du Paysage).
Urban Design Guidelines
2.6 Loading, Services and Utilities
Loading areas, servicing areas, and utility equipment
supports the essential functions of any development
site. Their location and access requires strategic
consideration.
Design Guidelines
i. Where possible, on-site loading and servicing
areas shall be located internal to the development
and below grade with access from local streets
and lanes. Access points shall be coordinated to
minimize impacts on the pedestrian realm, including
minimizing the interruption of sidewalks.
ii. Servicing lanes should be designed to welcome
pedestrians with sidewalks on both sides of the lane,
where practical, to accommodate safe pedestrian
movement (Fig. 28).
iii. Service and loading facilities shall be contained
within building envelopes and consolidated for each
block, when possible. Below -grade loading facilities
are encouraged for higher -density, larger -format
development. Garbage storage rooms shall be
centralized indoors, below grade, and at the rear of
buildings.
iv. Vehicular routes shall support goods movement
by designing right-of-ways and lanes to safely
accommodate truck traffic and turning movement.
v. Utilities and service equipment shall be located
within buildings or internal to building sites, where
practical, to reduce their visual impact on the
streetscape and public view. In outdoor areas, their
presence can be minimized through screening,
fencing, strategically -positioned landscaping and
integration with public art.
vi. In the location and design of loading facilities,
consideration should be given to implementation
measures to mitigate potential impacts of noise
and vibration on residents on the site or in adjacent
developments.
Figure 28. Lower Donlands, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Google Earth)
2.7 Landscape Design
Landscape design assists in defining building and site
character while contributing to a greener and more
sustainable streetscape.
Design Guidelines
i. Landscape shall be an integral piece of the site
design and be developed to unify and enhance
the overall architectural project. High-quality,
durable and diverse landscape elements shall be
encouraged.
ii. A minimum of 10% of each lot shall be landscaped,
with a significant proportion of that being soft
landscaping.
iii. Landscaping shall support and define a consistent
and attractive street edge. The selection and
spacing of all plantings should relate to the street
type and adjacent land use and site conditions.
iv. Within sites, landscaping shall define pedestrian
routes and enhance visual imagery of the site. Large
v.
tree canopies are encouraged along pedestrian
routes to provide shade and comfort (Fig. 29).
Every effort should be made to retain existing trees
and other mature vegetation during redevelopment.
Where possible, these should be integrated into
the site layout and landscape design for new
developments.
vi. Landscape buffers shall be encouraged along
surface parking lots adjacent to public streets to
soften and screen parking lot edges. They shall
also be encouraged on lots abutting low-density
residential uses to provide a privacy buffer. These
should have a minimum width of 3 to 3.5 metres.
vii. Within parking lots, curbed landscaped islands with
a minimum width of 2.5 metres shall be encouraged
to define major vehicle and pedestrian routes and
break-up the expanse of paved areas.
Figure 29. Yorkville Village Park, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Google Images)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
2.8 Sustainable Design
Development should incorporate sustainability principles
to support the positive integration of the natural
environment into the built form.
Design Guidelines
i. Sustainable and Low Impact Development (LID)
measures are encouraged for all development in
order to reduce stormwater run-off and optimize
water infiltration potential. This includes the use of
bio -retention areas, rain gardens, grass swales,
permeable pavement, and vegetated filter strips.
ii. Development should prioritize plantings of native
species that support ecological functions, are
drought -tolerant, require minimal maintenance and
increase biodiversity in the landscape.
iii. The use of softscapes should be encouraged on
flat roofs of all buildings, including residential,
commercial and mixed-use buildings. Softscape
features can include trees, grass, shrubs, flowers,
and soil. The green roofs are encouraged to act as
public amenity spaces (Fig. 30).
iv. Development is encouraged to seek current
Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design
(LEED) building design certification, or equivalent.
v. The incorporation of alternative or renewable energy
resources (i.e. solar panels) in building design is
encouraged. The design and orientation of buildings
should seek the maximization of solar gain.
vi. The use of bird -friendly glazing on mid -rise and tall
buildings is encouraged.
Figure 30. ESR1 Canada Garden in the Sky, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Forrec Ltd.)
2.9 Signage and Lighting
Effective signage and lighting, particularly along streets v.
and in the public realm, work to enhance the safety,
attractiveness and usability of an area.
Design Guidelines
i. Signs should be clear, visible, and easy to
understand. Signs should be properly lit to ensure
safety on the road and walkways at night (Fig. 31).
ii. Cohesive signage should be implemented within
each precinct to improve neighbourhood character
while providing valuable wayfinding information (Fig.
31).
iii. The size, design and placement of signs shall be
considered in accordance with the City's Sign By-law
and through Site Plan Control.
iv. The placement of signage shall not compromise
pedestrian movement and vehicular safety. The
use of illuminated sign boxes and channelized sign
boxes are discouraged.
Signage should be integrated with building design,
and should be consistent with the overall streetwall
and associated building facades (Fig. 31).
vi. A dark -sky policy shall be promoted along Kingston
Road with downward -directed lighting. All external
light fixtures shall be full cut-off and dark -sky friendly
to minimize sky glow effects and light pollution.
vii. Pedestrian -scaled lighting shall be used for active
public spaces, including inner -block walkways,
parks, and courtyards (Fig. 31). The use of outdoor
LED lighting systems is encouraged for energy
efficiency.
viii. Outdoor light shall be aimed and shielded to
illuminate areas on site and adjacent sidewalk areas,
including inner patios, but shall not illuminate the
street or adjacent residential uses (Fig. 31).
ix. Where there are architectural, landscape, and
decorative features on a building, lighting may be
directed upward to illuminate prominent details.
0.11_ 4:11 r
signage in coordination
with building materials,
colour palette and
character of adjacent
buildings
111 downward
directed
lighting
well -illuminated open
spaces and walkways
signage
integrated
with
overall
building
design
■
. lighting integrated into landscape
to illuminate prominent features
a f -r i�
accessible location
identifiers to assist
with wayfinding
Figure 31. Marine Gateway, Vancouver, Canada (photo credits: Perkins+Will)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
2.10 Transition and Massing
Building massing should implement appropriate
transitions in the built form to create an attractive
human -scaled environment, respect existing scale and
character, and appropriately respond to local context.
Transitions are provided to new and existing parks and
open spaces, as well as lower -scale residential areas.
Design Guidelines
i. New buildings should be massed and scaled to
establish compatible heights to adjacent streets
and open spaces, while retaining a comfortable
pedestrian scale.
ii. Where mid and high-rise buildings are adjacent to
low-rise buildings, increased setbacks or building
setbacks should be employed, in consideration of an
appropriate transition.
iii. In cases where buildings have a height of 8 storeys
or more proposed adjacent to the streetline, the
upper storeys of the building should be sited on
•
ws
30 s torey5
20 storeys
T2 storeys
8 storeys
6 storeys
EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
Setback to
low -residential
(hel9hl 10-5)9
45°
3m ryp. podium setback
podium height
Imin. 3 storeys •max.6 storeys}
with 4.5m high ground floor
podiums having a minimum height of 3 storeys and a
maximum height of 6 storeys.
iv. Development shall incorporate building and
landscape design which minimizes the extent and
duration of shadows and maximizes access to
sunlight for adjacent low-rise developments, parks,
open space, primary frontages, and other intensively
used areas of the public realm.
The shadow impact of buildings on adjacent
residential buildings, public parks and privately
owned publicly -accessible spaces shall be assessed
through a shadow impact study, where appropriate,
and minimized to the extent possible.
vi. Development shall incorporate building and
landscape design which protects and buffers the
pedestrian realm from prevailing winds.
vii. The development of large mass buildings
within areas that are characterized by a distinct
architectural theme should reflect similar
v.
45m
ILo.w,,
KINGSTON RD.
40 storeys
30 Storeys
20 stotey5
12 ,storeys
8storey5
0 storeys
HIGHWAY
Figure 32. Illustrative cross-section in the Rougemount Precinct, for cross-section location see Figure 13.
architectural features, where practical, to blend in
with the character of the particular area.
• To limit shadow and overlook impacts in low-rise
residential areas, an angular plane shall be applied
through the following:
viii. From the front yard of low-rise residential (i.e.
where development is across the street from
stable low-rise neighbourhoods), built form shall
conform to a 45 degree angular plane measured
from a height of 10.5 metres, set back 5 metres
from the front property line.
ix. From the rear yard of low-rise residential (i.e.
where development backs directly on to stable
low-rise neighbourhoods), built form shall
conform to a 45 degree angular plane measured
from a height of 10.5 metres, set back 7.5
metres from the rear property line.
GATEWAY (800m DIAMETER)
40 s L0 revs
30 storeys
20 storeys 1
12 MIrev: 1
8 storeys 1
5 :to rays
EX 1STING RESIDENTIAL
Setback to
low -residential
1halghl 10.5m)
• To help create a human -scaled environment along
public streets, an angular plane shall be applied
through the following:
x. On Kingston Road, Brock Road, Pickering
Parkway and existing north -south public roads
intersecting Kingston Road, built form shall
conform to an angular plane extended at a
45 degree angle from the front property line,
beginning at a height 80 percent the width of the
adjacent right-of-way.
xi. As an exception, on Kingston Road in the
Rougemount Precinct and on Kingston Road
between Dunbarton Creek and Pine Creek in
the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct, built form
shall conform to a 45 degree angular plane from
the front property line, beginning at a height 30
percent the width of the adjacent right-of-way.
Figures 32 to 37 illustrate the application of built form
principles along key streets within each precinct.
wr
xr
Mid I I'M WRlu!!•:1!i•m1
ao o1 Rnpy. Width:.
II
9 1
1
I
Fir
1
40 storeys
30 storeys
20 storeys
2storeys
8 storeys
6 storeys
HIGHWAY
Pato
P.O.W.
Sm typ. podium setback 4581 14m
podium height
(min -3 storeys -max- 6 storeys) FLO. W,
with 45m high ground floor $
KINGSTON RA
i
g
Figure 33. Illustrative cross-section in the Whites Precinct, for cross-section location see Figure 15.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
I [_
I
i
2:11
1.T.1
cc
Setback to
(height /0-Sm>i z •
•
•
45. / •
15m
SLOW.
g 4
t 4
I 2
GATEWAY (500m DA METER I
45m
KINGSTON RD.
•
5
-
3rn typ. podium setback
podium height
imIn. 3 storeys 'max. 6 storeys)
with 9.Sm high ground floor
19m
ROM,.
E
19.7
-
;
1.6
• :!40 Steneys!
I
F• I
I
130 storeys!,
;
I
I I 1.0
•
I ;
I ; 20 storeys;
I I
. I
:112 storeys!
;
1 StOreySi
• 6 stOreys.
1 !
7.5rn 19m
ROW.
16
o Q
g
a
Figure 34. Illustrative cross-section in the Liverpool/Dunbarton Precinct, for cross-section location see Figure 17.
GATEWAY 1500rn DIAMETER)
;0
40 storeys
3t) storeys
20 StOtey5
12 storeys
8 storeys
6 storeys
45m
ROA.
KINGSTON R.
Figure 35. Illustrative cross-section in the Brock Precinct, for cross-section location see Figure 19.
w f.10, l
SO PERKY.
Al More%
12 s1orerr r
8 slwuy1
691wyys 1
GATEWAY I SOOrn QIAMETERI
rcI
aeerascnm.c Som
Row. CaEu swift RQNL
PICKERING PKWY
Figure 36. Illustrative cross-section in the Brock Precinct, for cross-section location see Figure 19.
GATEWAY (Warn DIAMETER]
D I
4!
0▪ I
PI
1
1
1
1
1
MF.7-191n R' 6uII mmrpnr
taoa RP ROW. Wrdrh}
40 storeys,/
•
45'•
_ •_ 30 storeys
80 storeys
12 storeys
8 storeys
6 Storeys
4
50 storeys
40 storeys
30 Storey_
Setback to
• 1pw-re91den119I
• pleig5T 10.5m)
•
slxrys
Ill ]NEPA
Amin
Marrs
6 stamp
nuacn.dac
R0.W. o 9n1[F
20 storey;
•
•
43'
12 sl'8W
S storeys •
6
'POMP.
• 1
li
•
4
•
is
•
1z
ix
45m
R.O.W.
RROCK RD.
19m
RQLS[
3ro typ. podium setback
podium height
Orrin. 3 storeys -max. 6 storeys)
with 4.5e) high ground 0001
Figure 37. Illustrative cross-section in the Brock Precinct, for cross-section location see Figure 19.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
2.11 Materials and Facade Treatment
Development should reinforce a coherent, attractive and
animated streetscape through the use of high-quality
materials and articulated facades.
Design Guidelines
i. Main wall cladding materials should be high-
quality, aesthetically pleasing, and durable (Fig.
38). Materials such as brick, stone and glass are
encouraged.
ii. Building materials that are discouraged include:
stucco, vinyl, concrete block, metal siding, highly
reflective glass and mirror finishes for glazing.
iii. Materials should be complementary to the character
of the precinct. For example, the use of brick
may help reinforce the `urban village' character of
Rougemount Precinct, while glass may be more
appropriate to support the commercial gateway
features of the Whites Precinct.
iv. A variety of building materials, colours, and plane
variations should be used to create visual interest
along the streetscape and to avoid repetitive or
monotonous streetscapes (Fig. 38).
Building materials for higher floors may differ from
base materials, but compatibility, transition and
building proportions should be considered (Fig. 38).
Higher buildings should have a lighter appearance in
general to reduce perceived height, weight and bulk.
vi. Facade articulation, including projections,
recessions, design treatments and architectural
details (i.e. decorative mouldings, fenestration,
masonry banding) are encouraged to create
enhanced visual interest and a human -scaled
environment (Fig. 38).
v.
vii. Original architectural details and features should be
restored where appropriate.
facade articulation ,•*.
highlighting
contrast between -
building levels
--3
high quality
and durable
, materials
variety within material
colour palette to create
visual interest
I� L 1
I
glazing at grade with
fine line detail for
design and functionality
Figure 38. 60 Richmond Housing Cooperation, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Teeple Architects)
2.12 Streetwall
Streetwall v.
A consistent streetwall helps create a welcoming public
realm, particularly for pedestrians, and cultivate a vibrant
sense of place in local areas.
Design Guidelines
i. A consistent streetwall should be maintained along
Kingston Road and all Primary Frontages.
ii. The minimum streetwall height along all streets shall
be 3 storeys, with a minimum ground floor height of
4.5 metres to accommodate for retail uses.
iii. The podium portion of tall buildings shall have a
minimum height of 3 storeys and a maximum height
of 6 storeys.
iv. All street -related uses should have primary
entrances fronting onto the public street and feature
transparent windows and doors to provide outlook
and animation onto the street edge (Fig. 39).
Generally, buildings shall have a podium of at
least 3 storeys before any building stepbacks are
introduced. The first stepback for any building, shall
not occur higher than the sixth floor of a building.
vi. Building stepbacks should be a minimum of 2.5
metres.
vii. A fine-grain pattern of retail units and/or residential
entrances is encouraged to provide variety and
variation in the streetwall. Variation in frontage width
is encouraged to flexibly accommodate a range
of street -related uses, including multiple internal
formats and layouts for commercial/retail units.
viii. To introduce further variety and visual distinction
within the streetwall, the establishment of facade
articulation, differentiation and rhythm through
building projections, recessions, and the use of
distinct building materials is encouraged.
e�11;0 1►' 111
41 X111 1111111
4i 111111 1111111
4111;1 1 00
410i'1 i 1111 't..
illti71: :� 111 ,.
41.1:. aX 11111 ,:
4w ly[
Ligoio
IlW
ligoti
is t i11.
w.1t�1t1�Xpti'
.J IA 11 f -�. -L '
1ill 1 44fh414 f:l C. .
Figure 39. Paintbox Condominiums, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Lisa Logan)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design GuidelinesCM
2.13 Active Frontage Network
To help achieve a lively streetscape which encourages
pedestrian activity, certain streets are required to have
active uses at grade, with visual engagement between
the street and the ground floors of buildings.
Design Guidelines
i. Primary Frontages shall contain predominantly
street -related active retail or commercial service
uses at grade, with primary entrances oriented
towards the street to encourage a vibrant public
realm. Other street -related active uses, including
community and institutional uses, are also permitted.
ii. Secondary Frontages should contain street -related
active retail or other commercial service uses at
grade, with primary entrances oriented towards the
street to encourage a vibrant public realm. Other
street -related active uses, such as community and
institutional uses, are also encouraged.
iii. Development applications which are already
underway along Kingston Road and other major
intersections are encouraged to develop active
frontages.
iv. Elevated main front entrances and large
concentrations of steps along frontages should
generally be avoided. Entrances should be ground -
related and provide barrier -free access.
v. A reasonable proportion of frontages shall have
transparent windows at street level. Clear glass is
preferred for all glazing in order to promote a high
level of visibility (Fig. 40).
vi. Large format retail development may negatively
impact the pedestrian realm due to the scale of the
uses. To fit into the surrounding urban character,
large format retail shall be developed in a compact
and integrated form. Location within a multi-storey
building or in the podium portion of a mixed-use
building is strongly encouraged.
Figure 40. Richardson Apartments by David Baker + Partners, San Francisco, USA (photo credits: Bruce Damonte)
2.14 Gateways
Gateways are entry points into significant streetscapes,
areas or neighbourhoods, often signified by a distinctive
public realm or built form and enhanced through site and
building design.
Design Guidelines
i. Buildings with significant heights and massing
should be located at gateway locations, including
both mid -rise and tall buildings. Building and
landscape design should aim to create a sense of
arrival.
ii. Gateways should incorporate public gathering
spaces, such as plazas and urban squares.
iii. Buildings at gateways are encouraged to include
recessed corners to enlarge the public realm at key
intersections to support additional spill-over space
for active commercial uses.
Dtfi
View Approaching Rougemount Gateway looking North
View Approaching the Altona Gateway looking South
iv. Primary building entrances should be located at
gateways.
Building articulation, including vertical projections,
recessions, design treatments and other
architectural details, is encouraged at gateway
locations to create enhanced visual interest and a
distinct sense of place.
vi. Heights, massing and articulation of buildings
at gateways shall consider the aesthetics and
orientation of view corridors approaching gateways
to ensure a cohesive and prominent streetscape.
vii. Careful consideration should be given to views of
the gateway as traffic approaches from the north and
south crossing the highway, with an aim to create
a balance between the east and west sides and
provide a sense of arrival (Fig. 41).
v.
View Approaching the Whites Gateway looking North
Figure 41. Building Massing at Rougemount Precinct and Whites Precinct gateway locations
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design GuidelinesCM
2.15 Building Types
2.15.1 Tall Buildings
Tall buildings are generally defined as buildings that are
13 storeys or greater. They typically contain active uses
at -grade with apartment, condominium, or office uses
above. Tall buildings are defined by a podium base,
tower middle, and building top.
Design Guidelines
i. Tall buildings should generally be located within
gateways, including at the intersection of transit
spines, major arterials, along the highway and
proximate to highway access (Fig. 42).
ii. Podiums shall have a minimum height of 3 storeys
and a maximum height of 6 storeys to create a
comfortable public realm. Towers should be stepped
back a minimum of 3 metres from the podium wall.
iii. Tall buildings should appropriately transition in
height, particularly where high-rise development is
directly adjacent to existing low-rise neighbourhoods,
parks and open spaces, and POPS.
iv. Tall buildings should be designed and sited to
minimize shadows, maximize sky views, and reduce
negative micro -climate impacts, particularly where
high-rise development is directly adjacent to low-rise
neighbourhoods, parks and open spaces.
Building towers shall be subject to a minimum 25
metre separation distance, measured between the
exterior edge of the building face. Buildings shall
have a maximum tower floor plate of 750m2.
vi. Upper floors should terminate the tower with
distinctive crowning features and accent materials
compatible with the overall building design.
vii. Building tops should incorporate screening for
rooftop mechanical equipment to minimize their
visual impact.
v.
Figure 42. Marine Gateway, Vancouver, Canada (photo credits: Perkins+Will)
2.15.2 Mid -Rise Buildings
Mid -rise buildings are generally 5 to 12 storeys, and can
include residential apartments, condominium buildings,
office towers, and mixed-use buildings that feature a mix
of residential, commercial and office uses.
Design Guidelines
i. Mid -rise buildings are encouraged to be located
throughout the corridor and node, including along
primary and secondary streets.
ii. The base of a mid -rise building should be at least
3 storeys. Above three storeys, mid -rise buildings
should be stepped back a minimum of 3 metres from
the streetwall.
iii. Mid -rise buildings should appropriately transition in
height where they are directly adjacent to existing
low-rise neighbourhoods, parks and open spaces,
and POPS.
iv. Mid -rise buildings up to 8 storeys shall maintain a
minimum separation distance of 11 metres.
v. Mid -rise buildings between 8 and 12 storeys shall
maintain a minimum separation distance of 18
metres.
vi. Access points to parking and servicing areas should
be consolidated where possible to limit curb cuts and
opportunities for conflict between pedestrians and
vehicles.
vii. Building height and massing should be accentuated
at street corners and intersections, and away from
low-rise residential areas and internal roads. Public
amenities and retail uses are also encouraged to be
located at corners and intersections (Fig. 43).
Figure 43. Paintbox Condominium, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Lisa Logan)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design GuidelinesCM
2.15.3 Low -Rise Buildings
Low-rise buildings are generally 3 to 4 storeys, and can
include block townhouses, back-to-back townhouses,
stacked townhouses and low-rise apartment buildings.
Design Guidelines
i. Low-rise buildings are typically located adjacent to
low-rise residential areas and along streets without
active frontages.
ii. Low-rise buildings up to 4 storeys shall maintain a
minimum separation distance of 11 metres between
facing buildings.
iii. Low-rise buildings shall maintain a 8 metre
separation distance between the face of a building
containing primary living spaces, such as bedrooms
and living rooms, and the side of another building.
iv. Buildings with residential units at -grade should have
a primary entrance accessing the public street from
the sidewalk, via a walkway (Fig. 44).
v. Building entrances are encouraged to be enhanced
through features such as stoops, porches,
landings, canopies, decorative railings, and front
yard landscaping. They are encouraged to clearly
delineate the boundary between the public and
private realm through increased setbacks.
vi. Low-rise buildings are encouraged to incorporate
private outdoor amenity space, where possible. This
can include raised or below -grade terraces, rooftop
terraces, and balconies.
,•I
r
ItIMOMOIP
Figure 44. Regent Park townhouses, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: SvN)
This page has been Intentionally left blank.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design GuidelinesCM
3.0 Place -making
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Natural Heritage Network
3.3 Heritage Path
3.4 Public Green Spaces
3.5 Public Parks
3.6 Gateway Plazas
3.7 Public Lookouts
3.8 Privately Owned Publicly -Accessible Spaces (POPS)
3.9 Public Art
3.10 Heritage Buildings
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
3.1 Introduction
Placemaking involves the deliberate design of spaces to
foster public interactions that bring cities to life.
These Guidelines will facilitate the design of the
public realm, reflecting a high standard of quality and
responding to the surrounding context, built form
and land uses to create spaces that facilitate social
interaction.
The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing
Node contains a variety of publicly and privately -owned
and accessible spaces that significantly contribute
to defining the structure, identity and character of
the overall area and individual precincts. It features
a system of public parks and green spaces, plazas,
urban squares, Privately Owned Publicly -Accessible
Spaces (POPS), and lookouts. The public realm also
includes a prominent natural heritage network, culturally -
significant heritage buildings and public art features. The
Guidelines will support the creation of a more vibrant,
inclusive, and sustainable public realm for residents and
visitors alike.
Key Objectives
• Enhance and restore natural heritage features to
strengthen their relation to adjacent uses
• Promote sustainability in the design and full life -cycle
of the streetscape, open spaces and buildings
• Create a unique sense of place and distinct feeling
of arrival for each precinct and throughout the overall
corridor and node
• Include high-quality urban environments with a
diversity of public spaces and community amenities
• Contribute to overall placemaking goals in support of
creating complete communities
The section begins with a description and diagramatic
illustration of the Placemaking Plan for each precinct,
followed by design guidelines.
Figure 45. Chemin-Qui-Marche, Montreal, Canada (Image Credits: Alexis Nollet)
Rougemount
A range of placemaking features are located within the
Rougemount Precinct. These include a Public Green
Space, Public Lookout, POPS, Community Facility,
Gateway Plaza and Heritage Path.
A Gateway Plaza is proposed on the north side of
Kingston Road, at the intersection of Kingston Road
and Altona Road. This gateway feature provides
an entrance to the precinct from the west side, and
should incorporate notable public art, site furniture
and enhanced landscaping. An additional Gateway
Plaza is located at the intersection of Kingston Road
and Rougemount Drive as a gateway feature for those
arriving from the south.
A Community Facility is located adjacent to the existing
library and community center, and in close proximity to
East Woodlands Park, to create a concentrated cluster
of community amenities.
A proposed Public Green Space fronts the east side
of Rougemount Drive to the north of Kingston Road.
This space helps link and extend the natural heritage
area around Petticoat Creek. The proposed Public
Lookout is oriented north to offer views of the creek and
surrounding natural heritage features.
To strengthen access to Rouge National Urban Park,
a Heritage Path is proposed along Kingston Road. It
provides an enhanced connection between the park
to the west, the retail along Kingston Road and the
community center and library to the east.
East
Woodlands �
Park
F
ill
a
Rouge National Urban Park
Park Entrance
Figure 46. Rougemount Precinct Placemaking Plan
PLACE MAKING
Gateway Plaza
Public Green Space
Public Park
0
POPS
Public Lookout
Heritage Path
Potential Community
Facility
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
Whites
The Intensification Plan identifies a well -spaced
distribution of public realm features across the Whites
Precinct. These spaces vary in size and function to
ensure ease of access, and include Public Parks, Public
Green Spaces, POPS, Public Gateway Plazas, and
Public Lookouts.
Two Public Gateway Plazas are located on the south
side of the intersection of Kingston Road and Whites
Road, a major gateway. These Public Gateway plazas
will act as prominent locations for public gathering and
activity, and are expected to receive heavy pedestrian
foot traffic as a key hub of commercial and retail activity.
They should be designed together with similar theming,
including larger pieces of public art that may "play" off
each other.
A number of POPS are provided within development
blocks on the north and south side of Kingston, which
will allow private development to contribute to the
construction of open space for public enjoyment. Due
to the scale and character of the precinct, these are
recommended to take the form of hardscaped urban
squares which are able to host active programming.
Another noteworthy feature is the Public Lookout
identified off of Kingston Road, south of Ernie L. Stroud
Park. This lookout is oriented north and allows users to
stop along the sidewalk for a view of the park.
Ernie L. Stroud
Park
..............._Shrard Ave.
..... .......
_
ra
z-,
f�' ji [� School •
F +R•
�l��.ae
PLACE MAKING
0
Gateway Plaza
Public Green Space
Public Park
POPS
Public Lookout
Heritage Path
1i Potential Community
Facility
100m
Figure 47. Whites Precinct Placemaking Plan
Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct
In the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct, placemaking
features are concentrated along both Kingston Road and
the proposed east -west internal road running parallel to
Kingston Road.
Two Public Gateway Plazas are located on the
southwest and south east corners of Kingston Road
and Dixie Road, providing much-needed public space
to meet the needs of several high-density mixed-use
developments proposed in this area. They should be
designed together with similar theming, with uniform
public realm treatments that invoke the sense of a large,
contiguous space. A Public Park, located on the south
side of the proposed internal road, is imagined as a
community hub. It is seen as having the potential to act
as a multi -use space for lively community events, such
as weekend farmers markets.
Several POPS can be found throughout the precinct.
One POPS, which is recommended to take the form
of an urban square, is proposed at the northeast
intersection of Fairport Road and Kingston Road, as
a result of the limited redevelopment potential of the
property due to underground utilities running east -west
across its southern portion. Additional smaller POPS
should be provided central to the development blocks.
A proposed Public Green Space is identified where
the Kingston Road Corridor intersects with Dunbarton
Creek and its associated creeklands. This will provide
opportunities for recreation and relaxation while also
acting as a buffer for sensitive environmental areas.
7
Com,
Former Villago of
Dunbarton
Epm"ea dae
K1NG N$D <
Frenchman's Bay
PLACE MAKING
A
0
Gateway Plaza
Public Green Space
Public Park
POPS
Public lookout
Heritage Path
JPotential Community
Facility
100m
Figure 48. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Placemaking Plan
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
Brock Precinct
A number of publicly -accessible spaces of various
shapes and sizes are proposed for the Brock Precinct
to ensure a sufficient amount of open space for the
increased resident population. This includes Public
Parks, POPS and Gateway Plazas.
A series of linear parks, developed and maintained as
POPS, are proposed as connectors between larger open
spaces. One such linear park connects pedestrians
from Brock Street to the central internal Public Park
and to Beechlawn Park, located immediately east of
the precinct. This central Public Park is intended to act
as a community amenity for neighbouring residents; its
location directly adjacent to Beechlawn Park opens up
opportunities for park programming shared between
the two spaces. A potential Community Facility is
envisioned in close proximity. The specific function and
services of the facility will depend on local needs and
preferences.
An additional Public Park is located in the southern
end of the precinct. This park should be sized and
programmed to service the residents south of Pickering
Parkway. It should include features such as children's
play structures, seating areas, unprogrammed open
green space and a multi -use court, if possible.
South of Pickering Parkway, POPS are organized within
blocks of mixed-use and residential development.
They provide places of respite from retail activity, and
contribute to complete communities offering residents
places to live, work and play.
PLACE MAKING
0
ci
0
Gateway Plaza
Public Green Space
Public Park
POPS
Public Lookout
Heritage Path
Potential Community
Facility
Diana P.in
of Wales Park
Figure 49. Brock Precinct Placemaking Plan
3__ Naturae
The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing
Node benefits from proximity and access to an extensive
existing waterway system and natural heritage network.
These areas should be conserved, managed and
celebrated as a connected and integrated natural
system.
Design Guidelines
i. Natural heritage assets should be connected and
made accessible through sidewalks and trails, and
integrated with the surrounding landscape and urban
community without compromising their function and
integrity (Fig. 50).
ii. Natural heritage features should be buffered
from intensification areas, through setbacks and
appropriate building transitions, to ensure that
natural heritage is protected and that important
environmental ecosystems are not negatively
disturbed.
iii. Efforts should be made to facilitate greater
connections to the Rouge National Urban Park
and Petticoat Creek, subject to future study.
Opportunities to connect trails and walkways
providing access to these features should be
explored, pending further transportation and
environmental assessment.
iv. Through redevelopment and streetscape design
opportunities shall be sought to incorporate
gateways and lookouts to maximize opportunities
for views of natural heritage features. Streets and
blocks should be configured to provide exposure
to natural features, to amplify their significance and
functions.
Figure 50. Arninge-Ullna Riparian Forest Park, Stockholm, Sweden (photo credits: Topia landskapsarkitekter)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
3.3 Heritage Path
The Heritage Path provides an enhanced route along
Kingston Road in the Rougemount Precinct for cyclists,
leisure walkers and joggers while strengthening the
area's connection to Rouge National Urban Park.
Design Guidelines
i. The Heritage Path shall be located along Kingston
Road, running from the western boundary of the
Rougemount Precinct to Rosebank Road on the
north side of Kingston Road and from Altona Road to
Evelyn Avenue on the south side of Kingston Road.
ii. The Heritage Path should be designed to support
an extension beyond the western boundary of the
Rougemount Precinct to Rouge National Urban
Park, in a manner coordinated with Parks Canada
trail planning. The extension should create a link
between the Precinct and park entrance.
iii. The Heritage Path should feature an enhanced
public realm, including heritage markers and
informational plaques highlighting the history of the
area and significance of surrounding natural heritage
features. It should also include street planting,
enhanced paving materials, directional signage
and street furniture such as benches to enable a
comfortable pedestrian experience (Fig. 51).
Figure 51. Indianapolis Cultural Trail, Indianapolis, USA (photo credits: Indianapolis Cultural Trail Website)
3.4 Public Green Space
Public Green Spaces are located adjacent to creeks
and other sensitive environmental features throughout
the Corridor and Node. They act as a buffer between
development blocks and natural heritage features,
provide areas of rest and respite in a more naturalized
environment, and offer opportunities for active and
passive recreation.
Design Guidelines
i. Public Green Spaces adjacent to natural heritage
features shall be designed to help buffer and
preserve the integrity of sensitive environmental
areas.
ii. Public Green Spaces shall front onto public streets
where possible, and be of a shape, topography and
size that reflects their intended use. Green Space
design should incorporate a measure of flexibility to
enable the potential for multi -use spaces.
iii. Entrances to Public Entrances should be highly
visible, aesthetically -pleasing and accessible for
users with physical disabilities, and incorporate
signage that assists in wayfinding and orientation.
Where possible, efforts should be made to
incorporate multiple access points.
iv. Public Green Spaces are encouraged to have public
or private street frontages, where possible.
v. Developments adjacent to a Public Green Space will
be setback a minimum of 3 metres and will provide
an appropriate interface between public and private
lands. Developments will avoid locating loading and
service areas adjacent to green spaces.
vi. Public Green Spaces shall serve a community
function and incorporate an appropriate range and
variety of active and passive recreational uses,
subject to the size and shape of the green space
and its proximity to sensitive environmental features
(Fig. 52).
vii. Green Spaces shall incorporate opportunities to
educate the public about environmental conservation
Figure 52. Riverwalk Stratford, Stratford, Canada (photo credits: Riverwalk B&B)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
and the immediate natural heritage network, where
appropriate, through features such as illustrated
informational signs.
viii. Amenity areas within Green Spaces should be
located and oriented to maximize sunlight and be
sheltered from the noise and traffic of adjacent
streets and uses to increase user comfort.
ix. Development should seek to adequately limit
shadows on green spaces as necessary to preserve
their utility. Development should adequately limit
net -new shadow as measured from March 21st to
September 21st from 10:18 a.m. — 4:18 p.m. on
green spaces.
x. Where Public Green Spaces are located adjacent
to school sites or community facilities, the design
of both entities should be coordinated in order to
capitalize on opportunities for shared facilities and
amenities.
xi. On -street parking on streets adjacent to Public
Green Spaces should be situated on the same
side of the street as the park, in order to facilitate
convenient, direct and safe access.
xii. Plantings should comprise of species which are
tolerant of urban conditions, emphasizing native and
non-invasive species. Accent planting should be
focused at entrances, around seating areas and in
play areas (Fig. 53).
Figure 53. Westhaven Promenade, Auckland, New Zealand (photo credits: LandLAB )
3.5 Public Parks
Public Parks play a fundamental role in enhancing the
public realm and the natural environment. They provide
valuable outdoor activity space for communities to
gather, socialize and engage in an active lifestyle.
In order to achieve the Recreation and Parks Master
Plan's parkland service targets, significant new park
space is required throughout the Kingston Road corridor
and node.
Design Guidelines
i. Public Parks shall front onto public streets, be
accessible from adjacent public streets where
possible, and be of a shape, topography and size
that reflects their intended use. Park design should
incorporate a measure of flexibility to enable
the potential for multi -use spaces throughout all
seasons.
ii. Public parks should be a minimum of 0.3 hectares
in size, although larger parks are preferred. The
siting and sizing of new Public Parks should take
into account planned residential and employment
intensification to ensure adequate provision.
iii. Public Parks should contain multiple access points
(Fig. 54). Entrances should be highly visible,
aesthetically -pleasing, accessible for users with
physical disabilities, and incorporate signage that
assists in wayfinding and orientation.
iv. Public Parks should be physically and visually
connected to the public street. New buildings should
be positioned to define the shape and function of
the public park and to create the impression of a
cohesive public realm.
Public Parks should have a minimum of one public
street frontage and one private street frontage,
although greater street frontages are encouraged.
v.
vi. Developments adjacent to a Public Park will be
setback a minimum of 3 metres and will provide an
Figure 54. Mekel Park - Delft University of Technology Campus, Delft, Netherlands, (photo credits: Mecanoo)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
appropriate interface between public and private
lands, promote animated uses at grade and avoid
locating loading and service areas adjacent to parks.
vii. Public Parks shall serve a community function and
incorporate an appropriate range and variety of
active and passive recreational uses, subject to the
size and shape of the park (Fig. 55).
viii. Public Parks which are 0.3 ha or larger in size
should include a playground with junior and senior
children's play equipment, seating areas, pathways,
open unprogrammed turf areas and tree canopy.
Larger parks should accommodate water play
features, multi -use courts or one-on-one basketball
facilities.
ix. Public Parks also should incorporate pedestrian -
scaled lighting, bicycle racks, appropriate signage
and public art, where appropriate.
x. Amenity areas within Public Parks should be located
and oriented to maximize sunlight and be sheltered
from the noise and traffic of adjacent streets and
uses to increase user comfort.
xi. Development should seek to adequately limit
shadows on parks as necessary to preserve their
utility. Development should adequately limit net -new
shadow as measured from March 21st to September
21st from 10:18 a.m. — 4:18 p.m. on parks.
xii. Where Public Parks are located adjacent to school
sites or community facilities, the design of both
entities should be coordinated in order to capitalize
on opportunities for shared facilities and amenities.
xiii. On -street parking on streets adjacent to Public Parks
should be situated on the same side of the street
as the park to facilitate convenient, direct and safe
access.
xiv. Public Parks and Green Spaces should connect
to neighbouring natural heritage features through
enhanced boulevards to contribute to a green,
interconnected pedestrian network.
Figure 55. David H. Koch Plaza, New York, USA (photo credits: Olin Studio)
3.6 Gateway Plazas
Gateway Plazas are prominent publicly accessible
spaces in high -traffic areas that provide places to gather
and socialize, while adding aesthetic value to the built
environment.
to the highest architectural standard. They should
respond to the form and function of the site and
surrounding uses.
iv. Commercial and mixed-use buildings adjacent to
plazas should provide active frontages with direct
views and access. Patios are encouraged to be
located adjacent to these locations.
Gateways Plazas should contribute to a cohesive
streetscape through the consistent use of colour,
texture and building materials to the surrounding the
built form.
Design Guidelines
i. Gateway Plazas shall function as central gathering
spaces which can be programmed for public or
community events, and as pedestrian gateways v.
and connections which complement the existing
streetscape. The dimension, design and furnishing
of these spaces should offer comfort and allow for
a range of activities accommodating diverse user
groups.
ii. Gateway Plazas shall be physically and visually
connected to the public street and well-designed
to relate to surrounding buildings and create the
impression of a cohesive public realm.
iii. Gateway Plazas should be framed by adjacent
streets, landscape and buildings which are designed
vi. To create an enjoyable pedestrian environment,
Gateway Plazas should incorporate appropriate
lighting, signage, water features, and public art,
where appropriate (Fig. 56). High quality paving
treatments, in combination with landscaped
elements including coordinated plantings and street
furniture, should also be used.
Figure 56. Berczy Park, Toronto (photo credits: Jeremy Gilbert via I-l!ckr)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
3.7 Public Lookouts
Public Lookouts highlight important views within the
urban structure of streets, parks and open spaces.
These are located at natural vantage points typically
present in close proximity to the creeks and valleylands.
Design Guidelines
i. Lookouts should be physically and visually
integrated with the public street. They should be
easily accessible and useable, with clear signage to
indicate public use and connections to accessible
paths.
ii. New developments on sites adjacent to lookouts
should preserve the existing views for public
enjoyment. The location and massing of new
developments should complement these views.
iii. Lookouts should incorporate comfortable seating,
appropriate lighting and public art, where
appropriate. The design and placement of these
amenity features should facilitate, rather than hinder,
the movement and congregation of individuals and
groups (Fig. 57).
iv. Lookouts are encouraged to include informational
plaques, maps, heritage markers and interpretive
signage, where appropriate, to provide contextual
information about the landscape, region and
identifiable features in the view corridor.
Figure 57. The Chemin-Qui-Marche Lookout, Montreal Canada (photo credits: Lemey)
3.8 Privately Owned Publiclv-
Accessible
Spaces (POPS)
Privately Owned Publicly -accessible Spaces (POPS)
form a key part of the public realm network, providing
valuable amenity space through development. POPS are
owned and maintained by private landowners, but open
to the general public to enjoy. They can take a variety of
forms, including parks, linear parks and urban squares.
Design Guidelines
i. POPS shall be publicly accessible, with signage to
properly identify the space and indicate access for
public use.
ii. The locations of POPS will be identified in the
implementing zoning by-law and their exact size,
location and design shall be addressed through
detailed block planning, to include matters such
as connectivity and cost sharing between multiple
landowners.
iii. The size, shape and configuration of POPS will
vary based on the existing and planned context and
specific characteristics of the site and the building
program.
iv. POPS shall provide public easements as necessary
over privately -owned open spaces to provide access
to the general public.
Private landowners shall be responsible for ongoing
maintenance to ensure that POPS remain in a state
of good repair through all seasons.
v.
vi. The location and design of POPS should seek to
physically and visually connect to the public street.
vii. POPS should be framed by and relate to surrounding
buildings; at -grade active uses shall support
the programming of the open space and offer a
surveillance element to promote safety (Fig. 58).
viii. All POPS should incorporate soft landscape and
planting; trees shall have sufficient soil volumes to
enable large mature growth and a significant tree
canopy.
Figure 58. Artwork at Daniel's High Park Condos, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Urban Toronto)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
ix. POPS should maximize sun exposure and strive to
achieve 5 consecutive hours of sun as measured on
March 21 and September 21.
x. POPS should provide amenities including seating
areas, pedestrian -scale lighting, bicycle racks,
garbage cans, and public art to create a positive
walking and cycling environment. Amenities should
compliment the character of the surrounding public
realm and active ground floor uses.
• POPS designed as Parks should:
xi. Be located to provide areas of open green space
where intensified development is expected or
planned to occur.
xii. Have a dimension of a minimum of 0.2 ha, with
larger spaces preferred.
xiii. Include seating areas, walkways, a playground
with junior children's play equipment, an open
turf area, and tree canopy.
• POPS designed as Linear Parks should:
xiv. Be located where they are able to link several
larger green spaces in close proximity, for
example to connect Brock Road and Beechlawn
Park to the newly proposed internal park on the
development block east of Brock Road.
xv. Have a dimension which is based on local site
conditions; however, generally the minimum
width should be 6.5 metres or greater to provide
adequate spacing for the park to act as a
movement corridor as well as a landscaped
activity space.
xvi. Provide a clear pathway with high-quality,
durable paving materials.
• POPS designed as Urban Squares should:
xvii. Be located in commercial and areas and be
designed to accommodate relatively higher
levels of pedestrian foot traffic, with more
hardscaped areas relative to softscape
xviii. Incorporate high-quality paving treatments,
with distinct paving materials used to delineate
between separated activity zones within larger
squares.
xix. Have a dimension which is based on local site
conditions; they could be as small as 100m'
but should be large enough to allow for active
programming and public events.
xx. Provide seating areas in the form of benches or
seat walls, plant material (preferably in raised
planters) and higher branching trees for shade.
If located near dining establishments, tables with
seats may be appropriate.
3.9 Public Art
Public art is an important part of the public realm,
incorporating culture, beauty and vibrancy to
streetscapes. They enhance neighborhoods by making
communities more attractive, and help enliven areas with
distinct character and identity.
Design Guidelines
i. Public art should be located in or with close
proximity to community -oriented spaces, such
as parks, open spaces, public squares, plazas,
and gateways, to maximize visibility. It should be
exhibited along streets and laneways that support a
continuous flow of high pedestrian volumes.
ii. Public art should be durable and low -maintenance.
iii. Public art should explore opportunities to celebrate
local history and culture, including notable events
and figures (Fig. 59).
iv. Opportunities to incorporate public art into building
design as an architectural element are encouraged.
Public art installations may be publicly or privately
owned, and private developers are strongly
encouraged to incorporate public art elements within
their developments.
v.
Figure 59. Dan Bergeon Public Art, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Marcus Mitanis)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
3.10 Heritage Buildings
There is one designated heritage building and four
buildings of heritage interest within the Kingston
Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. Heritage
resources play a valuable role in celebrating local history
and preserving cultural identity.
Design Guidelines
i. Heritage buildings and historic elements should
be integrated into the wider public realm, and
connected to the surrounding public open space
network when possible.
ii. Built heritage features on focal sites should be
accentuated to create a sense of place and enhance
cultural identity.
iii. Through the review of development proposals,
the historical significance of designated heritage
buildings and buildings with heritage merits shall be
assessed to determine how the building or elements
can be protected, enhanced or integrated into new
development.
iv. Distinct historical eras in the history of Kingston
Road in the City of Pickering should be celebrated
through public realm treatments on lands with
specific ties to those activities, and incorporated into
the landscape, lighting, signage, interpretation and
v.
art.
New development should recognize heritage
buildings and historic elements by facilitating
opportunities for building and site design to reflect
the scale, building materials, architectural style
and other attributes of adjacent cultural heritage
resources (Fig. 60).
Figure 60. Casey House, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Marcus Mitanis)
This page has been Intentionally left blank.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
Connectivity
4.1 Introduction
4.2 Pedestrians
4.3 Cycling
4.4 Transit
4.5 Street Types
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
4.1 Introduction
Connectivity involves creating a robust, multi -modal
transportation system that supports the freedom of
movement for all users in the urban environment.
These guidelines will inform the creation of an integrated
mobility network that takes into account the needs
of pedestrians, cyclists, transit riders and drivers. To
facilitate this network, proposed connections include
pedestrian paths, pedestrian crossings, multi -use paths,
bicycle lanes and cycle tracks, and new and improved
public and private streets.
New or improved connections are used to provide
alternate travel routes, break up larger blocks into
smaller and more walkable blocks, allow for smooth
vehicular and servicing access, and provide access
to parks, open spaces and natural heritage features.
The network will provide a range of safe, accessible
and inviting transportation choices and support public
and environmental health by encouraging the uptake of
active modes.
Key Objectives
Design all public roads and private connections
to be complete streets and emphasize transit and
pedestrian -oriented development.
Improve access management and connectivity for all
transportation modes.
Ensure that all users of have distinct and delineated
spaces to separate modes of travel moving at
different speeds.
• Support current and future transit services through
building and site design and public streetscape
treatments.
Encourage the optimization of existing and planned
infrastructure, including transit facilities.
The section begins with a description and diagramatic
illustration of the overall Connectivity Plan for each
precinct. Following this, within each subsection, the
Pedestrian Connectivity Plan, Cycling Connectivity
Plan, and Street Types Plan are detailed, along with
accompanying design guidelines.
Rougemount
To better align with the planned 45 metre right of way
and the ultimate provision of centre -running Bus Rapid
Transit (BRT) service along Kingston Road, and to
make this precinct truly pedestrian and cyclist -friendly,
the Intensification Plan minimizes and consolidates
multiple accesses off Kingston Road and increases the
permeability of the precinct by the introduction of two
rear service streets on properties south of Kingston
Road.
The first of these potential service roads runs from the
southern end of Altona Road, east across the southern
limit of properties with frontage on Kingston Road, and
then turns back up to Kingston Road two properties
west of Rougemount Drive. The second commences at
LEGEND
•
New Streets
Potential Controlled intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing - Locatio
Subject to Further Review
indicative Enhanced Boulevard
tr RIght-In ,Pig hi -out
Access
Multi -Use Path
Proposed Cycling Facility
Existing Cycling Network
Planned Cycling N$twtlrk
Pedestrian Path
Bus Stops
Future& Planned Connection
Subject to EA
Evelyn Avenue, running west to reconnect with Kingston
Road closer to Rougemount Drive.
To improve connectivity between the properties south
and north of Kingston Road, east of Rougemount Drive,
and to create a better pedestrian connection between
the existing Library and Petticoat Creek to the "Main
Street" retail, it is recommended that provision of a
controlled intersection be explored at Evelyn Avenue.
In addition, since Rougemount Drive is one of the key
roads crossing the highway and thus connecting the
southern neighbourhoods, a new cycling connection is
proposed south of Kingston Road on Rougemount Drive.
Rouge National Urban Park
Figure 61. Rougemount Precinct Connectivity Plan
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
100m
Whites
The Whites Precinct is typified by relatively larger
parcels with greater depths. As a result, a number of
opportunities for new connections within and through
these larger parcels are proposed, featuring strategies
to provide consolidated access, internal routes of
circulation, and additional frontage opportunities through
new connections.
The Intensification Plan features a mid -block public road
connection south of Kingston Road with access points
off Kingston Road at the eastern edge of Petticoat Creek
and the intersection of Kingston Road and Steeple Hill
Road. It also features a potential public road connection
LEGEND
New Streets
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing - Location
Subject to Further Review
• Indicative Enhanced Boulevard
t•
Right -In Right -out
- Access
Multi-IJse Path
Proposed Cycling Facility
Existing Cycling Network
Planned Cycling Network
< } Pedestrian Path
i Bus Stops
41,0. 0 Future & Planned Connection
Subject to EA
Ernie L SIn d
M.k
N
• Planned eycliv facility
type and lodatron to be
determined through
future EA study
on the south side of Kingston Road, east of Whites
Road with the access aligning with Delta Boulevard.
This would connect to a private secondary loop street.
The configuration would reduce the number of individual
access points from Kingston Road while improving
connectivity and providing additional access points
within the block.
Lastly, rear private service streets are proposed on the
north side of Kingston Road, west and east of Whites
Road, with connections to Steeple Hill Road and Delta
Boulevard respectively, connecting with Kingston Road
at existing controlled intersections. These are aimed at
improving connectivity between the properties on the
north -side of Kingston Road, and reducing the number
of individual access points.
471.
�-i+•
.: r� 11.3 u _
+ t.
i4
Figure 62. Whites Precinct Connectivity Plan
Dunbarton/Liverpool
The Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct is typified by relatively
large parcels with even greater depths than those found
in the Whites Precinct. As a result, opportunities for
new road connections within and through these larger
parcels are proposed, featuring a strategy to provide
consolidated access, internal multi- modal routes of
circulation and additional frontage opportunities through
new connections. In addition, a new internal public
street is introduced running parallel to Kingston Road,
connecting Walnut Lane to Dixie Road. It is intended to
create a more pedestrian friendly east -west connection,
and opportunities for potential redevelopment with active
frontages through the core of the Precinct.
LEGEND
New Streets
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing - Location
Subject to Further Review
Indicative Enhanced Boulevard
Right -In Right -out
Access
Multi -Use Path
Proposed Cycling Facility
Existing Cycling Network
Planned Cycling Network
E--•] Pedestrian Path
11 Bus Stops
Future & Planned Connection
Subject. to EA
Fame, vllIaga ar
Ounhertan
The Intensification Plan also incorporates the planned
extension of Walnut Lane across Pine Creek, of which
the exact alignment is to be determined through
a municipal class environmental assessment. All
proposed roads within the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct
are encouraged to be multi -modal. A pedestrian and
cycling connection is proposed by re -using the existing
rail bridge and underpass over the highway to connect
the neighbourhood to the south, with an eventual
connection to the waterfront trail.
��y51i1Slrl 11
F ranch ma
Bay
100m
Figure 63. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Connectivity Plan
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
Brock
The Brock Precinct is typified by a mixture in size of
parcels along Kingston Road and very large parcels off
Pickering Parkway and Brock Road.
There are three main landowners within the Specialty
Retailing Node Area within the Brock Precinct, and as
a result, a number of opportunities for new connections
and public roads within and through these very large
parcels are encouraged.
These feature strategies to provide better access, more
internal routes of circulation and multi- modal routes, and
additional street frontage and activity hub opportunities
through new connections.
LEGEND
•
-Le
•
1 £
The Intensification Plan features a new public road
passing through the existing mid -block intersection
east of the Brock Road on Pickering Parkway. The
new proposed public street would become a "precinct
collector", forming the back -bone of a more strongly
defined internal road network and improving walkability
through the node. A series of private east -west streets
are proposed to intersect it to form a more fine-grained
street pattern.
Three new controlled intersections are proposed,
including one along Pickering Parkway and two along
the proposed public street, to improve traffic access and
safety.
New Streets
Potentia! Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing - Location
Subject to Further Review
Indicative Enhanced Boulevard
Right -In , Right -out
Access
Multi-UPeth
Proposed Cycling Facility
Existing Cycling Network
Planned Cycling Network
Pedestrian Path
Bus Stops
Future 6 Planned Connection
Subject to EA
Denrnar
Park
i
mftrl
14671
*.ty "1611^+
(—
Diana
r
Oia a Princess
of Wales Park
Figure 64. Brock Precinct Connectivity Plan
-r •
•
loom
4.2 Pedestrians
A well-designed pedestrian network is critical to
creating a comfortable and vibrant urban environment.
The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing
Node is envisioned as a place where pedestrians
are encouraged to walk between destinations, where
pedestrians feel safe interacting with other road users,
and where the pedestrian network supports broader
place -making goals.
Sidewalks, multi -use paths, pedestrian paths, and
controlled intersections are proposed as part of the
Pedestrian Connectivity Plan, illustrated in Figures 66 to
69.
Figure 65. Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus, Buffalo, USA (photo credits: Scape Studio website)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
CONNECTIVITY - PEDESTRIAN
Sidewalks
• • - - - Multi -Use Path
<••• Pedestrian Path
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Locat]on Subject to Further
Review
Bus Stops
...................
Rouge Nae lunaI Urban Park
Ent
]-fid•-�
N
Figure 66. Rougemount Precinct Pedestrian Connectivity Plan
CONNECTIVITY - PEDESTRIAN
Sidewalks
Multi -Use Path
<••• Pedestrian Path
•1
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Locatlon Subject to Further
Review
• Bus Stops
Err& L. sty
Park
Figure 67. Whites Precinct Pedestrian Connectivity Plan
100m
CONNECTIVITY - PEDESTRIAN
Sidewalks
Multi -Use Path
<•••> Pedestrian Path
1
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Locatlon Subject to Further
Review
• Bus Stops
......
•
- •
... ... ..... -
Form. v;Ilagaof
Dunbarton
FfBnChn'ArriBay
Figure 68. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Pedestrian Connectivity Plan
CONNECTIVITY - PEDESTRIAN
Sidewalks
Multi -Use Path
<•••> destrian Path
1
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Locatlon Subject to Further
Review
• Bus Stops
.•:•:-: .•
•
Diana Arince,..c
of Wales F.a rk
-""1-
-•
Figure 69. Brock Precinct Pedestrian Connectivity Plan
'Conneclion
under mowiew
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
100m
100M
4.2.1 Sidewalks
Sidewalks are a critical component to creating a safe, v.
coordinated and continuous pedestrian network.
Design Guidelines
i. Sidewalks should provide a network of accessible
and inter -connected pedestrian routes which relate
directly to surrounding buildings and destinations.
ii. Sidewalks should provide a clear, unobstructed
pathway and be a minimum width of 2 metres to
ensure a comfortable walking environment (Fig. 70).
iii. Sidewalks should be designed to serve all users,
including children, older people, parents with
strollers, the visually impaired, and those using
wheelchairs and other assistive devices. Barrier -free
surfaces should be in compliance with Accessibility
for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) standards.
iv. Sunlight exposure along sidewalks should be
achieved and protected to maintain an inviting
pedestrian realm, particularly at retail spill -out zones.
Where appropriate, curb extensions/bump-outs
may be incorporated at the street intersections or
mid -block locations to expand the pedestrian path,
provide additional queuing space, shorten roadway
crossings and calm motorized traffic. Where on -road
facilities exist, the bump -outs should not disrupt a
continuous bike lane through the intersection.
vi. Adequate space should be provided within the public
right-of-way to allow for landscape and furniture
zones adjacent to sidewalks.
vii. Street furniture may include benches, tables,
fountains, and newspaper boxes. These should be
placed in high -traffic areas, particularly where public
amenities or active frontages exist.
viii. Where appropriate, street trees which provide
significant canopy shading should be planted to
soften the built form, reduce the heat island effect
and maximize the urban tree canopy. Trees should
be incorporated at intervals of 6 to 9 metres.
Figure 70. Yannan Avenue Highway Adaptation, Chongqing, China (photo credits: WallaceLiu)
4.2.2 Pedestrian Paths
Pedestrian paths provide enjoyable, human -scaled
connections in the urban environment. They create
inviting spaces to walk or run, providing short-cuts
between blocks and encouraging exercise and leisure
opportunities.
Design Guidelines
i. Pedestrian paths are reserved for the exclusive
use of pedestrians, and should be implemented
to provide additional connections and routes of
circulation within blocks and to open spaces and
destinations (Fig. 71).
ii. Pedestrian paths should be designed with a
minimum width of 2.5 metres to provide for a
comfortable walking environment.
iii. Pedestrian paths should be well-designed and
inviting to users, with features such as soft
landscaping, plantings, public art, wayfinding
signage and pedestrian -scaled lighting implemented
where appropriate. Where possible, a generous
urban tree canopy is encouraged.
iv. The placement of street furniture should ensure that
pedestrian routes are free of obstruction and enable
proper circulation and sight lines.
v. Pedestrian paths should utilize high-quality and
durable paving material. The paving treatment is
encouraged to have a distinctive colour, texture or
pattern to assist with wayfinding. Permeable paving
materials should be used for pedestrian paths
in areas intersecting with green space or natural
heritage features.
vi. Pedestrian paths should be designed to encourage
strolling and gathering of people, and include spill -
out spaces and other elements to keep the public
realm active.
Figure 71. Requalification of Mermoz Avenue, Lyon, France (photo credits: Gautier Conquet
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
4.2.3 Pedestrian Crossings
Pedestrian crossings contribute to an improved walking
experience by providing designated locations where
pedestrians can cross safely across the flow of vehicular
traffic.
Design Guidelines
i. Pedestrian crossings should provide clear,
unobstructed paths and be connected to adjacent
sidewalks to allow ease of access for all users.
ii. Crossings should be clearly designed for safety, with
appropriate traffic control devices, surface markings
or variation in construction material, lighting and
signage (Fig. 72).
iii. Examples of controlled pedestrian crossings are
pedestrian crossover (PXO), intersection pedestrian
signal (IPS) and mid -block pedestrian signal (MPS).
iv. Signalized crossings should be located at all major
intersections and areas of high pedestrian traffic
v.
such as gateways, parks, schools, libraries and
major retail areas. Signalized crossings should be
considered at these locations, where appropriate
and warranted. Signalization should be prioritized for
pedestrian crossings over traffic.
The pedestrian network, including sidewalks and
pedestrian paths, should be designed to bring
pedestrians to safe, controlled crossing locations
and discourage crossings at uncontrolled mid -block
locations.
vi. Accessible pedestrian signals with push -buttons
and count -down signals should be provided at all
signalized intersections.
vii. On private sites where new road connections and
blocks are established, pedestrians should be
accommodated and given priority through stop signs
or other signalization methods..
Figure 72. Requalification of Mermoz Avenue, Lyon, France (photo credits: Gautier Conquet)
4.3 Cycling
A high-quality, well-connected cycling network is critical
to successfully providing residents with a sustainable
active transportation alternative.
To complement existing and planned cycling facilities,
the Intensification Plan identifies additions and upgrades
to improve access and fill in gaps to the existing
network. Proposed Cycling Facilities could take the
form of on -street bike lanes or in -boulevard cycle tracks.
The cycling network is also supplemented by proposed
Multi -use Paths, which are accessible to both cyclists
and pedestrians. These should be integrated into the
wider active transportation network of sidewalks, trails,
pedestrian connections and crossings, linear parks and
cycling facilities to contribute to the establishment of
walkable and cyclist -friendly neighbourhoods.
The Cycling Connectivity Plan is illustrated in Figures 74
to 77.
Figure 73. Group of People on a Cycle Track (photo credits: People for Bikes )
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
CONNECTIVITY - CYCLING
Perk Entrance
Multi -Use Path
Proposed Cycling Facility
Existing Cycling Network
Planned Cycling Network
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Locatlon Subject to Further
Review
..................
.................
..................
East
Woodlands
Perk /
Figure 74. Rougemount Precinct Cycling Connectivity Plan
CONNECTIVITY - CYCLING
Multi -Use Path
•--+ Proposed Cycling Facility
Existing Cycling Network
- Planned Cycling Network
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Location Subject to Further
Review
Erma L. Ward
Park
H
SMpFwd Ma.
r.:
1OOm
291
Figure 75. Whites Precinct Cycling Connectivity Plan
ON
�,aV t}
1DOm
CONNECTIVITY - CYCLING
Multi -Use Path
f --t Proposed Cycling Faddy
Existing Cycling Network
— - Planned Cycling Network
Potential Controlled Inters -action
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Locatlon Subject to Further
Review
FOrmof Vl11ag0 Of
Dunnarlhn
ls5
unm
tits
KINGSTON SD, � ,.
I
tiY
Ffonttman's Bay
Figure 76. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Cycling Connectivity Plan
CONNECTIVITY - CYCLING
Mt11tl-Use Path
+--+ Proposed Cycling Facllity
Existing Cycling Network
- Planned Cycling Network
0
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing -
Locatlon Subject to Further
Review
Den r
P.ka
r.
Diana P.in
of Wales Park
Figure 77. Brock Precinct Cycling Connectivity Plan
.Conry
under ekitw
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
4.3.1 Multi -Use Paths
Multi -use paths (MUP) are off-road pathways shared by
cyclists and pedestrians, separated from vehicle traffic
and located within the boulevard.
Design Guidelines
i. MUPs are encouraged as connectors between
neighbouring communities, transit corridors and
nodes.
ii. Where space or other considerations do not permit
provision of desired separate facilities for cyclists
from pedestrians, MUP can be used in areas that
are less travelled by pedestrians and cyclists. They
should be implemented on key connector streets
with lower vehicle traffic volume (Fig. 78).
iii. To ensure adequate space for all users, the
minimum width of an in -boulevard MUP is 3 metres,
with a desired width of 4 metres.
iv. MUP should be separated from vehicle traffic and
located within the boulevard, with a 1 metre wide
splash strip.
v. Within MUP, segregation of cyclists and pedestrians
should be avoided where possible. Instead, a
directional dividing line may be marked on the
pathway.
vi. When appropriate, multiple access points should be
provided to all MUP, with connections to a variety of
transportation options including public transit routes,
other separate cycling facilities and MUP, sidewalks
and parking areas.
vii. MUP should include adequate amenities, such
as seating, waste receptacles, lighting, signage,
wayfinding features, and educational and historic
information. These features should be located at
accessible key points along path routes.
viii. Roadside infrastructure should have a smooth
surface and a minimum 0.6 metre lateral clearance
from the MUP.
Figure 78. Requalification of Mermoz Avenue, Lyon (Image Credits: Gautier Conquet)
4.3.2 Bicycle Lanes and Cycle Tracks
Bicycle lanes and cycle tracks provide dedicated space
for cyclists on the road. They are differentiated by their
degree of separation from motor vehicles.
Design Guidelines
i. Cycle tracks are exclusive cycling facilities which are
physically separated from vehicular traffic (Fig. 79).
Cycle tracks should be designed with a minimum
width of 2 metres. They should be raised or vertically
separated from the street at an intermediate or
sidewalk level to create a safety buffer between
cyclists and other road users. Where appropriate,
they may also incorporate barrier features.
ii. Bicycle lanes are cycling facilities which are located
at -grade, alongside vehicular traffic. Bicycle lanes
should have a minimum width of 1.5 metres plus 0.5
metres of buffer, with a desired width of 1.8 metres
plus 1.2 metres of buffer.
iii. Cycle tracks are preferred over bicycle lanes due to
the safety and security that they provide for cyclists.
iv. Bicycle lanes and cycle tracks should include clear
pavement markings. Signs should be placed at
intersections and access points, and are required to
be appropriately spaced.
Cycle tracks should connect through bike boxes and
crossrides to increase cyclist safety at intersections.
vi. Bicycle lanes on streets with on -street parking are
recommended to be located between the parking
lane and adjacent live traffic lane and with sufficient
space to mitigate conflicts between cyclist and
opening car doors.
vii. From a traffic safety standpoint, and as the
introduction of two-way cycling facilities leads
to greater conflict with turning motor vehicles at
intersections and driveways, one-way facilities are
generally preferred over two-way facilities.
viii. Bicycle lanes should be designed with consideration
of landscape and furniture zone buffers which
separate cycling lanes from sidewalks.
v.
Figure 79. Mermoz Avenue, Lyon, France (photo credits: Gautier Conquet)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
4.3.3 Shared Facilities
Shared facilities provide opportunities for motorists and
cyclists to share road space, and is an alternative to
specialized segregated cycling infrastructure.
Design Guidelines
i. Shared facilities include shared roadways and
signed bicycle routes (i.e. shared facilities between
cyclists and motorized vehicles). Shared facilities
are typically implemented on low-volume traffic
streets with lower speed limits, such as the smaller
east -west streets abuting Brock Road in the Brock
Precinct. Generally, shared facilities are well-suited
for the Brock and Dunbarton/Liverpool Precincts due
to the presence of internal streets and residential
blocks in these areas.
ii. The minimum width for a shared facility is 4 metres,
with a desired width of 4.5 metres, to ensure
adequate space for both motorists and cyclists.
Implementation of the additional desired width
shall offer a more comfortable riding experience for
cyclists.
iii. Clear lane markings will indicate to motorists and
cyclists the appropriate line of travel for cyclists (Fig.
80).
iv. Appropriate signage, including route markers, should
be installed along designated shared facilities.
Figure 80. Shared Cycling Facility on Brighton Ave, Boston, USA (photo credits: Boston Globe)
4.4 "Trans
Kingston Road is a vital transit corridor within the City of
Pickering, with a number of existing and planned transit
routes.
The Region of Durham and Durham Region Transit
have identified preferred bus rapid stations along the
Kingston Road corridor in the City of Pickering as part
of Metrolinx's Preliminary Design Business Case and
Transit Project Assessment Process for the Durham
Scarborough Bus Rapid Transit project. Preferred stop
locations were investigated based on future development
and planning horizons, connectivity, ridership, right of
way limitations, and stop proximity and placement.
• Altona Road
• Rosebank Road
• Whites Road
• Fairport Road
• Dixie Road
• Liverpool Road
• Glenanna Road
• Valley Farm Road
• Brock Road
• Notion Road
The preferred BRT transit stops are subject to change
throughout the Metrolinx Design and TPAP EA process.
Current stops not listed will be investigated further as
they serve a significant purpose by providing access
to key destinations and services and support the local
transit network.
Whites Road and Brock Road are identified as Regional
Corridors and are both part of the High Frequency
Network within the Durham Regional Official Plan. The
High Frequency Network will consist of buses in planned
High Occupancy Behicle (HOV) lanes, or buses in mixed
traffic, with transit signal priority at major intersections
with peak period service headways between 5 and 10
minutes.
Additionally, these corridors are also targeted within
Metrolinx's Regional Transportation Plan and are
encouraged to have Bus Priority Measures (BPM) which
include all door boarding, limited stops, reserved lanes,
transit signal priority, queue jump lanes, queue jump
signals, curb side alignment, and high-quality stops.
Therefore, stop locations along these corridors should
be protected in terms of right of way requirements
for spacing of high-quality transit stops and future
BPM infrastructure, especially at Brock and Whites
intersections where they will be intersecting with the
Durham -Scarborough BRT.
This would greatly enhance the quality of the transit
network by improving service integration, efficiency and
providing a more seamless customer journey.
Transit must be well -integrated with the surrounding
streetscape and wider mobility network to help enablie
greater uptake through access and convenience.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
Design Guidelines
i. Transit stops should be clearly marked and highly
visible.
ii. Transit shelters which maximize user comfort and
extreme weather protection should be provided
where possible, prioritizing areas with higher transit
ridership (Fig. 81). Transit shelters should include
comfortable seating, pedestrian -scaled lighting, route
information and directional signage.
iii. Direct and barrier -free connections should be
established between transit shelters and adjacent
sidewalks. Sidewalks and boulevard multi -use paths
should pass behind transit shelters.
iv. Transit stops shall have safe access via appropriate
street crossings, including controlled intersections x.
where possible.
vi. Where bicycle lanes and cycle tracks pass a transit
stop, on -road interaction between cyclists and
buses, as well as passengers boarding or waiting for
transit, should be minimized to avoid conflict.
vii. Secure bicycle parking and storage spaces should
be provided at transit stops to increase multi -modal
options and encourage active transportation.
viii. The exploration of energy efficient technologies
to provide light and heat at transit shelters is
encouraged.
ix. Transit stops can have a role in supporting overall
placemaking objectives. Enhanced design and
sensitive placement of transit stops should be used
to provide key entrances to major destinations.
Transit stop placement should be considered
and implemented in coordination with roadway
construction to streamline transit infrastructure
inclusion.
v. Transit shelters should be located to avoid impeding
pedestrian movement on adjacent sidewalks.
Figure 81. Heated bus shelter, Fort McMurray, Canada (photo credits: National Post)
4.5 Street Types
A well-functioning street network is integral to ensuring
the speedy and safe movement of people and goods
thorough the corridor and node.
The proposed street network of the Kingston Road
Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node provides for safe,
accessible and convenient movement of pedestrians,
cyclists and vehicles and transit users throughout
the area. A number of new public and private streets
are proposed, each with different functions and
characteristics. Upgrades to existing public streets are
also recommended.
The planned street network is comprised of three
hierarchical categories: Primary Streets, Secondary
Streets and Service Streets (laneways).
The Street Types Plan is illustrated in Figures 83 to 86.
This is followed by design guidelines for each of the
three categories, key streetscape cross-sections for
public and private streets, and recommendations for
upgrades to existing streets.
Figure 82. Multi -modal street in Brooklyn, New York City, USA (photo credits: New York City Department of
Transportation)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
CONNECTIVITY - STREETS
- Primanl Streets CPublici
- Primary Streets (Private)
- Secondary Streets
- Service Streets
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing - Location
Subject to Further Review
• Indicative Enhanced Boulevard
zP Bight -In • Right -out
Access
Future & Planned Connectlen
Subject to EA
Rouge National Urban Park
East
Woodlends
Palk
--A
Figure 83. Rougemount Precinct Street Types Plan
CONNECTIVITY - STREETS
Mini Primary Streets (Public)
- Primary Streets (Private)
- Secondary Streets
- Service Streets
0
Potent Ial Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing - Location
Subject to Further Review
ar Indicative Enhanced Boulevard
zP
Right -In Right -out
Recess
Future & Planned Connection
Subject to EA
Ernie L. Stteud
Pork
Shavers! Asa.
100m
Figure 84. Whites Precinct Street Types Plan
rtya`i
N�
room
CONNECTIVITY -STREETS
Primary Streets CPublicS
- Primary Streets (Private)
�11 Secondary Streets
- Service Streets
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing - location
Sub}ect to Further Review
• Indicative Enhanced Boulevard
zl'
Right -in ,Right -out
• Access
4...+ Future & Planned Connection
Subject to EA
Former Village of
Dunbarton
KINGSTON Etk..•
Frenchman's Say
JL
Figure 85. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Street Types Plan
CONNECTIVITY -STREETS
P Primary Streets (Public)
- Primary Streets (Private)
- Secondary Streets
- Service Streets
Potential Controlled Intersection
and Pedestrian Crossing - Location
Subject to Further Review
ar Indicative Enhanced Boulevard
zP
Right -in ,Right -out
• Access
4..0- Future & Planned Connection
Subject to EA
aimsPri ***
of Wales Peek.
Figure 86. Brock Precinct Street Types Plan
r1� r"y
I l rr+5
Pork
W I
WWI
InrL
Ogliie
FC
Co necaon
under review
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
4.5.1 Primary Streets
Primary streets are higher -order streets which help
facilitate safe and efficient vehicular, cyclist, transit and
pedestrian movement. Primary streets consist of primary
streets that are proposed to be both publicly -owned and
primary streets that are proposed to be privately owned.
Design Guidelines
i. Primary streets have a distinctively urban character,
and should be designed as complete streets with
consideration given to the needs, safety and comfort
of pedestrians, cyclists, transit users and drivers
(Fig. 87).
ii. Travel lanes should be designed with a minimum
width of 3.5 metres and should be provided in both
directions of travel.
iii. Primary streets should be designed to prioritize
public transit facilities, such as stops, shelters and
dedicated lanes.
iv. Sidewalks should be provided on both sides of the
road. They should be designed to accommodate all
v.
user groups and be a minimum width of 2 metres.
Where appropriate, dedicated raised cycle tracks
should be provided on primary streets.
vi. Landscaping and street furniture zones should
be provided on both sides of the street to provide
a comfortable public realm. They should be wide
enough to accommodate a continuous row of street
trees, typically a width of 2 metres.
vii. On -street lay-by parking lanes should be provided,
where practical, having a minimum width of 2.5
metres. They may be provided on one or both sides
of the road.
viii. Individual access driveways to multiple properties
should be discouraged in favour of shared
driveways.
ix. Where appropriate, road and right-of-way widths
should be reduced in favour of providing active
transportation connections, improved transit, and
wider boulevards.
Figure 87. Requalification of Mermoz Avenue, Lyon, France (photo credits: Gautier Conquet)
4.5.2 Secondary Streets
Secondary streets help facilitate vehicular, cyclist and
pedestrian movement in areas with lower traffic volumes,
while ensuring a positive streetscape experience.
Design Guidelines
i. Secondary streets are medium or low -capacity
roads that act as local connectors, taking on a
more neighbourhood -oriented scale and character
while creating links between local destinations and
surrounding neighbourhood areas (Fig. 88).
ii. Travel lanes should be designed with a minimum
width of 3.5 metres and may be provided in one or
both directions of travel.
iii. Where appropriate, dedicated bicycle lanes or
shared cycling facilities should be provided on
secondary streets.
iv. Where appropriate, landscaping and street furniture
zones should be provided on secondary streets.
They should be wide enough to accommodate a
continuous row of street trees, typically a width of 2
metres.
v. Sidewalks should be provided on both sides of the
road on secondary streets. They should be designed
to accommodate all user groups and be a minimum
width of 2 metres.
vi. On -street lay-by parking lanes should be provided
on one side of the road, where practical, having a
minimum width of 2.5 metres.
vii. Traffic calming measures, including road width
reductions and bump -outs, may be considered
where appropriate.
viii. Where appropriate, road and right-of-way widths
should be reduced in favour of providing active
transportation connections and wider boulevards.
Figure 88. Market Street, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: DTAH)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
4.5.3 Service Streets and Laneways
Design Guidelines v.
i. Service streets and laneways should be considered
in key areas where a street -oriented built form with
continuous active frontages is desired, to allow for
buildings to be placed closer to the street edge so
that servicing functions can be allocated at the rear
of properties.
ii. Travel lanes should be designed with a minimum
width of 3.5 metres and should be provided in one or
both directions of travel.
iii. A sidewalk should be provided on one side of a
service street or laneway.
iv. The use of permeable surface materials is
encouraged within service streets and laneways.
Service streets and laneways should be considered
as pedestrian corridors, and should be designed
with the pedestrian experience in mind. Where
appropriate, the rear facade of buildings should be
similar in quality (i.e. materials, articulation) to the
front facade.
vi. Where possible, soft landscaping should be
incorporated into the design of service streets and
laneways. Planters, shrubs and vegetation strips are
encouraged (Fig. 89).
"Milne Ilul'' Il''Gllglll A
Figure 89. Lower River Street in the West Donlands, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Google Maps)
4.5.4 New Public Streets
A number of new public streets are proposed within the
Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. All
new proposed public streets are primary streets.
These will provide greater circulation throughout the
precincts by developing new connections, forming new
block patterns, consolidating access on Kingston Road,
providing alternative access off Kingston Road, providing
permeability within larger sites, and creating new
development frontages.
Development sites will identify lands to be conveyed
as public streets in identified locations as shown
conceptually through the Intensification Plan. The
location of new public streets is flexible provided the
overall block pattern is achieved, the achievement of
minimum and maximum block sizes on the development
site and adjacent sites is not compromised, and
appropriate intersection spacing is maintained.
In line with existing public streets, these new streets
should provide strong public amenities and opportunities
for active transportation. This includes the provision of
sidewalks, cycle paths or bicycle lanes, landscape and
furniture zones, and enhanced boulevards.
The following illustrative diagrams (Figures 90-92) show
streetscape cross-sections for new public streets in the
Whites, Dunbarton/Liverpool and Brock Precincts.
Proposed P.O.W.
(17.0 -19.0m)
2.00 2.00 2.00 7.00
Sidewalk Landscape Bike Lane Road
ttt
2.00 2.00 2.00
Bike Lane Landscape Sidewalk
Note: The right-of-way configuration may be revised to provide lay-by parking.
Figure 90. Whites Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New East-West Public Streets
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
Proposed P.O.W.
(17.0. 19.0m}
f
A
t*1
2.00 2.00 2.00 7.00 2.00 I 2.00 2.00
Sidewalk Landscape Bike Lane
Road Bike Lane Le ndscape Sidewalk
Note: The right-of-way configuration may be revised to provide lay-by parking.
Figure 91. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New East-West Public Street
3L ?
Proposed R.O.W.
(17.0 -19.0m)
2.00 2.00 2.00 7.00 2.00 I 2.00
Sidewalk Landscape Bike Lane Road
2.00
Bike Lane Landscape Sidewalk
Note: The right-of-way configuration may be revised to provide lay-by parking.
Figure 92. Brock Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New Public Street Linking the North and South Development
Parcels
4.5.5 New Private Streets
As with new public streets, the development of new
private streets is key to enabling higher -density
intensification and increasing multi -modal access for
pedestrians, cyclists, transit users and drivers. New
proposed private streets include both primary, secondary
and service streets. They are identified on the Street
Type Plans as 'Primary Streets (Private)', 'Secondary
Streets', and 'Service Streets'.
Private streets are designed to similar municipal
standards as public streets, but remain in private
ownership. Private streets must provide the same
high-quality public realm and streetscape experience
as public streets, are expected to adopt similar
treatments and aesthetics to ensure that a uniform
streetscape character is maintained across the precinct.
This includes soft landscaping, street furniture, active
transportation infrastructure, and other public amenities.
Development sites will provide lands for the development
of private roads. The location of these roads is flexible as
the overall block pattern is achieved, the achievement of
minimum and maximum block sizes on the development
site and adjacent sites is not compromised, and
appropriate intersection spacing is maintained.
Private landowners shall be responsible for ongoing
maintenance to ensure that publicly accessible spaces
remain in a state of good repair.
The following illustrative diagrams (Figures 93-94)
show streetscape cross-sections for new private streets
throughout the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty
Retailing Node.
Proposal R.O.W.
015,5 - 175m)
2.00 2.00
Sidewalk Landscape
7.00
2.00
4.00
Landscape Two.W y Multi -ma Path
Note: The right-of-way configuration may be revised to provide lay-by parking.
Figure 93. Whites Precinct, Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct and Brock Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New
Private Streets
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
lir.rr'.
Proposed P.O.W.
(24.0m)
1
2.00 2.00 2.00 . 2.50 7.00 I 2.50 2.00 2.00 2.00
Sidewalk Landscape Bike Lane Leahy Perking
Layby Parking Bike Lane Landscape Sidewalk
Note: The right-of-way configuration may be revised to provide lay-by parking.
Figure 94. Brock Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New Private Street from Brock Road to Beechlawn Park or
other New Private Streets
4.5.6 Existing Streets
As the corridor intensifies, there are a number of
planned or existing roadways that require alterations
and/or additions to better reflect the vision of the
corridor. These include: Kingston Road, Brock Road,
Walnut Lane and Pickering Parkway.
Kingston Road
To bolster its character as a distinct urban avenue
and enhance connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists,
Kingston Road is recommended to adopt enhanced
landscaping treatments and introduce additional active
transportation facilities. The street is currently part of a
Metrolinx-led planning, design and engineering study in
anticipation of a proposed BRT route running between
Scarborough Town center and Downtown Oshawa.
The proposed streetscape cross-section for Kingston
Road is shown in Figure 95. The cross-section features
four travel lanes, one left -turn lane, and a 7 -metre bi-
directional transit way with 4.2 metre median platform.
There are also cycling lanes, sidewalks and landscape
zones on either side.
It is recommended that a 2m cycle track and treed and
landscaped planting area be implemented on both
0.9 2.2 0.6
3LVD BLVD BUFFER
1.8
SIDEWALK {
1.50m
CYCLING
TREE LIGHT/HP — LANE
3.35 _ I 3.35
THRU THRU
LANE LANE
8.20
45.00
sides of Kingston Road through road widening via
redevelopment. This landscaped area is recommended
to include street trees, street furniture, and planting
strips.
Brock Road
Brock Road is a significant street which carries
pedestrian, cyclist and vehicular traffic. The streetscape
is recommended to be improved to create a more
enjoyable experience for users travelling south from
Kingston Road towards the Specialty Retailing Node.
Additional street trees should be incorporated on the
east side of Brock Road to provide shade and comfort
for pedestrians. Figure 96 shows the current condition
along Brock Road.
Walnut Lane
Subject to an Environmental Assessment, it is
recommended that Walnut Lane be expanded eastwards
to connect to Liverpool Street. This will create an
improved connection between Walnut Lane and the
eastern portion of the precinct, taking advantage of a
connection with the new internal public road.
34.00
Pavement Distance
8.20
1 55
ISLAND
3.15
LEFT
TURN
LANE
3.50
3.50
7.00
TRANSITWAY
4
SHY DISTANCE
0.50
4.20
3.35
PLATFORM THRU THRU
LANE LANE
0.6
BUFFER
Ir
1.50m
CYCLING
LANE
2.2
BLVD 0.9
1.8 BLVD
SIDEWALK/
STREETLIGHT
HP
Figure 95. Kingston Road Cross Section - this is only an approximation, the cross-section will be determined through
the Durham -Scarborough BRT TPAP study (photo credits: Region of Durham)
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
Figure 96. Existing Streetscape along Brock Road
(photo credits: Google Maps)
Furthermore, Walnut Lane should be improved as a key
pedestrian and cyclist route. It is proposed to incorporate
a multi -use path on one side of the road, with space
for a generous landscaping zone to further improve the
aesthetics of the street. Figure 97 shows the current
condition along Walnut Lane.
Pickering Parkway
Within the Brock Precinct, enhanced active
transportation infrastructure is recommended for
Pickering Parkway. This can be implemented through
three proposed options. The first option is a raised cycle
tracks and a landscape and furniture zone on both sides
of the road, the second option is a single -lane MUP
facility on both sides of the road, and the third option is a
two-way MUP on one side. Figure 98 shows the current
condition along Pickering Parkway. Figure 99 shows a
cross-section of the planned reconfiguration of Pickering
Parkway as part of the Notion Road / Highway 401
Overpass EA, which features streetscape enhancements
similar to the first proposed option.
Figure 97. Existing Streetscape along Walnut Lane
(photo credits: Google Maps)
I. _
Figure 98. Existing Streetscape along Pickering Parkway
(photo credits: Google Maps)
HOUSE SETBACK
NORTH
PICKERING PARKWAY CROSS SECTION
STATION A -A 10+200
PICKERING PARKWAY
26. 0
SOUTH
6.25
WESTBOUND
LANE
VARIES
VARIES 3.50 .0
(LEFT I EASTBOUND I BOULEVARD WALK
PANE LANE
0.8 m OF SET
EXISTING R.O.W.
CONCRETE CURB
CONCRETE CURB
Figure 99. Notion Road / Highway 401 Overpass EA -
eastern part of Pickering Parkway
This page has been Intentionally left blank.
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
MID
5.0 Illustrative Blocks
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Mid -Block Sites
5.3 Intersection Sites
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
5.1 Introduction
The Urban Design Guidelines aim to support the
implementation of the Kingston Road Corridor and
Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan by providing
design recommendations to support the creation of
successful neighbourhoods consistent with the Vision
outlined in Section 1.3.
To support these recommendations and guide
policymakers in the implementation process,
demonstration plans have been developed showing
illustrative diagrams for mid -block and intersection
sites. These illustrative plans show how discrete design
guidelines can be applied comprehensively to support
the overall function of the block, and particularly the
interface between private development and the public
realm. It encourages a `kit -of -parts' approach which
allows for greater flexibility in certain elements of the
built form, while ensuring qualty design consistent with
the objectives of the Intensification Plan.
The plan diagrams on the left-hand pages illustrate
street and block configurations, as well as accesses and
connections between sites. The massing diagrams on
the right-hand pages demonstrate a built form scenario
including the placement and orientation of a mix of
building types. Both diagrams reference specific design
principles outlined in Sections 2 to 4 in this document,
which are referenced with colour-coded call -outs.
All block plans are illustrative in nature. These
demonstrations should not be interpreted as the only
feasible scenario for each block.
The following legend items are used in the demonstration plans in Figures 100 to 103.
Pedestrian Connection
4 Enhanced Existing Public Realm
1 A 1 Vehicular Access
illi II1I1 POPS
err Streetwall
4, 4, 4, Spill -out Spaces
v /A Commercial Frontage Required (Primary Frontage)
Commercial Frontage Recommended (Secondary Frontage)
5 • Preferred Location for Servicing
•
References to Sections 2.0 Built Form, 3.0 Place -Making and
4.0 Connectivity in this report
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
5.2 Mid -Block Sites
Mid -Block sites are found throughout the corridor along
Kingston Road, Brock Road, Pickering Parkway and
within larger lots on new proposed public streets. The
following example is in the Whites Precinct, on the south
side of Kingston Road and to the east of Whites Road.
41110 Primary Frontage is encouraged along certain streetscapes (i.e. in this
block, along the south side of Kingston Road). In these areas, a high
proportion of retail uses with a strong street -related presence is desired.
0 POPS are encouraged between buildings to break up streetwall
homogeneity and add variety and/or variation to the block. These POPS
should incorporate a diverse range of active programming, and can
include spill -out uses from adjacent developments. They should be
highly accessible from pedestrian connections and usable by residents.
Kingston Road
Pedestrian access is encouraged to be provided through mid -block
sites via pedestrian walkways and POPS. These access routes facilitate
connectivity from one end of the site to another (i.e. in this block, access
is provided from the southern portion of the site near Highway 401 to
Kingston Road and the open space in the northeast end of the site.
Landscaped setbacks may assist in creating more visible entrances to
buildings and gathering spaces in areas where the pedestrian boulevard
is limited.
Natural heritage features are encouraged to be buffered by open spaces
with compatible uses that encourage a naturalized environment. These
areas should incorporate significant landscaping.
On -street parking with landscaped treatments on the boulevards is
encouraged. Large surface parking lots are discouraged, with main
parking preferred below ground or in parking structures.
Access points off Kingston Road should be minimized, where possible,
with consolidated rear accesses provided through private service streets.
6 till 1161 Ms •s •u .. mo ms ms .. ms .. ms �� � , �� • • i� • ti ►_• MIi \„' MI. ME • i� . i� • �.
2.13 ,.. ,. -... ..A,MF .,.
25in offset from Kingston Road me.{fian
_ ._ ._ __ ._ ._ ._ ._ ._ ._ ._ _ ._ ._ private boulevard _ _ _
�+syimma' -vm....:e 7r4APS' SPrit
3.8 al
a �3
I 3- y'
4,x-4
4 4 4 4
ervice
street
: S ;
TOWER
14m offset from Highway
Figure 100. Plan diagram illustrating design principles at a mid -block site
46.
Site Objectives
Mid -Block Sites should maintain the streetwall of the
neighbourhood by breaking up the facade in relation
to the scale of the neighbourhood. For example,
such breaks will be more frequent in Rougemount to
maintain a small-town main street feel, whereas they
will be less frequent in the Whites Precinct where the
overall neighbourhood scale is much larger. In addition,
within the Whites Precinct where the streetwall has
considerable length, the buildings should be pulled apart
to create POPS to serve as mid block connections and
to add spill out spaces closely integrated with the public
realm of Kingston Road.
•
•
'i
Regular breaks
seetwall contribute
variety and van
streetwall and in«
2.12 permeability wifhi
Conne '.n an
n.. al heritag
• `1�_=
�.� Primary Frontage to
accommodate -large format
retail uses including departme
stores, furniture stores, etc.
De\\elopment'`F
enco`` ur,aged to seek
sustainable practic
such as green roofi
Second
have ac
sensitivi
needs a
•P__, ra d ny and rela ing to
surrounding•. ilfiings, to s pport
open space pro framing ankl promote
�. �. safety 1 I
1
Primary " -et to be designed with
consider. . , to needs, safety and
comfo = pedestrians, cyclists,
tr. - s and drivers
..
\ .,
CID \\
,,
,.;
Street parking strategically designed
to minimize the need for parking lots
Sidewalks t6 be de
to provide a clear pa h to
users •
cessibility to
Frontage to
ve frontage with „.•
to residential•'"
d comfort
Secondary Street for medium or
low-c4pacity transportation.
s to loading arrdjserviefhg
thin the blockfioin local
inimize imbact on
n realm
1Ve . bui d ngglo be itive to
adjacent strets and open spaces
Figure 101. Massing diagram illustrating design principles at a mid -block site
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
5.3 Intersection Sites
Intersection sites are found throughout the Intensification
Plan at the crossings of major roads, minor roads and
new internal roads. The below example is located in the
Brock Precinct. It is a large site that has been divided
into multiple blocks and contains a variety of intersection
sites, including one related to a gateway.
•
•
•
Primary Frontage is encouraged to provide a fine grain of active uses at
grade, including retail and other public uses.
POPS, including parks and urban squares, are encouraged to provide
valuable amenity space internally within development blocks. Dependent
on location, they are may be surrounded or enclosed by buildings on
multiple sides.
Gateway plazas are located at key high -traffic intersections. Open space
should be highly accessible from pedestrian connections.
O Pedestrian access should be provided through pedestrian paths and
sidewalks with enhanced boulevards with ample landscape and street
furniture.
O Planned cycling facilities should connect to existing cycling routes
in order to increase multi -modal mobility choices for residents and
visitors.
® Additional trees are recommended to be incorporated within the
existing streetscape to provide shaded access for pedestrians and
users travelling to specialty retailing locations south of Pickering
Parkway.
O Tall buildings are recommended to be located at gateway locations.
Gateways should incorporate enhanced site and building design to
reinforce their prominent locations.
0 Block sizes should be designed to accomodate for permeability within
the neighbourhood and increase ease of movement for pedestrians
and cyclists.
4I 11111111//
11 11 11 11
T
1
Figure 102. Plan diagram illustrating design principles at an intersection site
Site Objectives
Intersection sites are prominent sites seen from multiple
vantage points, and as such require enhanced design
attention based on their location within the precinct. For
example, if they are at a main intersection identified as a
gateway, the building articulation should create a sense
of arrival into the neighbourhood with more refined
bases and towers that guide your eye up, or artwork and
landscapes that can be seen from a distance. At more
internal locations, the built form of the towers can be
more subtle and modest and artwork should be more
geared towards the pedestrian experience due to less of
a need to be prominent from a distance.
Secondary Frontage with
sensitivity to residential
eeds and comfort
rindary Frontage providi
focal hub in the Corrid
through-cpncentratiop o
pedestrian��ctivity retail
facilities and`commu
menit s •
ay Plaza to be
ally and vi ually
ted to public str
ycling network critical to
77providing residents and
users with multi modal
7 7 mobility options
Pr ry
a Stre
a distinctive'
character de
prioritize publi
itie
7.7 Gateways and gateway
�' / buildings should create
—y7 a sense of arrival,
contributing to the image
and identity of the area.
POPS for public and/or
community gatherings to
have easy physical and
visual access
Design opportunities
to reduce the carbon
footprint such as green
roofs and solar panels are
recommended
Figure 103. Massing diagram illustrating design principles at an intersection site
Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines
Attachment #1 to Report #PLN 26-19
J ALTONA ROAD
%ID
oCi
�
4i1
o).
Ca
Cce
_
—
1
5
1
FINCH_ AVENUE
a1
5{
IJ �
a-�
r'
u
� � �fl
�
q IFD0
I �� IFD01
,
I D�
_1
-
�
�
,
-
�6
-r
-L
A
-
e
P
_,,
11
❑
o
i
i1!
—
-_
0
0
,:,
o
r
a
C
�,
�o�
i
0,Ezi
w
a
G`'
I I
E
2
a
w
=2
K,
rill
>
la
it
JaINI1
c1111E
P.110.1.11111.611
4
1
7
\GHW
r
111....figirA
1BAYLY
STREET
1
.P...---tI
=
I 1
��
9
,,,
ile
tO -'-*' 1) A ii I
4
-7
1),
,
.,,
EI
t .1
-
1
4
�
..J�Wpl
�
k
_.........
��
a❑� F1
1
aa-
.�
RENCHMAN'S
-,
4
-
QCT_
r 1 BAY a� ti 1
,A1
J-11
n , _a
(1
0417
II j—^
LAKE ONTARIO
.`
f
40O G3
~ "fZ _7
Kingston Corridor & Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Study Areas Scale: 1:28,000
Key Comments/Concerns and Staff's Response
Attachment #2 to Report #PLN 26-19
Key Comments/Concerns
Staff's Response
The application of a 45 degrees angular plane for
Although it is standard practice to apply an angular plane of 45 percent
mid -rise buildings adjacent to established low
(measured from a point 7.5 metres from the rear property line from a height
density properties is deficient in addressing privacy,
enjoyment of backyards and aesthetic impacts.
of 10.5 metres above the 7.5 metres setback line), it was recognized that
this tool would only address potential shadow impacts, but not the concerns
about potential privacy and aesthetic impacts. Accordingly, an additional
policy recommendations has been included in the policy recommendations
related to Mid -Rise Buildings (from 5 to 12 storeys in height) stating that
"where shallow redevelopment lots are immediately adjacent to designated
established low-density residential properties, the City may also consider
the implementation of other regulations to ensure built form compatibility in
addition to the application of the angular plane." This recommendation
speaks to a more context sensitive approach, recognizing that a one model
fits all approach cannot apply to all locations within the Corridor and Node.
The Intensification Plan states that opportunities for
To address this concern and to provide greater clarity, two policy
the greatest heights and densities exist at gateway
recommendations were added under Section 3.3.1 (Tall Buildings). The first
locations and along Highway 401, as opposed to
recommendation states that the general maximum height of tall buildings
the proposed policy recommendations and the
should not be more than 45 storeys, and at gateway locations and along
mapping that do not reflect such opportunities.
Highway 401within the Dunbarton/Liverpool and Rougemount precincts the
maximum height should be 25 storeys to reflect the precinct character,
followed by the following: "If the general intent of the Intensification Plan is
met, flexibility with massing and height may be considered on a site specific
basis". The Intensification Plan therefore recognizes that one model does
not fit all, and that through further detailed assessment and contextual
planning possible higher heights could be considered at gateway locations
and along Highway 401 within the precincts, provided that the intent of the
Intensification Plan is met.
Furthermore, the angular plane diagrams that were initially contained in the
Draft Intensification Plan, have been removed and will only serve as
illustrations in the Urban Design Guidelines on how the angular planes
should be used in block planning and review.
Page 1
Key Comments/Concerns
Staff's Response
The identification of preferred office locations within
the Brock, Dunbarton/Liverpool, and Whites
Precincts, and setting certain minimum targets for
office development have no basis and have not
been substantiated through a market.
The preferred office locations shown within the three precincts were
selected based on their close proximity to gateways where public transit
stops are within easy walking distance. Also, the use of the word "preferred"
clearly indicates that other locations are not precluded.
Even though the setting of minimum targets for office uses within these
precincts was based on a high level analysis of what each precinct may
require to function as a "complete community", it is acknowledged that the
setting of minimum targets in the Intensification Plan in the absence of a
detailed market analysis, may not be appropriate. Accordingly, the minimum
office targets were removed from the Draft Intensification Plan.
In recognition of the importance of creating local job opportunities in concert
with residential intensification and developing complete communities over
time, revised language has been included in Section 3.2.1 of the Draft
Intensification Plan that: "encourages" major office development to occur at
preferred locations; "promotes" the development of office uses within the
redevelopment of Mixed Use areas; and "encourages" the City to undertake
an office demand study or that the City may also request an office demand
study as part of development applications at key locations.
The proposed policy recommendation that 25% of
new residential units within new construction must
be affordable to households of low or moderate
income, in keeping with municipal goals, can be
misinterpreted as a goal to be met on a site specific
basis instead of a City-wide basis.
To address this concern the language in Section 3.2.4 (Residential) of the
Draft Intensification Plan has been revised to read as follows; "a minimum
of 25% of new residential construction is encouraged to be of forms that
would be affordable to households of low or moderate income. The revised
wording is consistent with policy 6.4 (a) in the Pickering Official Plan, and
clarifies that the percentage applies city-wide and not to each site.
Concern that the requirement in the Intensification
Plan that Primary Retail Frontage Areas (shown in
the Intensification Plan Maps) should consist of
75% active ground floor uses and 55% in
Secondary Retail Frontage Areas, and the mapping
of the Primary and Secondary Retail Frontages are
unrealistic and the associated mapping is too
prescriptive.
To address this concern a number of revisions were included in the Draft
Intensification Plan.
Firstly, the word "Retail" has been removed from these terms so that they
read "Primary Frontages and Secondary Frontages", thereby
acknowledging the fact that a retail use may not always be feasible and that
other non -retail uses, such as clinics and gyms, may also be appropriate on
the ground floor, provided the ground floor of the building is designed to
interact with the public realm through elements such as transparent glazing,
access doors facing the street, etc.
Page 2
Key Comments/Concerns
Staff's Response
Note: "Primary Frontages" contain a greater
consistency and greater number of fine grain active
uses at grade, such as retail units with glazing
oriented to the street. They are identified as areas
where the highest levels of retail activity are
desired, whereas "Secondary Frontages" consist of
a less continuous presence of publicly-accessible
spaces, or more private spaces that still have a
strong street-related presence.
Secondly, the requirement for active ground floor uses (including service,
community and institutional uses, and consolidated office and residential
entrances) within Primary Frontage Areas have been reduced from 75% to
60%, and within Secondary Frontages from 55% to 30%, and are no longer
"required" but "encouraged", providing greater flexibility.
Thirdly, a number of minor revisions were made to the Intensification Plan
map by reducing the length of certain Primary and Secondary Frontage
areas in locations where it may be more challenging to be attained.
The proposed minimum building separation
distances for Low-rise and Mid-rise buildings are
called into question and should be reduced.
Following further review of the comments and best practices, the proposed
recommendations in the Intensification Plan and the guidelines in the Draft
UDGs regarding minimum building separations as it relates to Low-rise
buildings and Mid-rise buildings were further revised, and language added
to provide greater clarity.
Also, a new policy recommendation has been added under Section 3.3.3
(Low Rise Buildings) encouraging the City to develop comprehensive
low-rise residential design guidelines in support of the development of
townhouses and low-rise apartment buildings.
The position is taken that all streets on the
SmartCentres lands within the Brock Precinct will
be privately owned and publicly accessible whereas
the Intensification Plan identifies certain streets to
be public streets.
Although the ultimate street pattern, road configurations and road
ownership will only be finalized through a more detailed review of the
subject lands (which could be at the time of the City-initiated Official Plan
Amendment or when a development application is submitted), the position
that is being maintained in the Intensification Plan and the Draft Urban
Design Guidelines is that certain future key road connections, which forms
the backbone for traffic circulation for multiple transportation modes,
accesses to multiple high density, mixed use developments, parks and
amenities, and conduits for underground municipal services, should be in
public ownership to provide and maintain a sustained level of service to the
future population in the precinct. The public ownership and maintenance of
these roads will ensure that they are developed and maintained to City
standards.
Page 3
Key Comments/Concerns
Staff's Response
The Draft UDGs have been further revised (under Section 4.5.4 New Public
Streets), to clarify that the location of new public streets is flexible provided
the overall block pattern is achieved, the achievement of minimum block
sizes on the development sites and adjacent sites is not compromised, and
appropriate intersection spacing is maintained.
It is felt that certain new roads in the Intensification
Plan should be identified as Primary Public Streets
instead of Secondary Streets (private streets).
This response must be read in conjunction with the previous point.
The purpose of the proposed Public Streets in the Intensification Plan is to
provide a new and improved road network for multiple modes of
transportation, providing access to multiple development blocks, and
serving as right of ways (conduits) for underground municipal infrastructure,
integrated with a secondary network of private roads and laneways.
Although the Intensification Plan reflects a logical hierarchy and network of
roads, the Plan does not preclude alternative options from being
considered.
Furthermore, staff is aware of the fact the right of way width of a public road
is typically wider than that of a private road, which validates the concern
that developable lands would be lost through redevelopments. To offset the
loss of land due to proposed future public roads, the City may, in addition to
stratified parking arrangements, also consider increasing the permissible
floor space index and density within development blocks without netting out
the future public road areas, and/or by reducing building setbacks, where
viable.
The opinion is expressed that the provision of
publicly accessible privately owned open spaces
should be considered an appropriate replacement
for the required provision of public parkland on the
SmartCentres lands, whereas the Intensification
Plan identifies two new public parks on the subject
lands. The opinion is also expressed that the open
spaces should be open to strata arrangements to
accommodate private underground parking and
subsurface structures.
The proposed public parks shown on the SmartCentres lands in the Brock
Precinct, will not only service immediately adjacent developments, but a
broader public consisting of residents from within and outside the precinct,
employees and business customers. The broader purpose and size of the
proposed public parks, which allows for various programming and events, is
more befitting to public ownership, maintenance and programming, and
eliminate concerns regarding long-term maintenance costs, year-round
accessibility, and the complications associated with service and access
cross easements to serve multiple development blocks.
Page 4
Key Comments/Concerns
Staff's Response
To offset the loss of lands for public park purposes, a policy recommendation
was added under Section 3.5.9 (Parking) of the Intensification Plan stating
that underground parking beneath the City's roads and parks may be
considered, provided property owners enter into an agreement subject to
terms and conditions acceptable to the City. This is similar to a policy that
was adopted for City Centre redevelopments.
The implementation of the Intensification Plan could
have a detrimental impact on existing businesses
and the planning for complete communities.
Consideration should be given to reserving a certain
percentage of the land base for employment
opportunities and to optimize intensification rather
than maximizing intensification.
The nature of retail and shopping is changing, and staff have noticed that
more recent redevelopment concepts along the corridor and within the node
consist mainly of medium and/or high density residential proposals with
limited or no non-residential or commercial components.
Although the City cannot dictate or control the market conditions for local
retail and businesses, it can create a revised land use policy framework,
coupled with a zoning by-law that could facilitate and promote mixed use
development and the development of a complete community. The City may
also consider other tools, such as community improvement plans, tax and
development charges rebates to incentivize the development of certain
uses.
Accordingly, the following policy recommendations have been included in
the Intensification Plan: "Redevelopment shall seek to accommodate
residential, retail and or other non-residential uses in a form and scale that
are complimentary to the vision of the mixed-use corridor and node", and
under Section 5.2 (Future Studies) it is recommended that "the City initiate
a program to engage local businesses along the corridor and in the node to
consider matters such as business retention and expansion needs in a
changing retail environment."
The preservation of the Post Manor (located at the
corner of Brock and Kingston Roads), the only
designated heritage structure in the study area,
needs more emphasis, and language should be
included to clarify that the City would not be
supportive of moving or removing buildings of
heritage significance without first studying the
properties for their significance.
Language has been incorporated in the Intensification Plan speaking to the
significance of the Post Manor, and the proposed policy recommendation
under Section 3.3.8 (Heritage Buildings) was revised to confirm the
importance of studies for heritage merit and potential designation or listing,
and to clarify that the use of other avenues to address buildings with
heritage significance, e.g. moving them to other locations or removing and
replacing them with a plaque describing their heritage significance, are last
resort options and not suggestions.
Page 5
Key Comments/Concerns
Staff's Response
The Intensification Plan figures and 3-D model
demonstrations, and the angular plane diagrams in
the UDGs are being interpreted as too prescriptive,
offering little or no flexibility.
The maps and 3-D illustrations of each precincts in the Intensification Plan
illustrate and articulate the vision and objectives for the study area. They
are visual demonstrations of one manner in which the Corridor and Node
could potentially built out over time, and do not preclude alternative built
form and height arrangements, provided that the alternative proposals are
generally consistent with the vision and key objectives for the Corridor and
Node.
Various revisions have been made to figure labels and text to clarify that the
figures, angular plane diagrams, and 3-D model diagrams are illustrative
and not prescriptive.
Also to be noted, with regard to the angular plane diagrams, is that each
one is based on a specific cross section location in each precinct (as shown
in figures 13, 15, 17 and 19 in the Draft UDGs) and does not reflect a
condition that can be homogeneously applied across a precinct.
The language used in the Intensification Plan and
UDGs is too prescriptive, and there should be a
degree of flexibility in its interpretation.
Read together with the previous comment point, the language in various
proposed policy recommendations and draft urban design guidelines were
softened from "shall" to "should"; and by using words such as "shown
conceptually" in the text and "illustrative ..." in figure labels to clarify that the
maps and figures are for demonstrative purposes and do not preclude other
options, provided the general intent of the Plan and the UDGs is met.
Through the preparation of the Official Plan Amendment, staff will consider
the use of more prescriptive policy language, where it is warranted and
appropriate.
The Intensification Plan lacks direction regarding
the maintenance of existing land use permissions
and to permit modest expansion.
The Intensification Plan recognizes that the redevelopment of the corridor
and node may take a long time. Section 3.2.5 "Transition of Use Over Time"
was intentionally included to address this issue. It does not include
permissions per se and does not provide direction on the extent of minor
expansions to "legal non -conforming" uses that may be permitted, because
these matters are typically addressed through Official Plan policies or
zoning by-law regulations.
Page 6
Key Comments/Concerns
Staff's Response
Furthermore, there are certain uses within the Corridor and Node that do
not complement the long-term vision and objectives for the Corridor and
Node, for example car sale lots, warehouses and scrapyards. The
Intensification Plan encourages these uses to locate elsewhere in the City,
and discourage the expansion of these uses, because an expansion would
further entrench uses that are incompatible with the vision for intensification
and more compact development forms. Discouraging these types of uses
to continue or expand does not prevent them from continuing as "legal
non-conforming" uses.
The Region indicated that, given the scale and
Firstly, it is important to point at that the Intensification Plan is a visionary
density of recent development proposals, there may
document, that needs to be implemented through various planning tools
be water and sanitary service capacity constraints
e.g. Official Plan policies and zoning regulations, and other initiatives such
to accommodate future growth and intensification
as infrastructure projects and development charges.
within the Corridor and Node.
One of the goals and objectives approved as part of the new Vision for the
Corridor and Node, is to encourage the optimization of infrastructure and to
ensure that intensification can be supported by existing infrastructure
capacity and that additional infrastructure is phased in step with
development.
To plan and phase additional infrastructure in step with development can be
challenging, because the level of service required is influenced by the
anticipated level of demand, which is partially driven by development
applications and market forces. Although it is difficult the predict the overall
capacity of services required, the population and employment estimates
that were calculated for each precinct through the development of the
Recommended Intensification Scenario would be a good starting point to
initiate the planning, design and phasing of infrastructure expansion and
upgrading in support of the redevelopment and intensification along the
Corridor and in the Node.
The Intensification Plan does not provide all the answers to infrastructure
service available and constraints, but do provide policy recommendations
under Sections 3.6.1 — Water, 3.6.2 — Wastewater, and 3.6.3 — Stormwater
that speaks to the preparation of Infrastructure Master Plans to ensure a
coordinated and integrated approach to providing water, wastewater and
stormwater management solutions, and to guide and inform the preparation
Page 7
Key Comments/Concerns
Staff's Response
of future Functional Servicing Reports in support of individual development
applications.
Furthermore, the Intensification Plan also contains a policy recommendation
that private developers should consult early with the City and the Region to
ensure infrastructure needs for the planned development can be properly
planned, coordinated and integrated with planned infrastructure
improvements and development applications.
The Intensification Plan should provide direction
Section 5.1(Implementation) of the Intensification Plan provides direction
regarding the need for cost sharing associated with
regarding development phasing, cost sharing and the preparation of context
services and new roads that will be shared, and the
plans to address the sequencing of development. The Official Plan
sequencing of development.
Amendment process may further review the introduction of policies specific
to cost sharing and the sequencing of development.
Note: Since the Draft Urban Design Guidelines goes hand in hand with the Draft Intensification Plan, final revisions made to the
Draft Intensification Plan also included corresponding revisions to the Draft Urban Design Guidelines, where applicable.
Page 8