The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPD 31-06 ú28 CiÚf o~ REPORT TO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Report Number: PO 31-06 Date: May 8,2006 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Department Subject: Disposal of Surplus Lands - Blocks 26,27,28 and 29, Plan 40M-1774, Pickering - Transfer of Landlocked Blocks to Stonebridge Lane Residents - File: L4650-019 Recommendation: A Resolution should be passed to: (a) declare the lands described as Blocks 26,27,28 and 29, Plan 40M-1774 surplus to the needs of the Corporation for the purpose of sale, for nominal consideration, to the abutting owners fronting Stonebridge Lane; and (b) authorize the Mayor, City Clerk, Director, Planning & Development and the City Solicitor to obtain all relevant documentation and execute all documentation required to effect the sale of Blocks 26, 27, 28 and 29, Plan 40M-1774 to the abutting owners, subject to any required easements. Executive Summary: It has been determined that the subject lands are no longer required by the City. In accordance with the Municipal Act and the City's Acquisition and Disposal of Land Policy, it is recommended that a Resolution be passed to declare the blocks surplus to the needs of the Corporation for the purpose of sale to the abutting owners. Financial Implications: Legal Fees (City's cost) Approximately $500.00 029 Report PO 31-06 Date: May 8, 2006 Subject: Disposal of Surplus Lands Page 2 Background: In 1993 the City entered into a Subdivision Agreement with Stolp Homes regarding the development of Plan 40M-1774. That Agreement provided for the conveyance of Blocks 26 to 30 to the abutting owners (residents fronting Stonebridge Lane - Plan M-1017) within 30 days of the registration of the Plan of Subdivision. The City was provided with copies of the Agreements of Purchase and Sale between Stolp Homes and the abutting owners, however the conveyances were never finalized by Stolp, leaving these blocks landlocked and undevelopable (see Location Map, Attachment #1 ). In 2000, Blocks 26 to 29 were acquired by Roni Excavating (a creditor of Stolp Homes) and Block 30 was acquired by a private individual through a Sheriffs sale. All five (5) blocks remained in these ownerships until early 2005 when they were processed through the City's property tax sales procedure. Block 30 was sold to the owner of 591 Stonebridge Lane through that tax sales process. Blocks 26 to 29 were not sold, and transferred to the ownership of the City. On November 7, 2005, Resolution 203/05 was passed by Pickering Council concurring with the recommendation of the Chief Administrative Officer to proceed with declaring Blocks 26 to 29 surplus to the needs of the Corporation and conveying them to the abutting owners fronting Stonebridge Lane as set out in the Subdivision Agreement entered into in 1993 (see Resolution, Attachment #2). City staff have been in contact with the landowners on Stonebridge Lane and all parties are interested in the acquisition of these blocks, for nominal consideration. It should be noted that the owners of 721 Sandcastle Court have submitted correspondence expressing an interest in acquiring Block 29, 40M-1774 and merging it with their easterly-abutting property (see Attachment #3). Accordingly, to implement the direction provided through Resolution 203/05, a Resolution should be passed to: (a) declare the lands described as Blocks 26,27,28 and 29, Plan 40M-1774 surplus to the needs of the Corporation for the purpose of sale, for nominal consideration, to the abutting owners fronting Stonebridge Lane; and (b) authorize the Mayor, City Clerk, Director, Planning & Development and the City Solicitor to obtain all relevant documentation and execute all documentation required to effect the sale of Blocks 26,27,28 and 29, Plan 40M-1774, subject to any required easements. Report PO 31-06 030 Date: May 8, 2006 Subject: Disposal of Surplus Lands Page 3 Attachments: 1 . Location Map 2. Resolution 203/05 3. Correspondence from the owners of 721 Sandcastle Court Prepared By: Approved I Endorsed By: '"1 D~ ~y~1n~or Property & Development Services Neil arrol Director, Planning & Development .-£ç? ~ mïlis Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer DB:bg Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer City Solicitor Coordinator, Business Development & Investment Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council \ ,/ " 6' / ,ì r 031 ATTACHMENT' , TO REPORT fI PO .~ \ - 0 L, --~ 0 « 0 !:r f- (j) W !:r u LANP€ ~ ~ - I STONEBRIDGE \ BLOCKS 26 TO 30 . rPLAN 40M·1774 STC NEBRIDGE:30 ~ ore .~~DG" 2j 721 587 SANDCASTLE STq NEBRIDGE 28 _____ or a$.------- (f) ~~¿r$ -- 719 '9~Q SANDCASTLE» IS'~OA.$. ~ 27 Z '~J901 0 <iT"", 715 ""'<>. - SANDCASTLE () ç'~ 26 ,/ » ~ 0' --1 f;; 1 úQ:-~ · ~ COURT / / í' 1/ I / ~ f- / / / I / I (j) W !:r U I \ \ \ \ \~> ?\ 1\ \----- ~ r \ ~OO~IV <.-<¡ II¡ 0 0¡y. City of Pickering ~ !:r « Q.. \ Planning & Development Department DATE: NOV. 1, 2005 J I SCALE: N.T.S. Data Sourc..: CI Teronet Ent.rpri... Inc. and ita aupplie,.a. "II riQl"lta Reaerved. Not 0 plan or .urvey. C 2005 MPAC and it. .upplie"s. AIt right. R...rv.d. Not a plan of S...,......y. ATTACHMENT,,62ro r¡U'OR1 # PD.-.;.~ ,- Ç)l,.; .. 032 ,CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT, . ',.,. CLER~S'DIVISION Clerk to ActiOn - Copy of -Correspondence to Follow Receive as Information Idb Q ~ L.b.IDh ~~_'* Debi A. Bentley () Copy: Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Division Head, Corporate Projects & Policy Taylor, Ron ...,;'TTt\CHf'JiEl'n#,~· _, ~m .,,¡:" ," R"I J; "ìD ':J - 0 ( , 1¡.r'U I 11 ~ c ~,___~_.__" From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: 033 Lawrence Servos [beverleyhendry@sympatico.ca] March 8, 2006 9:12 PM Taylor, Ron Ashe, Kevin -- Telus Blackberry; Brenner, Maurice, Councillor Fwd: Inquiry - Landlocked City-owned land 11 neighbourhood plan.pdf (1 MB) ~'!{ì ."..,.',..\,.. :;:~:¡ [MG_1948.jpg (220 KB) Mr. Taylor, My wife and I have owned the property adjoining east of block 29 (roll no. 010029231050000, see attached pdf reference map) for 12 years. Over that period the City has sold through bankruptcy proceedings, been owed taxes on, and is now in the process of declaring the land surplus. In short, the City has been unable to attract interest to buy this land from any of the adjoining properties, until now. Council is now in the process of declaring the land surplus, and has advised City staff to convey this block to the adjoining property on Stonebridge Dr. Council's direction to staff was to return the properties to the Stonebridge residents as intended in the original subdivision plan. This rationale is not entirely correct. My recollection in speaking with the property owners on Stonebridge and with the Sandcastle subdivision developer representative (Stolp Homes) was that a large retaining wall along this strip would have provided a terraced, leveled extension to the properties on Stonebridge, Stolp Homes reneged on this plan, and obtained permission from the city to grade the lots to a 2:1 slope, This decision made it acceptable for my wife and I to by the adjoining property at 721 Sandcastle Crt, as the steep block provided a sufficient privacy buffer from the extreme difference in elevation between the two properties (see photo below). Subsequent actions by the City to sell block 29 in order to manage the issues arising over the ownership of this block was ignored by both ourselves and the property owner on Stonebridge because the property has no useful function, and we believed that the City resolution would encompass all of the adjoining properties. Given the City is now proceeding to convey block 29 to the property on Stonebridege, we have since acquired an interest in joining block 29 to 721 Sandcastle Crt. Consistent with our written requests over the past year we request that the City: 1. convey block 29 to us, the owners of 721 Sandcastle Crt., (for which we would be willing to pay the legal costs), or 2. allow us to purchase block 29 at a reasonable cost. In closing, I would ask that the City reconsider its decision to convey block 29 to the adjoining property on Stonebridge, as it does not satisfy the original intent of the subdivision. I believe that the appropriate action for Council is to direct the City to offer block 29 for sale to all of the adjoining lots. Yours sincerely, Lawrence Servos, P.Eng. Beverly Hendry, M,Sc. 1 þ,TTt\CHMENT;; 3 ':;F"'Ufll fI PD _~L ~~TO ,_.,oQ1o "''''"''''''''' 034