HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD 23-02
092
REPORT TO COUNCIL
FROM:
DATE: May 1, 2002
Neil Carroll
Director, Planning and Development
REPORT NUMBER: PD 23-02
Northeast Quadrant Review:
Final Report
Proposed Official Plan Amendment
Revised Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines
City of Pickering
SUBJECT:
RECOMMENDATION:
1.
That Council receive as background information the Kingston Road - Whites Road
Northeast Quadrant Transportation Study, Phase I report, dated September, 2001, and
the Kingston Road - Whites Road Northeast Quadrant Transportation Study,
Phase 2 report, dated May, 2002, prepared by TSH Associates for the City (previously
distributed under separate cover);
2.
That Council receive as background information the Amberlea Creek Northeast Quadrant
- Assessment of Alternatives, dated September, 2001, prepared by Schollen & Company
Inc. for the City, (previously distributed under separate cover);
3.
That Council endorse the recommendations of the "Northeast Quadrant Review", as set
out in Report to Council PD 23-02;
4.
That Council direct staff to hold a Statutory Public Information Meeting in June 2002, to
discuss potential amendments to the Pickering Official Plan that are required to
implement the recommendations of the "Northeast Quadrant Review", as set out in
Appendix I to Report Number PD 23-02;
5.
That Council adopt, in principle, the revised "Northeast Quadrant Development
Guidelines" as the City's strategy for detailed land use, urban design, transportation and
stormwater, as set out in Appendix IT to Report Number PD 23-02, and that staff be
requested to finalize the Guidelines in light of the final official plan amendment that is
brought back to Council;
6.
That Council require the proponents of major development applications within the
Northeast Quadrant Area to contribute their proportionate share of the Northeast
Quadrant Review costs prior to zoning by-laws being adopted for their lands; and
7.
That Council direct the City Clerk to forward a copy of Report Number PD 23-02 to the
Region of Durham, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, and the funding
landowners within the Northeast Quadrant.
ORIGIN:
Council Resolutions #24/01, passed on March 5, 2001, which directed staff to commence with
the Northeast Quadrant Review, and established pre-budget approval to undertake the review of
the Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines.
REPORT NUMBER PD 23-02
Northeast Quadrant Final Review
May I, 2002
Page 2
093
AUTHORITY:
The Planning Act, RS.O. 1990, chapter P.13
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS:
No direct cost to the City is anticipated as a result of the proposed Official Plan policies.
However, there will be costs associated with maintenance of the public road recommended
within the Quadrant by staff. These costs are similar to the public road maintenance costs
already endorsed by Council in the currently approved Northeast Quadrant Development
Guidelines.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
In 1990, Council approved the Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines. The Guidelines
contemplated a high intensity of mixed-use development with substantial underground parking.
An internal residential neighbourhood focused around a ring road, and an interior linear park was
illustrated. Additional commercial and office, with office-support commercial was proposed for
the Kingston Road and Whites Road frontages.
Due to recent market interest throughout the Quadrant and landowners requesting changes to
specific elements of the current Guidelines, Council subsequently authorized a review of the
Development Guidelines. As part of the Quadrant Review, the City retained the consulting
services of Schollen & Company, TSH Associates, and Markson Borooah Hodgson Architects to
assess the environmental, transportation and land uselurban design components.
Through the environmental analysis, it was determined that a net environmental benefit could be
achieved by piping the tributary of Amberlea Creek through the Quadrant, if a downstream
stormwater management facility was constructed. For the transportation analysis, it was
concluded that a proposed new public road through the Quadrant between Delta Boulevard and
the new signalized access opposite the Highway 401 westbound on/off ramp would co-ordinate
internal movement between sites, allow orderly development of the Quadrant, reduce congestion
on Kingston Road, and provide for future intensification through redevelopment over time.
, In addition, through public and landowner consultation, staff has prepared revised Development
Guidelines that are more responsive to development interests while still maintaining the
principles of higher intensity, mixed use and pedestrian connectivity that are articulated in the
current Development Guidelines. Further, a number of potential amendments to the Official Plan
are proposed, which implement the recommendations of the Northeast Quadrant Review. The
next step in the planning process is to hold a statutory public information meeting in June with a
final recommendation report being brought back for Council's consideration in the fall.
BACKGROUND:
1.0
Location and Description
The "Northeast Quadrant" lands are generally bounded by Kingston Road to the south,
Whites Road to the west, Sheppard Avenue to the north and the Amberlea Creek tributary
to the east. These lands are currently subject to the Northeast Quadrant Development
Guidelines. The Boyer property, located at the southwest corner of Kingston Road and
Highway 401 on/off ramp and the old Dunbarton School property have also been
included in the review area (see Attachment 1 - Review Map).
094
REPORT NUMBER PD 23-02
Northeast Quadrant Final Review
May I, 2002
Page 3
A tributary of Amberlea Creek traverses the Quadrant and flows in a southerly direction
under Kingston Road, through the Boyer lands, under the Highway 401 on/off ramp,
connecting to the main branch of Amberlea Creek and into Frenchman's Bay.
1.1
History
The existing Development Guidelines were formulated through a review of the land use
policies in the Highway No.2 - Whites Road Northeast Quadrant Study initiated by
Pickering in the late 1980's.
In 1990, Pickering Council adopted the Development Guidelines for the Northeast
Quadrant. The Guidelines contemplated a high intensity of mixed-use development with
substantial underground parking. An internal residential neighbourhood focused around a
ring road, and an interior linear park was illustrated. Additional commercial and office,
with office-support commercial was proposed for the Kingston Road and Whites Road
frontages. A copy of the concept plan from the current Development Guidelines is
attached (see Attachment #2).
Recently, there has been significant market interest throughout the quadrant and
landowners are requesting that changes to specific elements of the current Guidelines be
made. These changes relate to the arrangement of uses, design matters, provision of the
park, provision of the internal ring road, and access to the external road network.
As well, other on-going challenges include the interest in primarily commercial
development adjacent to Kingston Road, the high cost and resultant lack of interest in
underground parking, the difficulty in implementing the internal public ring road, and the
location of the Amberlea Creek tributary bisecting the Quadrant. In an effort to be more
proactive in working with development interests, the City commenced a review of the
Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines.
1.3
Development Applications
Within the Northeast Quadrant Review area, several development applications have been
submitted including:
. Wood/Carroll (Hayes Line Properties) (A 22/00)
. Lydia Dobbin/City of Pickering (Marion Hill Development Corporation)
(OPA 01 002/P & A 04/01)
. Michael Boyer/Pickering Holdings Inc.Neridian Corporation (A 40101)
. North American Acquisitions (old Dunbarton School Property) (OP A 01-003/P &
A 10101)
A brief summary of each application is provided in Attachment #3 to this report.
1.4
Quadrant Review
On May 3, 2001, Council approved a budget allocation for the Northeast Quadrant
Development Guidelines Review with a total developer contribution of not less than
50% of the total Review costs. To assist in the Review, the Planning & Development
Department retained the following consultants:
. Schollen & Company, an environmental consultant to determine the feasibility for
piping the Amberlea Creek tributary;
. TSH Associates, transportation consultants, to undertake a traffic and access review
for the entire Northeast Quadrant; and
. Markson Borooah Hodgson Architects, a urban designer/facilitator to assist staff in
the review of land use and urban design matters.
095
REPORTNUMBERPD 23-02
Northeast Quadrant Final Review
May I, 2002
Page 4
The Amberlea Creek Northeast Quadrant - Assessment of Alternatives report prepared by
Schollen & Company Inc. determined the implications and benefits of piping Amberlea
Creek tributary traversing the Northeast Quadrant and concluded that a net environmental
benefit could be achieved by piping the tributary of Amberlea Creek through the
Quadrant, provided a downstream stormwater management pond was constructed.
TSH Associates prepared two reports for the transportation component. The Phase 1 -
Final Report examined existing traffic conditions, access opportunities and constraints
within the Quadrant and concluded that the major signalized intersections in the
Northeast Quadrant Review area are operating at or above capacity. In Phase 2, it was
concluded that a proposed new public road opposite the Highway 401 westbound on/off
ramp would provide additional signalized access to the Northeast Quadrant and facilitate
the possible implementation of access control measures along Kingston Road.
A summary of these Reports are provided in Attachment #4 to this Report. As well,
copies of the reports are available for public review in the Planning & Development
Department.
2.0
Public Consultation
2.1
Public Meetings
Over the course of the Review, meetings have been held with the landowners to introduce
and discuss the study process, a revised set of urban design and land use principles for the
Quadrant and the results of the transportation and environmental studies. This
information was then presented at a public meeting held on October 30, 2001. Notes of
that meeting are provided in Attachment #5 to this report. On November 24, 2001 a
design workshop was subsequently held, with both area residents and landowners, to
discuss urban design and transportation issues with the City staff and the City's
consultants. Notes of the workshop are also provided in Attachment #6 to this report.
On April 9, 2002 a further public meeting was held to present and discuss the results of
the review, including land use concepts, transportation, and urban design matters for the
Northeast Quadrant. A meeting of landowners was also held on April 17, 2002 to discuss
their views.
2.2
Agency Comments
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA)
The TRCA indicated support in principle for a proposed downstream stormwater
management facility located east of the Bayfair Baptist church property that could enable
further changes (piping) to the upstream portion of the Amberlea creek that runs through
the Quadrant location for this facility. It was noted that that the works constitute a
harmful alteration disruption and destruction to a watercourse and as a result, noted that a
suitable compensation arrangement would be required to support the project. Further
verbal comments have been received from TRCA indicating that City would be required
to undertake detailed flood line mapping, a detailed erosion assessment and preliminary
engineering of the proposed facility to confirm the required and available storage volume
of the proposed stormwater facility (see Attachment #7).
Ministry of Transportation (MTO)
The MTO provided comments on the Phase I Final Report of the
TSH Transportation Study for the Northeast Quadrant. The comments emphasized a
preference that no access onto Kingston Road directly across from the Highway 401 ramp
terminal be provided. However, provided the need for s\lch an access could be justified,
MTO would require the road to be a public road with no access, conflict points or sharp
096
REPORT NUMBER PD 23-02
Northeast Quadrant Final Review
May 1, 2002
Page 5
2.3
3.0
3.1
radius curves for the first 110 metres of the north limit of the current
Kingston Road/Highway ramp intersection in order to provide adequate stopping
distances for any vehicles that run the amber light at the intersection. MTO commented
that they would prohibit full moves access points along the first 180 metres of this road
(see Attachment #8).
In a subsequent letter, MTO re-emphasized that no access onto Kingston Road across
from the Highway 401 ramp terminal be provided; however, MTO is prepared to
co-operate and work with City and Regional staffs toward a design, which would be
acceptable to all parties concerned (see Attachment #9).
Comments received from Area Residents and Property Owners
.
Vivian Vandenhazel, 1757 Fairport Road, indicated objection to the piping the
Amberlea Creek tributary as it would only increase the proposed density for the
subject lands and that open space/park should be planned along the watercourse.
She also suggested the following: the proposed density of development is too
high; the existing mature trees must be preserved, the single family character on
the south side of Sheppard Ave should be maintained; and there is not enough
park lopen spacel bike path development (see Attachment #10).
.
Robert McConachie, 770 Kingston Road, indicated that the City should be
responsible for paying the entire consulting costs or require all landowners in
Quadrant to pay equal amounts toward the cost of the studies
(see Attachment #11).
.
Kim Baker, Valarie Lawson, and Shane Legere, 765 Sheppard Ave,
757 Sheppard Ave, and 751 Sheppard Ave., indicated they should have the
opportunity to sell off a portion of their backyards for development. They also
commented that it would beneficial to the City and its residents that development
of this area be appealing to the eye, easily accessed and with amenities and
services that are best suited for the area (see Attachment #12).
.
Stefan & Raffi Nalbandian, 1475 & 1485 Whites Road, indicated that "Access
Concept B" proposed in the Transportation Study restricts access to our property
by "right in-right out" access only (by means of raised center median). Proposed
restricted access devaluates our property and as much changes the original
grounds upon which we acquired our property. Therefore we support the
alternative "Access Concept A" which enables safe pedestrian crossing of Whites
Road and unrestricted access onto our property (See Attachment # 13).
DISCUSSION
Vision for the Quadrant
A revised vision for the Northeast Quadrant is being recommended by staff, which
reinforces the importance of the area as a gateway to the City, supports a mix of land uses
at higher intensities, and reinforces and enhances the pedestrian network. At the same
time, the Guidelines are cognizant of current development realities while providing the
foundation for redevelopment and intensification opportunities in the Quadrant. As well,
instead of the current requirement in the Development Guidelines for a ring road, an
intemal road network is proposed that would provide access to existing and proposed
signalized intersections - Delta Boulevard 1 Kingston Road and Kingston Road!
Highway 401 westbound onlofframp.
097
REPORT NUMBER PD 23-02
Northeast Quadrant Final Review
May I, 2002
Page 6
Further, to ensure that main street characteristics of higher intensity and mixed use are
achieved in the Quadrant over time, the revise Guidelines include provisions that address:
.
building frontage, heights, and massing/appearance;
building relationships to the main public streets;
streetscape elements;
access and circulation;
parking and service areas; and
pedestrian amenities.
.
.
.
.
.
The Guidelines also, in recognition of the existing character of Sheppard A venue, require
development proposals to be in a form and scale that is compatible with the existing low
density residential land uses.
3.2
Recommended Land Use
Through community and landowner consultation, staff concluded that the high intensity,
mixed residential 1 commercial 1 office development concept originally contemplated for
the Quadrant will not be' achieved in the near to mid term. However, an appropriate and
compatible land use concept has been identified that is more responsive to development
interests while still respecting the community context.
Staff recommends residential medium density development on the south side of
Sheppard Avenue, as a buffer between the existing low density residential development
on the north side of Sheppard Avenue, and new moderate intensity commercial uses on
Kingston Road. Over time, it is anticipated that some of the commercial properties will
redevelop and further intensify.
A land use map that appears, on Page 7 of this Report specific land use delineates
precincts areas within the Quadrant. The delineation is based on existing property
boundaries, Delta Boulevard and the proposed east-west public road. Land use
designations are discussed for each precinct.
Precinct A
The retention of residential uses within the North East Quadrant was an important
conclusion of both the 1980's review and the current review. What has changed is its
location from both the north and central part of the lands, and a collapsing of the three
tiers of low, medium, and high residential density to a single medium density.
It is proposed therefore that the lands within this Precinct currently designated Mixed
Corridor along the Whites road frontage; Low Density Residential along Sheppard
Avenue frontage; and Medium Density Residential in the interior be designated to
Medium Density Residential with a maximum density restriction of 55 units per net
hectare. This would simplify the number of designations, reduce the allowable densities
in some portions of the Precinct, and increase it modestly in other portions. These
increases in residential density can result in a housing form that respects the existing
character of Sheppard Avenue. Further, it would provide an appropriate transition
between the single detached dwellings on the north side of Sheppard Avenue and
proposed commercial uses along Kingston Road.
A proposed policy would require the design of properties being redeveloped for
residential and commercial purposes on the south side of Sheppard Avenue to be
compatible with existing residential development. Further, a single vehicular access to
Sheppard Avenue is proposed from Precinct A, which will allow future residents to travel
in all directions from this site, resulting in a nominal increase in traffic in the area. The
Precinct is adjacent to an arterial roadway with sufficient capacity to support the traffic
anticipated from a medium residential density development. A policy promoting the
0 9 8 REPORT NUMBER PD 23-02
Northeast Quadrant Final Review
May 1, 2002
Page 7
reduction of traffic speeds and improvement of pedestrian safety along Sheppard Avenue
by implementing pavement markings and other measures is proposed. The City will
consider additional "traffic-calming" techniques following the adoption of a safer street
traffic management policy.
n
u
C>
'"
0
a:
DUNFAIR STREET-
City of Pickering
NORTHEAST QUADRANT LAND USE PRECINCTS
_'!Ii ~gu~Ib':~1SNEIGHBOURHOOD rn LAND USE PRECINCTS -.- ~g~~~~~TQUADRANT
l'
SCALE
1 :6000
DATE OCT. 29, 2001
Precinct B
Nine residential lots fronting Sheppard Avenue, east of the City's property, characterize
this Precinct. The lands are currently designated Low Density Residential along the
Sheppard Avenue frontage and Medium Density Residential in the interior. The existing
residential character is low density residential. It is envisioned that over time some of the
residential lots will be assembled and/or developed at the higher end of the density
provisions. This is consistent with the views of some' of the property owners in the
Precinct who indicated an interest in subdividing their lots for development purposes. It
REPORT NUMBER PD 23-02
Northeast Quadrant Final Review
09~J
May 1, 2002
Page 8
is therefore appropriate to extend the Medium Density Residential over this area with the
density restricted at 55 units per net hectare over the entire Precinct. As well, the new
official plan policies and Guidelines recommended for Precinct A are applicable to this
Precinct. In this way, any new development along Sheppard Avenue will be required to
be compatible with the character of the existing neighbourhood. A further policy has
been added to permit residential development below the minimum overall net density of
30 units per net hectare for lands on the south side of Sheppard Avenue. This will enable
some of the lots to be redeveloped on a site-specific basis without having to be
consolidated.
Precinct C
The lands within Precinct C include existing retail uses on Delta Boulevard, on the north
side Kingston Road are currently designated Mixed Corridor along the frontage and
Medium Density Residential in the interior.
The current Guidelines envisioned medium density residential uses in the internal portion
of the Quadrant centered on an internal ring road with an interior linear park, and
commercial/retail uses on the Kingston Road frontage. The Guidelines also contemplated
separate underground parking for residential buildings. Through the Review and working
in part with proponents of development applications, it was determined that surface as
opposed to underground parking was appropriate as there were insufficient parcel sizes to
accommodate separate commercial and residential developments. The Mixed Corridor
designation is proposed for Precinct C.
As well, to achieve the City's 'mainstreet' objective, the revised Guidelines require
second storey floorspace and a minimum building height oftwo-storeys. The inclusion of
the second storey functional floorspace would be expected to attract uses such as offices,
adding variety to the mix of uses and times of activity in the Quadrant. These are
important objectives of the City for 'mainstreet' - Kingston Road, and for the Northeast
Quadrant.
Precincts D and E
Precinct D is currently designated Urban Study Area. This designation permits
conservation, environmental protection, restoration, education, passive recreation, similar
uses and existing lawful uses. Council may replace the Urban Study Area designation for
the "old" Dunbarton school property with appropriate land use designations and policies
by amendment to the Official Plan, following completion of a land use, transportation and
design study that responds appropriately to the dual frontage of the property along
Kingston Road and Sheppard Avenue, identifies an appropriate means of conserving and
re-using the Dunbarton school building, and adequately addresses the location opposite
the Highway 401 on 1 off ramps. Precinct E consisting of four parcels to the east of the
school property are currently designated Urban Residential Areas - Medium Density.
Through the Review process, it has been determined that a redesignation of the
Dunbarton School property and the four adjacent properties to Mixed Corridor would be
appropriate and would provide opportunities for redevelopment on all four properties.
The 'old Dunbarton school' building is not designated as a historical building by either
local or provincial authorities; however, staff supports the re-use of the school building
for other purposes. The revised Guidelines require any commercial buildings located in
the northern portion of the school property to present a building face to Sheppard Avenue
that reflects a residential character.
As indicated earlier, an application has been received from
North American Acquisitions Corporation to develop the school property for retail,
personal service, office and restaurant uses in addition to, gas bar and car wash facilities.
Staff does not support additional gas bar and car wash facilities within this already
100
REPORT NUMBER PD 23-02
Northeast Quadrant Final Review
May 1, 2002
Page 9
congested area, and is proposing a new policy prohibiting the development of any new
gas bars, automobile service stations, or car washes for lands designated Mixed Used
Area - Mixed Corridors or Medium Density Residential within in the Northeast Quadrant.
The revised Guidelines for commercial proposals along Kingston Road would also apply
to Precincts D and E.
Precincts F and G
Both properties are currently designated Mixed Corridor. No changes to the Official Plan
are required; however, any commercial or residential developments on either property
would be subject to the revised Guidelines. Any development on lands within Precinct F
would be required to maintain a 10-metre buffer strip from Amberlea Creek unless piped.
3.3
Internal Public Road
The current Guidelines contemplated an internal ring road, with an interior linear park as
a focus for a residential neighbourhood, and to accommodate access movement within the
Northeast Quadrant. Through the Review process, it has been determined that an internal
east-west public road (10 metre wide right-of-way), through the Quadrant would provide
an appropriate traffic circulation system between Delta Boulevard and the new signalized
access opposite the Highway 401 westbound on/off ramp (see Access Concept E in
Appendix II). This internal public road would co-ordinate internal movement between
sites, allow orderly development of the Quadrant, reduce congestion on Kingston Road,
and provide for future intensification through redevelopment over time. Staff is
proposing that the new public road be designated as a collector road on Schedule II -
Transportation in the Official Plan.
The public road would also provide access to signalized intersections at Delta Boulevard
and the Highway 401 westbound on/off ramp intersections at Kingston Road. The
Ministry of Transportation has indicated that a public road is required in order to permit
access from the Dunbarton school site to the Highway 401 westbound on/off ramp
intersection and that access to the public road should be limited in proximity to the
signalized intersection to ensure that free flow of vehicles can be maintained. It is
recognized that the access plan, and the related major changes to the intersection will
require approval by both the Region of Durham and the Ministry of Transportation.
A requirement for a public road would be implemented through imposition of a
Holding Provision in the Zoning By- laws for lands in the Quadrant except for the Wood,
Carroll properties (the OMB decision for these lands accepted Wood Carroll's approach
to provide a right-of-way only). The provision would require property owners to enter
into development agreements requiring construction and conveyance of a public road to
the City's satisfaction before removal of the holding provision.
3.4
Amberlea Creek Tributary
The previous Development Guidelines did not contemplate an open channel for this
stream. The Schollen report on the feasibility of piping the creek has concluded that a net
environmental benefit will result from construction of a downstream stormwater pond on
lands north of Highway 401, and could allow consideration of piping the tributary. Until
a decision is reached on the matter of the stormwater management facility, the creek
channel will remain open. This will require applications to respond to TRCA's normal
requirement for a 10-metre buffer between development and the stream corridor.
3.5
Stormwater Treatment
The Schollen Report on the Amberlea Creek tributary, the potential for a downstream
Amberlea stormwater quantitylquality control facility is ~eing investigated. In the event
development within the Quadrant precedes construction of the Amberlea pond,
REPORT NUMBER PD 23-02
Northeast Quadrant Final Review
101
May 1, 2002
Page 10
landowners within the Northeast Quadrant will be required to contribute to the proposed
downstream stormwater control works and provide on-site treatment. On-site stormwater
treatment is to be implemented through future site plan approval. A policy is proposed
requiring any developer to construct on-site controls if development precedes a
downstream solution. On-site controls will address both quantity and quality stormwater
concerns.
3.6
Potential Amendments to the Pickering Official Plan
As mentioned previously, amendments to the Official Plan will require further public
consultation process separate from this Review. Accordingly, staff recommend that
Council direct staff to hold a Statutory Public Information Meeting in June 2002, to
discuss the details of the potential amendments to the Pickering Official Plan required to
implement the recommendations of the "Northeast Quadrant Review", as set out in
Appendix I to this Report
3.7
Proposed Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines
The proposed new Northeast Quadrant Guidelines were prepared to assist the public and
developers with interest in these lands, and to assist the Planning & Development
Department in reviewing proposals in this area. The preparation of the guidelines
required a review of current policy, a rethinking of the existing Northeast Quadrant
guidelines, and a number of meetings with the various stakeholder groups in this area. A
distillation of issues relating to the City's urban design objectives and the concerns of the
development community and the neighbouring residents was also required.
The Guidelines are laid out to first provide the City's overall urban design objectives and
then to elaborate a set of guidelines, which implement these objectives. The objectives of
the City can be summarized as allowing these lands to evolve in an appropriate manner,
while striving to provide a safe, pleasant environment that displays a high quality urban
image and to integrate this new development sensitively into the existing neighbourhood.
The Guidelines themselves are separated into guidelines for Commercial Development
Proposals and guidelines for Residential Development Proposals, and cover matters
ranging from building location, height and appearance to landscaping, site layout
requirements, storm water management and traffic.
The Guidelines are the result of a collaborative effort between all of the stakeholders and
the Planning & Development Department and shall provide a framework to review the
various development proposals in this area. They are provided as Appendix II to this
Report. Staff requests that Council adopt the Guidelines in principle that they be brought
back to Council for final adoption with the formal Official Plan amendment.
3.8
Study Costs
Staff recommends Council re-affirm the requirement that applicants pay a proportionate
share of the study costs before zoning is approved for each site. It is recommended that
this be a requirement prior to removal of the Holding symbol from the proposed zoning
for the subj ect lands.
Council previously required cost sharing of the Review, with benefiting
landownersldevelopers contributing at least 50% of the anticipated $50,000 study cost.
Some additional work has been necessary to complete the study, due to the requirements
of approval agencies. This work was undertaken with the concurrence of funding
landowners. It is recommended that Council fe-affirm the requirement for benefiting
landowners to pay all costs in excess of the City's initial $25,000 commitment. If these
costs are not recovered in 2002, they will be inc:t:.eased in accordance with the
Southam Construction Index.
102
REPORT NUMBER PD 23-02
Northeast Quadrant Final Review
May 1, 2002
Page 11
CONCLUSION
The Review provides a renewed vision for the future growth and evolution of the
Northeast Quadrant. The draft Woodlands Neighbourhood policies and
Development Guidelines establish a comprehensive framework for guiding private
development and private investment within the Quadrant, while ensuring a sensitive 'fit'
to the existing neighbourhood context. As well, the framework provides direction and
guidance for the reorganization of the built and natural environments that could result in
the transformation of this section of Kingston Road into a more vibrant "mainstreet".
It is therefore recommended that Council endorse the recommendations of the "Northeast
Quadrant Review", as set out in Report to Council PD 23-02 and adopt, in principle, the
revised "Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines". Further, it is recommended that
staff be authorized to hold a Statutory Public Information Meeting in June 2002, to
discuss potential amendments to the Pickering Official Plan that are required to
implement the recommendations of the "Northeast Quadrant Review".
REPORT NUMBER PD 23-02
Northeast Quadrant Final Review
103
May I, 2002
Page 12
APPENDICES
I. Potential Amendments to the Pickering Official Plan
II. Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Northeast Map
2. Current Northeast Quadrant Development Guideline Concept
3. Summary of Development Applications
4. Summary of Reports prepared for the Northeast Quadrant
5. Notes of Public Meeting held on October 30,2001.
6. Notes from Design Workshop held on November 24,2001
7. Comment Letter from Toronto and Region Conservation Authority dated October 24,2001
8. Comment Letter from Ministry of Transportation dated November 9,2001
9. Comment letter from Ministry of Transportation dated February 26,2002
10. Letter from Vivian Vandenhazel dated October 30, 2001
11. Letter from Robert McConachie dated November 6, 2001
12. Letter from Kim Baker, Valarie Lawson, and Shane Legere received February 12, 2002
13. Letter from Stefan & Raffi Nalbandian dated October 30, 2001
Prepared By:
Approved 1 Endorsed by:
:}.\ ,'~ / !Jo - \ ON ~.l~
I
Grant McGregor, MCIP, RP¡P
Principal Planner - Policy:'
//'7L
//
/ /~- ",
. ¡' % .,/ --
Catherine L. Rose
Manager, Policy
,ßl~~
GM/CLR/pr
Attachments
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Director, Operations and Emergency Services
Recommended for the consideration of Pickering
City Council '7
I'
II
104
APPENDIX I TO
REPORT NUMBER PD 23-02
POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS TO THE
PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN
FOR THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT AREA
1 ()"~
.~
POTENTIAL AMENDMENTS TO THE
PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN
FOR THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT AREA
Certain formal amendments to the Pickering Official Plan are required to provide
a strong policy foundation for the City's objectives for the Northeast Quadrant
Area. The following potential amendments have been drafted based on the
conclusions reached through the Review of the 1990 Northeast Quadrant
Development Guidelines. All potential amendments to the Official Plan will
require a further public consultation process, including a Statutory Public
Information Meeting. Staff will initiate this process once directed to do so by
City Council.
Potential amendments to the Pickering Official Plan include:
1. Amending Schedule I - Land Use Structure by redesignating lands as
follows:
. the south-east quadrant of Whites Road and Sheppard A venue
from Mixed Use Areas - Mixed Corridors and Urban Residential
Area - Low Density to Urban Residential Area - Medium Density;
. the 'old' Dunbarton School property from Other Designations -
Urban Study Areas to Mixed Use Areas - Mixed Corridors;
. the properties lying east of the 'old' Dunbarton School property,
west of the main Amberlea Creek tributary, and south of
Sheppard Avenue, from Urban Residential Area - Medium
Density to Mixed Use Areas - Mixed Corridors; and
. the interior lands located north and east of Whites Road and
Kingston Road from Urban Residential Area - Medium Density to
Mixed Use Areas - Mixed Corridors,
as illustrated on Schedule 'A' attached to this draft Amendment;
2. Amending Schedule II - Transportation System, to add a
Future Collector Road, opposite the Highway 401 westbound on/off
ramp to connect with Delta Boulevard, as illustrated on Schedule 'B'
attached to this draft Amendment;
3. Revise policy 11.8 - Woodlands Neighbourhood Policies, by retaining
the existing sections (a), (b) and (c), renumbering existing section (e) as
(d), and adding new subsections (e) through (g) as follows:
WOODLANDS NEIGHBOURHOOD POLICIES
"11.8
City Council shall,
(a)
in the established residential areas along
Highbush Trail, Old Forest Road,
Rosebank Road and Sheppard Avenue, encourage
and where possible require new development to be
compatible with the character of existing
development;
encourage the introduction of uses and facilities
into the neighbourhood that complement and
support secondary school students and activities;
despite Table 6* of Chapter Three, establish a
maximum residential density of 55 units per net
hectare for lands located on the north side of
Kingston Road that are designated Mixed Use
Areas and abut lands developed as low density
development;
(b)
(c)
*
Table 6 is attached to this Amendment for information purposes only; it does not
constitute part of the Amendment.
In6
Appendix I to Report to Council PD 23-02
Page 2
Potential Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan - Northeast Quadrant Area
(d)
accommodate future improvements to Sheppard
Avenue and Rosebank Road within the existing
20 metre road allowance, except at intersections
where additional road allowance width may be
need to provide vehicular turning lanes;
(e)
to provide clearer direction for land use within
the lands covered by the Northeast Quadrant
Development Guidelines,
(i) further its objective of transforming Kingston
Road into a "mainstreet" for Pickering by
requiring the placement of buildings to
provide a strong and identifiable urban edge,
the construction of some multi-storey
buildings, and the provision of safe and
convenient pedestrian access; accordingly,
for the lands designated Mixed Use Areas -
Mixed Corridor, City Council shall require,
(A) buildings to be located close to the
street edge, with the minimum
specified percentage of their front walls
required to be located within build-to-
zones to be established in the
implementing zoning by-laws for each
site;
(B) all buildings to be a minimum of two
storeys in height;
(C) commercial development to provide
second storey functional floor space,
with the minimum percentage of their
gross floor area to be provided in second
(or higher) storeys to be established in
the implementing zoning by-laws for
each project;
(ii) despite Table 10* of Chapter Three, establish
a maximum residential density of 55 units per
net hectare for lands located within the area
governed by the Northeast Quadrant
Development Guidelines that are designated
Urban Residential - Medium Density, in light
of their location abutting lands developed as
low density development;
(iii) despite 11.8(d)(ii) above, and Table 10* of
Chapter Three, permit residential development
below the minimum residential density of
30 units per net hectare for lands on the south
side of Sheppard Avenue;
(iv) require new development to establish
buildings on Whites Road and Sheppard
Avenue close to the street edge, with the front
doors facing the street, with a specified
percentage of their front walls required to be
located within build-to-zones to be
established in the implementing zoning
by-law for this site; ,
(v) restrict the height of the Sheppard Avenue
elevation of new dwellings fronting Sheppard
Avenue to a maximum of two storeys;
(vi) require a minimum of four functional storeys
for the Whites Road elevations of new
dwellings fronting Whites Road;
*
Table 10 is attached to this Amendment for information purposes only; it does not
constitute part of the amendment.
Appendix I to Report to Council PD 23-02
Page 3
107
Potential Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan - Northeast Quadrant Area
*
(vii) recognize the existing low density
development on Sheppard Avenue, and to this
end, require the design of new residential or
commercial development to be compatible
with existing development with respect to
such matters as building heights, yard
setbacks, building orientation and massing,
access to sunlight, and privacy;
(vi) despite sections 3.6(b)*, 3.9(b)* and 15.38*,
and Tables 5* and 9* of Chapter 3, prohibit
the development of any new gas bars,
automobile service stations, or car washes for
lands designated Mixed Used Area - Mixed
Corridors or Urban Residential - Medium
Density;
(f)
to provide clearer direction for transportation
matters within and around the lands covered by the
Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines,
(i) support shared access points between
properties along Kingston Road, in
consultation with the Region of Durham;
(ii) endeavour to secure with the approval of the
Ministry of Transportation and the Region of
Durham, in consultation with the affected
landowners(s), a signalized intersection for a
future collector road opposite the Highway
401 westbound on/off ramp;
(iii) despite Section 4.10(c)(i)* and in accordance
with Section 4.11(a)*, reduce the width of the
future collector road to 10 metres, to the
satisfaction of the City;
(iv) restrict vehicular access from Whites Road to
the property located at the south-east corner
of Whites Road and Sheppard Avenue, in the
future, to right-in/ right-out turns only
through the installment of a centre median
down Whites Road between Sheppard Avenue
and Dunfair Street;
(v) promote the reduction of traffic speeds and
improvement of pedestrian safety along
Sheppard Avenue by implementing pavement
markings and other measures, and
considering "traffic-calming" techniques
following the adoption of a City policy;
(vi) require pedestrian access, by means of
easements, from Delta Boulevard and from
the future collector road through the old
Dunbarton School site to Sheppard Avenue;
(vii) require vehicular and pedestrian access, by
means of easements, from Delta Boulevard to
Whites Road;;
(viii) require easements to connect the old
Dunbarton School site to the Mixed Corridor
lands to the east;
(ix) require easements across the lands located
south of Kingston Road and west of Highway
401 westbound on/off ramp in order to
provide access to Delta Boulevard;
Sections 3.6(b), 3,9(b), 14. 1 0 (c) (i), 14.11(a), and 15.38, and Tables 5 and 9 are
attached to this Amendment for information purposes' only; they does not
constitute part of the Amendment.
Ins
Appendix I to Report to Council PD 23-02
Page 4
Potential Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan - Northeast Quadrant Area
(h)
(g)
to provide clearer direction for environmental and
stormwater management matters respecting the
Amberlea Creek tributary that flows through lands
covered by the Northeast Quadrant Development
Guidelines,
(i) support the principle of piping the Amberlea
Creek tributary that flows through the
Northeast Quadrant lands and, at the same
time, recognizing the interests of landowners
within the Northeast Quadrant on whose
lands Amberlea Creek tributary flows to pipe
that tributary, and the interests of the Toronto
and Region Conservation Authority to
maintain the Amberlea Creek tributary
through the Northeast Quadrant lands as an
open and buffered creek channel;
(ii) require any developer of lands within the
Northeast Quadrant proposing to pipe or
relocated the Amberlea Creek tributary to:
(A) submit an environmental/
stormwater management report, to the
satisfaction of the City and the Toronto
and Region Conservation Authority,
which report must demonstrate a
strategy resulting in a significant net
environmental benefit to the watershed
if justifying piping of the creek;
(B) obtain appropriate approvals and
permits from public review agencies;
and
(C) satisfy any required compensation
under the Fisheries Act; and
(iii) ensure that development proposals are
undertaken in a manner that does not
adversely impact downstream water quality
and quantity through the use of on-site
controls and/or financial contributions to a
downstream stormwater facility if necessary;
and
to provide additional direction on implementation
matters for lands covered by the Northeast
Quadrant Development Guidelines,
(i) through the use of the holding provisions of
the Planning Act, require where necessary,
proponents to enter into agreements with the
City, Region and other agencies as
appropriate, respecting various development
related matters including but not limited to:
the construction of a collector road across
their lands to the City's satisfaction and
conveying the road to the City upon
completion; entering into cost sharing
agreements between each other where mutual
shared access is necessary; providing or
exchanging easements over lands where
necessary; payment of study costs; and
providing contributions to the cost of a
downstream stormwater management facility,
if necessary."
4. Delete in its entirety, section 3.16, Urban Study Area: Old Dunbarton
School policies, which policies identify that City Council shall,
following the results of an appropriate lan~ use, transportation and
design study, establish appropriate land use designations and policies
for the subject lands, by amendment.
0055 Reference.
City-initiated
Review of the Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines
May 3.2002
Appendix I to Report to Council PD 23-02
Page 5
109
Potential Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan - Northeast Quadrant Area
Selected Policy Extracts from the Pickering Official Plan
Referred to in the Potential Amendment
Provided for Information Purposes Only - Not Part of Potential Amendment
f=~E:~~~r==~;;;~~~-=:=~::.:....l
¡ ~ (Restrictions and limitations on the uses pennissible, arising from other ¡
I........ ..........,......... ..................... ........................ ,¡................................P..?~.~~~~..?!.~~~..~~.~.~?.~~~.~.~..~~.!,~,~~~!:'.J~..~g.~~~8..~.Y.: ~,~~~.:t......................... ......1
¡ Local Nodes ! Residential; I
¡ ¡ Retailing of goods and services generally serving the needs of the ¡
surrounding neighbourhoods;
1 I Offices and restaurants; I
I I Community, cultural and recreational uses. I
¡..........................................................................¡,....................................................................................................................................."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""1
¡ Community Nodes ¡ All uses permissible in Local Nodes, at a larger scale and intensity, ¡
[..."""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'..........1... ~.~,~..~.~:.~~..~..~.~~.~~~~..~~~,~ :............................................ """""""""""""""'" ...................................... ....... .......J
¡ Mixed Corridors ¡ All uses permissible in Local Nodes and Community Nodes, at a ¡
I ¡ scale and intensity equivalent to Community Nodes; I
[..................... ..................... ....................... .......~...~.~.~.~~~~..~.~.::..~.~~..~.~ ~~.~~.~.~.~~..~.~~.~.:....... ............... .......................... ................. ......................... .............. ......1
¡ Downtown Core i All uses permissible in Local Nodes and Community Nodes, at the ¡
¡¡greatest scale and intensity in the City, serving City-wide and regional ¡
1 1 levels;
I I Special purpose commercial uses. I
;..........................................................................:.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................
3.6
City Council,
(a) ...;
(b) may zone lands designated Mixed Use Areas for one or more
purposes as set out in Table 5, and in so doing will apply appropriate
performance standards, restrictions and provisions, including those set
out in Table 6;
110
Appendix I to Report to Council PD 23-02
Page 6
Potential Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan - Northeast Quadrant Area
Selected Policy Extracts from the Pickering Official Plan
Referred to in the Potential Amendment
Provided for Infonnation Purposes Only - Not Part of Potential Amendment
,.............,.........................,.....................................................................................................................................................................................................................,...........,.....,..................................
. ,
. .
. ,
. ,
. ,
¡ TABLE 6 ¡
. ,
. ,
, ,
¡""""""""""""""""""""""""1""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""T"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""Y""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""]
i Mixed Use i Maximum and Minimum ¡ Maximum Gross ¡ Maximum i
¡ Areas ¡ Net Residential Density ¡ Leasable Floorspace for ¡ Floorspace Index ¡
¡ Subcategory ¡ (in dwellings per hectare) ¡ the Retailing of Goods ¡ (total building ¡
¡ ¡ ¡ and Services ¡ fIoorspace divided i
¡ j I (in square metres) I by total lot area) j
(...............................................¡.............................................................................................¡...................................................................""""""""""ý""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""]
i Local Nodes ¡ over 30 and up to and i up to and including 10,000 i up to and including ¡
I.................................................I....~.~.~,~~~~~~...~.~......................................................1.......................................................................................l...=~.~..~=.~.................................................
¡ Community ¡ over 80 and up to and ¡ up to and including 20,000 ¡ up to and including ¡
I... ~~,~~,~........................i....~.~.~.~,~~~~~..~~~...................................................1........................................................ ............................... ¡...=~.~ ..~.~.~................... ........... ...................
i Mixed ¡ over 30 and up to and ¡ determined by site-specific ¡ up to and including ¡
I.... ~ ~,~,~~~.~.~~............ ...I....~.~.~.~.~ ~~~~..~~~.. ............... ............... ............. ..... ,!... ~.~ ~~~~.................... .............................. .............. t...=~.~..~.~,~,.......... ........ ..............................!
i Downtown i over 80 and up to and ¡ up to and including 300,000 ¡ up to and including ¡
L.~. ~,~,~ .............................J...~.~ ~,~~~~~~..~~~................................... ........ ....... J......................................... ............. """""""" ................l...~~.~..~=.~................. "" .............................!
r:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;:::::::::::::::::::::::::::!~~~:I:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::1
i i Permissible Uses (Restrictions and i
¡ Designation llimitation~ ?n the u~es penniss.ible, arisin¥ fro~ ¡
¡ ¡ other policies of thiS Plan, WIll be detaIled In ¡
¡ ¡ zoning by-laws.) ¡
r...................................................................t........................................................................................................................................¡
¡ Urban Residential i Residential uses, home occupations, limited i
¡ Areas i offices serving the area, and limited i
I I retailing of goods and services serving the I
, i area; i
I I Community, cultural and recreational uses; !
¡ i Compatible employment uses, and ¡
¡ ¡ compatible special purpose commercial ¡
l.........................................................;.........L.~~.~~..~.~:.~~..~~.~..~~,~,~:.."...................................................................I
3.9
City Council,
(a) ...;
(b) may zone lands designated Urban Residential Areas for one or more
purposes as set out in Table 9, and in so doing will apply appropriate
performance standards, restrictions and provisions, including those set out
in Table 10;
r"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""TÄBï::Ë"iÕ""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'l
(""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""1""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'1
! R .d . I Ar ¡ Maximum and Minimum ¡
¡ eSl entia ea ¡ N R .d . I D . ¡
¡ S b ¡ et eSl entia enslty i
, u category '(' d II' h)'
f"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""'f"""~'~"""~.~....~~~~...~ ~.~..~.~~.......~~.~.~,~.~................... ......1
~... ~:. ..~. ~ .~.~. ~~. .~,~~................... ...t... :.~..~.~.. ~ ~~.. ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~~.~.. ~~..................................................../
~.. .~. ~ ~.~. ~ ~.. ~~. ~ ~ .~.~. ~~.~......... t... ~ ~.~. ~.. ~ ~.. :.~.~.. :.~.. ~.~ , :~ ~ ..~.~.~.~ ~~~.~.. .~.~ ................1
L ~ ~.~ ~..~. ~.~~, ~ ~ ..~.~ ~...................1... ~ ~.~.~.. ~~.. :.~.~..:~.. ~.~.. ~~ ~ ..~.~ .~.~.~ ~ ~~ ~. ~ ~.~..............I
Appendix I to Report to Council PD 23-02
Page 7
111
Potential Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan - Northeast Quadrant Area
Selected Policy Extracts from the Pickering Official Plan
Referred to in the Potential Amendment
Provided for Information Purposes Only - Not Part of Potential Amendment
4.10
City Council shall,
(a) ...;
(b) ...;,
(c) recognize the following municipal road categories, wherein,
(i) Collector Roads: generally provide access to individual
properties, to local roads, to other collector roads and to Type C
arterial roads; carry greater volumes of traffic than local roads,
including automobiles, pedestrians, bicycles and transit; and
generally have a right-of-way width ranging from 20 to 22
metres; and
4.11
Despite section 4.10, City Council may,
(a) vary road right-of-way widths, and related road category intersection
criteria, for roads under its jurisdiction and which are not
designated on Map 'B' of the Durham Regional Official Plan, either
upward or downward, without amendment to this Plan, where
circumstances warrant such action, including,
(i) at intersections to improve sight-lines, accommodate turning
movements, and provide for transit stops;
(ii) for traffic calming purposes, and to provide for the installation,
where warranted, of traffic circles and other similar features;
(iii)where rear yard lanes are provided;
(iv) to avoid providing excessively wide roads or boulevards; and
(v) to improve streetscapes and/or reduce the crossing distance
between buildings and activities on opposite sides of a street;
and
15.38
Within the urban area or within a rural hamlet, City Council may
approve a site specific zoning by-law with appropriate provisions and
restrictions, to permit a retail gasoline outlet in any land use
designation except Open Space - Natural Areas, provided,
(a) the retail gasoline outlet maintains the goals, objectives and
policies of this Plan;
(b) the retail gasoline outlet obtains access from an arterial road as
identified on Schedule II;
(c) the retail gasoline outlet is not located adjacent to or opposite a
school;
(d) the number of retail gasoline outlets is limited to a maximum of
two outlets within 100 metres of any intersection; and
(e) the retail gasoline outlet will not adversely affect the safe and
convenient movement of pedestrian and vehicular traffic.
112
SCHEDULE IAI
,',
--, '-----.
0
I I
, I
': "
t-
O:::
0
0...
0:::
«
l.L
EXTRACT FROM
SCHEDULE I TO THE
PICKERING
0 FFI CIAL PLAN
LAND USE STRUCTURE
OPEN SPACE SYSTEM
EMPLOYMENT AREAS FREEWAYS AND MAJOR UTILITIES
~ PRESTIGE EMPLOYMENT ~ CONTROLLED ACCESS AREAS
EDITION 2
NATURAL AREAS
Ii"nhI ACTIVE RECREATIONAL
rzELd AREAS
~ MARINA AREAS
MIXED USE AREAS
URBAN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OTHER DESIGNATIONS
LOW DENSITY AREAS EJ'r'i', URBAN STUDY AREAS
~ MEDIUM DENSITY AREAS
_w-
LOCAL NODES
Cm'
OF
PICK...,NG
~ COMMUNITY NODES
~ MIXED CORRIDORS
SHEET 1 OF 3
Cm' OF PICKE.'NG
"'-"'NINO'" DEVELOPMENT DEP"""'ENT
0 .EPTE..E.. 2DOG
.:t1':, '=' =-.. ~~~ ;:;. ~~mu:n~ ~ t::i,
113
(
\
\
~
(t
0
(t
(t
<{
LL
-------------~- ------------------------ -
\ L.L..
\
. .
P RAVE.
ADD NEW
COLLECTOR ROAD
~H
')
\
'--.
PI CKERIN G
OFFICIAL PLAN
EDmON2
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
EXIII11NG
FU11IIE
-
FREEWAYS
.--.
l'YPE A ARTERIAL Ro.t.DS
- l'YPE B ARTERIAL ROADS . - - .
- l'YPE C ARTERIAL ROADS . - - .
-
COLLECTOR ROADS
.--.
LOCAL ROADS
0
FREEWAY INTERCHANGES
()
RAILWAYS
~
GO RAIL
...... f+I-
-
-
TRANSIT SPINES
cnv",,- l'
...-----
- -. .-,
, - - - - "'- . ... - - - - -
---..--------..... "
180
SCHEDULE IAI
0
0
a::
~
z
«
CD
f-
a::
0
0..
a::
«
LL
REDESIGNATE FROM 'URBAN RESIDENTIAL
AREAS-LOW DENSITY AREAS' TO 'URBAN
RESIDENTIAL AREAS-MEDIUM DENSITY AREAS'
----------------
EXTRACT FROM
SCHEDULE ITO THE
PI CKERIN G
0 FFI CIAL PLAN
LAND USE STRUCfURE
OPEN SPACE SYSTEM
EMPLOYMENT AREAS FREEWAYS AND MAJOR UTILITIES
~ PRESTIGE EMPLOYMENT ~ CONTROLLED ACCESS AREAS
NATURAL AREAS
I"'fi'ZI ACTIVE RECREATIONAL
~ AREAS
~ MARINA AREAS
URBAN RESIDENTIAL AREAS OTHER DESIGNATIONS
LOW DENSITY AREAS ~~ URBAN STUDY AREAS
~ MEDIUM DENSITY AREAS
EDmON2
-.-
MIXED USE AREAS
LOCAL NODES
CnY
OF
PICKER...,
~ COMMUNITY NODES
~ MIXED CORRIDORS
SHEET 1 OF 3
CITY OF PICIŒRtNC
PLANNINe '" DEVELOPMÐ<T DEPARnÆNT
0 SEPTEW"". '000
"...-.......""'" OF""", OF"".......... --......-
MUST""""'""""""", -"" """" """""-US_"""",",
114
APPENDIX II TO
REPORT NUMBER PD 23-02
DRAFT DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES FOR
THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT
1.15
Woodlands Neighbourhood
Section F1
Northeast Quadrant
DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES
1:1 () Il. W
W ~
It U I/)
U 0
W 0: 0:
I: w
:¡: ~
~ II)
"fit.
U
::J
0:
Il.
"§PRUCE
:¡:
F
;u
!J
w
~
0:
()
Iz
::J
0
~
w
g ROUGE HILL
0
0:
w
~
0:
0
TOYNEVALE
ROAD
I-
Z
I-
Z
W
u
1:1
0
1,16
Draft Northeast Quadrant
Development Guidelines - Table of Contents
Sections
Fl.1 General Description
Fl.2 Development Framework
Fl.3 Urban Design Objectives
F1.4 Urban Design Guidelines
F1.5 Transportation
F1.6 Stormwater
F1.7 Implementation
F1.8 Summary
Figure 1
This Draft Guideline was prepared for
discussion purposes, May 3, 2002
Page
1
2
2
3
13
14
15
16
17
1,1'7
Draft Northeast Quadrant
Development Guidelines
F1.1
General Description
The revised Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines apply to lands generally located
between Kingston Road and Sheppard Avenue, east of Whites Road, and for lands located
at the southwest corner of Dunfair Street and Whites Road. In addition, through the review
that led to these Guidelines, a parcel of land located at the southwest corner of Kingston
Road and Highway 401 on/off ramp was added (see attached Figure A - tertiary plan).
The previous Development Guidelines were formulated through a larger review of the land
use policies in the Highway No.2 - Whites Road Northeast Quadrant Study initiated by
Pickering in the late 1980's. In 1990, Pickering Council approved Development Guidelines
for the Northeast Quadrant. The Guidelines contemplated a high, intensity of mixed-use
development, with substantial underground parking. An internal residential
neighbourhood, focused around a ring road with an interior linear park was illustrated.
Additional commercial and office, with office-support commercial was proposed for the
Kingston Road and Whites Road frontages. .
Recently, there has been significant market interest throughout the quadrant but landowners
are requesting that changes to specific elements of the current Guidelines be made.
Accordingly, City staff in collaboration with the consulting firms of TSH Associates,
Schollen & Company Inc., and Markson Borooah Hodgson Architects, major landowners
within the Northeast Quadrant Area, commenced a review of the Northeast Quadrant
Development Guidelines.
As background to these development guidelines the following reports were prepared for the
City of Pickering: the Kingston Road - Whites Road Northeast Quadrant Transportation
Study, Phase 1 Final Report, dated September, 2001, prepared by TSH Associates; the
Kingston Road - Whites Road Northeast Quadrant Transportåtion Study, Phase 2 Final
Report, dated May, 2002, prepared by TSH Associates; and the Amberlea Creek Northeast
Quadrant - Assessment of Alternatives, dated September, 2001, prepared by Schollen &
Company Inc.
F1.2
Development Framework
The Northeast Quadrant is an important focal point in the City of Pickering and acts as a
'gateway' for the planned Seaton Community. This intersection brings together access to
and from the 401, downtown Pickering to the east and the planned Seaton Community to
the north. The visual character of this intersection should serve to substantiate the role of a
'gateway' and shift the focus from the present highway commercial developments presently
positioned at the street corners.
It is recognized that the spatial and land use characteristics of the three main roads
bounding the study lands are quite different, and correspondingly urban design concepts
are proposed and elaborated for each in section F1.5.
1.18
Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines (May 3, 2002)
F1.3
Northeast Quadrant Objectives
Page 2
The development of lands affected by the Development Guidelines will strive to
achieve the urban design objectives of chapter 9 - "Community Design", Chapter
13 - "Detailed Design Considerations", and the Kingston Road Corridor Urban
Design Development Guidelines of the Official Plan. It is the intent of these
guidelines to both further those objectives and embellish the ones listed below:
------/'.-
1. To provide a quality urban image by
encouraging the placement of high quality
buildings located to define the street edge.
2. To provide a quality urban image by
encouraging a harmonized and complementary
landscape treatment throughout the
Northeast Quadrant.
3. To provide a quality urban image by
encouraging a coordinated effort to improving the streetscape that includes
pedestrian oriented furnishings and other appropriate improvements.
AN AmACTNE COR tiER
CRV,TEí A TDCAL 1'D/NT
4. To provide a safe, pleasant,
comfortable and convenient environment
supporting all modes of travel
including bicycle, pedestrian and
vehicular traffic.
5. To minimize views to large parking
areas by utilizing appropriate principles
of site planning and street edge
treatment.
6. To ensure that new development is
compatible with existing development
while allowing appropriate evolution
of this area.
7. To recognize the need for efficient vehicular movement through and within
this area including access to individual properties.
8. To recognize and support all efforts to address the stormwater management
issues facing this area and to work cooperatively with all agencies towards a
suitable resolution of issues.
119
Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines (May 3, 2002)
Page 3
F1.4 Urban Design Guidelines
The following guidelines have been developed to help meet the above stated
objectives.
F1.4.1
Commercial Development Proposals
In reviewing any commercial development proposals fronting Whites Road or
Kingston Road:
1.0
Building Placement:
. Buildings should be located close to the
street with no parki ng between the
buildings and the street.
. This will be implemented by the
establishment of provisions within the
zoning by-law creating a build to zone;
along Kingston Road 40% of its length
will contain the front walls of buildings
and 30% of the build to zone's length
will contain the front walls of buildings
along Whites Road. Where the configuration
of a property makes this requirement onerous, special considerations can be
made.
Building Appearance:
. Buildings shall be constructed
with heights greater than one
storey with building height
not less than 6.5 metres.
. A minimum amount of
functional second storey floor
space will be required for
each development in the
quadrant, with a ratio established
in each implementing zoning
bylaw.
. Development will employ
innovative architectural designs COMMERCIÀL
utilizing high quality materials ROAD FRONTAGE
to humanize the street, ,
mitigate the effects of traffic, and present an attractive frontage along public
roads.' . .
iè
2.0
.......--- ./~
120
Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines (May 3, 2002)
Page 4
. No blank walls shall be exposed to public right of ways.
. Buildings that front the street should be constructed with street level
windows and entrances to buildings directly off of the public right.
. Covered entries in order to provide points of refuge to pedestrians and define
entry points shall be provided at all public entrances.
. A minimum of 50% glazing will be required on the
facades facing Kingston Road where possible.
. Pedestrian entry doors facing Kingston Road will be
required regardless of whether these are the main
entry points.
//
3.0
Rooftop Equipment
. All mechanical equipment must be
adequately screened and all commercial
buildings should contain their rooftop
mechanical equipment either in small
rooftop elements or under roof profi les.
4.0
Parking:
. Parking areas will be required to
be attractively buffered from publ ic
rights-of-way through the appropriate
layout of plant and landscape
materials.
. Parking areas shall be set back a
minimum of 3.0 metres from adjacent
residential development.
. The majority of parking shall be
provided at the rear of the site
behind the main buildings, and at
the side.
'STREET
121
Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines (May 3, 2002)
. Landscape islands a minimum of
3.0 metres in width shall be required at
the ends of each parking row.
. Parking between building façade and
streetline is discouraged.
. Where appropriate, bicycle lock ups
shall be provided for employees and
patrons.
6.0
Loading & Services:
. All loading and service areas should be
located away from street frontages and
effectively screened.
Page 5
5.0
Road Boulevards:
. The Ki ngston Road and
Whites Road frontage's will
be urbanized and
landscaped appropriately as
part of any development
proposal. The City may
assist in implementation costs
for certain improvement
elements.
~
122
Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines (May 3, 2002)
10.0 Internal Public Lane
. Internal access for vehicular traffic and pedestrians
to other properties in the Northeast Quadrant shall
be provided by a publicly owned and maintained
lane, aligned as indicated in Access Concept E,
attached as Figure 1, of approximately 10 metres
7.0
8.0
9.0
Page 6
Odour Control:
. For all restaurant uses, restaurant cooking
ventilation systems shall incorporate ecologizer,
water wash, ultraviolet or other equivalent odour
extraction mechanisms sufficient to ensure that
the resulting exhaust is substantially odour free
and will not effect surrounding residents.
Drive-Thru Facilities:
. Drive-thru facilities shall be located
such that the pick up window or
stacking spaces are not situated
between the front wall of a building
and Kingston Road or Whites Road.
. Drive-thru facilities should provide
a minimum of 8 automobile
stacking spaces before the order
board and a minimum of 4
automobile staking spaces between
the order board and the pick-up
window.
111 STR~~T OUT
OR 1l1IERAAL ~£
","Ic.1<, uP
\/Vni'ti'ov./
Vehicular Access:
~IpEWf,L~
.
Pedestrian and vehicular conflict points
should be minimized and pedestrians
should be given priority at crossings by
treating the ground plane with textured
asphalt or pavers.
. Driveways and parking areas located
between streetl i ne and the front of the
building are discouraged.
UJti :Uc.T
"~E ,
==
1'J.I\IE W,A.'
1,0
85m
solJTH rè.
123
Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines (May 3, 2002)
Page 7
in width, generally consisting of a 1.0 metre north boulevard, 8.5 metre
pavement, including curbs gutter and storm sewer and a 0.5 metre south
boulevard. A publicly accessible sidewalk shall be located on private
property on the south side of the lane.
11.0 Conditions Abutting Creek
----- .-
.- .-,--- .- -----------'-------- --=~~-~,~~~--
.--..---------
---,-' '
..............-----
tOM..
40 MA.
12.0 Pedestrian Environment:
. Clearly articulated pedestrian access
from the publ ic right of way to the entry
of all buildings will be provided.
. Where possible a minimum landscape
strip of 3.0 metres will be required
along building fr.ontages to allow .for
comfortable pedestrian circulation and
adequate landscaping and site furnishings
to be integrated into these areas.
. In large parking areas landscaped
pedestrian walkways shall be provided
from the parking area to the main entry.
.
No buildings or structures shall
be permitted within 10 metres of
the stream corridor of the
Amberlea Creek tributary. If
possible, this area adjacent to the
creek should be landscaped in a
manner that is sensitive to the
natural processes of the stream,
unless the stream is piped or
currently channelized.
---",
..".-
13.0 Storage:
. Garbage and recycling enclosures for commercial development will be fully
enclosed in roofed structures and located towards the rear of the properties.
. Garbage and recycling enclosures will be
required to be constructed of materials
matching or complementary to that of the
buildings.
. I
J .
I
rll.--:-J
4')¡Rþ\G,£ E1-\c.lOSUl1.£ AT"'R€$;R
1?4
Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines (May 3, 2002)
Page 8
. Garbage and recycling storage can also be handled interior to the building
itself.
. Any outdoor storage shall be completely screened within a structure.
14.0
Landscaping:
//
. All areas not required for building,
storage, servicing, or parking shall
be landscaped.
. Front yard landscape areas should
be maximized by minimizing access
points and reducing the amount of
paved area at the front of buildings.
. A continuous landscape connection
between the building front and the
street boulevard is preferred.
. Berms are not considered appropriate
along the frontage of a commercial
property.
. As the percentage of front yard landscaping decreases
quality of landscaping throughout the site shall increase.
the intensity and
15.0
Buffers:
. Adequate and attractive buffering between
commercial and residential development
shall be required; landscape elements
including fencing may be utilized
c.O""""ERc..'^L
1!!UJ:1:
TA.'IQC.It\ IS
1Œ:"',VE'",.,.J.\L
16.0 Site Furniture:
. Bicycle lock-up areas and trash receptacles
will be integrated into development sites in convenient locations and shown
on site plans.
.
Attractive exterior seating
areas or courtyards
that include benches,
bicycle lock ups and
garbage receptacles and
are safely removed
from vehicular routes
will be encouraged.
rrnmffiJ
! ~\ (J.lI<J~~ I
1?-
.. ~
--.------,
Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines (May 3, 2002)
Page 9
17.0 Signage:
. Site plan applications should identify sign details including location and size.
1411'1
",,\1\
Mtl
~~)
ITIl@
n
. . Fascia signs should be designed
to be integral with the buildings
façade.
. Signage for second storey businesses
should be located on a sign
directory near the main entry.
. Ground signs are preferred over
pole or pylon signs.
18.0 Lighting:
. Lighting design should complement the
design of the development.
. Exterior lighting shall not spillover onto
adjacent properties or streets.
. Lighting shall be downcast to avoid
excessive light pollution.
. Lighting and light standards in public
areas including parking lots should relate
to the pedestrian and be limited to a
height of 6.0 metres.
19.0 Tree Preservation
. Established trees that provide significant buffering or aesthetic contributions
to the neighbourhood should be considered for preservation and protected
during construction. Tree preservation details will be required to be
submitted for the City's review.
20.0 'Former' Dunbarton School Site and lands to East
. Any buildings located in the northern portion of the sites shall include a
treatment of the north facing façade that presents a building face to Sheppard
Avenue that refleCts a residential character. '
l?G
Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines (May 3, 2002)
Page 10
F1.4.2
Residential Development Proposals
In reviewing residential development proposals:
For the proposed residential development, at the south-east corner of
Whites Road and Sheppard Avenue, buildings shall be located close to the
street, with parking provided at the rear.
1.
New residential development shall be integrated into the area in a manner
that is both respectful of the character of the existing neighborhood and
serves as an interface between this area and the surrounding lands.
2.
AN ATIRACTIVE CORNER
C'R~TEí A "tOCAL POINT
3.
The south-east corner of
Sheppard Avenue and Whites
Road shall act as a transition
area between the higher
buildings on Whites Road and
the lower buildings on Sheppard
Avenue. This corner should be
treated as an important focal
pointl and include landscape
and hardscape treatment to
create an identifiable amenity
areal preferably including pedestrian
connections into the site.
New residential development along Sheppard Avenue shall include no more
than four units that are attached before providing a break between building
masses.
4.
5.
The height of residential units
along Sheppard Avenue shall be
restricted to two storeys on the
front elevation facing Sheppard
Avenue, and shall include facades
that are mostly brick on all sides
facing the public right of way.
5HEPi"ARt7 A\/E.
2. ~"To~e'l
,/-/
-- .....-/
, - -..-.,- --- -'- -.- . _..:...:...;--:-:-------
--'--.-.-. ,-
4UM\n
..,....x.
4ulirrs.
MÀ'I(.
1?7
Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines (May 3, 2002)
Page 12
11.
A public pedestrian link which runs
north south from the end of Delta Blvd
connecting to the sidewalk on the
south side of Sheppard Avenue, and
includes up-graded landscape treatment
and a minimum 2.0 metre wide
sidewalk, shall be included as an
easement for pedestrian access granted
to the City.
12.
Allowance for comfortable and convenient
pedestrian movement from areas north
and west of this location to destinations
to the south shall ~e integrated into t~e site layout.
'"1
. '\ -.J
..«
.' I-
:' 'I"L
. ~
'þ.
, V"
, l~
13.
No buildings or structures shall be permitted within 10 metres of the stream
corridor of the Amberlea Creek tributary. If possible, this area adjacent to the
creek should be landscaped in a manner that is sensitive to the natural
processes of the stream, unless the stream is ~:,.;.~. ~-",
:::--...,,~
piped. ~~" %
14.
Any building mounted utility boxes including
telephone and hydro shall be enclosed
within or behind a screening device, which
generally matches the materials used in the
building façade construction.
15.
Any free standing utility boxes including
hydro, telephone, etc. shall be enclosed
within screening devices designed to match or complement the buildings.
STAIfl:S c.A\ï
.1-1 "VlAc.~
16.
All stairs, which are required on building
facades, shall be cast in place and not pre-
cast units.
17.
The grade of the site along the Whites
Road frontage shall be raised so that any
proposed dwelling's front entry is at or
above the grade of the sidewalk on Whites
Road.
~
D'
~,
1?8
--------.. -
Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines (May 3, 2002)
New residential development along
Whites Road shall be a minimum four
functional storeys on the side of the
building facing Whites Road, and of
mostly brick facades on all sides facing
the public right of way.
.---.
6.
::.--
W~ITE\ 1«>"17
4 <;TORE.'l
7.
Architectural detailing and stepping the
footprint of the front and rear facades
shall be utilized to avoid the appearance
of long flat walls.
Page 11
Ul'tþULATINú t-OOT~INT
c' ¡:'EÀn~ It\ìE"RE\T
-
8.
A new sidewalk shall be constructed along the south side of Sheppard
Avenue.
9.
A vegetative buffer and a generous
sideyard width will be required along
the eastern property line separating any
proposed residential development at the
south-east corner of Wh ites Road and
Sheppard Avenue from the existing
neighbourhood.
~
I
1 'BUFFE1< ~
I
Attractive and appropriate landscaping
will be required both on the perimeters
of the development facing the streets and interior to the site.
10.
1?9
Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines (May 3, 2002)
Page 13
18.
Garbage and recyclable material shall be
handled internally within each dwelling unit
(including its garage), and not within separate
buildings or centralized areas.
.; '..
19.
Lighting design should complement the design
of the development, shall not spillover into
adjacent properties or streets, and shall be
downcast to avoid excessive light pollution.
." "
20.
For residential development along
Whites Road and Sheppard Avenue,
the front entrance wi II face the publ ic
streets.
F1.5
Transportation
The three primary roads .surrounding the Quadrant are Kingston Road, Whites Road
and Sheppard Avenue. All are arterial roads that perform an important traffic
function in the City. As lands are developed along these roads, this function must
be maintained. Accordingly, the number and spacing of new access points to
Kingston Road, Whites Road and Sheppard Avenue will be carefully reviewed by
City and/or Regional staff. However, no through road is permitted to connect
Delta Boulevard to Sheppard Avenue or the Highway 401 westbound on/off ramp
to Sheppard Avenue.
It is anticipated that Kingston Road and Whites Road will be widened to six lanes
plus ,auxiliary turn lanes in the future, and upgraded to standard urban cross-sections
with curbs, gutters and sidewalks.
Access Concept E, attached as Figure 1, identifies the approximate alignment of a
proposed east-west road that is proposed to connect Delta Boulevard with the
Kingston Road/Highway 401 westbound on/off ramp. Access to Kingston Road will
occur at points indicated by Access Concept E, with signalized intersections along
130
Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines (May 3, 2002)
Page 14
Kingston Road occurring at the 401 westbound on/off ramp, Delta Boulevard and
Whites Road. The City of Pickering acknowledges and advises landowners and
developers that the intersection of Kingston Road and the Highway 401 westbound
on/off ramp is under the sole jurisdiction of the Ministry of Transportation. Further,
the City acknowledges and advises landowners and developers that remaining
access locations along Kingston Road and Whites Road are under the sole
jurisdiction of the Region of Durham, and access permissions may change over time
from full access to restricted access as traffic and safety conditions warrant.
A single access onto Sheppard Avenue from the new residential development,
located at the south-east corner of Whites Road and Sheppard Avenue, is supported.
Despite the access restrictions to Sheppard Avenue, shown on Figure 1,
Access Concept E, for a"ny new residential' development proposals located along
Sheppard Avenue east of the residential development proposed at the south-east
corner of Whites Road and Sheppard Avenue, the City will consider permitting
selected additional accesses.
As a condition of development, landowners will be required to enter into
development agreements to construct, at their cost, the new collector road, to the
City's satisfaction. Additionally, the City will support all opportunities for shared
access from abutting private property to public streets as well as coordinated
internal access, between private properties, and will require the granting of
easements in favour of neighbouring landowners and/or the City if deemed
necessary. Where the new collector road intersects with Kingston Road opposite
the Kingston Road/Highway 401 westbound on/off ramp, the proponent of
development on those lands shall require approval of the entrance configuration
from the Ministry of Transportation in consultation with the Region of Durham, and
the City, prior to consideration by Council of any zoning by-law amendment
application for those lands. In the event the intersection is not approved, alternative
access to Kingston Road would be required.
F 1.6 Stormwater
The Amberlea Creek Northeast Quadrant - Assessment of Alternatives study,
prepared by Scholl en & Company Inc., identifies an option for a storm sewer
extension of the existing system south of Sheppard Avenue to the Highway 401
westbound on/off ramp. The City supports the piping of the existing tributary of
Amberlea Creek, which traverses the Northeast Quadrant, as an integral component
of a stormwater management system that i ncl udes a storm sewer system and a
stormwater management pond. The stormwater facility is required to control both
quality and quantity stormwater. A substantial net benefit to the downstream
environment must be demonstrated in order to warrant consideration of piping the
tributary.
131
Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines (May 3, 2002)
Page 15
lands located east of the Bayfair Baptist Church are the preferred location for a
stormwater management facility. Detailed siting, engineering and grading plans are
required to assess the feasibility of, and design options for, a storwmwater
management pond (reference may be made to the Assessment of Alternatives study
for additional stormwater management details available to date).
If the storm water management facility is approved, the City will be requiring
proponents of development applications within the Northeast Quadrant and lands
currently draining into the reach of the Amberlea Creek tributary to pay a
proportionate share for the detailed design work and costs of piping the creek, in
addition to a share of the total cost of implementation of the proposed
Amberlea Creek stormwater management pond.
In the event that approvals are not granted for the stormwater pond, or development
proceeds ahead of construction of the pond, developers will be required to install
quality and quantity control devices and to enter into agreements with the City to
cost share future stormwater works. Further, in the event approvals from the
Toronto Region Conservation Authority, Ministry of Natural Resources, and the
Department of Fisheries are not granted to pipe the creek, the landowners shall be
required to maintain the Creek with appropriate setbacks.
F 1.7 Implementation
Council and City staff shall implement the appropriate components of the Northeast
Quadrant Development Guidelines in the review of all land use applications in the
Quadrant and through zoning by-law performance standards. Accordingly, to
ensure that proponents have considered this Guideline in the preparation of any
major land use application and to assist the City's review, a statement of how the
proposal will achieve the intent of the Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines
will be required to be submitted to the City, prior to the City's consideration of an
application for site plan approval.
All building permit applications will also be reviewed in the context of these
development guidelines including any corresponding Siting and Architectural
Design Statements.
Developers or property owners will be required to contribute to the costs of
completing the Review of the Northeast Quadrant Guidelines including the
transportation, environmental/stormwater and urban design components. Costs will
be adjusted annually based on the Southam Construction Index.
1 ~~2
Draft Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines (May 3, 2002)
Page 16
F1.8
Summary
The Northeast Quadrant Guidelines were prepared balancing the at times
competing interests in the lands of the various concerned parties. The Guidelines
were prepared to aid developers in designing their deyelopment projects, and to
assist the Planning & Development Department in reviewing proposals in this area.
A distillation of issues relating to the City's objectives and the concerns of the
development community and the neighbouring residents was required.
The Guidelines are laid out to first provide the City's overall objectives and then to
elaborate a set of guidelines, which implement these objectives. The objectives of
the City can be summarized as allowing these lands to evolve in an appropriate,
manner, while striving to provide a safe, pleasant environment that displays a high
quality urban image and to integrate this new development sensitively into the
existing neighbourhood.
The Guidelines themselves are separated into guidelines for
Commercial Development Proposals, Residential Development Proposals and
further to cover Transportation, Stormwater Management, and Implementation
matters. The Guidelines are the result of a collaborative effort between all of the
stakeholders and the Planning & Development Department, ar)d shall provide a
framework to review all development proposals in this area.
~
-. SHEPPARD
~
Not to Scale
Legend
IZJj Future Development
G) Site Reference Number
ðìJ Existing Traffic Signal
Wide Median (:t3m)/
Pedestrian Refuge
+ t Possible Gated Access
~ Proposed Raised Median
II--tI No Access
.I L- Right Turns Only
-'" Left Turns / All Moves Access
_no Possible Future Median
(Subjad to discretion of Durham Region.
fa traffic operations I safety monitoring)
~
.
J
e
¡
Access Concept E
May 1,2002
¡:--"VIf
[!]¡~
"Ij
1-"
<.Q
~
ti
CD
I-'
'"0
PJ
<.Q
CD
~
~~
W
I-'
-.J
1~4
ATTACHMENT' --t --- TO "
REPORT, PO 2~-n2..
...J
...J
Ï
c
«
0
It:
Iii
w
~
:.",= NORTHEAST QUADRANT REV~EW AREA
.....
l'
DATE MAY 2, 2002
ATTACHMENT' .....t::-- TO "
REPORT' PO 2~-Q2. '"
CURRENT NORTHEAST QUADRANT DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINE
CONCEPT
LJ
[?
~;
'-oj
0
0
[j
0
Q
[J
B~
~i
8:
Bi
C?
C?
~
C?
~
CJ
~
~
C?
~
ß
~
~.
~-
JV
CJ
C:J
Q
\jO'
~ \
~
i
~i
!¡
1~5
e
0
0'1
0'1
-
IX:
l.o.J
CD
:E
l.o.J
l-
e.
l.o.J
en
z
0
~
::)
3 ~
Q. 8
I.&J z
!: Co?
en ¡¡;
I,¡,
i ~
a::
>- ::)
~ ~
en ¡¡:
1 ~~6
ATTACHMENT' .~ TO
REPORT # PO 2 . n2
SUMMARY OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS
Within the Northeast Quadrant Review area, several development applications
have been submitted to the City as follows:
.
Wood/Carroll (Hayes Line Properties) (A 22/00)
The original application proposed zoning amendments to implement a preliminary
conceptual site plan that included 18 townhouses on the north part of the site and
1625 square metres of commercial/retail and restaurant uses on the lands fronting
Kingston Road.). Despite Council's authorization to undertake the Quadrant
review, Hayes Line Properties Inc. appealed Council's neglect to make a decision
on the application to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB).
The application was revised through the submission to the OMB of a new
proposed amending zoning by-law. The City received circulation of the revised
by-law in December 2001 to implement a revised preliminary site concept. The
revised preliminary site concept eliminated the residential uses and reconfigured
one-storey retail/commercial/restaurant building envelopes. On February 14 and
15, 2002, the OMB heard the appeal and delivered its decision on April 11, 2002.
The OMB approved commercial zoning for the entire property providing for:
one-storey buildings with a two-storey façade; the location of front walls of
buildings required to occupy at least 25% of a 'build-to' zone along the Kingston
Road frontage; connectivity of this site to abutting sites by means other than
dedication of a 'public lane'; a cap of 1200 square metres of gross floor area for
restaurants on the site and no requirement to impose a "Holding" zone to
guarantee certain public matters are addressed. The OMB will issue its formal
order once the final implementing Zoning By-law is provided to the Board.
.
Lydia Dobbin/City of Pickering (Marion Hill Development Corporation)
(OPA 01-002/P & A 04/01)
The proposal consists of constructing 97 stacked townhouses units with a massing
concept of 4 storeys fronting onto Whites Road, 2 to 3 storeys fronting onto
Sheppard Avenue, and 2 to 3 storeys fronting onto a private loop lane in the
interior of the site. The application also applies to a City owned parcel of land,
previously owned by Veridian Corporation, which abuts the Dobbin property.
A statutory public meeting on the application was heard on May 17, 2001.
.
Michael Boyer/Pickering Holdings Inc.Neridian Corporation (A 40101)
The proposal consists of expanding the list of permitted uses by consolidating the
prevailing "sc-8" and "ca3-3" categories into a single and inclusive zone. The
application applies to lands located at the southwest corner of Kingston Road and
the Highway 401 on/off ramp east of Whites Road.
.
North American Acquisitions
(OPA 01-003/P & A 10101)
("old" Dunbarton
School
Property)
The proposal consists of constructing of 2,1000 square metres of retail store,
personal service shops, office and restaurant uses within two buildings located on
the east and north sides of the site. Gas bar and car wash facilities are located
within two other buildings on the west part of the site separated by a proposed
right-of-way to the abutting property to the west.
ATTACHMENT # 'i . TO
REPORT # PO ~.
1~7
SUMMARY OF REPORTS
A)
En vironm en tall Storm water
Amberlea Creek-Northeast Quadrant Assessment of Alternatives prepared by
Schollen & Company Inc. in association with Aquafor Beech Limited and
LGL Limited dated October 2001, Revision #1
A summary of the assessment contained within the report concluded the
following:
. reduced rates of erosion and enhance stability of Amberlea Creek downstream
of West Shore Boulevard will be realized through the construction of the
proposed stormwater management facility. The proposed stormwater
management will address flood and erosion control objectives for the
.Amberlea Creek watershed, mitigating erosion and its associated impacts in
the downstream reach. The implementation of the storm water management
facility will also reduce the extent of erosion protection work required to be
implemented over the long-term;
. water quality improvements will be achieved through the implementation of
the storm water management facility and will enhance the viability of aquatic
habitat downstream. These water quality benefits will also have a positive
effect on aquatic habitat in Frenchman's Bay; and
. the implementation of the storm water management pond will moderate water
flows, reduce erosion and consequent sediment accumulation in Frenchman's
Bay enhancing the long-term sustainability of the wetland.
A copy of the Amberlea Creek - Northeast Quadrant Assessment of Alternatives
report is available for public review in the Planning & Development Department
at the City of Pickering.
B)
Transportation
Phase I - Final Report prepared by TSH Associates dated September 2001
Conclusions reached as a result of the work undertaken for Phase I include:
. the major signalized intersections in the study area are operating at or above
capacity in both the a.m. and p.m. peak hours with the exception of the
Kingston Road/Delta Boulevard at it operates at a good level of service;
. the concept site plans for the propitious east of Delta Boulevard, including the
Wood Carroll lands and the Dunbarton school site reflect a highway
commercial orientation with a reliance on direct access to Kingston Road and
little opportunity for good internal vehicular or pedestrian connections with
adjacent properties;
. significant constraints exist to providing all moves access points along the
subject sections of the White Road corridor;
. it would be desirable to develop an access management plan that would
include the consolidation of access ;points al for the properties along Kingston
Road east of Delta Boulevard, the possible restriction of certain turning
movements along Kingston Road, and the provision of alternative access via
internal connections to adjacent properties and linkages with the east-west
road to access Delta Boulevard;
. it is desirable to mitigate the potential traffic impact on Sheppard Avenue by
providing access for new developments via adjacent Type A (Whites Road)
and B (Kingston Road) arterial roads and by providing an internal traffic
1~8
ATTACHMENT#~O
REPORT # PO - ,
circulation system to serve the various properties within the Northeast
Quadrant;
. two access concepts A and B have been developed (see Attachments #3 and
4); these access points will be refined through discussions with the City,
Durham Region, MTO, and property owner/developers, and in the Phase 2
study will be subject to a traffic operations analysis
Phase 2 - Draft Final Report prepared by TSH Associates dated May 2002
Conclusions reached as a result of the work undertaken for Phase 2 include:
. due to signalized intersection spacing constraints, there are no opportunities
other than the Highway 401 westbound on/of ramp location to develop a new
signalized access on Kingston Road in the subject corridor;
. in the future, it is likely that access to Study Area properties on the north and
south sides of Kingston road will be restricted to right turns only. The
proposed access road, opposite the Highway 401 westbound on/off ramp,
would provide for traffic signal controlled left turn movements to and from
this development area;
. the long-term development potential of the subject area is not likely to be
achieved without the provision of an internal road connecting the developable
properties between Delta boulevard and the Dunbarton school site, and the
related additional signalized access to Kingston Road opposite the Highway
401 westbound on/off ramp. It is the City's preference that the internal road
connection be provided as a public road way, rather than thorough property
easements;
. without the access road opposite the Highway 401 westbound on/off ramp, the
road connecting the properties along the north side of Kingston Road may not
be developed as envisioned and the implementation of access managem((nt in
the Kingston road corridor will be difficult in the future as no alternative
access plans will be possible;
. the analysis indicated that the proposed new road opposite the Highway 401
westbound on/off ramp would be beneficial for the operation of the Kingston
Road/Delta Boulevard intersection;
. the Whites Road corridor will be subject to access controls in the future as
development occurs, including section with raised center medians to control
left turn movements;
. it has been determined that is not feasible from a traffic operation and safety
perspective to signalize the intersection of Whites Road/Dunfair Street due to
its close probity to the existing traffic signal at Whites Road/Kingston road
and Whites/Sheppard Avenue;
. with the existing residential land use along the Sheppard Avenue corridor, and
its functional classification as a Type 'c' arterial, it is seen as appropriate to
permit access for new residential developments proposed along the south side
of Sheppard Avenue. In considering the proposal for the Marion Hill
development, the combination of access to Sheppard Avenue, Whites Road,
and an internal driveway connection (possibly gated) at the north end of Delta
Boulevard would result in a nominal traffic impact on Sheppard Avenue
operation.
Copies of the Kingston Road - Whites Road Northeast Quadrant
Transportation Study, Phase 1 and Phase 2 Reports are available for public
review in the Planning & Development Department at the City of Pickering.
139.
~-_._---------~--~-----_.,--
ATTACHMENT # b TO
REPORT # PO 2,~-n2.
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
MEETING NOTES
Subject:
Public Meeting: Northeast Quadrant Review
(Information Package provided for pick-up at the meeting)
Meeting Date and Time:
'\
October 30,2001
Pickering Civic Complex
Council Chambers
7:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m.
Attendees
Staff:
Catherine Rose, Manager, Policy
Grant McGregor, Principal Planner - Policy
Steve Gaunt, Phumer, II
Consultants 1 Developers:
Alex Artuchov (representing Pickering Holdings (Boyer»)
Lorelei Jones (representing Wood Carroll)
Ian Matthews (representing Marion Hill)
Robert McConachie
Stefan & Raffi Nalbandian (submitted letter, see attached)
Ron Richards (representing North American Acquisitions)
Public/Other Area Residents & Landowners:
:t 15
Councillors:
none present
******************************************************************************
Purpose:
. to exchange information concerning the Northeast Quadrant Review
Catherine Rose:
. introductions'
Grant McGregor:
. brief overview
140
. -,----_... .-. -------------- ----_...
------------ÃTTACHMENT# 5----io~-
REPORT # PO 2.~ - 02. ' -
Meeting Notes
Northeast Quadrant Review: Public Information Meeting
~
October 30, 2001
Page 2
John Ibettson:
. mentioned that his neighbour's property has an angled property line at south-east
corner
. confused that Mixed Corridor is an option for his property
. asks, "Where's the proposal"?
. is concerned about noise from car wash close to his home
. wants homes on south side of Sheppard
. does not want gas stations or other commercial uses that stay open between 8 pm
and 8 am
. says Wood Carroll homes don't fit - concerned with stylelpricelproperty
valuelclass ofoccupant/height/ovedook over swimining pool/privacy
. says residential area north of road should front road and be low density
David Steele:
. is concerned with environmental impact
. is opposed in general to piping creek
. wants Schollen report reviewed by Dr. Byles at University of Toronto
. has no confidence in TRCA
Ron Richards:
. stated staff is not giving any real consideration to or consulting with development
interests, including transportation study
. rejects staff's findings in the Information Package as they apply to his client's
property .
. use of word "development guidelines" wrong - should be "design guidelines"
. comment in Information Package that there is little opportunity for vehicular
access IS wrong'
. traffic conclusions in the Information Package are not the only conclusions
available and other options are possible including access to site at full intersection
Grant McGregor:
. transportation issues will be reviewed and other conclusions are possible
Ron Richards:
. wants full commercial
. Mixed Corridor use option does not clearly permit this
. suggests more meetings
141
------.---------......-.-- - -----~---_.._._._------_._.._--_.._.. .-----
ATTACHMENT # f) TO
REPORT # PO '::?~-{'2.
Meeting Notes
Northeast Quadrant Review: Public Information Meeting
. .
October 30,2001
Page 3
Irene McNamara
. too much density is being proposed
. no one asked home owners
. wants R3 zoning on Sheppard
. there is currently too much traffic on Sheppard
. currently dangerous on Whites for pedestrians
. proposal would create conflict with traffic 1 don't add to it
. too many homes proposed
. doesn't like 'Canoe Landing' development
. likes townhomes at Whitby Village
. traffic survey should not be done at mid-day
. don't want to be like downtown Toronto or Scarborough
. concerned with school services as they are too crowded already
. likes seniors' home or adult housing
. only comment was about Marion Hill
Sylvia Spencer:
. wants median on Whites Road for safety of kids
. no new traffic onto Sheppard
. can she buy back expropriated land? (Catherine advised she'd call Legal Services)
. wants low density residential in Precincts D and A
. wants access onto Sheppard from City lands for only eight houses - low density
i.e. rear land
. and same on school site - would be seven hous.es
. access concept b preferred
. wants development on Nallandian to be street-oriented
. why full median across front of Boyer property - should be more breaks for turns
. concerned with noise - lots of roads proposed
. fumes from Wendy's and Tim Hortons are bad
Tim Costar:
. lives in E
. none of plans recognize existing character of development on Sheppard Avenue
Irene Wolf:
. lives on north side of Sheppard Avenue
. wants low-density residential along Sheppard Avenue
. too much development proposed - density is too much
. .
142
-"" ----- -------,""-" - ---"-- ""---""- ""--"-- ----"-"" --"-----------" ""- -
A'"T ACHfViENT # ~ TO
;:¡:?ORT # PO 2~-O2.
Meeting Notes
Northeast Quadrant Review: Public Information Meeting
October 30, 2001
Page 4
John Ibettson:
. maintain low density on Sheppard Avenue
. there are too many townhomes proposed
. there are too many cars and that the traffic is dangerous
Mrs. Costar:
.
concerned with safety of any proposed bank because robbers can easily escape
onto Highway 401
Several People:
. no restaurants, car wash, gas stations or bank
Ian Matthews:
. there are always concerns
. willing to meet with residents
Lorelie Jones:
. developers concerned that information from City not good enough
. not enough land for public road on their property
. will want all commercial on Wood Carroll site
Wilma Flavelle:
. Sheppard and .Whites are plugged with traffic
. too much traffic, parked cars - all day and night
. Sheppard not safe
. lights from Tim Hortons shine onto our properties
Several People:
. Boyer's has loud speakers that disturb area residents
Mrs. Costar:
.
lights from 401 off-ramp shine onto our properties
Mrs. Ibettson:
. how high of a fence can she build [call Clerk's for sign by-law information]
Mr. Costar:
.
lives in Precinct E
can it be a mix of use?
could access be provided from former school site?
.
.
--
---- --------------------------------
---------'-
1.43'
AT1ACHMENT # 5 TO
::;::;¡ORT # po 2~- 02,
Meeting Notes
Northeast Quadrant Review: Public Information Meeting
October 30,2001
Page 5
Ms Parkes:
.
lives in Precinct E
should be mixed use
access from school site should be provided for
lands could be developed for a dental office
don't let design of North American Acquisitions proposal land-lock their property
.
.
.
.
Sylvia Spencer:
. why does creek have to be piped? ,
. wants a park, creek and walkway from medical centre to Delta Boulevard
David Steele:
. if keeping stream - needs a buffer
Tim Costar:
.
concerned that stormwater pond could be dangerous for kids and will breed
mosquitoes
Catherine Rose:
. wrap-up
. welcomes sharing Schollen study with David of University of Toronto
Next Steps:
. originally anticipated proposed Official Plan Amendment being forwarded to a
Statutory Public Meeing and Council before end of year
. in light of comments, probably not making recommendations before end of year
. willing to have additional meetings between developers and residents
Mr. McNamara:
. will residents get to see another revision prior to it going to Planning Committee?
. wants more time than a month
. wants everyone on street to be contacted
Attachment
II1II7 &m'8'_1uortb COIIIM- To Pi IcOcI3 ON_-.doc
144
AT. T ACHMENï. # 2~ TO
f1:PORT # PO ' - 02-. '
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
MEETING NOTES
Subject:
Northeast Quadrant Review
Design Workshop
Meeting Place and Time:
November 24,2001 - 9:30 a.m. - 1:30 p.m.
Pickering Civic Complex - Library Auditorium
Attendees:
Staff:
Catherine Rose, Manager, Policy
Grant McGregor, Principal Planner - Policy
John McMullen, Senior Planner - Site Planning
Steve Gaunt, Planner II
City's Consultants: Ronji Borooah, Planner & Architect, of
Markson, Borooah, Hodgson Architects Ltd.
Garry Pappin, Transportation Consultant, of
TSH Associates
Landowners 1
Agents:
Lorelei Jones (representing Wood, Carroll, et al)
Ron Richards (representing North American Acquisitions)
Robert McConachie
Robert Gordon
Mr. Case
Vincent Santamaura (representing Marion Hill)
Alex Artuchov (representing Pickering Holdings (Boyer)
Residents:
Vivian VandenHazel
Raouf Besharat
John Ibettson
Ann Picton
Mr. & Mrs. Costar
John Hache
Bonnie Bayes & Mr. Bayes
Irene McNamara
Robert Laurie
Diana Robinson
Irene Moult
John Mahar
Bill Sornberger
Sylvia Spencer
Wilma & Ken Flavell
David Steele
Councillors: none present
******************************************************************************
Meeting Notes
ATTACHMENT # lo-.h TO "-
REPORT # PO 73. n2 "
145
November 24,2001
Review of Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines - Design Workshop
Page 2
WELCOME & INTRODUCTIONS (Catherine Rose):
. outlined purpose and intent of to day's workshop;
0 review new transportation information;
0 provide opportunity for residents, staff and developers to discuss
opportunities, constraints of the Quadrant, the sites within the Quadrant
and the individual development proposals.
TRANSPORTATION INFORMATION UPDATE (Gary Pappin, TSH Consultants):
. presented an update of findings and alternative access opportunities and
constraints within the Northeast Quadrant.
Resident's questions/comments (includes comments recorded on flip charts):
. what is the purpose oftraffic signal at Dunfair?
. when were traffic counts done? - they appear to under represent reality;
. cars infiltrate to Sheppard to avoid right turn ITom Whites Road northbound to
Kingston Road eastbound;
. concerns with parking at medical centre, and drop-offs at school;
. current traffic situation is broke - adding development makes it worse, not better;
. no enforcement of parking on Sheppard Avenue;
. parking in front of Dunbarton High School is a problem;
. build public parking;
. speed and volume on Sheppard Avenue;
. delays (4+ cycles) to turn left at Whites Road to Kingston Road;
. suggest physical traffic, calming speed bumps on Sheppard Avenue;
. speed of traffic on Whites Road down to Kingston Road problematic;
. widen Sheppard Avenue and allow on-street parking;
. delays turning right from Whites Road north to Kingston Road east;
. consider an all-way pedestrian lights at Whites Road and Sheppard Avenue;
. students jay-walking causes delays and safety concerns;
. widen Kingston Road and Whites Road;
. consider parking metres.
BREAK-OUT GROUPS
GROUP 1 - KINGSTON ROAD DEVELOPMENTS (Facilitator: Steve Gaunt)
(Wood/Carroll [Hayes Line Properties], North American Acquisitions
[Dunbarton school site], Boyer/Pickering Holdings)
146
Meeting Notes ~;;~~~~E~¿ # 2~;2 TO'"" November 24,2001
Review of Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines - Design Workshop Page 3
Ron Richards (for North American Acquisitions):
. offered to meet with residents to discuss his proposal;
Lorelei Jones (for Wood, Carroll (Hayes Line Properties)):
. not supportive of public road;
. prepared to work with City and residents to achieve an acceptable access
easement across their property.
Sylvia Spencer:
. if no public road, rear of lots will be landlocked;
. wants the Sheppard frontage lands to remain as low 4ensity residential.
. ,
Mrs. MeN amara:
. vehicle repair shops, restaurants, gas stations, car washes, car sales and banks
should not be permitted in the Quadrant;
. concerned with buffering for light; screening and fencing should be done
properly; trees, including the whole tree line and particularly the existing big
maple tree, should be retained;
Mr. Ibettson:
. objects to townhomes;
. wants good buffering and screening between existing homes and yards and
proposed new development.
A Residen t:
. Ministry of Transportation and Communications has control over road access
from Kingston Road and the length of such road
Ron Richards:
. the cost of constructing and providing the land for a public road will be too
expensive for his client; consequently, other developers and/or the City should
contribute to its cost.
A Resident:
. regarding buffering: asked for an example of adequate buffering/sound barriers to
protect residential uses from car washes and gas stations; need trees back to buffer
noise from Highway 401;
. opposed to building height above one storey near the rear of existing homes;
should not have two storeys close to any existing houses.
Meeting Notes
~;~~CHMENT # -dto2 TO
1'\;:1 aRT 11 PO . .
14?
November 24,2001 "
Review of Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines - Design Workshop
Page 4
Ron Richards:
. his client is a commercial developer - not residential;
. wants his commercial development to have minimal effect on residential uses;
. it is inherently difficult to achieve a suitable interface between residential and
commercial use
Residents:
.
office uses are Okay;
does not want car wash or gas bar uses;
need adequate buffering between residential and commercial uses.
.
.
Ron Richards:
. needs to first see how access road onto his site will work, then will develop
detailed designs to determine whether economics of development can work;
. this location is good for retail 1 restaurant 1 gas station uses;
. it is difficult to rent second-storey space;
. as plans evolve, Ron will keep residents informed of his evolving proposal.
Resident(s):
. don't object to . commercial uses in. general; do object to noise 1 smell expected
from gas station or car wash use;
. wants to keep the ability to have easements from the school site property to
properties to the east;
. need buffering along the north edge of Wood Carroll, McConachie and school site
properties;
. should keep trees;
. need fencing;
. detailed design should look attractive;
. pedestrian access is needed.
Alex Artuchov (for Boyer 1 Pickering Holdings Agent):
. no specific development is proposed and Mr. Boyer wants to broaden the
permitted uses on his site at this stage.
148
AïTACHMENT#_LP- TO
:':::?,jhT # PO 2~ .02
November 24, 2001
Meeting Notes
Review of Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines - Design Workshop
Page 5
GROUP 2 - MARION HILL DEVELOPMENT (Facilitator: Grant McGregor)
Grant McGregor:
. Introductions;
Vincent Santamaura:
. Provided the Group with an overview of the Marion Hill Development;
Grant McGregor:
. Reviewed the design challenge statement and urban design objechves
All:
.
There was considerable discussion on the volume and speed of traffic on Sheppard
Avenue especially at peak times and on weekends. Also, mentioned was the parking of
cars on the south side of Sheppard Avenue by parents dropping off and/or picking-up
their children from the Dunbarton High SchooL It was suggested that the City should be
enforcing the no parking bylaw.
.
The participants in the Group generally agreed that the Marion Hill townhouse proposal
was too dense for the neighbourhood. As well, there were concerns expressed regarding
the proposed building heights along Sheppard Avenue and that such heights should be
similar to the heights of existing residences. In addition, the need for more open space
areas especially for children and the need for more parking areas within the development,
were expressed. The Group indicated their preference for eight single detached lots along
Sheppard Avenue as opposed to the Marion Hill townhouse proposal. Townhouse units,
if constructed should be located in behind the single detached lots and similar in design to
the townhouse units constructed by John Body Homes in. Ajax. Vincent Santamaura
provided the Group with alternate designs for the proposed townhouse units along
Sheppard Avenue that emulated the existing building size and height of residences on the
north side and suggested that parking be provided in sculpted areas along the side of
Sheppard Avenue.
. There was a suggestion from one of the Group participants that a greenspace corridor
along the frontage of Sheppard Avenue should be incorporated into the Marion Hill
proposal. This would allow future residents the ability to have flower and shrub beds in
the fÌ"ont of the units.
. There was considerable discussion' and concern about the impact of traffic from the
Marion Hill proposal onto Sheppard Avenue. As a result, the Group indicated that access
onto Sheppard Avenue for the Marion Hill proposal was inappropriate. Alternatively,
access should be directed to Delta Blvd and/or Whites Road.
Meeting Notes
'""'TACH~n¡:r"T l - "fO
hi 11\",- v ':_~\.e.....~ '
Q<:::>ORT # Do 2~-O2
",-, , , "
149
November 24, 2001
Review of Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines - Design Workshop
Page 6
. One of the participants who lives directly across the road from the proposed driveway
location into the Marion Hill site indicated a concern with both lights shining into their
house from cars and increased traffic making their driveway difficult to utilize.
.
It was noted that the medical art building at the corner of Whites Road and Sheppard
Avenue has created a traffic and parking problem for the neighbourhood. There was a
suggestion that the City owned lands be swapped for lands opposite the medical arts
building in order to accommodate additional parking. There was also the suggestion that
the City owned lands, in conjunction with a natural trail along Amberlea Creek, be used
as a public open space feature for the quadrant.
.
It was noted that public bus service is no longer provided on Sheppard Avenue so
residents are forced to use their vehicles. This is particularly bothersome to the elderly
who are dependant on public transportation to get around.
.
The Group raised the issue of odours emulating from the fast food restaurants located
along Kingston Road affecting their quality of life. As well, noise issues were identified
with respect to the servicing of these restaurants in the early morning especially with
respect to waste haulage. There was a suggestion that garbage enclosures at Marion Hill
be provided.
.
In addition, there was a concern about the high number of cars idling their engines while
in the restaurant drive thru's and the related impact of exhaust fumes on the surrounding
environment.
. Three was comment from one of participants of a review by Dr. N. Eyles on the City's
report Amberlea Creek-Northeast Quadrant Assessment of Alternatives that piping the
creek is not appropriate.
. The Group indicated that they would be like to see an alternate design for the Marion Hill
proposal illustrating what the proposal would look like with single detached residential
lots fronting onto Sheppard Avenue.
SUMMARY/WRAP-UP & NEXT STEPS (Catherine Rose):
.
indicated that staff will arrange a meeting on Transportation issues to address the
current traffic conditions with Regional and Pickering Works staff within a couple
of weeks [now slated for January, 2002];
indicated that a'copy of the notes from this Workshop and the previous October
30th Information Meeting to the participants at those two meetings;
indicated that, as a result of this workshop, that the statutory public information
meeting for the Northeast Quadrant Review will be rescheduled from the
previously announced December 20, 2001 date to a later date and that any report
on the findings of the study will be in the new year [subsequent notice to be
mailed].
.
.
SGlsm
staff! sgauntJrnisclNortheastQuadran t Workshop, doc
150 )(:onservatTon
TORONTO AND REGION
ATTACHMENT#_~L,.. ro
REPORT # PO '2?'¡ - 02 :,,-,_0.
~~ rC) \'~ ~ ~ ~ ~-D'\
[; __9 .- \ I
OC1301001 J
'"'\TY OF PICKERING
'-' PICKERING, ONTARIO
October 24, 2001
Ms. Catherine Rose
City of Pickering
Pickering Civic Centre
One The Esplanade
Pickering, Ontario
L1 V 6K7
REC~JYED.
OCT ~J 1 2001
Dear Ms. Rose:
CI i Y ;:)¡~ ,:¡C<,,~;¡NG
rL¡:"":c"'~"U
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Re:
Amberlea Creek - Northeast Quadrant Report
Assessment of Alternatives
City of Pickering
Further to our discussions and after reviews of the above report prepared by Scholten & Company
Inc., The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRGA) staff offer the following comments.
The proposal is to develop a comprehensive plan for Stormwater Management for the Amberlea
Community, by placing a Stormwater Management Pond on two intermitted tributaries (described
as AC3 and AC5). The works would appear to benefit downstream portion of Amberlea Creek and
Frenchman's Bay which currently received large amounts of sediment from the upstream
developed community. From the inventory provided it is evident that the tributaries upstream of the
prepared pond are degraded and a large percentage of flows result from stormwater run-off.
Given the potential benefits to Frenchman's Bay, TRCA staff would support in principle the
proposed Stormwater Management Scheme and the resulting changes to the upstream portions of
the creeks AG3 and AC5. However we would note that the works constitute a Harmful Alteration
Disruption and Destruction and as a result note that a suitable compensation arrangement would
be required to support the project and we are prepared to work with the Municipality, DFO and
MNR to help further this project.
We are prepared to work with the municipality Department of Fisheries and Oceans and the
Ministry of National Resources to help further this project.
We trust that this is of assistance.
Yours truly,
.'7
;L J.c
.Russel White
Senior Planner
Development Services Section
Extension 5306
RW /gc
cc:
Laud Matos, DFO
Rob Fancy, MNR
F :\PRS\CORRES P\PICKERI N\AM BERLEA. WPD
NOY-.-O9'û1(FRI) 16:07
CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT
TEL:4162354267
Po 002
Ministry of
TI"II!llIportlitlon
Mlnlstèrc du
Trunapor1s
ATTACHMENT #- B ._TÜ
REPORT # PO 2~ . 02 .
@
151
Ontario
Phone: (416) 235-3509
Fax: (416) 235-4267
E-mail: charles.petro@mto.goy.on.ca
Corridor Management Office
7th Floor, Atrium Tower
1201 Wilson Avenue
Downsview, Ontario
M3M U8
November 9, 2001
File No: 42-80197
City of Pickering
Plamùng & Development Department
Pickering Civic Complex
One The Esplanade
Pickering, Ontario
LIV 6K7
Attention: Grant McGregor
Dear Sir:
RE: Kingston Road - Whites Road Northeast Quadrant Transportation Study
Phase 1 Final Report
City of Pickering
Highway 401
We have reviewed the submitted infonnation and offer the following comments:
It is this ministry's preference that there be no access on Kingston Road directly across the Highway 401
ramp temlinal. We would therefor encourage development as shown in Alternative 5, Alternative 6 and
Access Concept A.
Our concerns regarding the alternatives involving access across from the Highway 401 E. E/W ramp are as
fol1ows~
.
As mentioned in the report, the need for this access must be justified. The Delta Boulevard access
may be sufficient to serve the development. Benefits ofthc new access would have to be weighed
against impacts of locaIing directly across a. ramp terminal.
Any access acroSs from the ramp terminal shall have no southbound through movement to access
Highway 401 WB. This through movement would probably necessitate an additional signal phase,
which is not possible as the signals are at capacity and the signal timing has no free time. Signal timing
must be maintained to ensure preference is given to ramp traffic.
If northbound through movements are considered from the ramp to the access; it must be ensured that
minimum stopping distances are maintained. The current advisory speed on the :ramp is 50km/hr.
There is the possibility of northbound ramp through vehicles crossing the intersection at 60km/hr-
70kmlhr if they' are trying to "beat" an amber signal. Therefore if the 70lan/hr is assumed, a minimum
.
.
1~2
ATTACHMENT # <f\ TO
REPORT # PO 23.02.
-----,--,-----,---------------------------------_u_--------- --- ---------- _u_------ - - - -----,--
NOV,-O9'Q1(FRI) 16:07
CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT
TEL:4162354267
P. 003
stopping distance of 110m is required, which means there should be no accesses, no conflict points, no
sharp radius cmves, etc. within 110m north of the north limit of the ;mersection.
. Some alternatives consider a southbound lei!: turn movement to go east on Kingston Road. This
presents a conflict point ifnorthbound ramp vehicles are pennitted through the intersection to the
development (Alternatives 1,2, and possibly Access Còncept B). If northbound ramp vehicles are not
permitted through the intersection, as shoWTI in Alternative 3, "no though access" signage would have
to erected for the ramp. This may not be effective, and depending where this signing is erected, it may
possibly confuse Kingston Road left turn and right turn vehicles attempting to access the development.
. The road would have to be a public road, (not an entrance as indicated in OP A 01-D03/P and ZBA
AID/Ol, for North American Acquisition Corp). We would also require that there be no full moves
access points along the first 180m of this road. This requirement may preclude the viability of the gas
bar as indicated in the OP AlZÐA.
Weare also prepared to discuss access opportunities as they relate [0 Highway 401 and ramp tenninals at
Wlútes Road and Kingston Road, during Phase 2 of the Transportation Network review. We will require:
1. Estimates of site generated traffic from all existing and proposed land uses within the study area.
2. Detailed traffic operational analysis of the impact of future traffic on the level of traffic service on
Highway 401 and associated ramps and ramp terminals on Whites Road and Kingston Road.
Analysis of e::âsting traffic conditions
Table 1 - Characteristics of Study area roads - does not include the Hwy 401 WB on ramp from
southbound on Whites road. From Figure 1 - Study Area - the Whites road north and south approaches on
ramps to WE 401 fall within the boundaries of the Study area. At least the on ramp from the north
approach of Whites road should be included for analysis in Phase 2. This one lane on-ramp had peak a.m.
vo.1ume of about 1900 vph, acèording to OUI 1995 database.
Please provide justification for the assumption that p.m. peak hour volume is 12%of daily traffic (Table 1
-column 6). A check with Kingston on/off ramp 1995 data indicates an average of about 6.7% of daily
traffic as p.m. peak volume, ~d ranges from 6% to 10%. Using J2% for all roads in the study area
underestimates the daily traffic where the actual percentage is less. The consultant should deteT1Tline the
actual percentage for each road- Also, it should be confirmed that the daily traffic is an estimation of the
annual average daily traffic. As well, Table t does not indicate the dates for the p.m. peak hour volumes
from which the daily traffic was estimated. We believe the source is the p.m. peak flows given in Figure 3
ofilie report. Table 1, which appears before Figure 3, doesn't indicate that.
Additional comments will be provided once a detailed analysis is received.
I trust that this is sufficient to your needs. Please do not hesitate to call should you require further
information or clarification.
Yours tTuly,
. ;e?~~
Charlie Petro
Project Manager
c::::-
cc.
Tom Hewitt, MTO
Michael DeMichele, MTO
Ken Sherbanowski, MTO
Steve Gaunt, City of Pickering
Steve Mayhew, Durham Region
ATTACHMENT # q. TO
-_.---~------- _BÉ_~9_~~!!~~~Q2 :_--- ,_. - .-----
153
fEB..-26'92(TUE) 18:00
CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT
TEL:4162354267
P. 002
Ministry Dr
Trln!pol'tlltlon
\tiniøt~rf dl:.!l
Traqøports
(i)
Ontari.o
Phone: (416) 235-3509
Fax: (416) 235...4267
E-mail: charJes.petro@mto.gov.on.ca
Corridor Management Office
7th Floor, Atrium Tower
1201 Wilson Avenue
Downsview. Ontario
M3M 118
February 26, 2002
File No: 42-80197
City of Pickering
Planning & Development Department
Pickering Civic Complex
One The Esplanade
Pickering, Ontario
Ll V 6K7
Attention: Grant McGregor
Dear Sir:
RE: Kingston Road - Whites Road Northeast Quadrant Transportation Study
Proposed Access Opposite Kingston RoadIHighway 401 Westbound On/Off Ramp
City of Pickering
Further to the meeting of January 30, 2002, we offer the following comments:
It is rhis ministry's preference that ~ere be no access on Kingston Road directly across the Highway 401
ramp tenninal and would therefore 'encourage development of one of the other options outlined iIl your
Transportation study, Phase 1 Final Report dated September 2001. We appreciate the municipal need for a
ramp terminal access road, but 'We are reluctant to approve it at this time, as many details still need to be
resolved to our satisfaction. This ministry is prepared to co-operate with your staff, and regional staff, and
to work toward a design, which would be acceptable to all parties concerned. To this end, since it is your
.- desire to pursue the ramp tenninal access road optionJ we offer the following points for consideration:
. The need for this access must be justified. Other options must also be examined and the benefits of any
new access options would have to be weighed against impacts of locating access directly across ftom
the ramp terminal. Some prelùninary design work would also need to be undertaken. This ministry is
not prepared to sacrifice Level of Service of the Highway 401 Ramp Terminal. Also, any
roadway/intersection/ramp improvements, should an acceptable design be developed and approved,
shall be at no cost to MTO.
. Any access across from the ramp terminal shall have no southbound through movement to access
Highway 401 WH. This through movement would necessitate an additional signal phase, which is not
,RECEIVED
FEB 27 2002
ClfY Of- PICKëniNG
PLANNING é'\I~D
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
15 4 ..__._._-------_._._---_.~~:.~~!~~------
------.
FEB,-26' 02 (TUE) 18:01 CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT TEL:4162354267
P. 003
possible as the signals are at capacity and the signal timing has no free time. Signal timing must be
maintained to ensure preference is given to ramp traffic.
. Proposed road must be design~d to meet the design parameters of the off ramp i.e. 70 k:mIhr de.sign
speed.
. Northbound through movements fi'om the ramp to the access road, must be provided. Minimum
stopping distances must be maintained.
. A southbound left turn movement to go east on Kingston Road presents a conflict point if northbound
ramp vehicles are petT!1itted through the intersection to the development. At this time the Mmistry is
not prepared to accept these movements. Similarly, a left turn movement into the development from
eastbound Kingston Road also presents a con,flict. Signal timing priorities must be as foHows: 1)
Highway 401 R1unp, 2) Kingston Road (Arterial Road)t and finally, 3) Development access road at
ramp terminal.
. The road would have to be a public road. (under Municipal jurisdiction and maintained to municipal
standards). We would also require that there be no full moves access points along the first 180m of this
road. This requirement may preclude the viability of any development near the intersection.
In order to fUrther our evaluation of access opportunities as they relate to Highway 401 ar¡d ramp terminals
at Whites Road and Kingston Road, we will require:
1. A detailed traffic impact study, which reflects and identifies all of the proposed geometries of the
roadway.
Please note that all comments submitted to you in our Jetter of November 9, 2001, still apply.
I trust that this is sufficient to your needs. Please do not hesitate to call should you require further
information or clarificatioll.
Yours truly,
~OZ
Charlie Petro
Project Manager
=
CC,
Tom Hewitt, MTO
Michael DeMichele, MTO
Ken Sherbanowski, MTO
Steve Gaunt, City of Pickering
Steve Mayhew, Durham Region
~~ , ATTACHMENT #--.1 0 ~TO
--- m_-. ........ REPORH.PO 2".~~_VIVLÆ..A/.~ i\LD£NJ1IlZE;,", ..
[:1r:Ç r;:: I vr; - ~--- --- - -- l J 5.1 Edt'lI'OfŒßD.__..
--_._-_.._._--_._------rtGV~2--200 - -..- ------.-------.. - P.LS:-:K€e LA) Go- aM___._-
.------'.------h- .-'.-~f¡N~,~ß- --- -------'---_._-'-- --,-- .L..JI¿-1-LL- -._h_~,-.--
....:. i"MENT DEPARTMENT
155
. ---........-----....--- -- _.
-
-..."-'.--. .--- .-- --_..._--_...._.._--_._---_._-,_....._._~._-_.. .--...
-----..---.--.- ------:......_-- ._--_._.._-_._-~--_: .__._.__:..-O-~t-3Ç¿,.do.OJ.- ..--.
G [\1,~i.~ci~~~o~~_. -- .. -.. ~~~-- . ..
PlCUlJl.c!- t~ '.h..f-L_tg_cl~ .B_Cjg¿( t'^J-_.
'--.....-......,--.,,-....--.--
... .-.---.-.- .
..-.-.........-...----.--.-.........---.-...-.,...., -. '",.,-..--.- .-.-
--.&.:,.&OC~Q ~t- ----Q.~.ra.tït../2g .vi~_~__. m... h__.
...-.-----.-....--.,-,., .
,- - "'_.h...- .....
. . ... ..__n - -. .
h.._L.he. \I(., --'-I.. -- f.M.Cg m,LL~"f"[d i~ cI.i.<&./SJ(J1M ,..:t In t~ /II f= . 'ì- ya.Nf:r. <1 &-;
L .ßpi"5~.. cow- 5':'5. .. J1e....beocJ~,> d- 0. J l w ak.rc CW.Y: 5C <;, 16 PK.L<gO.^j
,.,G'n:s i:~ ..1C\.jbg.- ilik R£dße~L.. }jQ.c.gLf1.€.. Jkr J '0 u,~. . "3° .l/ fr n('(\.fì,.J.D ~...ffJv.Lrq.o.=,
,_m~icLL.-8r:Q_up-~_.are iL~¡'~_tDhpre.5eCV:€:_'h~ mo.cajn~. . J+f\X,\,k#s no Se.C'~~
h.w_.J.u~L_cr i'.~ln "ß'cke(l~.ìf flJ"r'f{Qc _upstr~fY\ hWl,A..Qters 0. ;--.e. f'-CQ~
'.' i.etiecL_--_.Mtf:1(\c'j.." su(..vi.~ß_~. -Ù"L..Ü '.. .iu.ûüeL-r.d___crfe.k_lt
..... .... .--.......- .
.r Qki JjC.Qw.ili_-1r~~'§L. ..Muc.b......of fhR ~l"\d.f~eJopsd laf'-Ç2Í .ba ~ old 9 rowTÅ
tCf-e-s 'Mse.--O\.!.t~t--b¿ ff.,~C?eC!L~d -10.. reffio,~ . ¡:;ö ¡ut,'çn . trOD) Ço.r~xbo.y,~t
fr.Offi\iQ. WI (:1ktd.<." tofu.I\Umerou,> dÜ~fr-r9V5~ ~ b.?1"S fk?(jnjf~g
_Œ_.....W.~'ld.~/? (-l.,lro---\-XK1DJ~~.~-+ ,Siw ß-,-,~k~.Jrt<~) Jk> .1rgf? PCQ9 i.~ .'.
QX'd (j!2nÛ-, Q.hür:ol....~b¡j-cd.CL~CiIE:a.~tb~tl~(O..JJ j pt~a$"(\J CV~ C9f1çre.tJ.,.
3.I}.g. o.~~t.of \ì.*~C. L¡ +-krl'J hCt5 dro.":>i(co.-Llj ¡'(\(JeD ~<d. In 1h(~
..G.ceCb...w.¡fu. &tu.(r.e~ ~(fD it.fëcl d~Y~JÇJ~:.H'::::,. /}\I'S (h~ ~ 1 P,¿
pr..f \Je.~cl .
'..n. ------...-....
---------._.
1~6
----
-,---.-.--.--.--
ATTACHMENT' B _TO --,
REPORI I PO '2 -n2 -.-- '
--------- ..
"-'-----"--'----.
4 '. _.lro..f -Ç-rG. Tk h\'~ h c;lQ¡) ~I +J I hi'j" i ra.-t-hc.. ~ ot.e VdðpMe~s profD S ecÁ-
---~ perrnifiecl f(\~ NE 1~u..ad-rQ~ are u('\qccepia..bl€., Hw~. ~
---j~... opera-! '"NQ 0.1"" capeL d~, ("lOW. Thl2.r~ Or-€. {(\+er?ed"ò,,~ c,-;-
-_'S_b.epfn~./ Fð,(p,r-t O-,-..d lJJ"i-k-;, / f-tuJ<j ~ which- rov-€. a. V~~J
-. hi3h _f\u.mber..ot o.CClclQr-::t~1 ~r-t. úr€ o.l~ cJ.~I'ð" (Yoblerns aT
-. HVJj 'J) S}v¿ppcvd! fO.¡'(fX>rt due iú -JJ.e Olco :,fuf(oo'"\ Q(\.c1 ot
S~ppo.rd / Lv ki tee:, c1..u~ to ¡,rdec¡ uo-:/€. l)arJ¿/~ a:f- fI..R.- r'Y\ eel I co.--{
___\)lJi Idì^j Cð.I..À~"~ p2op~_io pork in no park/',,:) Ctr-t'as on 5J..epfbrc1
- - _T~re is ('()- -coeClcd-j. _-fer {ur#.eî cMve(øp/J\Q,J" req tn'r 1'(\5
-- - v~hlc u to ( -f (a-f{ tL e~.'- hok l ~ I dr'-uQ th.ro<.JJ~S I hl'S" cif.{\ ~ d-'j
re)lcle.~ioJ I r(~tou.(Cl,,*.s \ (on venier'\vL ~ior{.s Ot\O~ ~QS bars,
- Unle';.s -the('( o.re rt'O.jor ,cÙ~í'8('\ <..J-.a.,,&e.~ot""\ +~ rOMS-
'"
-.
- '---..-------------.-----.
--~--,_.
- . -- -._----
. .
. . - '. ,
- ----:------.---..---------------.----,--------
---------------
, - ----- -----_____n --- _n-__-.'----------------...--
Let~ --. --=i..h1C\/c'Ù\.J ¡'f'I____Ac{<.or'^j o..Y'\d. AoT
~f' u.w.. t~ ,---~ wa..:kr . lO...u...cS e. .$
o.r<Á rÁe\/eJopffi.~I\-~ I'~ .b;<;~d (ji\ V€.f\t'c. u Lar
--_.._..---fr.a£~ c.. _,~_ID.U :(tÅ:~~a.i.c__p:ill-ull' 0 ^ a ~
_._-~--~ d.fsi r u c. i i 0('\. of ve 3Q1-0.."1_1-00.4
, ;
--------_. u_-----------------, -. -"---'------------_____h____-
. '
----------- '.
------------- --------..----.,,-.---------
. -,
--.".. ---..-----...----- ,~-----_._----------
"'-----------"--'-"--- h -'-' -...--------..----.-.-,..--.--....-.., h.. ""----'----'--'---------' "'----------..--......--.-------,- ._,
------
---- ----'----------'-----'
----..".. -..".. ----- ------.--- ---..----..---.-.-
n-"____"-"",, ..---------------------.---- h-- ...._------,-----------
-- -_..---------
. ,
- -..... ..------------------------------------ __n"__, .--------.--------...----.---..-------------- ---_c_-
, . I ,-'
------"""h_'_-__-,--,--,--, --""'- --".. . -------------....--,----. '-------"------------..---..-....-,,- "----'--"--.---, "'------------_._..--n
-"
----------- """'----"-------- -..__.- ...-..-- '---------""-'------'-'------ -----....-'-------------.------...-'------,----------.-.-
---.._--...--_..,.__..----_.._---.._------"...._. .... --..... --'---"'---"'-'- .... -'" --""'--...---......---------.---- -.- - '.. ..-_... '-' -. -""""-""--"-- --.. -----------.---..--
---------- ....---- '---'----"'----"- ----
- ...---..""""- .. -- ---...
-- -,--.. ..-----.---..-....-
--,--..------., '-"'--...---..-----------
---""--------"---., _. ""'--'--"------------..--....,
.....-..--- ..--..---..--------------------- .--
157
ATTACHMENT u--LL--ro
REPORT 1/ PO 2?:> -{)2
Dear Catherine Rose
Nov. 6 2001
Re: Stormwater Management Study
Transportation Study
Development in the N.E. Quadrant
As I stated to Ron Taylor and yourself at the landowners meeting of March 200 I,
that I would not agree to give anymore financial retribution for any more studies in
The NorthEast Quadrant.
At the landowners meeting of March 2001, it was understood the landowners
and The City Of Pickering would be both involved with the consultants in these
studies. Since The City was the only one involved with the consultants the City
should be the only one to pay for these studies.
In 1999 I hired a consultant and biologist to perform an independent study on
this water course from Frenchman's Bay to Sheppard Ave. where this watercourse
turns into a massive system of storm water piping for the development north of
Sheppard Ave. to my astonishment the two studies from different consultants have the
the same outcome. I feel The City Of Pickering has wasted two years of my life and
held up development in the North East Quadrant for a long period of time.
The storm water problem we have now from Sheppard Ave. to Frenchman's Bay
was created by the residential and commercial development north of Sheppard Ave.
which the City let be built with insufficient storm water management facility.
There has been other studies done on this water course in the West shore area
because of a serious erosion problems. The city paid for these studies to be done.
In my opinion, the City is being predigest against the land owners of the North
East Quadrant.
If the Landowners of the North East Quadrant ,have to financiaUy contribute to these
studies, all Landowners of the North East Quadrant should pay equal amounts not the
payment schule set up by the Planning Dept. because these studies might contribute
some information for the development to all properties in the North East Quadrant not
certain property owners.
l!í8
ATTACHMENT # -JL_.. h : i
REPORT Ii PD~O2.. --.
The transportation study shows two different schemes on two maps I feel
if the best feature were used from both these maps, to make it a must that the
entrance on the north side of Kingston Rd. would be between Wood Carroll west
property line and are east property line aligning the entrance to these properties
with Michael Boyer east entrance on the south side Kingston Rd. allowing a break
in the future center medium if there was ever one put on Kingston Rd. Maybe there
could be some consideration on the north of the properties for an internal road of
minimal width from Delta Blvd. to the Hwy. 401 interchange stoplights.
Every public meeting I have attended, there are a small handful of residents from
Sheppard ave. that bring up the same complaints about development in the North
East Quadrant. It is about time personal from the City's Planning Dept. and the
Ward One Councilors stop looking at maps and pieces of paper and personally come
and look at these properties of the North East Quadrant to make their own decisions
about the accusations of a small minority of Sheppard Ave. residents and decide for
themselves if these accusations are real or a figment of their imagination.
I was very discussed with the public meeting of Oct 302001 where the meeting got
out of control and no one from the Planning Dept. could accomplish getting this meeting
back into some kind of orderly fashion, again nothing was accomplished. There was a
mention of another public meeting on Nov. 17 2001 I would hope that this meeting will
have a chairperson to keep this meeting in an orderly manner and be able to explain to the
public if any issues arise.
Thankyou
R McConachie
cc; N Carol
G McGregor
Councilor Brenner
Councilor Ryan
/:,'/""""e~:-
",/ "'~ "
ATTACHMENT #-12 _TO
REPORT # PO 23-02.
RECEIVED
FEB 1 2 2002 1. ~ 9
The City of Pickering Planning
And Development Department,
CITY OF PICKERING
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
Re: Northeast Ouacb:ill!LDevelopment
As land owners of765, 757 and 751 Sheppard Avenue, and being 3 of 4
lots which will be directly affected by the development of the Northeast Quadrant
of Whites Road, Kingston Road, and Sheppard Avenue, feel that based on neigh-
boring concel11S we would discriminated against in any endeavors to be included
(as per the approved NorthEast Quadrant Land Use and Guidlines) of the oppor-
tunity to sell off a portion of our backyards,for development.
We realize that the Northeast Quadrant needs to be carefully planned, as
Whites Road and Kingston Road is the main entrance off Hwy. #401 into the
City of Pickering. It would be beneficial to the City of Pickering and it's residents
that development of this area be appealing to the eye, easily accessed and with
amenities and services that are best suited for the area.
We have no objections to fe-zoning to accept these changes and would like
to kept infonned of all Applications, Amendments etc , but we would also like to
be given the opportunity, should it arise to be separated from the fourth lot 771
Sheppard Avenue which has shown no-interest to have these lands developed.
Yours Truly,
Kim Baker Valarie Lawson Shane Legere
765 Sheppard Ave. 757 Sheppard Ave. 751 Sheppard Ave.
Pickering, Ontario Pickering, Ontario. Pickering, Ontario
L1V IG7Æit-4 L1V IG4,.."., L1V 1G4
,/ - (~'_.-'" --., ~ ~
,/' "1.. --- .:> \ ~
- I/. -----,-"""-_.,-:,,J.._-_.._-_._-
-:/JIf. fF -==:-~-- ~:;:Z> ~
c.c /;Ontario Municipal Board
File #Z010070
160
ATTACHMENT#-.J~ TO
REPORT # PO 2~ - n2 .
Stefan and Raffi Nalbandian
3-30 Rivermede Road, Concord, Ontario, UK 3N3
October 30, 2001
Mr. Grant McGregor
Planning and Development Department
City of Pickering
One The Esplanade, Pickering, Ontario, L1 V 6K7
RECEIVED
OCT 3 0 2001
Re:
1475 & 1485 Whites Road
Public Meeting
North East Quadrant Review
CITY OF PICKERING
PLANNING AND
DEVELOPMENTDEPARTIMENT
Mr. McGregor
,.
We bought our property, municipally known as 1475 & 1485 Whites Road
based on the Northeast Quadrant Development Guidelines, which provides for full
access road for our property onto Whites Road.
For tonight Public Meeting we received for comments the Kingston Road-
Whites Road Northeast Quadrant Transportation Study, prepared by TSH. In this
study in the alternative íí Access Concept B íf you are proposing to restrict the access
to our property by fíright in- right out" access road only ( by means of raised center
median). Proposed restricted access devaluates our property and as such changes the
original grounds upon which we acquired our property. Therefore we support the
alternative íí Access Concept A "which enables safe pedestrian .crossing of Whites
Road and unrestricted access onto our property. '
Yours truly
Stefan and Raffi Nalbandian
~/A~ \~