HomeMy WebLinkAboutJune 12, 2006
~
Executive Committee Meeting
Agenda
Monday, June 12,2006
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor Dickerson
PRE-MEETING HAS BEEN SCHEDULED FOR 6:30 PM
(I)
MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION
PAGES
1.
Director, Planning & Development, Report PO 35-06
Amendment to Fill and Topsoil Disturbance Bv-Iaw 6060/02
1-22
1. That Report PO 35-06 of the Director, Planning & Development be received;
and
2. That the Amendment to Fill and Topsoil Disturbance By-law 6060/2, as set
out in Appendix I to Report PO 35-06, be forwarded to City Council for
enactment.
2.
Director, Plánning & Development, Report PO 36-06
Environmental Servicing Plan (ESP)
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
City of PickerinQ
23-40
1. That Report PO 36-06 of the Director, Planning & Development be received;
2. That Council endorse the draft Terms of Reference for the Duffin Heights
Neighbourhood Environmental Servicing Plan (ESP) as outlined in
Attachment #3 to Report PO 36-06 and authorize City staff to:
a) Retain the services of an engineering consulting firm to assist and provide
expertise to the City in the preparation of the ESP with an upset limit of
$30,000 to be paid for by Mattamy Homes; and
b) Undertake its best efforts to recover the costs of the ESP, including the
City's consultant costs, from landowners/developers within the Duffin
Heights Neighbourhood; and
c) Reimburse Mattamy Homes, to the extent costs are recovered, in
undertaking the Environmental Servicing Plan including costs under (3)
above; and
d) Enter into any agreements necessary in a form satisfactory to the Director,
Corporate Services & Treasurer and the City Solicitor, to provide for the
foregoing;
~...r..1
~
Executive Committee Meeting
Agenda
Monday, June 12, 2006
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor Dickerson
3. That the City Clerk forward a copy of Report PO 36-06 to the Region of
Durham Works Department, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority,
Mattamy Homes and Coughlan Homes; and
4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to give effect
thereto.
3.
Director, Planning & Development, Report PO 37-06
Durham Regional Official Plan Review
Proposed Amendments for Population
Emplovment and Urban Land
41-71
1. That Council receive Report PO 37-06 as the City's comments on the
Supplementary Attachment to the Proposed Amendment to the Durham
Regional Official Plan for Population, Employment and Urban Land, dated
April 25, 2006;
2. That Council request the Region to revise the Proposed Amendment for
Population, Employment and Urban Land of the Durham Regional Official
Plan to incorporate the revisions as set out in Appendix I to Report PO 37-06,
which among other matters, would include the following:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
identify the lands around Kinsale as an Urban Study Area instead of a
Living Area on Schedule 'A' - Map A4 - Regional Structure;
identify the lands east and south of Greenwood located outside the
Greenbelt Plan, within the Urban Area Boundary and as an Urban
Study Area on Schedule 'A' - Map A4 - Regional Structure, instead of
Major Open Space;
adopt a policy for the Kinsale and Greenwood Urban Study Areas to
permit redesignation of the study area lands for urban uses following
further review;
identify the Cherrywood Community as a Future Urban Policy Area on
Schedule 'A' - Map A4 - Regional Structure;
adopt a policy for the Cherrywood Future Urban Policy Area similar to
the following:
"Regional Council acknowledges that the Provincial
Greenbelt Plan and other legislation restricts urban
designation of the Cherrywood Community, in the City of
Pickering, at this time. However, should such restrictions be
removed in the future, the Region intends to pursue urban
Executive Committee Meeting
Agenda
Monday, June 12, 2006
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor Dickerson
designations for the Cherrywood Community, and, to this
end, has identified the Cherrywood Community as a Future
Urban Policy Area.";
(vi)
revise the population and employment forecast table to increase the
share for Pickering (and Whitby) reflecting a reallocation of the surplus
Ajax population and employment forecasts to Pickering (and Whitby);
and
reduce the net (developable) land area ratio to at least 50% of the
gross (total) land area to reflect current development and
environmental protection standards; and, if necessary, conduct a study
of recent development standards as back-up; and,
(vii)
1. That the City Clerk forward a copy of Report PO 37-06 to the Region of
Durham and to local municipalities in Durham Region.
4.
Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 25-06
Supply and Delivery of 4-Ton Truck
Quotation No. 20-2006
72-77
1. That Report OES 25-06 regarding the supply and delivery of a 4 Ton Dump
Truck be received;
2. That Quotation No. Q-20-2006 submitted by Scarborough Truck Centre Inc.
for the supply and delivery of a 4 Ton Dump Truck with snow plow and wing,
and electronic salt metering in the amount of $157,624 (GST, PST and
license extra) be accepted;
3. That the total gross purchase cost of $180,432.36 and a net purchase cost of
$170,974.92 be approved;
4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to
finance the project through the issuance of debt;
a) That debt financing through the Region of Durham in the amount of
$170,000.00 for a period not exceeding five (5) years, at a rate to be
determined, be approved and the balance of approximately $975 plus
financing costs be financed from current funds;
Executive Committee Meeting
Agenda
Monday, June 12, 2006
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor Dickerson
b) That financing and repayment charges in the amount of approximately
$39,000 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering
commencing in 2007 and continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid;
c) That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has certified that this
loan and the repayment thereof falls within the City's debt and financial
obligations approved annual repayment limit for debt and other financial
obligations for 2006 as established by the Province for municipalities in
Ontario;
d) That the Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary in order to
effect the foregoing; and
e) That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be given the authority to
give effect hereto.
5.
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 28-06
2006 Tax Rates for all Classes of Property and Final Tax Due Dates
For All Realty Tax Classes Except for Commercial, Industrial and
Multi-Residential Realitv Classes
78-84
1. That Report CS 28-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
be received;
2. That the 2006 Residential tax rates for the City of Pickering be approved
as contained in Schedule A to draft By-law No. 6676/06 attached hereto;
3. That the tax levy due dates for the Final Billing be July 7, 2006 and
September 28, 2006 excluding the industrial, multi-residential and
commercial realty tax classes;
4. That the attached draft By-law No. 6676/06 providing for the imposition of
the tax rates approved under Recommendation 1 above, be read three
times and approved;
5. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to make
any changes or undertake any actions necessary, including altering due
dates, in order to ensure the tax billing process is completed;
Executive Committee Meeting
Agenda
Monday, June 12, 2006
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor Dickerson
6. That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to make
any changes to the final tax rates to comply with Provincial regulations;
and
7. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the
necessary actions to give effect thereto:
6.
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 30-06
2005 Pre-Audit Balances of Reserves and Reserve Funds
85-112
That Report CS 30-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be
received for information.
7.
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 31-06
ChanQe to User Fee By-law Due to Reduction in GST
113-149
1. That Report CS 31-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be
received;
2. That Council enact the attached General Municipal Fees and Charges By-
law which provides for revised 2006 fees and charges, where applicable,
adjusted to reflect the reduction in the Goods and Services Taxes (GST);
and
3. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the
necessary actions to give effect thereto.
8.
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 32-06
Cash Position Report as at March 31. 2006
150-159
That Report CS 32-06 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be
received for information.
(II)
OTHER BUSINESS
(III)
ADJOURNMENT
CitJ¡ c~
001
REPORT TO
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Report Number: PO 35-06
Date: June 12, 2006
From:
Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
Subject:
Amendment to Fill and Topsoil Disturbance By-law 6060/02
Recommendation:
1.
That Council RECEIVE Report PO 35-06 of the Director, Planning & Development.
2.
That the Amendment to Fill and Topsoil Disturbance By-law 6060/02, as set out
in Appendix I to Report PO 35-06, be FORWARDED to City Council for
enactment.
Executive Summary: It is necessary to amend portions of the City's Fill and
Topsoil Disturbance By-law 6060/02 in order to provide more specific restrictions on the
type of fill material which may be placed.
Financial Implications:
N/A
1.0
Backaround:
By-law 6060/02 was implemented in order to control the removal and placement
of significant amounts of fill, where such activities are not otherwise regulated by
City Planning or Conservation Authority applications.
In December 2005, the City issued Orders against a fill permit holder for placing
material which contained debris and refuse. The by-law contains a prohibition
against the dumping of "contaminated fill", however the owner provided reports
which contested that the material, albeit full of debris, was nonetheless
uncontaminated in environmental terms. The City did manage to address this
case successfully and enforce the placement of clean fill.
In order to augment the City's capability to enforce prohibitions on the dumping of
fill which contains debris and other deleterious material in any future cases, it is
recommended that the by-law be amended to further define the types of
permitted fill.
-,
on')
I( (...
Report PO 35-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Subject: Amendment to Fill and Topsoil
Disturbance By-law 6060/02
Page 2
The proposed amendment introduces additional definitions of permitted fill types,
further requirements for specifying all proposed fill material in every permit
application, and a prohibition against the dumping of anything other than clean
fill. A draft amending by-law is attached as Appendix I to Report PO 35-06 and a
copy of the complete by-law incorporating and highlighting the proposed
revisions, is attached for information as Attachment #1. These revisions have
been reviewed and sanctioned by the City Solicitor.
Further, it is the intention of the Planning & Development Department to meet
later this year with Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) and
Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) to review our respective
fill and topsoil disturbance regulations with the objective of improving the
integration and coordination of our joint efforts in regulating this activity.
APPENDIX:
Appendix I: Draft By-law
Attachment:
1.
Proposed Revisions for Draft By-law 6060/02
Prepared By:
Approved I Endorsed By:
~
Robert Starr
Supervisor, Development Control
---
BS:jlm
Attachment
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering ci Council
/'
003
APPENDIX I TO
REPORT PO 35-06
DRAFT BY-LAW
AMENDMENT TO FILL AND TOPSOIL DISTURBANCE
004
TH E CORPORATION OF T'Jf pf OF PICKERING
BY-~~I" 106
Being a by-law to amend the
Fill and Topsoil Disturbance By-law
WHEREAS on January 20, 2002 the City passed By-law 6060/02 to regulate the
placing or dumping of fill, the removal of topsoil and the alteration of the grading
of land; and
WHEREAS the City wishes to amend By-law 6060/02 to further define the types
of permitted fill.
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.
Section 1 of By-law 6060/02 is amended by adding the following definition:
d. 1) "clean fill" means soil, stone, concrete, sod, turf or other fill material
approved by the Director on the basis of the submission described
in clause 7 i) to this by-law, which is not contaminated and which
does not contain garbage, debris or other materials;
2.
Section 5 of By-law 6060/02 is amended by striking out "or" at the of
clause a), by adding "or" at the end of clause b), and by adding the
following clause:
c)
place or allow to be placed anything other than clean fill.
3.
Section 7 of By-law 6060/02 is amended by striking out "and" at the end of
clause h), by renumbering clause i) to clause j), and by adding the
following clause:
i)
a description of the type of any fill material being placed; and
4.
This by-law shall come into effect on the day of its passing.
BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this - day of
June, 2006.
David Ryan, ~:AFf
Debi, A. Qntley, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT' , TO
REPORT I PO ?>5-0"
005
THE CORPORATION OF TH( CITY OF PICKERING
BY - ..A W "'\'0102
Being a by-law to prOhi~~egUlate the placing or dumping
of fill, the removal of to= :~d the alteration of the grade of
land.
WHEREAS pursuant to Section 142(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, the Council of a local
municipality may,
a)
prohibit or regulate the placing or dumping of fill;
b)
prohibit or regulate the removal of topsoil;
c)
prohibit or regulate the alteration of the grade of the land;
d)
require that a permit be obtained for the placing or dumping of fill, the removal of
topsoil or the alteration of the grade of the land;
e)
impose conditions to a permit, including requiring the preparation of plans
acceptable to the municipality relating to grading, filling or dumping, the removal
of topsoil and the rehabilitation of the site;
f)
require that fill dumped or placed contrary to a by-law passed or a permit issued
under Section 142 of the Act be removed by the person who dumped or placed it
or who caused or permitted it to be dumped or placed;
g)
require the rehabilitation of land from which topsoil has been removed contrary to
a by-law passed or a permit issued under Section 142 of the Act;
h)
require that the grade of the land altered contrary to a by-law passed or a permit
issued under Section 142 of the Act be restored to its original condition by the
person who altered it or who caused or permitted it to be altered;
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
DEFINITIONS
1.
For the purpose of this by-law,
a)
"agricultural" means lands that are cultivated and/or used for raising of
livestock;
006
- 2-
ATTACHMENT I I TO
REPORT I PO ð6 .- 010
b)
"applicant" means an owner, or an owner's agent who is authorized by the
owner to act on behalf of the owner;
c)
"body of water" includes any brook, creek, stream, river, lake, pond,
waterway, watercourse, canal, or other flowing or standing water;
d)
"City" means the Corporation of the City of Pickering;
d.1) fI' an fill" means soil, stone, concrete, sod, turf or other fill material
~A roved by the Director on the basis of the submission described in
D to this by-law, which is not contaminated and which does not
contain garbage, debris or other materials;
e) "contaminated fill" means soil, fill or other material containing any solid,
liquid, gas, odour, waste product, radioactivity or any combination thereof
which is present in a concentration greater than which naturally occurs
and which has the potential to have an adverse effect on human activity;
f)
"development" means the construction of buildings and above or
underground services such as roads, parking lots, paved storage areas,
watermains, storm and sanitary sewers, general grading works and similar
facilities;
g)
"Director" means the Director, Planning & Development for the City of
Pickering, or designate;
h)
"dumping" means the depositing of fill in a location other than where the fill
was obtained and includes the movement and depositing of fill from one
location on a property to another location on the same property;
i)
"dust" includes loose or blowing earth, sand or soil that may be
transported from the site;
j)
"erosion" means the detachment and movement of soil, sediment or rock
fragments by water, wind, ice or gravity;
k)
"fill" means any type of material deposited or placed on lands and includes
soil, stone, concrete, sod or turf either singly or in combination;
I)
"grade" is defined as:
i)
"existing grade" means the elevation of the existing ground surface
of the lands upon which dumping and/or placing of fill is proposed
or as it existed prior to the placing or dumping of fill;
007
ATTACHMENT fI I TO
REPOAl # PO ~'5 -oþ
~(¡i) "finished grade" means the elevation of ground surface of lands
~J ~ \ upon which fill is proposed to be placed or has been placed in
d r accordance with this by-law;
"'~) "land disturbance" means any man-made change of the land surface
V including removing vegetative cover, removing topsoil, excavating, filling
and grading;
2.
- 3-
n)
"litter and debris" includes building materials, garbage, waste, vegetation
or any other loose material that may be transported from the site by wind,
persons, vehicles or other means;
0)
"lot" means a legally described parcel of land;
p)
"mud tracking" means the obstruction, encumbering, injuring, or fouling of
roads, boulevards and bridges via the throwing, placing or depositing of
dirt, refuse or any other debris;
q)
"officer" means persons assigned by the Director to enforce the provisions
of this by-law";
r)
"owner" means the registered owner of the land on which is located or will
be located the topsoil removal, fill placement and erosion and sediment
control;
s)
"permit" means a topsoil removal, fill placement and erosion and sediment
control permit;
t)
u)
"permit holder" means an owner to whom a permit has been issued;
"site" means the lands from which it is proposed that topsoil be moved or
removed, or subjected to land disturbance and/or land development;
v)
"topsoil" means those horizons in a soil profile, commonly known as the
"0" and the "A" horizons, containing organic material and includes
deposits of partially decomposed organic matter such as peat;
w)
"Treasurer" shall mean the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer for
the City of Pickering, or designate.
EXEMPTIONS
This by-law does not apply to:
a)
Activities or matters undertaken by the City, any local board of the City or
the Regional Municipality of Durham.
008 ~
Q~~~ b)
f)
g)
i)
j)
- 4 -
ATTACHMENT # , TO
REPORT # PO 35 -Ob
The placing or dumping of fill, removal of topsoil or alteration of the grade
of land which is carried out to implement a site plan agreement,
subdivision agreement or development agreement previously entered into
with the City, pursuant to the provisions of the Planning Act.
c)
The placing or dumping of fill, removal of topsoil or alteration of the grade
of land imposed as a condition to a development permit authorized by
regulation made under Section 70.2 of the Planning Act or as a
requirement of an agreement entered into under that regulation.
d)
The placing or dumping of fill, removal of topsoil or alteration of the grade
of land undertaken by a transmitter or distributor, as those terms are
defined in Section 2 of the Electricity Act, 1998, for the purpose of
constructing and maintaining a transmission system or a distribution
system, as those terms are defined in the that Section.
e)
The placing or dumping of fill, removal of topsoil or alteration of the grade
of land undertaken on land described in a licence for a pit or quarry or a
permit for a wayside pit or wayside quarry issued under the Aggregate
Resources Act.
The placing or dumping of fill, removal of topsoil or alteration of the grade
of land undertaken on land in order to lawfully establish and operate or
enlarge any pit or quarry on land,
i)
that has not been designated under the Aggregate Resources Act
or a predecessor of that Act, and
ii)
on which a pit or quarry is a permitted land use under a by-law
passed under Section 34 of the Planning Act.
The placing or dumping of fill, removal of topsoil or alteration of the grade
of land undertaken as an incidental part of drain construction under the
Drainage Act or the Tile Drainage Act.
h)
The removal of topsoil as an incidental part of a normal agricultural
practice including sod-farming, greenhouse operations and nurseries for
horticultural products, provided the topsoil itself is not for sale, exchange
or other disposition.
Lands within a fill regulated area as defined by regulations made under
the Conservation Authorities Act.
Land disturbance associated with minor gardening, landscaping or the
installation of swimming pools incidental to a residential use.
3.
4.
5.
~~~
Q~ c)
6.
- 5-
ATTACHMENT # I TO
REPOR1 # PO ~~-Db
009
k)
The removal of topsoil as an incidental part of the construction of
underground services or utilities, where the topsoil is removed and held for
subsequent replacement.
I)
The removal of topsoil or placing of fill where the aggregate quantity of
such removal or placement on anyone lot does not exceed twenty cubic
metres in any period of three consecutive months.
PROHIBITION
No person or corporation shall remove or cause the removal of any topsoil, place
or dump fill, or grade or perform any other land disturbance or land filling activity
on or from any lot in the City except in accordance with a permit issued under
this by-law.
Notwithstanding the exemptions described in Section 2 of this by-law, no person
or corporation shall remove or permit the removal of topsoil from any land or
place or permit the placement of fill on any land adjacent to or within 30 metres of
any body of water without a permit having been issued by the Director.
Notwithstanding the exemptions described in Section 2 of this by-law, no person
or corporation shall;
a)
place or allow to be placed, or remove or allow to be removed any fill on
any wetlands identified as provincially significant by the Ministry of Natural
Resources;
place or allow to be placed, or remove or allow to be removed any
contaminated fill on or from any land within the City unless the placing or
removal of such fill is authorized by a certificate issued by the Ministry of
Environment and Energy, or
place or allow to be placed anything other than clean fill.
PERMIT APPLICATIONS
To obtain a permit, the owner of the land or his authorized agent shall file an
application with the Director.
7.
All applications for permits shall be accompanied by:
a)
b)
A completed application on the form as established by the Director;
A site map identifying the location, boundaries and number of hectares in
the site, the nearest major intersection and a north arrow;
010
8.
-6-
ATTACHMENT II 1 10
~EPORIII PO 36 -of:>
c)
Erosion and Sediment Control Plans and Design Report in accordance
with Section 8 herein;
d)
The fee prescribed in Schedule A to this by-law;
e)
A letter of credit as prescribed in Schedule A to this by-law;
f)
A written authorization, signed by the owner, stating that officers of the
City and/or any person in the company of the officers will be allowed to
enter the site for the purpose of inspecting for compliance with the control
plan or for performing any work necessary to bring the site into
compliance with the control plan;
g)
Work schedule;
A written confirmation from a qualified person that the material being
placed or removed is not contaminated fill;
A description of the type of any fill material being placed; and
All other information as may be required.
Erosion and Sediment Control Plans shall be certified by a professional engineer
licensed to practice in Ontario and shall include:
a)
Drawings at a scale of 1 :500 or 1: 1 000 which described compliance with
the site design requirements in Schedule B to this by-law, and which
include:
i)
adjacent land uses and the location and use of any buildings and
other structures adjacent to the site;
ii)
the location, dimensions and use of the buildings and other
structures existing or proposed to be erected on the site;
iii)
the location and dimensions of driveways and rights-of-way across
each lot;
iv)
the location of lakes, streams, wetlands, channels, ditches, other
water courses and other bodies of water on and within 30 metres
beyond the site boundary;
v)
the Regional Storm Flood Line and Conservation Authority Fill
Regulation Lines;
vi)
the location and boundaries of predominant soil types;
ATTACHMENT # t TO
- 7 - REPORT # PO 35.. 0 b .
l\if1 the location and type of existing vegetative cover, including the
o. ~t'" species and size in caliper of all trees and the location of all shrubs;
. viii) the location and dimensions of any existing and proposed storm
water drainage systems and natural drainage patterns on and
within 30 metres beyond the site boundary;
ix)
x)
xi)
xii)
xiii)
xiv)
xv)
xvi)
011
the location and dimensions of utilities, structures, wells, sewage
systems, roads, highways and paving within 30 metres beyond the
site boundary;
the existing site topography at a contour interval not to exceed one-
half of one metre and to extend a minimum of 30 metres beyond
the lot/site boundary;
the proposed final elevations of the site;
the location and dimensions of all proposed land disturbance
activities;
the location and dimensions of all temporary soil stockpiles;
the location of designated haul routes and construction access
points to the site including the location of mud mats or other
measures to remove earth and mud from the tires of vehicles
leaving the site;
the location, dimensions and details of all construction site control
measures necessary to meet the requirements of this by-law; and
an indication of the direction of overland flow routes.
b)
An Erosion and Sediment Control Design Report containing:
i)
ii)
iii)
a description of the features in the Erosion and Sediment Control
Plan;
a description of the measures proposed to prevent erosion and to
retain sediment on the site, including, but not limited to, the designs
and specifications for swales, dikes, drains, sediment control
ponds, mud mats, silt fences, check dams, catch basin protection
and slope stabilization measures and a schedule for their
maintenance and upkeep;
a description of the mud tracking control and road maintenance
program;
012
~r1
o~ v)
vi)
vii)
-8-
ATTACHMENT #
REPOR11J PO
\ TO
~5-D'=>
a description of the measures proposed to control the offsite
movement of dust, litter and debris and related offsite maintenance;
the name and 24 hour contact telephone number of the person
responsible for the maintenance programs described in (iii) and (iv)
above;
a description of the vegetative measures to be used, including, but
not limited to mulches, types of seeds and fertilizers and their
application rates, the type, location and extent of pre-existing and
undisturbed vegetation types and a schedule for maintenance and
upkeep;
a schedule of the starting and completion dates of each land
disturbing or related activity, including the installation of
construction site control measures needed to meet the requirement
of this by-law.
COMPLIANCE WITH OTHER REGULATIONS AND STATUTES
The provisions of this by-law and the issuance of a permit by the Director shall
not affect the obligations of an owner to comply with all other restrictions
governing the work imposed under law by any authority having jurisdiction.
9.
10.
The Director shall not issue a permit unless;
Where applicable, all requirements contained in the Oak Ridges
Conservation Plan, O.Reg 140102, and any other regulations made under
the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act 2001 are complied with in the
proposed work, and
a)
b)
The land use to which the proposed work pertains is permitted by the
applicable by-laws passed under the Planning Act.
PERMIT ISSUANCE
The Director shall issue a permit where all the application requirements set out
herein are completed, and the proposed land disturbance, Erosion and Sediment
Control Plans and Design Report comply with the requirements of this by-law.
11.
12.
Where the Director refuses to issue a permit, the applicant shall be informed in
writing of the reasons for refusal.
13.
Permits shall be subject to the conditions described in Schedule C to this by-law.
nl r.!
U J
ArTACHiVíE.Nf # ' TO
- 9 - REPORT # PO 35- 0&
14.~~'1 shall be valid for a period of one year, and may be extended one or more
0 . ~rs for an additional one year, subject to any additional control measures and
nspection fees as determined by the Director and as set out in this by-law.
c
IMPLEMENTATION AND INSPECTIONS
15.
16.
17.
18.
All erosion and sediment control measures necessary to meet the requirements
of this by-law shall be in place prior to any land disturbance of the site. These
measures shall be maintained by the owner during the period of land disturbance
so as to ensure adequate compliance with the requirements of this by-law and to
prevent damage occurring as a result of erosion, sedimentation or flooding.
If the property for which the permit has been issued is transferred while the
permit remains in effect, the new owner shall either:
a)
provide the City with a written undertaking agreeing to comply with all the
conditions under which the existing permit was issued; and
b)
provide a Letter of Credit in accordance with the requirements of Schedule
A to this by-law; or
c)
apply for and obtain a new permit in accordance with the provisions of this
by-law.
REVOCATION OF PERMITS
Where a permit has been issued on the basis of misleading or false information
in an application, the permit may be revoked and the permit holder shall
immediately cease all operations being conducted under the authority of the
revoked permit.
ENFORCEMENT
If an officer is satisfied that a contravention of the by-law has occurred, the officer
may make an order requiring the owner of the land or the person who caused or
permitted the placing or dumping of fill, removal of topsoil or alteration of the
grade of land in contravention of the by-law to discontinue the activity and the
order shall set out,
a)
the municipal address or the legal description of the land; and
b)
reasonable particulars of the contravention and the period within which
there must be compliance.
014
19.
20.
21.
- 10-
ATTACHMENT #"'f TO
REPORT II PO - '3 S -.o~_o.
Every person who contravenes any section of this by-law is guilty of an offence
and upon conviction is liable to a fine or penalty for each offence, exclusive of
costs as prescribed by the Provincial Offences Act.
All Schedules attached to this by-law shall form part of this by-law.
In the event that a court of competent jurisdiction declares any provision or
provisions of this by-law to be invalid for any reason, the remainder of the by-law
shall remain in full force and effect.
BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this
,2006.
day of
Debi A. Bentley, City Clerk
p~Afs1
The Fee for processing, administration and inspection for a one year permit is
Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00) plus One Thousand Dollars ($1,000.00) per
hectare to a maximum of Four Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($4,500.00) or
part thereof of site area.
1.
ATTACHMENT II
REPORT # PO
I TO
3 ~-- 0 ~,_.
015
SCHEDULE A
LETTER OF CREDIT (to guarantee site control measures)
An irrevocable letter of Credit or other security acceptable to the City to cover
100% of the estimated cost of site control measures including the cost of the
Erosion and Sediment Control measures, mud tracking control measures, litter
and debris control measures, and dust control measures is required. The
security is to be in a form acceptable to the Treasurer.
2.
a)
The security must remain in effect for the full duration of the permit with an
automatic renewal clause in the document. Any letter of Credit and its
subsequent renewal forms shall contain a clause stating that thirty days
written notice must be given to the City prior to its expiry or cancellation.
All calculations to be supplied by the owner or their representative and
verified by City staff.
b)
In the event that the City receives notice that a Letter of Credit is expiring
and will not be renewed, or, if further or additional securities are not
provided within the said thirty days, the city may draw on the current Letter
of Credit at the discretion of the Treasurer. The permit holder agrees that
any interest accruing on the realized security shall belong to the City and
not to the permit holder.
c)
It is the responsibility of the permit holder:
i)
to provide evidence satisfactory to the Director that the site has
been adequately reinstated and stabilized in accordance with this
by-law and the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan accompanying
the permit; and
ii)
to notify the City no later than five working days of the completion of
works set out in the Permit and to request that the City carry out an
inspection to confirm that all relevant terms of this by-law have
been complied with.
d)
The security may be reduced from time to time by the Treasurer. When
the provisions of subsections (i) and (ii) of Section 2 (c) have been fully
complied with, the Treasurer shall release the Applicant's security.
016
ATTACHMENT' , TO
1 REPORTI PO ~~-ot
ð J\f If a new owner satisfies all the conditions outlined in the by-law, all
O.¡pf" securities will be returned to the original owner unless the original owner
'" authorizes, in writing, the return of the securities to another person.
PERMIT EXTENSION FEES
3.
The fee for processing, administration and inspection for a one year permit
extension is Five Hundred Dollars ($500.00).
ATTACHMENT # ' TO
REPORT # PO- "3 S =-o_~"~~.
017
&i SCHEDULE B
ð. ~' ~IGN REQUIREM ENTS
t\¡UIOWing requirements shall be met on all sites where a permit is required to
:Rove topsoil:
1.
2.
3.
Site Dewaterina:
a)
If it is demonstrated that no particles are greater than or equal to 40
microns in size, then dewatering operations may be conducted provided
that the water is not permitted to discharge directly into receiving bodies of
water or stream.
b)
Water pumped for dewatering operations on the site shall be treated by
temporary sedimentation basins, grit chambers, sand filters, upflow
chambers, swirl concentrators or other appropriate controls.
Drain Inlet Protection:
All rear lot storm drain inlets or any other inlets as the Director considers
necessary, shall be protected with filter fabric, or equivalent barriers meeting
accepted design criteria, standards and specifications accepted by the Director.
Site Erosion and Sediment Control:
The Erosion and Sediment Control Plan should consider the following types of
controls:
a)
Stabilization practices for soil erosion and sediment control. The common
stabilization practices of two types: vegetative stabilization practices such
as temporary seeding, sod stabilization, permanent seeding and
plantation, maintenance of buffer zone, and preservation of natural
vegetation and non-vegetative stabilization practices such as mulching,
geotextiles, soil-retaining measures and stream bank stabilization.
b)
Runoff velocity dissipation measures, which slow down the runoff flowing
across the site by using measures such as check dams and surface
roughening, and gradient terraces.
c)
Storm water runoff control, which prevent runoff from flowing across
disturbing areas by using measures such as earth dikes, drainage swales,
and drains.
d)
Structural control measures to eliminate the offsite movement of soil such
as mud mats and silt fences.
'.. 1°. ATIACHNIENT #~ I TO
(\ 0 REPORT # PD~L._.
~r\.~luclura, practices such as Sediment Control Ponds and ultimate
nr Stormwater Management (SWM) ponds, which hold storm water runoff in
V ' a controlled fashion and remove sediments in the storage device.
'f) In the event that a Sediment Control Pond cannot be constructed to
service the entire site (i.e., capture all the runoff from the site), the reasons
must be documented and alternative control works must be proposed.
Other approved sediment control measures, which remove sediments
from on-site runoff before it leaves the site must be constructed.
4.
5.
As required in this by-law for the lots/sites with more than five hectares disturbed
at a time, or in staggered manner, all of which are served by a common
discharge location, a Sediment Control Pond, or equivalent control measures
(e.g., SWM facility, if applicable) must be provided. The Sediment Control Pond
volume should consist of a permanent pool and active storage component. The
permanent pool component should be sized for ultimate development conditions
to provide a volume equivalent to a Level 1 water quality control as per the
current Ministry of the Environment Stormwater Management Planning (SWMP)
Manual, or 125 m3/ha, whichever is greater. The active storage volume
component should be sized for a minimum of 125 m3/ha of runoff and released
over a minimum 24-hour period.
If the ultimate SWM facility cannot be used as the Sediment Control Pond for the
entire site/lot during construction period, a temporary sedimentation pond shall
be constructed with design criteria as follows:
a)
The Sediment Control Pond shall be constructed prior to topsoil stripping
or fill placement;
b)
Where possible, the Sediment Control Pond and conveyance channels
should be located in such a way that the runoff will be captured and
conveyed from the entire disturbed area to the pond;
c)
The Sediment Control Pond volume must consist of a permanent pool and
active storage component. The permanent pool component should be
sized for ultimate development conditions to provide a volume equivalent
to a level 1 water quality control as per the current Ministry of the
Environment (MOE) SWMP Manual, or 125 m3/ha, whichever is greater.
The active storage volume component should be sized for a minimum of
125 m3/ha of runoff and released over a minimum 24-hour period;
d)
To maintain sufficient permanent pool volume during the land disturbance
period, the Erosion Sediment Control (ESC) Plan should provide the
maintenance schedule. The Sediment Control Pond should be cleaned
once the removal efficiency of the pond has been reduced by 5% as per
the MOE SWMP Manual;
ATTACHMENT #
REI-'OAT # PO
I TO
~5 - Ob
019
6. 1\.",~oIlOWing criteria apply to land disturbing activities that results in runoff
d ~1Ving the site:
Of' a) All the activities on the lot/site shall be conducted in a phased manner,
... where appropriate, to minimize the area of bare soil exposed at anyone
time.
b)
c)
d)
Concentrated runoff from adjacent areas passing through the site shall be
diverted around disturbed areas, if practical. Otherwise, the channel shall
be protected by cut-off swales and/or silt fences being placed along
channel edges to avoid sediment from disturbed areas reaching the
channel.
Any topsoil or dirt storage piles containing more than one hundred cubic
metres (100 m3) of material shall be a minimum of 10 metres from or up
the slope from a roadway or channel. If remaining for more than sixty
days, said soil or dirt storage piles shall be stabilized by mulching,
vegetative cover, traps or other means. Erosion from topsoil or dirt
storage piles which will be in existence for less than sixty days should be
controlled by sediment control fence (i.e., filter fence) barriers around the
pile.
Runoff from the entire disturbed area on the site shall be controlled as
follows:
i)
All disturbed ground left inactive shall be stabilized by seeding,
sodding, mulching or covering, or other control measure. The
period of time of inactivity shall be at the discretion of the Director.
ii)
Notwithstanding the above paragraph, a permit holder or applicant
for a permit who has also applied for but not yet received a building
permit or any other necessary permit may be granted an extension
to the permitted period of inactivity, at the discretion of the Director,
provided that said applicant or permit holder provides satisfactory
proof that he has made his best efforts to have said building or
other necessary permit issued. Fees for the extension will be
deferred for the period of inactivity if the site is secured in a manner
satisfactory to the City.
iii)
For lots/sites less than five hectares disturbed at one time,
sediment control fences and cut-off swales/channels or equivalent
control measures shall be placed along all down slope boundaries
of the site.
~, r ATTACHMENT I \ TO
U ¿ 0 REPORT;¡ PO ~S-OCo
~" ~\or lots/sites adjacent to existing residential areas, a fence and a
Q r cut-off swale/channel may be required around the entire perimeter
of the site to prevent drainage onto private lands. A three metre
, wide buffer strip and/or sediment control fence shall be provided
along the perimeter of the down slope boundaries of the site.
v)
The sediment control guidelines prepared by the Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority and Ministry of Natural Resources
for the Province of Ontario, or municipal standards are to be
followed.
vi)
For sites with extensive fill requirement, the Director may waive the
requirements for stabilization of disturbed land after thirty days of
inactivity provided that the sediment control measures have been
implemented to the satisfaction of the Director.
,;.\, fAt::';.,:!),) r !I t
QEf'ur-n,~ PD~__... 3.$ --ok:. -.
(i? -,
,~- ..
SCHEDULE C
j)
ONDITIONS
Notify the Director or his/her designate a minimum of two business days
prior to the commencement or recommencement of any land disturbing
activity;
b)
Obtain permission in writing from the Director or his/her designate prior to
modifying any element of the ESC Plan;
c)
Install all control measures as identified in the approved ESe Plan;
d)
Maintain all road drainage systems, stormwater drainage systems, control
measures and other facilities identified in the ESe Plan;
e)
Promptly repair any siltation or erosion damage to adjoining surfaces and
drainage ways resulting from land developing or disturbing activities;
f)
Inspect the sedimentation control measures at least once per week and
after each rainfall of at least one centimeter and make needed repairs;
g)
Allow City officers or agents of the City to enter the site for the purpose of
inspecting for compliance with the ESC Plan or for performing any work
necessary to bring the site into compliance with the ESe Plan;
h)
i)
Maintain a copy of the permit on the site;
Notify all sub-contractors and suppliers of approved access routes to the
site and ensure compliance with these instructions;
Maintain all roads in same or better condition than existed prior to the
commencement of the work and keep all roads free from any materials or
equipment arising from the work set out in the permit;
k)
Ensure that no construction machinery is operated in contravention of
By-law 3821, as amended, (Noise By-law) or any successor thereto.
;¡,' I
35-QC9
2. ~~i~
Qt1 ~ Upon the failure by the permit holder to complete all or part of the works in
If' the time stipulated in the ESC Plan, the City may draw the appropriate
amount from the securities posted and use the funds to arrange for the
completion of the said works, or any part thereof.
022
dl .¡
b)
Upon failure by the permit holder to install, repair or maintain a specific
part of the works as requested by the City, and in the time requested, the
City may at any time authorize the use of all or part of the securities to pay
the cost of any part of the works it may in its or their absolute discretion
deem necessary.
c)
In the case of emergency repairs or clean-up, the City may undertake the
necessary works at the expense of the permit holder and reimburse itself
out of securities posted by the applicant.
C¿ÚI c~
From:
Subject:
REPORT TO
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
023
Report Number: 36-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
Environmental Servicing Plan (ESP)
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
City of Pickering
Recommendation:
That Council RECEIVE Report PO 36-06 of the Director, Planning & Development;
That Council ENDORSE the draft Terms of Reference for the Duffin Heights
Neighbourhood Environmental Servicing Plan (ESP) as outlined in Attachment #3
to Report PO 36-06 and AUTHORIZE City staff to:
retain the services of an engineering consulting firm to assist and provide
expertise to the City in the preparation of the ESP with an upset limit of
$30,000 to be paid for by Mattamy Homes;
undertake its best efforts to recover the costs of the ESP, including the
City's consultant costs, from landowners/developers within the Duffin
Heights Neighbourhood;
reimburse Mattamy Homes, to the extent costs are recovered, in
undertaking the Environmental Servicing Plan including costs under (a)
above;
enter into any agreements necessary in a form satisfactory to the Director,
Corporate Services & Treasurer and the City Solicitor, to provide for the
foregoing;
That the City Clerk FORWARD a copy of Report PO 36-06 to the Region of
Durham Works Department, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority,
Mattamy Homes and Coughlan Homes; and
1.
2.
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
3.
4.
That the appropriate City staff be authorized to give effect thereto.
Executive Summary: In 2003, Council refined the policies and designations to the
Pickering Official Plan for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood. Development Guidelines
were also adopted to ensure that an identifiable urban image develops over time along
Brock Road through urban design principles.
Prior to development occurring in the neighbourhood, an Environmental Servicing Plan
(ESP) is required. This ESP will define boundaries and buffers for the natural features,
address servicing provisions, and confirm municipal infrastructure.
'Ì '
, .'
024
Report PO 36-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Subject: Environmental Servicing Plan
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
Page 2
Aware of the need for an ESP, Mattamy Homes (Mattamy) and Coughlan Homes
(Coughlan) have agreed to undertake the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood ESP as
co-proponents. The consulting firm of Sernas Associates (Sernas) has been retained to
prepare the ESP.
City staff has reviewed the draft Terms of Reference document to ensure that the ESP
satisfies all Official Plan requirements. In addition, Toronto and Region Conservation
Authority has reviewed and provided comments on the draft Terms of Reference
document. The ESP is expected to take nine months to complete and will involve an
extensive consultation process with the City, the Region of Durham, the Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority, the benefiting landowners within the Duffin Heights
Neighbourhood and the public. The City will retain a consulting firm, at Mattamy's
expense, to assist staff in providing input to the process of preparing the ESP.
It is recommended that Council endorse the draft Terms of Reference and require any
benefiting landowners developing property in the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood to
contribute their pro-rata costs of preparing the ESP, including consulting costs incurred
by the City.
Financial Implications:
No direct cost to the City.
1.0
Backaround:
1.1
In 2003, Council adopted new land use policies and designations for the
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
On April 22, 2003, City Council adopted both Revision 1 to Modification 1 to the
Pickering Official Plan and new Development Guidelines for the Duffin Heights
Neighbourhood. This Revision fine-tuned the land use policies and designations
for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood. Regional Council later approved the
designations and associated land uses for the neighbourhood (see Attachment #1 -
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Land Use Designations).
1.2
An Environmental Servicing Plan is required prior to development
occurring in the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
An Environmental Servicing Plan (ESP) is required prior to development
occurring in the neighbourhood. The ESP will define the boundaries, buffers and
protection requirements for the natural features, outline servicing requirements
and phasing, and confirm the location of municipal infrastructure including
stormwater management facilities, parks and roads.
Report PO 36-06
Date: June 12, 2006
025
Subject: Environmental Servicing Plan
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
Page 3
1.3
Mattamy Homes and Coughlan Homes have agreed to undertake the ESP
for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood as co-proponents
Mattamy Homes (Mattamy) informed City staff of an agreement to acquire part of
the Seaton Golf Course lands for residential development after the Provincial
land exchange is finalized. In addition, Coughlan Homes (Coughlan) has
proposed to develop its lands north of the City's Operations Centre for residential
uses (see Attachment #2 - Development Interests). Aware of the need for an
ESP, both developers have agreed to collaborate and undertake the Duffin
Heights ESP as co-proponents.
2.0
Discussion
2.1
City staff has been reviewing and providing input on the draft Terms of
Reference document to ensure that the ESP satisfies all Official Plan
requirements
Mattamy has retained Sernas Associates (Sernas) to prepare the draft Terms of
Reference for the proposed Duffin Heights Neighbourhood ESP. Sernas was
previously involved in an earlier MESP for the East Duffins Area that was
prepared for the North Pickering Land Corporation in 1999. No further action
was taken on the 1999 MESP.
City staff has reviewed and provided input on the draft Terms of Reference
document to ensure that the ESP satisfies all Official Plan requirements. In
addition, TRCA has reviewed and provided comments on the draft Terms of
Reference. The ESP is expected to take nine months to complete and will be
carried out in accordance with the Class EA process that includes a consultation
process with the City, the Region of Durham, the Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority, the benefiting landowners within the Duffin Heights
Neighbourhood and the public (see Attachment #3 - Draft Terms of Reference
for the ESP).
2.2
Mattamy has agreed to front fund the ESP provided the City requires all
benefiting landowners developing property in the neighbourhood to
contribute their share of the study costs
Mattamy has agreed to front fund the ESP subject to the City agreeing to a
condition that any benefiting landowners developing property in the
neighbourhood will contribute their pro-rata costs of preparing the ESP, including
related consulting costs incurred by the City. In this regard, the City will retain a
consulting firm to assist staff in providing technical input to the process of
developing an ESP. A draft Terms of Reference for the consulting service has
been provided and is attached (see Attachment #4 - Consultant Review).
026
Report PO 36-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Subject: Environmental Servicing Plan
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
Page 4
The total cost of the ESP is estimated at $165,000, which includes the City's
consulting costs to an upset limit of $30,000. The recovery of costs is similar to
the City's Northeast Quadrant Study where benefiting landowners had to pay
their share of the study costs. In this case, a developer within the Duffin Heights
Neighbourhood will be required to pay their contribution at the appropriate time
as determined through the planning approval process, based on developable
hectares.
It is recommended that the Council authorize staff to recover the cost of the ESP
from landowners/developers within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood at an
appropriate pro-rate share including the City's consulting costs and to reimburse
Mattamy to the extent costs are recovered.
2.3
City staff supports Mattamy and Coughlan as co-proponents of the ESP for
the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
Having Mattamy and Coughlan as co-proponents in undertaking the ESP
provides cost and timing efficiencies. Completion of the ESP by the end of 2006
will provide the foundation for development proposals to be considered by the
City in 2007.
In conclusion, staff supports Mattamy and Coughlan as co-proponents of the
ESP for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood and requests that Council endorse the
ESP draft Terms of Reference. The undertaking of the ESP by Mattamy and
Coughlan does not prejudice Council's authority to endorse, amend or reject the
ESP upon completion and submission to the City.
Attachments:
1. Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Land Use Designations
2. Development Interests
3. Draft Terms of Reference for the Environmental Servicing Plan
4. Draft Terms of Reference for the City's Consultant
027
Report PO 36-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Subject: Environmental Servicing Plan
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
Page 5
Prepared By:
Approved I Endorsed By:
~ nI:L fI.g >-4 ~
Grant McGregor, MCIP, PP
Principal Planner - Policy
Neil Carro . PP
Director, Planning & Development
GM:ld
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering Cit au
,1/
LAND USE
STRUCTURE
¡'RBAX RESIDEXTlAL AREAS
LOWDENsm' AREAS
~ MEDIUM DE,'SITY AREAS
MIXEDUSEAREAS
III M]XEDCORRIDORS
NA ruRAL AREAS
FREEWAYS AXD MAJOR l'TILITIES
~ POTEKI1\LMUTIUSEAREAS
Z
..J
City of Pickering Planning & Development Department
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Land Use Designations
DATE: JUNE 1, 2006
l'
Dolo Sou'coo'
T.,on.' £n'.'p"o., Inc, ond n. .uppli.....,
All "11"'0 R.......d, Not 0 pion 01 ou......
All "II"to ,.:.o.~:","~~ ::n:,O~o o~u~~~:;~:
~I-
Ii) c~;
I
(~
f\.)
0_;
z
~
City of Pickering
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
DATE: JUNE 1, 2006
l'
Data Sa"....oo,
0 To",not Entorprlo.. 'nc. and It. .yppllono.
"II rl"nt. Ro.oNod. Not a pion of .YNOy.
"II rl".,to 'O:O~:d."~~~ :n:'a~. o~Y;E~~:
i:::i"j
',,¡ -!
C' Þ
::IJ ¡;
-: ;r~
~ ;,
~ :::j
'I¡,
I
~I 'J
~~
a
a
l\)
CD
030
1.0
Sernas Associates
ATTACHMENT # -~ TO
REPORT # PO 3~ - 0<0
~
--------...-.-.
.6'ßIT~---"""""
"""'~.,---~..."'"
~'--
TERMS OF REFERENCE
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICING PLAN
DUFFIN HEIGHTS NEIGHBOURHOOD
CITY OF PICKERING
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
Given the on going studies being undertaken as part of the Environmental Assessment relating to the
exchange of certain provincially controlled lands within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood and in preparation
for the anticipated submission of development applications within the Neighbourhood, an Environmental
Servicing Plan (ESP) is to be prepared to:
. Confirm the limits of the Natural Heritage System west of Brock Road, including addressing the
requirements of the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood policies of the Pickering Official Plan respecting
the coniferous and mixed forest located between the valley corridor of Ganatsekiagon Creek and
Brock Road (see sections 11.17 (i) and U) of the Pickering Official Plan).
. Provide the details for input into Functional Servicing Reports to be submitted in support of project
specific development applications (e.g. plans of subdivisions, site plans etc.).
.
Develop potential phasing scenarios for the community.
. Assist in the preparation of amendments to the existing Pickering Official Plan, if required.
. Assist in the preparation of appropriate revisions to development guidelines if required;
. Assist in the preparation of an Environmental Report to be submitted with development
applications (see sections 15.8, 15.9 and 15.11 of the Pickering Official Plan).
30 May 06
04565
1
Draft T errns of Reference
Environmental Servicing Plan
Duffin Heights Community
ATTACHMENT # L -3 TO
REPOR1 # PO 3/0 - òCo
031
2.0
BACKGROUND
In 2003, the City of Pickering completed a secondary plan for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood. The
secondary plan was based on the Natural Heritage System (NHS) identified by the City and the Toronto and
Region Conservation Authority at that time. The neighbourhood policies in the Pickering Official Plan
contemplated further work to define the exact boundaries of the natural heritage system.
This work will be undertaken through an Environmental Report in accordance with section 15.11 of the
Pickering Official Plan. The Environmental Report will determine the site's developable limits and
demonstrate whether the features and functions of the site can be maintained if development occurs also
occurs on the lands.
In addition, the Province completed a supporting document for the NHS for the Seaton lands in 2005. For
the purpose of this study, the NHS lands east of Brock Road as determined by the Province in 2005 shall be
considered fixed.
For the lands west of Brock Road, previous staking of the limits of the NHS parcels was completed as part
of the Secondary Planning exercise. This study shall reconfirm and, where appropriate, make adjustments
to the limits based on ground truthing to be done as part of this study.
In addition, certain arterial and collector roads that are shown on both the Regional and City plans were
incorporated in the previous official plan amendments. Given the potential for an expanded NHS lands and
the on-going development of a plan for the Seaton Community, some or all of these roads may not be
required in the future. This ESP will analyze and confirm the need, location and phasing for these roads.
Finally the previous neighbourhood plan indicated the location for required community facilities. This ESP
will review these locations and reconfirm the need and location for such facilities.
3.0
STUDY AREA
The Study Area is shown on the attached Figure 1.
4.0
STUDY MANAGEMENT
Co-proponents of the ESP will be Mattamy Homes Limited and Coughlan Homes.
The ESP shall be completed in consultation with the TRCA, the Region of Durham, the City of Pickering and
the benefiting landowners within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood.
1) Mattamy will agree to front fund the ESP, including the City's peer review costs and subject to the City
of Pickering agreeing to include a condition in any approval of development applications within the
Neighbourhood such that benefiting development parcel within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood Area
will contribute their pro-rata costs of the preparation of this ESP and the costs incurred by the City in
peer reviewing this ESP.
Sernas Associates
30 May 06
04565
2
Draft Terms of Reference
Environmental Servicing Plan
Duffin Heights Community
032
ATTACHMENT # 3 TO
REPORT # PO .%- õÞ
5.0
DETAILED REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ESP
The following outlines the detailed requirements for the ESP:
5.1 Natural Heritaae System
For the study area lands west of Brock Road:
1) The ESP will identify the features and functions of the natural areas within and immediately
adjacent to the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood.
2) Define and provide the rationale for the boundaries of the natural heritage system and reaffirm the
westerly development limits of the Duffin Heights Community based on the previous staking of the
limits as part of the secondary planning exercise.
3) Make specific recommendations on the protection and enhancement of the tableland coniferous
and mixed forest located between the valley corridor of the Ganatsekiagon Creek and Brock Road.
4) Identify edge management strategies to address the interface between development and natural
areas.
5.2 Source Water Protection
The development of a preliminary Assessment Report for the Duffins and Carruthers Creek Watersheds is
currently being carried out by the TRCA as part of the anticipated requirements of the draft Drinking Water
Source Protection Act (Bill 34). This report will include an inventory of drinking water resources, and will
identify potential threats to drinking water resources that must be considered in the development of the ESP.
Under Provincial guidelines, these threats may include the construction of municipal infrastructure (Le.
construction impacts due to dewatering), and stormwater infiltration measures with direct pathways to
vulnerable groundwater sources.
1) The ESP will identify any requirements for water source protection within the Duffin Heights
Neighbourhood, through consultation with TRCA and Durham Region.
2) Make specific recommendations to mitigate any impacts to hydrologically sensitive areas, and to
existing and anticipated wells (e.g. private wells in proximity of the urban/rural boundary). This
may include precautionary, interim management measures until such time as the Source Water
Protection Plan is completed.
3) Identify all domestic and other wells, including depth, type, size, pump intake, water level, owner
and address.
4) Identify potential impacts on water quality and quantity in the main aquifer, streams and wells.
5) Identify potential ground settlement if the water table is modified.
Sernas Associates
30 May 06
04565
3
Draft Terms of Reference
Environmental Servicing Plan
Duffin Heights Community
ATTACHMENT fI
REPORT # PO
.3 TO
qb-d:>
033
5.3 Water Balance
The ESP will:
1) Develop an overall hydrologic model, calibrated with seasonal modeling and prepare an overall
water balance analysis for the Neighbourhood on the basis of local surface drainage, soil and
existing land use characteristics.
2) Identify local areas that may contribute to the recharge of shallow aquifers, and that contribute to
wetlands, local discharge and baseflow, using available resources such as aquifer vulnerability
index mapping.
3) In consultation with DFO, MNR and TRCA, develop local surface and groundwater recharge
targets that must be attained to sustain wetlands and woodlots, and local baseflow in sensitive
areas.
4) Develop a post-development mitigation scenario to demonstrate that the annual groundwater
recharge will be met on a sub watershed basis and on a seasonal basis for wetland and woodlot
areas for the study area.
5) Identify implementation measures including but not limited to, baseflow sustaining Best
Management Practices and other servicing measures including based on local soil types,
percolation rates, and generic design conditions.
The latest version of the Duffins Creek water balance model shall be used in completing the water balance
analysis.
5.4 Erosion Sensitivity Analvsis
The ESP will:
1) Review fieldwork completed by Parish Geomorphic in 2003 for the TRCA for the West Duffins
(south of Taunton Rd), Ganatsekiagon and Urfe Creeks.
2) Where required, establish the erosion thresholds for the entire study area based on field
measurements (i.e. determine critical discharge, velocity and depth of flow for the most sensitive
reaches based on both bed and bank assessment - the most critical values should be used).
3) Where required, characterize the existing channel form to define representative reaches and
classify the stability of the active channel (i.e. determine the most sensitive reaches).
4) Investigate and identify slope stability at locations where toe erosion is occurring or where visible
slumps or scars exist.
5) Establish a continuous simulation model using Qualhymo (version 2.1 or greater). The modelling
will include converting the Duffins Creek Visual OTTHYMO (version 2.0) existing conditions
hydrology model to Qualhymo to assess the instream erosion potential. The continuous model
should be completed using a minimum of 6 years of hourly data (to be provided by the TRCA).
6) Run the existing conditions scenario, which will establish the targets for the receiving
watercourses.
7) Run the future land use scenario (which would include the proposed developments and the airport
lands) (with consultation with GTM in regard to assumptions used) with and without SWM controls
(i.e. all SWM ponds need to be modelled) to determine the necessary storage volume and release
rates to maintain the existing erosion potential.
8) Perform a sensitivity analysis to determine how a 25% variation in the erosion thresholds
established in paragraph 2 above will affect the design of the stormwater management facilities
(i.e. pond volumes and release rates).
Sernas Associates
30 May 06
04565
4
Draft Terms of Reference
Environmental Servicing Plan
Duffin Heights Community
034
ATTACHMENT # 3 TO
i'í=T'íJRT J< Po 2/__7V"
,-- ,11. - ._.""~~-,-
5.5 Fisheries Manaaement
1) Document and define existing aquatic habitat conditions within each watercourse, from existing
data sources, other ESP study components and additional field reconnaissance as required.
Components of this task are as follows:
. Confirm the presence, location and nature of all watercourses on-site;
. Summarize and describe the aquatic habitat conditions within each watercourse, including
channel dimensions, in-stream cover, substrate quality, water quality, and thermal regime
(where data available);
. Summarize and describe the historic and current resident and migratory fish communities
(where data available);
. Classify the watercourses based on habitat quality, present fish community; target fish
community and thermal regime (where data available);
. Identify and describe barriers to fish migration (both physical and velocity);
. Document the nature and extent of riparian vegetation along the watercourses; and
. Identify data gaps and develop a plan for additional study where required.
2) Determine potential impacts to fish and fish habitat from proposed development activities. As part
of this task, representative predictions from other ESP study components will be extracted to define
potential impacts. Impacts may include, but not be limited to:
. Watercourse crossings;
. Dewatering;
. Loss of riparian vegetation;
. Loss of in-stream habitat;
. Degradation of water quality or thermal stability;
. Disruption of sediment transport;
. Barriers to fish migration (physical or velocity); or
. Stormwater inputs and infrastructure.
3) Develop preliminary design detail and mitigation approaches to address the impacts identified at
each watercourse crossing and stormwater management facility. Impacts will be assessed using a
multi-disciplinary evaluation matrix approach, factoring in the regulatory requirements of each
approval agency.
4) Evaluate the net effects of the development, considering the identified impacts and the proposed
design and mitigation approaches, to determine if a "net gain" in fish habitat productive capacity
can be achieved, consistent with the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) Policy for the
Management of Fish Habitat in Canada (1986).
5) If a "net gain" cannot be achieved through design innovation and mitigation alone, develop a
Conceptual Fish Habitat Compensation Plan to attain a "net gain" following the hierarchy of
compensation preferences outlined in DFO's Policy for the Management of Fish Habitat in Canada
(1986). The Compensation Plan will consider opportunities both on and off-site as required.
6) Prepare a monitoring plan for the fish habitat mitigation and compensation works, forming part of
the broader scale ESP monitoring plan.
Sernas Associates
30 May 06
04565
5
Draft Terms of Reference
Environmental Servicing Plan
Duffin Heights Community
ATTACHMENT # 3 TO
REPOR1 # Po-3..LOb
035
5.6 Stormwater Manaaement
The following criteria are to be used in the preparation of the ESP:
Water Quality - Minimum criteria will be enhanced (Level 1) protection based on the MOE SWM manual
(2003). Where necessary provide for temperature mitigation measures in the design of SWM facilities.
Frequent Flow - Based on the criteria mentioned in Section 5.4.
Flood Flow - The criteria will be dependent on the subcatchment (Whitevale, Urfe, Ganatsekiagon and
Brougham Creeks have 2-100 year post to pre-control, while, direct discharge to East and West Duffins
Creek requires no quantity control, Duffins Creek Hydrology Update by Aquafor Beach 2002).
The ESP will:
1) Develop stormwater management alternatives (source, conveyance and end-of-pipe controls) in
order to address the water management criteria and sustainability.
2) Select a preferred stormwater strategy (e.g. BMPs and locations etc.).
3) Stormwater alternatives will be reviewed with TRCA, MNR and the City before selecting the
preferred alternative. Regional end-of-pipe facilities may be located within the NHS lands subject
to confirmation that the facilities will not adversely impact any core natural heritage features.
4) Select a preferred stormwater strategy (e.g. BMPs and locations etc.).
5) Update the post-development model from the Aquafor Beach 2002 hydrology report to include the
proposed upstream development area (Le. the future OP scenario from the 2002 update did not
include urban areas to Hwy 7), and to include the proposed development area within the Duffin
Heights Neighbourhood.
6) Reassess the current quantity criteria as stated above based on the future development to confirm
it remains valid.
7) Carry out a regional storm analysis to determine the need for regional control.
8) Determine the location, size and discharge characteristics for all SWM facilities within the Duffin
Heights Neighbourhood
5.7 Municipal Service Reauirements
Concurrent with the preparation of this ESP, The Region of Durham may be preparing a Master Class EA
for the principal Regional trunk water and sewerage infrastructure and Regional Roads. The
recommendations of the ESP shall be coordinated with the Regional EA and shall address those Regional
items not included in the Master Class EA.
The ESP shall, in relation to works not being undertaken by the Region of Durham:
1) Confirm the municipal water, stormwater, and wastewater servicing requirements for the proposed
development and prepare a plan at a Neighbourhood level, showing the location and anticipated
sizing of all trunk sewers and watermains using the Municipal Class EA process, and fulfilling at a
minimum, the first two phases of the Municipal Class EA.
2) Estimate the costs for design, construction and operation of municipal facilities at a level of detail
that will be of value in a financial impact analysis for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood and for
identification of Development Charges and funding agreements.
Sernas Associates
30 May 06
04565
6
Draft Terms of Reference
Environmental Servicing Plan
Duffin Heights Community
('\ 3 ('.
) n
A TT ACHMHJT #3- TO
REPOR1 # PO 3'==> - oCo
5.8 Transportation System
The ESP shall, in relation to works not being undertaken by the Region of Durham:
1) Confirm the road and transit network requirements for the proposed development.
2) Identify road and engineering designs that maintain the ecological integrity of the tableland
coniferous and mixed forest located between the valley corridor of the Ganatsekiagon Creek and
Brock Road.
3) Specifically review the needs for the collector and arterial road crossings of the NHS areas and
between neighbourhoods to determine if amendments to delete some or all of the roads are
appropriate.
4) Determine the estimated costs for design, construction and operation of facilities at a level of detail
that will be of value in the identification of Development Charges and funding agreements.
Specific to Municipal (both Regional and City) servicing and transportation requirements for the
neighbourhood and the need to minimize road and utility crossings of the natural heritage system, the ESP
shall address the following planning and design matters:
1) Treat water runoff from roads within stormwater management facilities prior to its release to a
stream or groundwater.
2) Use of alternative road design standards to minimize the footprint of roads;
3) Locate and design NHS crossings to facilitate the preservation of natural habitat form and function.
4) Incorporate measures to maintain current aquatic and terrestrial linkages and minimize negative
impacts (e.g. salt spray and road way illumination) for all NHS crossings.
5) Co-locate infrastructure and road crossings of the NHS, wherever possible.
6) Where there is no road crossing, align infrastructure to avoid significant natural features, where
possible.
7) Where intrusions into significant natural features do occur, minimize intrusions and impacts, and
avoid fragmentation.
8) Provide recommendations on detailed requirements for the preparation of subsequent Functional
Servicing Studies (F.S.S.) in support of subdivision level approvals. Necessary future requirements
(Le. detailed hydraulic analysis) may be required to demonstrate that there is no increase in flood
risk to adjacent, upstream or downstream properties, method of construction including geotechnical
investigations and the depth of servicing.
5.9 Non Municipal Utilities
The ESP will:
1) Identify existing and proposed major utility installations, corridors, easements, substations etc, in
consultation with the appropriated utility company. To the extent possible, shall be co-located with
other road and municipal servicing infrastructure.
Sernas Associates
30 May 06
04565
7
Draft Terms of Reference
Environmental Servicing Plan
Duffin Heights Community
ATTACHMENT #_3 TO
REPORT # PO ~ - 0<0
03~¡
5.10 Preliminary Servicina Estimates
The ESP will:
1) To the extent that the cost estimates are not provided through the requirements outlined in section
5.7, Development Charges calculations or front-ending discussions, prepare preliminary servicing
construction cost estimates or updates to the cost should they exist in current documentation (e.g.
City's and Region's DC Studies) for the servicing infrastructure recommended within the ESP.
5.11 Community Facilities
The ESP will:
1) Identify the preferred location for community facilities including, but not limited to schools, parks,
and trails, libraries, and places of worship.
2) Identify the potential to relocate the existing City Operations Facility either within or external to the
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood.
3) Review and make recommendations for adjustments to the proposed Duffins Heights portion of the
City Trail and Bikeway Master Plan, if necessary.
6.0
GENERAL AND PUBLIC CONSULTATION
The ESP will:
1) Meet all consultation requirements of the Municipal Class for the first two phases in the Planning
and Design Process of the Municipal Class EA for all major road, water and wastewater projects at
a minimum excluding any works being planned by the Region through the Seaton Class EA and/or
future planned EAs by the Region.
2) Consult with approval agencies and public in preparing the ESP.
7.0
PHASING ¡IMPLEMENTATION
The ESP will:
1) Prepare a phasing strategy in consultation with the City.
2) Identify facilities, services, structures /lands for major community facilities to be cost shared.
3) Prepare a process for the ESP to respond to and incorporate new technologies.
8.0
MONITORING PROGRAM
In consultation with the City of Pickering, TRCA and the landowners, the ESP shall establish an
environmental monitoring program, including implementation strategies and contingency planning. Details
to be provided in the ESP shall include the type, location, frequency, duration of reporting as well as
potential contingency measures (where feasible) based on the results of the monitoring. The monitoring
program shall tie into the TRCA Regional Monitoring Network as well as any Provincial and Federal
monitoring stations.
The implementation strategy shall confirm the process by which the monitoring will be carried out including the
funding mechanisms and the roles and responsibilities of both the land owners/developers and approval agencies.
Sernas Associates
30 May 06
04565
8
Draft Terms of Reference
Environmental Servicing Plan
Duffin Heights Community
038
ATTACHMENT # 4 TO
REPORT # PO .3t,-oh
DRAFT
TERMS OF REFERENCE
CONSULTANT REVIEW
DUFFIN HEIGHTS
ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICING PLAN
CITY OF PICKERING
1. PURPOSE
The City of Pickering will be entering into an agreement with Mattamy Brock Road
Limited (Matta my) that will allow Mattamy and Coughlan Homes to prepare an
Environmental Servicing Plan (ESP) for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood. Mattamy
will be responsible for assembling a consulting team in consultation with the City,
and for funding and conducting the study.
The City will retain a consultant to assist the City in analyzing and responding to the
work conducted by the consulting team.
This terms of reference is provided to assist the consultant in preparing a quotation
to the City to provide the services as further defined herein.
2. BACKGROUND
In 2003, the City of Pickering completed a secondary plan for the Duffin Heights
Neighbourhood. A tertiary level plan was also prepared by the City and has been
included as Attachment 1. Attachment 1 also depicts the limits of the study area.
The secondary plan was based on the Natural Heritage System (NHS) identified by
the City and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority at that time. The
neighbourhood policies in the Pickering Official Plan contemplated further work to
define the exact boundaries of the NHS. This work will be as part of the ESP in
accordance with section 15.11 of the Pickering Official Plan. The ESP will determine
the site's developable limits and demonstrate whether the features and functions of
the site can be maintained if development occurs also occurs on the lands.
The Province completed a supporting document for the NHS for the Seaton lands in
2005. For the purpose of the study, the NHS lands east of Brock Road as
determined by the Province in 2005 shall be considered fixed. For the lands west of
Brock Road, previous staking of the development limits was completed as part of the
Secondary Planning exercise. This ESP shall reconfirm and, where appropriate,
make adjustments to the limits based on ground truthing to be done as part of the
study.
A TT J\CHIViHJT # 'I TO
RC.- R1 . PO 2/- oto
,EflU 11 _.~....;.¿w-=--~~-~.
039
In addition, certain arterial and collector roads that are shown on both the Regional
and City Official Plans were incorporated in the previous official plan amendments.
Given the recent approval of the Central Pickering Development (Seaton) Plan by
the Province and the on-going secondary planning studies for the former A9 planning
area in Ajax, some or all of these roads may not be required in the future. The ER
will analyze and confirm the need, location and phasing for these roads.
Finally the previous neighbourhood plan indicated the location for required
community facilities as shown on Attachment 1. This ESP will review these locations
and reconfirm the need and location for such facilities including the potential
relocation of the existing City works yard to another location within the Community.
The agreed terms of reference for the ESP, as approved by the City and the Toronto
Region Conservation Authority, are attached (Attachment 2).
It should be also noted the Region of Durham will be initiating a Class Environmental
Assessment for the Regional servicing infrastructure required for the Duffin Heights
Neighbourhood. The Class EA will be done concurrently with the ESP for Duffin
Heights.
3. STUDY PROGRAM
A draft work program, utilizing the agreed terms of reference, is provided as
Attachment 3. Note that the work program has been prepared by the consulting team
and should be considered as draft although portions of the study and, in particular,
the assembly of background information and some fieldwork, has already
commenced.
The consultant is directed to Sections 6.0 General and Public Consultation and 9.0
ER Submission and Approval.
It is the intent to have regular status meetings with a Study Overview Team
consisting of selected staff from the City of Pickering, the Region of Durham, the
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, various landowners in the
Neighbourhood, members of the consulting team and the consultant retained by the
City.
In addition certain Public Information Centers (P.LC.s) have been incorporated into
the work program to provide opportunities for public input and comment to ensure
that Phases 1 and 2 of the Municipal Engineers Association Municipal Class EA
have been followed. Additional meetings may be scheduled by the Study Overview
Team if required.
The consulting team shall bring forward verbal and/or status reports at each
scheduled meeting for review and comment. The selected consultant will be asked
by the City to respond to the information provided.
The consultant shall also review the draft report and forward comments to the City as
appropriate.
C40
ATT~CHMENT # Lf TO
REP(j¡RT # PO 3~ -Ok--
4. Scope of Work
In preparing the fee quotation for providing the Consultant Review services, the
consultant shall consider the following:
.
The consultant is to ensure that he/she has sufficient knowledge in each of
the sections listed with the Terms of Reference for the for the Environmental
Servicing Report to offer comment on the information provided by the
Consulting Team and to actively participate in discussions during the Study
Overview Team meetings. Meetings shall be budgeted as lasting 3 hours and
will likely be held at the City of Pickering.
.
The consultant shall make an allowance for part-time attendance at the
scheduled P.LC.'s to ensure that he/she is familiar with the information being
presented.
.
The consultant is to provide additional time and resources as necessary
during the information gathering phase to review and comment upon written
information and oral provided by the consulting team
.
The consultant shall be required to review and comment upon the draft
Report and Final report.
5. Fee Proposal
The consultant shall provide the estimated cost of the Consultant Review services as
outlined herein inclusive of all sub-consulting fees, disbursement allowances and
applicable taxes. In additional the consultant shall provide the hourly rates any personnel
that may be used during this retainer including a brief summary of their expertise and
potential input.
The proposal is to be submitted to ..........................
CitJ¡ c~
From:
Subject:
041
REPORT TO
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Report Number: PO 37-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
Durham Regional Official Plan Review
Proposed Amendments for Population, Employment and Urban Land
Recommendations:
That Council RECEIVE Report PO 37-06 as the City's comments on the
Supplementary Attachment to the Proposed Amendment to the Durham Regional
Official Plan for Population, Employment and Urban Land, dated April 25, 2006;
1.
That Council REQUEST the Region to revise the Proposed Amendment for
Population, Employment and Urban Land of the Durham Regional Official Plan to
incorporate the revisions as set out in Appendix I to Report PO 37-06, which
among other matters, would include the following:
2.
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)
(v)
identify the lands around Kinsale as an Urban Study Area instead of a
Living Area on Schedule 'A' - Map A4 - Regional Structure;
identify the lands east and south of Greenwood located outside the
Greenbelt Plan, within the Urban Area Boundary and as an Urban Study
Area on Schedule "A' - Map A4 - Regional Structure, instead of Major
Open Space;
adopt a policy for the Kinsale and Greenwood Urban Study Areas to
permit redesignation of the study area lands for urban uses following
further review;
identify the Cherrywood Community as a Future Urban Policy Area on
Schedule "A' - Map A4 - Regional Structure;
adopt a policy for the Cherrywood Future Urban Policy Area similar to the
following:
"Regional Council acknowledges that the Provincial
Greenbelt Plan and other legislation restricts urban
designation of the Cherrywood Community, in the City of
Pickering, at this time. However, should such restrictions be
removed in the future, the Region intends to pursue urban
designations for the Cherrywood Community, and, to this
end, has identified the Cherrywood Community as a Future
Urban Policy Area."
C'4()
,.~
Report PO 37-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Subject: Proposed Amendments for Population,
Employment and Urban Land
Page 2
(vi)
revise the population and employment forecast table to increase the share
for Pickering (and Whitby) reflecting a reallocation of the surplus Ajax
population and employment forecasts to Pickering (and Whitby); and
reduce the net (developable) land area ratio to at least 50% of the gross
(total) land area to reflect current development and environmental
protection standards; and, if necessary, conduct a study of recent
development standards as back-up; and,
(vii)
3.
That the City Clerk FORWARD a copy of Report PO 37-06 to the Region of
Durham and to local municipalities in Durham Region.
Executive Summary: The Region of Durham, as the last part of its Official Plan
Review process, released the Supplemental Attachment to the Proposed Amendment to
the Durham Regional Official Plan to incorporate policies and designations respecting
Population, Employment and Urban Land.
While City staff is satisfied with most of the proposed Regional Official Plan amendments
for this component, staff has concerns with five important parts of the proposed
amendment.
Three of the concerns were raised previously by the City in its comments submitted in
Report PO 24-06 (see Attachment #1 - Region's summary of Pickering comments and the
Region's responses on Recommended Directions Report for Population, Employment and
Land Supply). The outstanding concerns relate to the:
. Cherrywood Community;
. assumptions used to allocate surplus population from Ajax; and
. assumptions used to calculate net land available for development.
Two concerns are new, and arise from the proposed designations in northeast Pickering
(see Attachment #2 to this Report, Pickering section of the proposed Regional Structure
- Map A4, from the Amendment). The concerns relate to the:
. lands east and south of Greenwood; and
. lands around Kinsale.
The Region is requested to incorporate the changes discussed in this Report, and set
out in Appendix I.
Financial Implications:
Not Applicable.
Report PO 37-06
Date: June 12, 2006
043
Subject: Proposed Amendments for Population,
Employment and Urban Land
Page 3
1.0
Backaround:
1.1
Staff previously commented on the 2006 Recommended Directions Report
for Population, Employment and Urban Land components of the Regional
Official Plan, which formed the basis for the proposed amendments
In January 2006, the Region of Durham released the Recommended Directions
Report for the Population, Employment and Urban Land components of the
Durham Regional Official Plan. The City of Pickering provided comments on the
Directions Report in April 2006 through Report PO 24-06.
After reviewing all comments received, the Region released Report 2006-P-39
with the Supplementary Attachment to the Proposed Amendment to the Durham
Regional Official Plan that incorporates the amendments for Population,
Employment and Urban Lands, authorized staff to proceed with the statutory
consultation process and forwarded the Report to area municipalities and others
for comment.
Copies of Commissioners Report 2006-P-39 and its attachments are available in
the Planning & Development Department and can also be viewed by accessing
the Region of Durham website at http://www.reaion.durham.on.ca.
1.2
Staff and the public are now requested to comment on the proposed Regional
Official Plan Amendments for Population, Employment and Urban Land
The Region has requested comments from area municipalities and other
interested parties by July 7, 2006. The statutory public meeting is scheduled for
June 27,2006 at the Regional offices.
The Recommended Amendment dealing with all parts of the Regional Official
Plan is to be forwarded to Regional Planning Committee on August 29, 2006 with
Regional Council adoption anticipated for September 13, 2006.
2.0
Discussion:
The proposed amendment implements most of the same proposals contained in
the Recommended Directions Report for Population, Employment and Urban
Land components. As set out in Report PO 24-06, the City was in support of
most of the proposed directions. The Amendment also made a number of
changes in response to the comments of Pickering, other area municipalities and
stakeholders. However, it did not make all the changes requested.
Attachment #1 to Report PO 37-06 is an extract of the comments made to the
Region by Pickering Council, and by others about lands in Pickering, respecting
the Recommended Directions, and the Regional staff response.
044
Report PO 37-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Subject: Proposed Amendments for Population,
Employment and Urban Land
Page 4
City staff's detailed comments on, and suggested revisions to, the Proposed
Regional Official Plan Amendment for Population, Employment and Urban Land
are outlined in Appendix I. The main areas of concern are discussed below.
2.1
Land Surrounding the Hamlets of Greenwood and Kinsale should be
included in the urban area and designated as Urban Study Areas in order to
properly evaluate the future development options
In response to the City recommendation that the lands in northeast Pickering be
included within the urban area boundary and be designated a Urban Study Area,
Regional staff designated the lands north of Highway 7 as Living Area and
Employment (Employment straddling the 407 route, and Living Area to the north)
and retained the designation of the lands south of Highway 7, outside of the
Protected Countryside designation in the Greenbelt Plan, as Major Open Space,
with a new Living Area designation around Kinsale.
The Employment designation north of Highway 7 and the retention of Major Open
Space east of Greenwood conform to Transport Canada's request to not permit
sensitive uses (residential, active parks etc.) within the noise sensitive areas of
the 25 NEF identified by the Federal Government to protect for the future airport.
The lands around Kinsale proposed as Living Area are outside the 25 NEF noise
zone but still within Greater Toronto Airports Authority's Interim Airport Protection
Area proposed in its 2004 draft airport plan. Other potential urban uses, non-noise
sensitive, do not need to be restricted.
For the Greenwood area, staff requests the inclusion of the area outside the
Greenbelt, within the Urban Area Boundary as an Urban Study Area. This
approach recognizes that potential noise constraints would occur should an
airport be constructed and that noise-sensitive uses (such as residential) should
be carefully considered. Further review will be necessary, taking into
consideration the status of the airport.
For Kinsale, staff is concerned that the designation of a small area of Living Area
will create a somewhat isolated neighbourhood, removed from the main
community services and facilities that would be planned to the north of the
Employment Area. Thus, staff recommend the Amendment be revised to change
the Living Area designation around Kinsale to Urban Study Area.
045
Report PO 37-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Subject: Proposed Amendments for Population,
Employment and Urban Land
Page 5
2.2
The Region's amendment should now indicate support for the urban
development of cherrywood at such time in the future as Provincial policy
may change to permit such development
Lands in Central Pickering were examined for potential urban development
through the City's Growth Management Study. The results of that study
concluded that some of the lands west of West Duffins Creek north of the CPR
tracks were appropriate for urban development. In April 2006, Regional Council
passed a resolution in light of the study's results and requested the Province to
remove the Cherrywood Community from the Greenbelt Plan and identify the
area as a "designated growth area" under the Provincial Places to Grow Plan.
In comments on the earlier Recommended Directions report, Pickering requested
that the Cherrywood Community be identified as a Future Urban Policy Area in
the Regional Official Plan now with its disposition as an urban area to follow
removal of Greenbelt Plan controls upon these lands. The Regional staff
response is that such designation would be contrary to the Greenbelt Plan and
therefore 'of no effect' and that re-designation could occur in the future if the
Greenbelt Plan is amended.
However, a policy recognizing the current Greenbelt Plan restrictions yet stating
Regional support of future Urban Area designation when/if the Greenbelt Plan
and other legislative restrictions are removed, would provide a clear statement of
the Region's future intent while also respecting the Greenbelt Plan.
Staff recommend that the Region identify the Cherrywood Community on
Schedule "A" - Map A4 - Regional Structure and as a Future Urban Policy Area
with an associated policy similar to the following:
"Regional Council acknowledges that the Provincial
Greenbelt Plan and other legislation restricts urban
designation of the Cherrywood Community, in the City of
Pickering, at this time. However, should such restrictions be
removed in the future, the Region intends to pursue urban
designations for the Cherrywood Community, and, to this
end, has identified the Cherrywood Community as a Future
Urban Policy Area."
At the time of writing this Report, Regional Planning Committee had supported
the inclusion of an Appendix to the new Regional Plan identifying lands currently
identified as Greenbelt that had Regional Council support for urban uses. The
Cherrywood Community was among the areas identified (see Attachment #3 -
Report 2006-P-51). While this approach is better than no recognition, staff
believes an appropriately worded policy could be included in the Amendment that
would not contravene the Greenbelt Plan/Act.
0 tk~port PO 37-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Subject: Proposed Amendments for Population,
Employment and Urban Land
Page 6
2.3
As Pickering previously recommended, the Region should reallocate the
surplus Ajax population to Pickering (and Whitby) to support Pickering's
role as the western anchor and an Urban Growth Centre
Despite Pickering's previous comments on the Recommended Directions Report
for Population, Employment and Urban Land, the Region continues to propose to
allocate the surplus Ajax population and employment (equal to about 49,000
people/19,000 jobs) to lands already designated as Living Area in Oshawa and
Clarington.
Although the Region has now recognized the shortage of urban land in Pickering
by proposing to expand Pickering's Living Area to include northeast Pickering,
the Region has not adjusted the population and employment forecasts to account
for earlier achievement of the forecasts. The Region's proposed amendment
does not assign sufficient population and employment forecasts to accommodate
the increased population and employment numbers mandated by the recently
released Provincial Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP) for Seaton. In
addition, Provincial adoption of the CPDP has now removed the restriction on
designation of further Living Area that has restricted Pickering growth over at
least the past five years. Since the calculation of the population and employment
forecasts is based on historical growth, the table should now be revised to reflect
this new potential, not the last five years of low growth.
Development of the Oshawa/Clarington lands first does not respect sustainable
development principles as it adds more urban development at the edge of the
GT A, leaving intervening pockets of undeveloped land, dispersal of scarce
infrastructure investment over a larger area and contributes to greater traffic
congestion than would earlier development in Pickering.
2.4
The calculation of land needs for urban expansions for
residentiallcommercial uses should be further adjusted downward to
reflect current standards of environmental protection and community uses
The Region's assumption on the net amount of land available for development
(Le.: excluding lands for open space valleys, roads, schools, parks and
stormwater ponds) remains too high at 55%, although this is a reduction from the
previous Recommended Direction (which used 63%). For example, the City
figures for Seaton show that approximately 55% of the total land area will be set
aside for Natural Heritage System and a further 40% of the remaining land
should be set aside for schools, parks, roads and stormwater ponds. As a result,
less than 30% of the total land area is available for residential and commercial
uses. Employment lands would have a slightly higher percentage remaining as
they do not require lands for schools and parks.
Report PO 37-06
Date: June 12, 2006
047
Subject: Proposed Amendments for Population,
Employment and Urban Land
Page 7
Assuming a higher percentage of the total land area is developable results in an
underestimation of the amount of land needed to accommodate the forecasted
population. Accordingly, staff recommend that the Region further reduce the
developable land ratio to 50% or lower and reevaluate urban land needs to
determine whether the development of Cherrywood is required sooner. The
Region may wish to undertake a review of more recent developments to further
verify the gross to net ratio.
APPENDIX:
Appendix I: Pickering Staff Comments on the Supplemental Attachment to the
Proposed Amendment to the Durham Regional Official Plan
Attachments:
1.
Comments received by the Region on Recommended Directions for Population,
Employment and Urban Land Respecting Pickering Issues
Pickering Portion of proposed Regional Structure - Map A4 in the proposed
Regional Official Plan Amendment
Report 2006-P-51 , dated June 6, 2006, of the Regional Commissioner of Planning
2.
3.
Prepared By:
Approved I Endorsed By:
~bz~
Steve Gaunt, MCIP, RPP
Senior Planner
Neil Carr, , RPP
Director, Panning & Development
f~/~
Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Policy
SG:ld
Attachments
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering City ouncil
",
C48
APPENDIX I TO
REPORT PD 37-06
Pickering Staff Comments on the Supplemental Attachment
to the Proposed Amendment to the
Durham Regional Official Plan
049
Pickering Staff Comments on the Supplemental Attachment to the
Proposed Amendment to the Durham Regional Official Plan
Item # Proposed Regior1 of Durham
Amendmtnts
SECTION 7 - REGIONAL STRUCTURE
Population And Employment Forecasts
1 7.3.1
(as it affects the Cherrywood Community)
The components of the Reqional Structure
are desiqnated on Map "A'.
Proposed Amended Map "A' proposes to
redesignate lands on the west side of West
Duffins Creek from Permanent Agricultural
Reserve to Prime Agricultural Areas, and
continue to only permit mainly agricultural
uses.
Staff
Comments I Revisions
The Regional Staff Response to
Pickering's submission that the
Cherrywood Community be identified as a
Future Urban Policy Area, once necessary
amendments to Greenbelt Plan occur, is
inadequate. Regional Staff responded that
the Greenbelt Act and Plan would render a
Future Urban Policy Area for Cherrywood
of no effect and that re-designation could
be considered if the Greenbelt Plan is
subsequently amended.
The Greenbelt Plan would not prevent the
Region from including a policy stating a
future intent to pursue urbanization of
Cherrywood once the Greenbelt Plan is
amended.
It is recommended that the Regional Plan
be amended to identify the Cherrywood
Community within the Urban Area
Boundary and as a Future Urban Policy
Area and include a policy for the Future
Urban Policy Area similar to the following:
"Regional Council acknowledges that
the Provincial Greenbelt Plan and
other legislation restricts urban
designation of the Cherrywood
Community, in the City of Pickering,
at this time. However, should such
restrictions be removed in the future,
the Region intends to pursue urban
designations for the Cherrywood
Community, and, to this end, has
identified the Cherrywood Community
as a Future Urban Policy Area."
050
Item #
2.
Proposed Regiorj of Durham
Amendm~mts
7.3.1
(as it affects the Greenwood Area and Kinsale Area)
The components of the Reqional Structure
are desiqnated on (proposed) Schedule A.
Lands east of the Hamlet of Greenwood,
outside the Protected Countryside
designation in the Greenbelt Plan maintain
the designation as Natural Heritage Area.
Lands surrounding the Hamlet of Kinsale are
redesignated from Permanent Agricultural
Preserve and Major Open Space to Living
Area
3.
7.3.2
The components of the ReQional Structure
are desiqned to accommodate the followinq
populations and employment forecasts.
TABLE
Municipality
Pickerinq
Year
Population
2011
105,100
2021
149.500
2031
205.900
Emplovment
38,200
67 .600
93.400
Sta'
Comments I Revisions
In response to the City Recommendation
that the lands in the northeast area of
Pickering (outside the Greenbelt) be
designated within the Urban Area Boundary
and as an Urban Study Area, Regional staff
responded by designating the lands north of
Highway 7 as Living Area and Employment
while retaining the lands south of Highway 7
as Major Open Space. The Regional staff
response is to not change the designation
of the area south of Highway 7 due to the
Federal Government request to not permit
sensitive uses within the 25 NEF noise
contour, including the lands east of
Greenwood.
It is recommended that the lands south of
Highway 7 and east of Greenwood be
designated within the Urban Area
Boundary and as an Urban Study Area,
requiring further review taking into
consideration the status of the airport.
City staff considers that the proposed
Living Area designation boundary around
the Hamlet of Kinsale will create an
isolated neighbourhood removed from
community services and facilities that
would be planned north of the Employment
designation. It is recommended that these
lands also be designated as an Urban
Study Area.
Regional staff continue to reallocate the
surplus Ajax population to the already
designated residential lands in
Oshawa/Clarington, despite Pickering's
recommendation to reallocate the Ajax
surplus (49,000 population/19,OOO jobs by
2031) to support Pickering's new role as a
Growth Centre.
Item #
Proposed Regiol l of Durham
Amendments
4.
7.3.12
Expansions to the Urban Area boundaries
shall only occur throuah a comprehensive
review of this plan that shall have reQard for
the foliowinQ: ...
(e) the population and employment
forecasts established by this Plan;
C51
Ståff
Comments I Revisions
The approved Central Pickering
Development Plan (CPDP) proposes a
population of up to 70,000 with 35,000
jobs. These figures are higher than the
Region's assumption of a population of
54,000 and 27,000 jobs.
Approval of the CPDP releasing long
constrained Provincial lands for
development, the increased population
capacity for Seaton and the proposed
designation of the northeast part of
Pickering provide designated lands
capable of absorbing significant portions of
the surplus Ajax population/employment
numbers.
Further, as a designated Growth Centre in
the proposed Places to Grow Plan for the
Greater Golden Horseshoe, Pickering will
be required to accommodate increased
population and employment, which should
also be accommodated by allocation of
increased population and employment
forecasts.
Accordingly, Regional staff should
reallocate the surplus Ajax growth to
Pickering (and Whitby), amend the
population / employment forecast table,
and then recalculate urban land needs.
This may demonstrate that lands in the
Cherrywood Community are required for
urban growth within the 30 year horizon of
the new Regional Plan.
The City commented that the previously
suggested ratio of 63% of land as the
developable area was out-of-date: 50%
would be more representative of the net
developable area once all required open
space conveyances to public bodies are
accounted for.
The Region agreed to a further reduction
to 55% to reflect more detailed open space
mappina by local municipalities.
Ü52
Item #
Proposed Regi01'. of Durham
Amendments
Staff
Comments I Revisions
The revision to 55% moves the ratio in a
realistic direction, but 55% is still too high
to reflect all lands necessary to provide
open space protection and municipal /
community land needs (roads, parkland,
school sites and open space).
Accordingly, it is recommended that the
Region adjust the developable land ratio to
50% or lower, and, if necessary, conduct a
study to reassess the actual amount of
designated Living Area land available for
development and determine whether
development of Cherrywood Community
should come on stream sooner. This may
demonstrate that lands in the Cherrywood
Community are required for urban growth
within the 30 year horizon.
Comments Received by the Region On Recommended Directions for
Population, Employment and Urban land Respecting Pickering Issues
Regional Official Plan Review
Outstanding Submissions from Population, Employment and Urban Land Discussion Paper
Submission Number and Submission Regional Staff Response
Name
0083-2 (J) More Living Area and Employment Area Land is needed in the Lands in north-east Pickering not subject to the Greenbelt Plan
Frank Clayton Pickering-Ajax Urban Anchor. To maintain the existing urban are included in the proposed Urban Area Boundary expansions,
Clayton Research Associates boundaries would constrain the Region's economic potential. refer to Supplemental Attachment Exhibit A4. Lands within the
Greenbelt Plan Area in west Pickering are not proposed for
John Bousfield Urban Boundary Area expansion through this amendment, as
Bousfields this would be contrary to the Greenbelt Plan and Act.
Consultants for West Duffins
Landowners' Group
If the expected 20% intensification is not realized, it will place One of the purposes of the 20% intensification requirement is
greater onus/pressure on agricultural lands in the Region to increase the amount of development that occurs in
based on the past 20 year history. existing built areas, and thereby reduce the relative need for
more Greenfield land to accommodate growth, including
agricultural land. Greater emphasis on more intensive
development in our Centres and along our Corridors is
intended to assist in achievinq the intensification target.
0174-3A Expresses concern that some of the area municipalities have The Urban Area Boundaries are proposed to be expanded to
Sharon Dionne a dwindling urban land supply and may not meet the address the land needs requirements presented in the
Urban Development designated and draft approved land supply requirements Recommended Directions report (refer to Exhibits A4 and
Institute/Ontario Durham under the PPS. A5).
Chapter Suggests the potential growth for the Town of Ajax would The forecasts take into consideration Regional
more reasonably be expected to occur within the adjacent policy/structural objectives which are intended to utilize land
municipalities of Pickering and Whitby than directed to responsibly and efficiently. Once Ajax's designated land
Oshawa and Clarington as indicated in the population and supply has been exhausted. the unmet share is first allocated
employment forecasts (Appendix II). Suggests that the to those municipalities that still have available designated
distribution of population growth be looked at on the basis of residential land. After this land has been exhausted, the
historical share of growth and consideration for attributes of remaining unmet share is allocated to all southern
each municipality regardless of current designated land municipalities on the basis of historical shares of growth.
supply.
on 1>
1'1 --I
',-, ~
õJ=.
:7J C)
-I I
~g;
m
" Z
0 -
~~
d
Page 1
,-.,
CJ1
W
Regional Official Plan Review
Outstanding Submissions from Population, Employment and Urban Land Discussion Paper
Submission Number and
Name
0174-3A (continued)
Sharon Dionne
Urban Development
Institute/Ontario Durham
Chapter
Submission
Requests clarification on Recommended Directions (2nd
bullet, p.19) that "urban boundaries may only be amended
through a comprehensive review undertaken by the Region.
in consultation with the respective area municipality". It is not
clear if the intention is that there would only be consideration
of an urban area boundary amendment through a five-year
review. Suggests the policies should not prevent a
municipality from initiating at any time an amendment to the
Urban Area Boundary for Living or Employment Areas.
Suggest that the designated built urban area reflect a more
current state of the built area rather than it be designated "in
accordance with the established 1991 built urban area
boundary" (4th bullet, p. 15).
Suggests that the 20% intensification target will be a
challenge to achieve in many areas throughout the Region.
Suggests that adding a policy that requires approved
secondary plans build out to 75% of dwelling unit capacity
prior to the approval of sequential secondary plans is "overly
restrictive and lacks consideration of the time it takes to bring
land through the processes of secondary plan approval. draft
plan approval, rezoning and plan registration to ensure that
housing needs are met".
Questions the rationale for the recommended minimum
overall Floor Space Index of 2.5 for all Regional Centres.
Page 2
Regional Staff Response
Growth management is a Regional interest. Sufficient urban
land is proposed to be designated to accommodate forecast
growth for the planning period. Area municipalities must
bring their official plans into conformity with the Rap through
their comprehensive review exercises.
The 1991 built urban area is fixed for the purposes of
monitoring performance of intensification established when
the Rap was adopted and remains relevant. No change is
recommended.
The challenge of meeting the 20% intensification target is
recognized, but this target is appropriate to meet future
transit and other structural and servicing objectives of the
Rap. The Province's draft Growth Plan suggests an
intensification target of 40% for municipalities including
Durham.
The proposed policy does not restrict the approval of
sequential secondary plans, rather the approval of
development within sequential secondary plan areas (refer to
policy 7.3.11 b).
The proposed policy would apply the floor space index to the
Regional Centres in Pickering, Ajax, Whitby, Oshawa and
Bowmanville and is intended to provide for increased
densities in areas where the majority of development should
occur (refer to policy 8A.2.4).
~
0
CJl
~
c:g !:¡
,-' -.
~~
::":x
"" ':C:;;
,r¡
V-.'~
o.::¡
. '*I>
wi
.JI-
I
0
(j
-t
0
Regional Official Plan Review
Outstanding Submissions from Population, Employment and Urban Land Discussion Paper
Submission Number and
Name
0174-3A (continued)
Sharon Dionne
Urban Development
Institute/Ontario Durham
Chapter
0177-3A
Linda Gasser
Submission
Suggests that there are lands currently designated
Employment Areas which no longer qualify as being in
'strategic' locations to accommodate employment
opportunities across the Region, particularly those not
located with high exposure and access to the 400 series
highways.
Expresses concern with the recommended direction which
restricts the urban boundary expansion to meet future
employment needs through the conversion of Employment
Areas and it not being consistent with the section 1.3.2 of the
PPS and Bill 51. The limitations on individuals/companies to
appeal to a Council decision should not imply that such a
request can only be municipally-initiated. This policy also
conflicts with the PPS as it promotes redevelopment of
brownfields and intensification opportunities.
Regional Staff Response
As noted in the Recommended Directions report, the
Employment land Needs study completed by C.N. Watson
Assoc. Ltd. concluded that the Region will have an
insufficient supply of Employment Area lands before 2031
and that existing designated Employment Areas should be
retained. As such, no redesignations of Employment Area
lands are recommended through this comprehensive review
exercise.
However, the proposed policies do allow for the area
municipalities to consider refinements to the designated f3
Employment Areas provided the total land area meets or g
exceeds that required to accommodate the employment :;:
forecast included in the ROP. "
Although the Provincial Policy Statement may recognize that CJ
a comprehensive review can include an official plan ~
amendment which is "adopted" by a planning authority, the
ROP can be more restrictive. In an effort to protect the I
Region's Employment Area land base from incremental site ~,
specific redesignations, it is proposed that a comprehensive
review only include reviews undertaken by the Region or
area municipalities.
:r>
-I
-I
:Þ
n
::r:
'5:
m
2:
-I
"110
-
~
0
However, policies have been added to allow for the
redesignation of brownfield sites to permit other appropriate
urban uses where the site is not part of a large contiguous
Employment Area (refer to policy 8C.2.16). No
redesignations of Employment Area lands are recommended
through this comprehensive review.
Suggests the Region's population and employment growth I Population and Employment forecasts are based upon
targets are overstated and overly optimistic. assumptions for natural growth and historical trends and are
considered appropriate for Durham.
Expresses concern the Region is continuing to develop many Highway 407 and Pickering Airport are key structural
of its plans by depending on another level of government elements of the ROP and continue to be relevant to the
(e.g. Highway 407 and Pickering Airport). future planning for the Region.
Page 3
C':)
CJl
(Jl
Regional Official Plan Review
Outstanding Submissions from Population, Employment and Urban Land Discussion Paper
Submission Number and Submission Regional Staff Response
Name
0177-3A (continued) Recommends actively attracting desirable knowledge- The Regional Official Plan is intended to provide a land base
Linda Gasser based/service businesses and employees to live and work in structure to allow a diversified employment base to flourish.
the Region with "innovative, multi-pronged approaches, On-going economic development initiatives are required to
partnerships, and strategic plans" in addition to designation assist in the realization of a diversified employment base.
of employment lands.
Suggests employment hubs be served by public transit and Consistent with proposed policies for Regional Centres and
lands in the vicinity of transportation corridors be protected. Corridors.
Suggests the Region develop a planning vision based on The Province with its very aggressive intensification target of
fixed urban boundaries that reflect provincial intensification 40% recognizes that expansions to urban boundaries are
targets and "complete communities" served by transit to required to accommodate growth.
provide stakeholder certainty, incentive towards achieving
intensification and long-term environmental protection.
Suggests that the two urban separators be maintained for a The urban separators are to be maintained to the extent that
longer term. they have been protected by the Greenbelt Plan.
Suggests the "Urban Boundary Expansion" section needs to The proposed 20% intensification factor is considered
be reviewed to be consistent with the Growth Plan appropriate for Durham and is being maintained at this time.
intensification targets. The statement that downtown Proposed policy 8A.2.2 a) recognizes downtown Oshawa
Pickering and Oshawa are used as focal points in providing and Pickering as Urban Growth Centres and the dominant
significant contribution to the required 40% intensification Regional Centres in Durham.
rate is vague and open to interpretation.
Requests clarification on the rationale for "Regional Centres" "Regional Centres" is a change in terminology and includes
and how they relate to municipal Central Areas and Major all of the existing "Main Central Areas".
Transit Station Areas discussed in the Provincial Growth Plan.
Expresses concern regarding the assumption that Highway The illustration of the future 407 has been modified to show a
407 will be built and the designated alignment will be more conceptual location and the links have been removed
identified to the previously recommended route. from the Plan (refer to Exhibits 4 and 5).
0178-3A Recommends the population forecasts be reviewed in This and other forecasts were considered in the preparation
Suzanne Elston relation to those forecasts made by Will Dunning in the of the Regional forecasts.
Durham Environmental January 2006 Neptis Foundation Report.
Advisory Committee (DEAC) Suggests a footnote be added to Table 1: Recommended Unless otherwise noted, the forecasts for Durham are always
Population Forecasts 2011-2031(p. 5), explaining that the inclusive of all areas in Durham and are recommended to be
forecasts include the Seaton area. included in the Regional Official Plan. There is no need to
provide a specific reference to the Seaton area.
~)
ú'1
0)
~;;; ~
'"i -!
Co' »
::IJ C'")
-I::r:;
.",,~
m
-02:
0-1
'II>
~
~~
0
Page 4
Regional Official Plan Review
Outstanding Submissions from Population, Employment and Urban Land Discussion Paper
Submission Number and Submission Regional Staff Response
Name
0178-3A (continued) Expresses concern about the inappropriate job growth in low- It is intended that employment growth will continue to be
Suzanne Elston income industries versus mid-high income industries. monitored through on-going monitoring exercises.
Durham Environmental Suggests there is a need to monitor the type of employment
Advisory Committee (DEAC) growth in Durham.
The registered unbuilt percentages mentioned in Appendix II, This is a typographical error, the "49% other" should be "39%
page 3, 2nd paragraph do not add up correctly. other".
0181-3A Questions appropriateness of sources references in dwelling "Table 3" in Note 1 should be "Table 4".
Gregory Daly unit forecasts, Table 6, Appendix II.
Walker, Nott, Dragicevic Suggests the use of a 70/30 split for unit forecasting does not Recommendation 4 d) of the Regional Housing Statement,
Associates Ltd. adequately acknowledge the existing circumstance. In adopted by Regional Council on April 14, 1993 requires that
Representing Runnymede almost all municipalities across the Region, single-detached at least 30% of all new residential units produced are to be of
Development Corp. and dwellings account for approximately 80% of all units. a type other than single-detached. The forecasts reflect
Tribute Communities policy objectives rather than the continuation of past trends.
Suggests the use of a base year of 1991 for intensification It appears that there has been a general misunderstanding of
targets may assist as a reference tool but will be difficult to the application of the 20% intensification policy and its
achieve any significant new intensification within this defined inclusion in Table 6 of the Recommended Directions report.
area beyond 2011. Table 6 is intended to provide an estimate of the residential
Expresses concern that intensification will be accomplished units and net greenfield residential land required to
as part of the development of new single-detached dwellings. accommodate forecasted growth. The column for
intensification includes single and other units only as a
With Ajax having a fixed urban boundary, opportunities to means to accurately calculate the greenfield residential land
achieve regional growth objectives on greenfields and inventory and should not be taken as the intended unit mix
through intensification are different. for intensification. The actual mix for intensification will be as
much as 90 to 95 percent units other than single detached.
Suggests the net-to-gross assumptions are too conservative. The 1 :1.59 ratio (63%) is based on a gross density of existing
Suggests 100 gross hectares of land will provide about 55 Living Area development based on a netting out of the area
net hectares of available land. municipal open space. The difference between the Region's
generalized open space mapping and the local municipality's
more detailed mapping amounts to an additional 20% of
land. This additional allocation of open space has been
taken into account in the consideration of the Urban Area
Boundary expansions resulting in a net to full gross ratio of
1 :1.82 (55%).
,-, ",,-.
:C;í :.,
TJ -{
c., :Þ
"'D ç,
...j~
""'g,
-0 -'"
o:::¡
, 'I "
I I
Il\)
..JI-
I
0
~~
0
Page 5
a
CJl
---.I
Regional Official Plan Review
Outstanding Submissions from Population, Employment and Urban Land Discussion Paper
Submission Number and
Name
0183-3A (continued)
Gregory Daly
Walker, Nott Dragicevic
Associates Ltd.
Representing Berrywoods
Farm Inc.
0223-3A
Neil Carroll
City of Pickering
Submission
Regional Staff Response
<::)
C".¡'1
00
Requests that 77 hectares of Berrywood Farm Inc. lands lands in the vicinity of the Hamlet of Greenwood are subject
should be designated for urban growth outside of the to the 25 NEF Noise Contour and therefore are not proposed
Greenbelt Plan area. to be included in the Urban Area Boundary.
The ROP Regional Structure Map A4 should be modified to
include all lands south of Hwy 7 in the vicinity of Greenwood,
which fall outside of the Greenbelt Plan, as Living Area. The
hamlet designation for Greenwood should be eliminated.
Suggests the Region relocate the surplus Ajax population to
Pickering and Whitby to fulfill its role as an Urban Growth
Centre in the Greater Golden Horseshoe Plan. Otherwise, it
should be allocated proportionately to local municipalities
based on adjustments from the proposed review/monitoring
of actual population data from Census Canada every 5
years.
Suggests Table 1 include separate figures for the rural and
urban population forecasts for each municipality.
Suggests an up-to-date ratio of land supply that considers
environmental standards that typically require 50% of land to
be used for non-development purposes.
Suggests the rate of development for Seaton is too
conservative. Recommends Table 1 and the land supply
table be amended to reflect an increased average annual
rate of growth due to stronger demand for development in
Seaton.
Page 6
The forecasts take into consideration policy/structural
objectives which aim at utilizing land responsibly and
efficiently. Once Ajax's designated land supply has been
exhausted, the unmet share is first allocated to those
municipalities which still have available designated
residential land. After this land has been exhausted, the
remaining unmet share is allocated to all southern
municipalities on the basis of historical shares of growth.
The proposed table for population and employment forecasts
includes a breakdown for urban and rural population (refer to
policy 7.3.2).
;:Uþ
m .,..,
1:' -I
O;:t>
::u ç~
-II;
'tb?,:
m
-02
0-1
'110
...,jl-.
I
0
\)'~
0
The 1:1.59 ratio (63%) is based on a gross density of existing
Living Area development based on a netting out of the area
municipal open space. The difference between the Region's
generalized open space mapping and the local municipality's
more detailed mapping amounts to an additional 20% of land.
This additional allocation of open space has been taken into
account in the consideration of the Urban Area Boundary
expansions resulting in a net to full gross ratio of 1 :1.82 (55%).
The rate of development used for Seaton's growth may be
conservative, however, the forecast was based on previously
published figures and will be revised once established
(historical) forecasts for Seaton become available.
Regional Official Plan Review
Outstanding Submissions from Population, Employment and Urban Land Discussion Paper
Submission Number and
Name
0223-3A (continued)
Neil Carroll
City of Pickering
new I The intent of proposed policy 7.3.13 is intended to ensure
and that future urban area expansions are sufficiently large to
Area address overall growth management needs and not
incremental, site specific expansions, focusing on
development at the secondary planning level. The proposed
definition for "sequential development" provides for the
progressive extension/expansion of the Regional water
supply and sewerage systems.
The proposed policy does not restrict the approval of sequential
secondary plans, rather the approval of development plans
within sequential secondary plan areas and is intended to
ensure that development proceeds in a sequential manner
(refer to policy 7.3.11 b). The percentage of build-out is
proposed to be included in the Rap to provide consistency
across municipalities as it relates to the progression of servicing.
Submission
Suggests the Cherrywood Community in Pickering be
identified as a Special Urban Policy Area once necessary
amendments to the Greenbelt Plan occur.
Suggests the lands outside the Greenbelt (north of Hwy ,
east of Westney Rd.) be designated as Future Urban Study
Area.
Requests clarification of who can initiate the comprehensive
review under the recommended direction that urban
boundary expansion amendments be permitted through a
comprehensive review. Suggests a definition of
"comprehensive review" to specify that it involves a review of
urban boundaries in one or more municipalities.
Requests clarification of the terms "complete
community", "complete an existing community",
"sequential development" as it relates to Living
Boundary Expansions.
Suggests the percentage of build-out required to release the
next sequential secondary plan be established in area
municipalities secondary plans. Also, suggests the
established amount of build-out should "delay" development
in the next sequential secondary plan, not approval of the
next secondary plan.
Regional Staff Response
Designating the lands as Future Urban Policy Area would be
contrary to the Greenbelt Act and Plan and, as such, would
have no effect. This request for re-designation could be
considered if the Greenbelt Plan is subsequently amended.
The lands in question are included in the proposed Urban Area
Boundary expansions (refer to Supplemental Attachment
Exhibit A4).
Proposed policy 7.3.12 provides for the future expansion of
the Urban Area boundaries of the Rap through a
comprehensive review. Proposed policy 7.3.9 provides for
the expansion of area municipal official plans to
accommodate a supply of land up to the timeframe of the
Rap through a comprehensive review of the area municipal
official plan. The proposed definitions section (15A) includes
a definition of "comprehensive review", including both
Regional and area municipal exercises.
,:;;¡ !~
>:' -'
C' :>
:J;J c,
-Ox
'>!-. ~:;;
." c;
o:'::¡
i
0
Suggests the minimum overall Floor Space Index for Urban I Proposed policy 7.3.7 d) provides for the achievement of the
Growth Centres and other Regional Centres be phased in f.s.i target within the timeframe of the Rap.
over the time frame of the Rap as infrastructure funding
becomes available.
Page 7
r-,
Ut
CD
Regional Official Plan Review
Outstanding Submissions from Population, Employment and Urban Land Discussion Paper
Submission Number and Submission Regional Staff Response
Name
0227 -3A Requests consideration of urban boundary expansions take The expansion of the Urban Area Boundary proposed in
Pat Neville into account the protection of lands in the immediate vicinity Pickering has taken into account the 25 NEF noise contour.
Greater Toronto Airports of the Federal airport lands in Pickering against noise
Authority sensitive land uses, such as residences, day care centres,
education and health care facilities.
0232-3A Expresses support for the City of Pickering's request that the Lands within the Greenbelt Plan Area in west Pickering are not
Frank Clayton new DROP identify the Cherrywood Community as a Future proposed for Urban Boundary Area expansion through this
Clayton Research Associates Urban Policy Area. Pickering will exhaust its greenfield land amendment, as this would be contrary to the Greenbelt Plan and
supply for low density housing prior to the year 2021 based Act.
on the Region's forecasts and without allowing for any land
supply shortfall in Ajax to be accommodated in Pickering.
Summary and Responses to Delegations Received at the
Regional Official Plan Review Public Consultation Meetings
Name and Description of Submission Response & Recommendation
Meetina location
Ms. Racansky - Pickering Requested that the Region carefully weigh the comments on The forecasts included in the January 2006 Neptis (Dunning)
the Greater Golden Horseshoe Growth Plan before making report were considered in the preparation of the Regional
any conclusions on land use, population densities and forecasts.
employment. The Region should take into consideration the
January 2006 Neptis Foundation Report.
Mr. Wilson - Pickering Suggests the cancellation of the proposed airport, and the The Pickering Airport remains a key structural element in the
need for revisions in the planning process to address energy, planning for the future growth and development of Durham.
open space, and the economic viability of the municipality.
The Seaton lands could be used as an economic base if The development of the north Pickering lands is a key
development was thought of in a creative way to preserve the consideration in the future growth of the Region.
future of the City of Pickering.
Ms. Chainey - Pickering Requested clarification on the maps included in the Clarification was provided.
Recommended Directions Report on Population, Employment
and Urban Land.
r::
C)
-::;
Page 8
¡ ---(:T'
, I
í I
!-f'U 1 '
'!\ -', ¡' 9.~
d.....,('\f"'"
, «""'ON'
i . ~,";' C.~,.)" '-,,::;.::::, .,...,
'I' !
,,'¡ ~
. I
, "DERAI. AIRPORT LANDS
¡ / "EEN 1
\ "'~, R,""E,R
r...~j,-'
;,,4\.,"
-':"~ ~. ",t,
'! ,:;~¡ 1 "
¡ WHITE"L~~
i '~ .
! ,¥'\
i i:t~¡~~~~¡;.\.
~,~., ' ' ' ' "..~ "
I' ~~!~~~~
hr,"'r-.. ' "," ~.
'J' . '0" .'
I,
t
~~"
~
w;ø
~
-
~
WÆí.
~
~.
»:o!;
-
::!::::::~
~
--+0
LEGEND FOR PROPOSED
REGIONAL OFFICIAL PLA N AMENDMENT
EXHIBITS
A1 TO AS
LANDS TD BE RE.DESIGNATED FRDM "PERMANENT
AGRICULTURAL RESERVE" TO "LIVING AREAO'
LANDS TDBE RE.DESIGNATED FROM "'ERMANENT
AGRICULTURAl RESERVE" TD "EMPLDYMENT AREAS"
LANDS TD BE RE.DESIGNA TED FROM ',,"AJDR
OPEN SPACE" TO "LIVING AREAS"
LANDS TD BE RE.DESIGNATED FROM "MAJOR
OPEN SPACE" TO "EMPLOYMENT AREAS"
LANDS TD BE RE.DESIGNATED FROM "GENERAl.
AGRICULTURAl AREA' TD 'tlVlNG AREAS"
LANDS TD SE RE.DESIGNATED FROM "GENERAl.
AGRICULTURAl AREA' TD 'OMPLDYMENT AREAS"
LANDS TO BE RE,DESIGNATED FROM'GENERAl
AGRICULTURAl AREA' TD "'ATURAL HERITAGE AREA"
LANDS TD BE RE.DESIGNATED FROM "PERMANENT
AGRICULTURAl RESERVE" TO "NATURAl HERITAGE AREA'
LANDS TO BE RE.DESIGNATED FROM ',,"AJDR DPEN
SPACE" TD "SPEC",L STUDY AREA 7"
LANDS TO BE RE.DESIGNATED FROM'GENERAl
AGRICULTURAl AREA" TD "'ATURAL HERITAGE AREAS"
LANDS TO BE RE.DESIGNATED FROM "GENERAl
AGRICULTURAl AREA' TO "'R.... AGRICULTURAl AREAS"
LANDS TD BE RE.DESIGNATED FROM "GENERAl
AGRICULTURAl AREA' TD 'WA TERFRDNT AREAO'
LANDS TO BE RE.DESIGNATED FROM 'GENERAl AGRICULTURAl
AREA" TD 'PRIME AGRICULTURAL AREAS SUBJECT TO THE AGRICULTURAL
POLICIES DF SECTION 1OA"
LANDS TO BE RE.DESIGNATED FROM "'ERMANENT AGRICULTURAL
RESERVE" TD "PRIME AGRICULTURAL AREAS SUBJECT TO THE AGRICULTURAl
POLICIES OF SECTION 'OA"
ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS ARE DElETED
IN THEIR ENTIRETY
ADD "GREENBELT BOUNDARY'
ADD "REGIONAL CDRRIDOR' DESIGNATIDN
ADD URBAN AREA BOUNDARY
REPLACE FUTURE FREEWAY SYMBOL
ADD "1991 BUILT BOUNDARY"
NOTE orR "" TI" '" ILLUSTRATES LEGEND
TEwSYMBOlS TO BE DELETED
81U£ ILLUS7RA7OS LEGEND TEX7/SYMBOLS
TDBEADDED
EXHIBIT A4 TO REGIONAL
OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT
NO.-
~ OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE
REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY
OF DURHAM
~ SCHEDULE 'A' - MAP 'A4'
~ REGIONAL STRUCTURE
LEGEND
URBAN- SYSTEM
UR"" AREA
SOUNDARY DEFERRED
. '.B ",nn L n,
- EMPLOYMENT AREAS
~:g ~
,~, -t
~-\ Þ
'üÖ
-I.:r:
.".~
" C~
c:.:;::¡
URBAN AREA SOUNDARY
.~-~-~ ~
N""ONAC,"N""
~
111111111111
mm
LlVING"EAS
""EAS DEVELOPASLE ON
MUNICIPAl WATEA
,YSTE".. PR"ATE
WAarE D"PO"" smEMS - _AS DEVELDPASLE
AR'AS DEVELOP"Lf ON = ON PRNATE ""LIS'
PRIV"E"""" - MUNICIPAL SEWER
PRIVAIE WAS" SYSTEMS
D"POSAlSYS"MS
AREAS DEVELOPAB" ON
FU"!PARTIAL MUNICIPAL
BERVICES
'">
"""ICIPAlSERVICE
,gR GU"W~U ""'\SIWM~SYUE!J¡I
c:::J PO"" -.. - --
AGRICULTURAL, --
........ ""'" -
,
I
I~~
¡ I
'0
(j
RORAl seTrLEMENTSO
ø
HAMLEY
RURAl EMPLOYMENT AREA
""_""'"
FOR D"C",PTlON)
COUNTRY RESIDENTIAL SUSOMSION
"" -- '^~ [ "FOR DESeRIPTIONI
SHORELINE RESID€",1Al
A REGIONALNDOE IseE "eT"""'" FOR DESeRIPTIONI
(;> Z;~:i :~~~ ,~ESi'.O~~E. W"~~ON
FOR DESeRIPTIONI
NArVI!A~I1ERlIAJìE 1M 'S~ S.,.,. S-~SE SYSTEM
OAK RIDGES MORAINE
OAK RIDGES MORAINE
SOUNDARY
.......
..
_WATERFRONT
NAiURN H""A'" ^"'^ AREA'
-- ..... TO RI&T &T . I ."
RECREATIONAL "U""'" Á WATERFRONT PLACE
""'V"'NODE
OPEN SPACE LlNI<AGE
WA"'FRONT LtN"
~~.. ,~
TRANSPO~TATION SYSTEM"
BEE -.ose"""",. c, FOR DESIGNATIONS
'HE FDLL(>MNG " ""'>'IN S"'CTIVEL Y FOR EASE OF INTERPRETATION
OF~m)'It£ESlGNATlDNSONLY FUruRE
A/HERIAL ROAD
,""WAY
GO RAIL
GO 51"ION
.
SPECIA~ AREAS
.
[¿~J SPECIAL SlUDY AREA
r-¡;;I DEFERREDBYMIN"YER
L...:::....J OFMUNICIP"AFFFA~S
fEl ~~I;~;"L
I: A: I SPEelALPOlICYAREA
E" ~"""'" "
--
0
OJ
......
l,TT ACH:!HJT # oS TO
r~:?OR1 1/ PO 37 -Ok,
0\6'>
, f-
The Regional Municipality of Durham
To: The Planning Committee
From: Commissioner of Planning
Report No.: 2006-P-51
Date: June 6, 2006
SUBJECT:
Approach to Addressing Region's Request for Greenbelt Plan Changes in the Regional
Official Plan Review, File: L 14-03-06
RECOMMENDATION:
THAT Commissioner's Report No. 2006-P-51 be received for information.
REPORT:
1.
1.1
1.2
2.
2.1
PURPOSE
On April 4 and 25, 2006, Planning Committee considered Commissioner's
Reports 2006-P-33 and 2006-P-38 presenting information on various matters
raised by Committee on the Greenbelt Plan, including details on the relevant
provisions of the Greenbelt Act and Plan and opportunities to initiate
amendments.
The purpose of this report is to respond to a further.request by Planning
Committee, at its May 16 meeting, to outline the approach being taken to
address the Region's request for changes to the Greenbelt Plan in the
Regional Official Plan (ROP) Review.
GREENBEL T PLAN IMPLEMENTATION
As reviewed in detail in Commissioner's Report No. 2006-P-33 that was
considered by Committee on April 4,2006, direction given throughout the
ROP Review process has been to ensure that the proposed amendment
brings the ROP into conformity with the Greenbelt Plan, as required by
Provincial legislation. Specifically, Planning Committee has directed, as
follows:
063
ATTACHMENT # 3 TO
REPORT # PO 37-CÝo.D
Report No.: 2006-P-51
Page No.2
2.2
. February 15, 2005, authorized proceeding with the preparation of draft
amendments to implement the commercial and rural components of the
Recommended Directions Report, including considerations for Greenbelt
Plan conformity (Commissioner's Report 2005-P-13);
. March 8, 2005, directed that the Greenbelt Plan approach to agricultural
designations be implemented through the ROP Review (Commissioner's
Report 2005-P-24);
. May 10, 2005, authorized proceeding with the preparation of draft
amendments to implement the environmental component of the
Recommended Directions Report, including considerations for Greenbelt
Plan conformity (Commissioner's Report 2005-P-40); and
. November 15, 2005, authorized the release of the proposed amendment
for the ROP Review, including amendments to address Greenbelt Plan
conformity (Commissioner's Report 2005-P-92).
Adoption of an amendment contrary to the Greenbelt fJ.ct and Plan would
render the amendment (including all of the other unrelated policies
addressing, for example, urban development) to be of no effect and in
violation of these Provincial instruments.
This approach complies with the following provisions of the Greenbelt Act and
Plan:
. the Greenbelt Act requires municipalities to amend their official plans to
conform to the Greenbelt Plan through the 5-year review provisions of the
Planning Act (Section 9.(1 )};
. the Greenbelt Act provides that all decisions or applications "commenced"
on or after December 16, 2004 must conform to the Greenbelt Plan
(Section 24.(2)}. The Greenbelt Act defines the commencement date for
an official plan or its amendment or repeal as the day the by-law adopting
the plan, amendment or repeal pursuant to the Planning Act, is passed
(Section 24.(4)};
ATTACHMENT # 3 TO
REPORT # PO 3ì -olD
064
Report No.: 2006-P-51
Page No.3
2.3
3.
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
. the Greenbelt Plan does not allow for settlement areas outside the
Greenbelt to expand into the Greenbelt (3.4.2(3)). All of the Lake Ontario
shoreline urban areas are outside the Greenbelt; and
. the Greenbelt Act provides that the Greenbelt Plan prevails in the case
of a conflict between the Plan and an official plan (Section 8.(1 )).
As such, in accordance with the direction of Committee, the proposed
Amendment developed for the ROP Review and currently subject to public
consultation, has been crafted to bring the ROP into conformity with the
Greenbelt Plan.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REQUESTED GREENBEL T PLAN CHANGES
Since Regional Council can only approve amendments in conformity with the
Greenbelt Plan, the recent changes sought by the Region to the Greenbelt
Plan, cannot be incorporated directly into the ROP Review Amendment.
However, Regional Council's request can be appended to the ROP as an
expression of Council's desire for certain amendments to the Greenbelt Plan.
This approach will also ensure continued awareness of the changes being
sought by the Region. Should the Minister amend the Greenbelt Plan as
requested, new amendments to the ROP will be initiated to implement
Council's direction.
The proposed Appendix is Attachment 1 to this report. The Appendix includes
Council's resolution initiating the request for changes to the Greenbelt Plan,
followed by the submission to the Minister and the Greenbelt Council detailing
the request. The Appendix also indicates Regional Council's intent to pursue
these changes and initiate subsequent amendments to the ROP, if and when
the Minister make~ the necessary enabling amendments to the Greenbelt
Plan.
The Appendix will be presented as part of the ROP Review documents
prepared for consideration by Planning Committee on August 29, 2006. The
Appendix, however, will not form part of the Actual Amendment to the ROP.
065
ATTACHMENT #~__,_TO
REPORT # PD_~.:.=2.:::.~... '
Report No.: 2006-P-51
Page No.4
The Legal Department has verified that this approach should not have the
effect of invalidating the actual amendment to the ROP.
/1: ;¡
AL. Georgieff, M.C.I.P., RP.P.
Commissioner of Planning
RECOMMENDED FOR PRESENTATION TO COMMITTEE
Attachment:
1.
Appendix 3 to the Regional Official Plan
H:\1-2\agendas\2006\O6-06-06\Greenbelt & OP Review.doc
ATTACHMENT # 3 TO
REPORT # PO 37 - ofo
C66
Attachment 1
Appendix 3
(Not part of the Regional Official Plan)
Requested Changes to the Greenbelt Plan
This Appendix is included with the Regional Official Plan for information purposes only
and does not form part of the Plan.
This Appendix confirms Regional Council's intent to pursue specific changes to the
Greenbelt Plan necessary for the effective implementation of the Plan by the Region of
Durham, expressed in the following resolution adopted on May 10, 2006:
c)
d)
e)
"a)
THAT staff be directed to forward a submission to the Minister of
Municipal Affairs and Housing and the Greenbelt Council that
incorporates the Region's issues with the Greenbelt Plan, as
identified in Report #2006-P-33 of the Commissioner of Planning,
and the following issues as set out in parts b) through e);
b)
THAT the lands located between Audley Road/Lakeridge Road
from Highway 401 to Taunton Road, in the Town of Ajax be
designated future development area subject to the final alignment
of the 401/407 Link and subject to removal from the Greenbelt
Plan;
THAT the lands located in the T ownline Road area of the
Municipality of Clarington which are bounded by Townline Road,
Pebblestone Road and the existing Courtice Urban Area Boundary
also be designated future development area subject to removal
from the Greenbelt Plan;
THAT the lands located on the north east corner of Nash Road and
Hancock Road, in the Municipality of Clarington also be designated
future development area subject to removal from the Greenbelt
Plan; and
THAT the lands located north of Brawley Road, in the Town of
Whitby, be removed from the Greenbelt Plan to reflect the draft
Greenbelt Plan area as shown in Attachment #5 to Report #2006-
P-38 of the Commissioner of Planning."
If and when the Province makes the necessary amendments to the Greenbelt Plan, it is
Regional Council's intent to initiate amendments to the Durham Regional Official Plan to
give effect to the above resolution.
06'7
ATTACHMENT # 3 TO
REPCJRl # PO 37 - Db
Regional Council's requested changes to the Greenbelt Plan are further detailed as
follows:
i) Lands to be Removed from the Greenbelt Plan Area
Regional Council is concerned that the extent of the Greenbelt in Durham Region had
increased in area by some 4,000+ hectares (10,000+ acres) with approval of the final
Plan. In total the Greenbelt covers over 80% of the Region's land base. In particular,
Regional Council has identified five areas that should not have been included in the
Greenbelt:
1. Pickering - Cherrywood Community the subject of a Growth Management Study
undertaken by the City of Pickering and identified as suitable for future urban
expansion in Pickering. This is consistent wit~ Regional Council's April 13, 2005
submission to the Minister of Public Infrastructure Renewal on the Draft Growth
Plan requesting that the Province remove this area from the Greenbelt and
identify it as a "Designated Growth Area";
2. Ajax - Audley and Lakeridge Road area added in the Final Plan. This area is no
longer considered a viable agricultural area by the farmers owning the land as a
result of the advancement of nearby urban development, the diminished
agricultural land base in the area and the potential impacts from the future
alignment of the Highway 401/407 link currently the subject of an Environmental
Assessment;
3. Whitby - north of Brawley Road area added in the Final Plan. This area is the
subject of an application to amend the Durham Regional Official Plan to permit a
golf course and a resort/conference centre;
4. Clarington - Townline and Pebblestone Road area. These lands are located
immediately adjacent to full municipal services in the City of Oshawa that can be
easily extended to support urban development in the Courtice urban area; and
5. Clarington - Nash and Hancock Road area added to the Final Plan. This area is
the subject of a request to expand the Courtice Urban Area Boundary as part of
the Regional Official Plan Review.
(Refer to Illustrations 1 and 2 attached for specific locations.)
AfT ACHr,J1[:NT # 3 __TO
qr,¡¡R'¡ it PO_~~~l.::Q<'e_,".,_..",.
068
These lands should continue to be governed by the municipal official plans.
, ii) Settlement Area Expansions
In its submission to the Province on the Greenbelt Draft Plan, the Region requested that
the Plan be sensitive to the need for growth in our TownsNillages (ie Uxbridge, Port
Perry, Sunderland, Cannington and Beaverton) located within the Greenbelt. This is
particularly crucial when considering expansions to accommodate employment uses in
a timely fashion. The Greenbelt Plan is unnecessarily restrictive in limiting the
opportunity for expansions to the 10 year review or the conformity exercise opportunity
provided by policy 3.4.4.1 for these settlements.
The Greenbelt Plan must be amended to provide opportunity for expansions to Towns
and Villages when the need and opportunity arises.
iii) Rural Employment Areas
Planned rural employment areas are focal points for the rural economy. The approved
Greenbelt Plan does not allow for the designation of new or expansions to existing rural
employment areas. .
To allow for moTe diverse employment opportunities in ru,ral communities, the Greenbelt
Plan must be amended to permit the designation of new Rural Employment Areas or the
expansion of existing Rural Employment Areas, in accordance with policies contained in
upper-tier official plans.
iv), Servicina of Orono
In its submission to the Province on the Greenbelt Draft Plan, the Region raised a
concern with the policy prohibiting the extension or expansion of Great Lakes based
water and sewer systems to settlement areas within the Protected Coùntryside,
particularly Orono. The Region requested that the Plan allow the opportunity to provide
lake-based services to Orono. This is consistent with the policies of the Regional Official
Plan, approved by the Province in 1993, that express a long-term intent to investigate
the provision of full, lake based, municipal services to that relatively large rural
community.
The absence of this opportunity in the Greenbelt Plan severely restricts the servicing
options for that settlement area.
The Greenbelt Plan must be amended to permit the further consideration of extending
full, lake based, municipal services to Orono.
e69
A rTACHMErJT # 3 TO
,er if PO ___.37::c:::!.c>
v) Urban Separator
In its submission to the Province on the Greenbelt Draft Plan, Regional Council
requested that Plan recognize an open space separator between the Courtice and
Bowmanville urban areas including lands that have not been identified for future
settlement expansion.
Unlike the other Greenbelt Plan issues discussed above, the inclusion of this area within
the Greenbelt would have the effect of increasing the total Greenbelt Plan area by 750
hectares (1,860 acres)(see Illustration 2).
Regional Council intends to pursue the above changes the Greenbelt Plan immediately
and through subsequent reviews of the Greenbelt Plan by the Province, or other means.
- 'I
L-
D
0
z
'"
0
Co
'"
z
'"
0
II
~
0
m
'"
CI>
0
Z
CI>
....
....
;¡:
ñ
"
en
0
Z
'"
0
~
'"
a>
IJ1!..---l-.--t -- .--
, '0' ,
-p I
21 ,
~i '-, I
~: IJ [--
a>
'"
0
0
"
CI>
....
(¡)
»
'"
0
m
z
CI>
....
~
I .' q,.: - - -
~
,f
.1'
:. II
,
-+-~--¡r
~jl""
'-'--I'~ '.:.' ~
~ d. 0-
~ Í¡
, -Ê
il
-~I ë:
en
r-+
D3
r-+
Õ'
::J
~ltLl~!
-"--------~~UME~~-
t--...
r -~/-:--
, ;
-1 ,I
Areas Requested to be Removed
from the Greenbelt Plan Area
ORM Boundary
Greenbelt Boundary
Urban Area Boundary
Municipal Boundary
0
2
4
6
8
Kilometres
. "".
Road
y. \G eoP loj\PolicyBra nCh 'Grea nbelnG teen be IIPlanSu bmission 'Appendi, 3M n p 1 .Irocd
CONL
J;)>
m--¡
ð;;
:IJ n
-I ::t:
"i ,5;
m
" ;2
0 -f
I ~
I~I{).)
, \
~
j -f
;0
»
1:3
1:3
CD
::J
Co
X'
(..)
.....
c)
-1
a
~;
..£)1
O!
, '
tY)1t}¡
..-î
1-0
2a.
LU
~~
Ir-
U a:
<t: C)
1-. .::c,
I- LLi
eta:
~
I:'-
(;)
N
c:
0
+:;
co
'-
.....
en
:J
to j_~_.n_n___---
~-1\
\
--- .1" 1'------11 -!- L__~- ~-~~-+---/ ---- - -,
-~----, .I--!r------------t----------ì---- r I / ~r-
""'-,,'1--- £1, ------ j r -fl- - '"- i-- -"---7."f""" 1 '
-M"l"--f--"""o_~ -. nul (,-"" ""'-"'+--7-l-._.-rb~f.l
___n~o_~_j-_J BETH..ESD...ARD .1. '--¡ , LAMBS __L_- ~--_J ) ,.r
I-. ---.1". -.n. - ----1----11.-L. -'\~-- "".~._....1.. .. I I-_J_n_' ---
I~Ef!TY_~~_--\'. __C!:EMENS_~__¡_n I I L -- - __+_n .n. t-.!A~RNSA"- --..". ~. ----( ,I.. I'
I I t t I ___d
, rr
--__-t~ ERTY ~---l---------~ -- -- n ~!lERTY S~--.-- -\ i~) î ~---=\,
'P.ERPAR.I~ -.- - -'--.--I-__!A!!'DlE.f!~-. -' - '--'.----. \-----'.--..--.-t-.._---.--~. MID ER_D.---t-.--.~n..T----.r-.-.\'--r. . ..., \ \
10 1 Zl' I \ I--/--- I
'~-----+- ,/ '- -- 8'/ ,-- -- /-
I --' --- ------.- -.--. --- -- . -- - - -.L----.-------------/
---- --~-----------.-- -- ~- --------- --------.-------+-// -.' ..'. ./ /~..'~.~/ =~=:;::== =!_---C-~~,
\ I . /'..-.' / ------ ------ ..' ~ .-.-'.-.-.-.-.1-.- ~_._._.
-------\ _n ---. ....m_n- OLDSCUGOGRD .----/ - x/ MAPlEGROVERD ' / i II
!,---------------- .r HOlTRD.-----L- ~ r- -----~---..-----:=---1--- - '---t.'
1_--__-' ____n'-------- --- J 0 -+ I
\1. '-., --' .' ____m'n---~Tl----:"".'-:_It- -~-- -
SCHO RD r 1------]["'---
.1- .- - _=,=fm_-t-_~ - ~-- -
, I ,1 "-'"'O,~ ~ , t ~
L_.. VANNEST RD .- COURTI RD
I ---------1 I---;~__--L-- --------
. I I I c:
D RD r ZION RD :J I TRUllS RD
---- -~I-----------I----~ -------------------I----~---~
~ 1-- - ---- -r-~~~~ID ~~-----1---- --1
g¡. J W
w I ~
u m
i5 .___~SKRD_- c- ffi
_'_n_~ l-----~---"------~I ... --~ ",. I I TOWt"-~INE RD "-
~
('I')
.~
"U
c:
Q)
0.
0.
~
OlEY RD
'"
!!!
m
E
.!2
~
...
'"
E
N
C.
~
~
g,
~
õ
~
~
~
;b
~
~
¡
~
~
.
£
~
>-
M
'"
It)
c:i
0
~
III
'0
c:
:>
0
ID
III
II:!
<
c:
III
-e
::;)
~
III
'0
c:
:>
0
ID
ãi
Q.
:¡;¡ '0
c: III
:> 0
~ II::
I
.
I
.
I
; .:
1 ~
'0
GI
>
0111
E !!
8!<
c: ~ ~~
._< oD..
'Cc:-."
GI III '0 ~
-gil:.æc:~
g:: S!:g III
-~:>...-g
GI c: g" :>
~~a:Æ~
-- .,-
III" III E ~
!!GI ~o II::
<= ~OI:: 0
~
III
'0
c:
:>
0
ID
:8
c:
GI
!!
"
072
REPORT TO
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Report Number: OES 25-06
Date: June 12, 2006
From:
Everett Buntsma
Director, Operations & Emergency Services
Subject:
Supply and Delivery of 4-Ton Truck
Q-20-2006
File: A-2130
Recommendation:
1. That Report OES 25-06 regarding the supply and delivery of a 4 Ton Dump Truck
be received and that:
2. Quotation No. Q-20-2006 submitted by Scarborough Truck Centre Inc. for the
supply and delivery of a 4 Ton Dump Truck with snow plow and wing, and
electronic salt metering in the amount of $157,624.00(GST, PST and license extra)
be accepted;
3. The total gross purchase cost $180,432.36 and a net purchase cost of
$170,974.92 be approved;
4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the
purchase through the issuance of debt; and
a) That debt financing through the Region of Durham in the amount of
$170,000.00 for a period not exceeding five (5) years, at a rate to be
determined, be approved and the balance of approximately $975 plus
financing costs be financed from current funds; and
b) That financing and repayment charges in the amount of approximately
$39,000 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering
commencing in 2007 and continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid; and
c) That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has certified that this loan
and the repayment thereof falls within the City's debt and financial
obligations approved annual repayment limit for debt and other financial
obligations for 2006 as established by the Province for municipalities in
Ontario; and
d) That the Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary in order to
effect the foregoing: and
073
Report OES 25-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Subject: Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Truck
Q-20-2006
Page 2
5. Staff at the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto.
Executive Summary: The City of Pickering has a fleet of 4 ton and 5 ton dump
trucks that are used year round for road maintenance activities including sanding,
salting and snow plowing. A replacement for the oldest 4 ton truck in the fleet was
approved in the 2006 Capital budget. Six vendors were invited to submit bids and two
bids were received. Upon review, the vehicle that meets the City's requirements is
being recommended. The vehicle proposed by the low bidder does not, in staff's
opinion, meet the overriding requirement for engine torque.
Given new emission requirements that will increase the cost of these trucks in January
2007, orders being placed at this time are significant resulting in extended delivery
times and actual uncertainty of availability. Therefore, the sooner Council approval is
received and the order is placed, the better chance the City has at receiving acceptance
and delivery. Scarborough truck has advised that delivery would be in December 2006.
The vehicle from Freightliner would be available in March 2007.
Financial Implications:
1.
Approved Source of Funds
Total Approved Funds
Amount
$175,000.00
$175.000.00
2006 Capital Budget
Debt (5 years)
New Chart of Accounts
5320.0602.6158
2.
Estimated Project Costing Summary
Sub Total
GST (6%)
PST
License
Total Gross Purchase Cost
$157.624.00
$157,624.00
$9,457.44
$12,609.92
~
$180,432.36
Q-20 -2006
4 Ton Dump Truck
GST Rebate
Total Net Purchase Cost
($9,457.44)
$170,974.92
074
Report OES 25-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Subject: Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Truck
Q-20-2006
Page 3
3.
Project Cost under (over) Approved Funds
$4025.08
The Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has reviewed the budgetary implications
and the financing of the expenditures contained in this report and concurs.
Background: The purchase of a 4-Ton Dump Truck with snow plow and wing
and electronic salt metering was approved by Council in the 2006 Capital Budget.
Through market research and analysis of emerging technology in winter control, Fleet
Operations compiled specifications for this piece of equipment. Supply & Services
invited six (6) vendors to participate in the bidding process of which two (2) have
submitted quotations.
The Supervisor, Fleet Operations advises that the low bid submitted by Freightliner Mid
Ontario does not provide the required engine torque specified in the document. A
torque of 1050 pound-foot at approximately 1500 RPM is required to operate the
vehicle efficiently and safely with the added load of the snow plow, wing, hydraulic
systems and salt metering device. The bid submitted by Scarborough Truck Centre
provides the torque of 1050 pound-foot at 1200 RPM whereas the bid from Freightliner
Mid Ontario only provides 950 pound-foot at 1500 RPM. This difference of 100 pound-
foot (or 10%) can be significant for vehicle performance, especially when considering
the topography and terrain of Pickering. A review of other municipalities in Durham
indicate others (Clarington and Whitby) are purchasing trucks with high torque engines
manufactured by International or Stirling.
The bid from Freightliner Mid Ontario indicates the engine supplied is a wet sleeve
engine, however, upon further research it can be stated that the MBE 900 engine is not
a true wet sleeve engine. It is a cast iron block with induction hardened cylinder bores.
The block cannot be replaced as a wet sleeve can, therefore, overhauls are more
complicated and not as cost effective.
The City's fleet of 4 ton and 5 ton dump trucks consists of four International trucks,
model year 1997-2000, five Freightliner trucks; model year 2001-2003 and three
International trucks; model year 2005-2006. The International truck has proven to be
reliable and several have been in service beyond the desirable seven-year life cycle.
The City's heavy equipment operators that operate the latest model International trucks
advise that the in-cab comfort and overall ride of the latest model International trucks
are superior. This is important during winter control events that can typically run for 13
hours when salting and plowing is required.
Should the order be accepted, Scarborough Truck Centre advises that delivery would
be in December 2006. A call to Freightliner Mid Ontario indicated delivery would be in
March 2007.
075
Report OES 25-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Subject: Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Truck
Q-20-2006
Page 4
Upon careful examination of all quotations received by Supply & Services the Municipal
Property & Engineering Division recommends acceptance of the bid from Scarborough
Truck Centre Inc. in the amount of $157,624.00 (GST, PST and License extra) and that
the total net purchase cost of $170.974,92 be approved. This report has been prepared
in conjunction with the Manager Supply & Services who concurs with the foregoing,
Attachments:
1,
Supply & Services Memorandum
Prepared By:
/\ ~Þc¿~~
, Grañt Smith
Superv'sor, Fleet Operations
Everett Buntsma
Director
Operations & Emergency Services
Vera A. Felgemacher
Manager, Supply & Services
~~6-- ~
"'-GITíis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
RH:GS
Attachments
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
-
CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
#M~L.. ¡U::'PORT#~~
-1.- ..,,2_- 076
May 15, 2006
RECEIVED
To:
Richard Holborn,
Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering
MAY 1 5 2006
CITY OF PICKERING
MUNICIPAL PROPERTY & ENGINEERING
From:
Bob Kuzma
Senior Purchasing Analyst
Subject:
Quotation No. Q-20-2006, Supply & Delivery Four-Ton Dump Truck
Closing: May 12, 2006
Quotations have been received for the above project. Six (6) companies were invited to
participate of which two (2) responded. Quotations shall be irrevocable for 60 days after the
official closing date and time.
Copies of the quotations are attached for your review along with the summary of costs. Each
line item provides a space for the vendor to indicate a "Yes, No, Specify" to provide the City with
information and details to subjectively review each line item and the sum total of all
specifications. Specifications item # 4b states: a mark in the "no" space shall mean a deviation
from the specification and must be further detailed in the SPECIFY space. Deviations will be
evaluated and acceptance of these deviations is within the discretion of the City of Pickering.
The quotation submitted by Freightliner Mid Ontario in the total amount of $171,092.34 is the
low quotation, subject to further evaluation of the vehicles conformance to specification. The
quote from Scarborough Truck Centre Inc. has been adjusted from 7% G.S.T. to 6% G.S.T.,
which will be the applicable amount at time of delivery. Also, please note that the bid from
Scarborough Truck Centre Inc. includes a statement that their bid is subject to component
availability at time of ordering. Orders placed within the next 30 days are least likely to be
affected by this situation. If the quotation from Scarborough Truck Centre is approved, the
components available or not available at the time of order would have to be evaluated and the
decision to proceed would be based on conformance to Specifications - Item # 4.
Please advise with your recommendation any reason the low bid from Freightliner Mid Ontario is
not acceptable.
Richard Holborn
0-20-2006
-077
ATTACh MENT #--1--.. TO REPORT#...o.s.s.. -.25'-()~
~of ?.
May 15, 2006
Page 2
SUMMARY
After
Vendor Amount G.S.T. P.S.T. Lic. Total Calculation
Fee Check
Freightliner $150,081.00 $ 9,004.86 $12,006.48 Incl. $171,092.34 $171,092.34
Mid Ontario
Scarborough $157,624.00 $ 11,033.68 $12,609.00 $741.00 $182,008.60 $180,432.36
Truck Centre
In accordance with Purchasing Policy Item 04.05 revised, an award exceeding $81,000 is
subject to Council approval.
Include in your report to Council:
1. the appropriate account number(s) to which this work is to be charged and
the budget amount(s) assigned thereto
2. Treasurer's confirmation of funding
3. related departmental approvals
4. any reason(s) why the low bid of Freightliner Mid Ontario is not acceptable,
and
5. related comments specific to the project
Bidders will be advised of the outcome. Please do not disclose pricing to enquiring bidders.
Subject to Council approval, an approved "on-line" requisition will also be required to proceed.
If you require further information or assistance during the evaluation phase of this quotation
call, feel free to contact me at extension 2131.
Thank you,
/bk
Attachments
078
CitJ¡ c~
REPORT TO
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Report Number: CS 28-06
Date: June 12, 2006
From:
Gillis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
Subject:
2006 Tax Rates for all Classes of Property and Final Tax Due Dates for
All Realty Tax Classes Except for Commercial, Industrial & Multi-
Residential Realty Classes
Recommendation:
1.
It is recommended that Report CS 28-06 of the Director, Corporate Services &
Treasurer be received and;
2.
That the 2006 Residential tax rates for the City of Pickering be approved as
contained in Schedule A to By-law No. 6676/06 attached hereto;
3.
That the tax levy due dates for the Final Billing be July 7, 2006 and September
28, 2006 excluding the industrial, multi-residential and commercial realty tax
classes;
4.
That the attached By-law No. 6676/06 providing for the imposition of the tax
rates approved under Recommendation 1 above, be read three times and
approved;
5.
That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to make any
changes or undertake any actions necessary, including altering due dates, in
order to ensure the tax billing process is completed;
6.
That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be authorized to make any
changes to the final tax rates to comply with Provincial regulations; and,
7.
That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the
necessary actions to give effect thereto.
Executive Summary: Adoption of the above recommendations and the attached
By-law provides for the approval of tax rates required to raise the levy approved in the
2006 Current Budget of the City of Pickering and to levy taxes for School Boards and
for the Region of Durham.
079
Report CS 28-06
Date: June 12,2006
Subject: 2006 Tax Rates and Final
T ax Due Dates for All Realty Tax Classes Except for
Commercial, Industrial & Multi-Residential Realty Classes
Page 2
Financial Implications: Adoption of the recommendations and passing the by-law
will allow staff of the Corporate Services Department to bill the Final 2006 levy for all
properties except for the industrial, commercial and multi-residential tax classes.
Passing of the by-law will assist the City of Pickering to meet its financial obligations
and reduce any borrowing costs.
Background:
components:
The 2006 final tax billing process will consist of two separate
1.
2.
residential and residential related (farm, managed forest) properties; and,
commercial, industrial and multi-residential realty classes.
Later this year, a report will be presented to Council asking for Council's approval to bill
the non-residential tax classes. The non-residential tax classes are subject to tax
capping and Pickering's staff in conjunction with the other lower tier municipal tax staff
and the Region's finance staff will be working on the tax capping calculations during the
summer.
City's Net Tax Levy and Tax Rate Increase
On April 3, 2006, City Council approved Report CS 16-06 of the Director, Corporate
Services & Treasurer that provided for a property tax levy of $34,611,494 resulting in a
budgetary increase of 5.79%. This increase is applied to the "City portion" of the
property tax bill.
Comparison of Pickerina's Residential Total Tax Rate with our Eastern
Neiahbours
Tax Rate Taxes Paid
Pickering 296,000 .01293052 3,827.43
.01
Whitby 296,000 .01326721 3,927.09 99.66
Oshawa 296,000 .01652425 4,891.18 1,063.74
As the above chart indicates, Pickering residents continue to enjoy having the lowest
tax rates and therefore, are paying lower property taxes per assessment dollar. The
total tax rates are used to facilitate an "apples to apples" comparison. With the transfer
of solid waste responsibility to the Region, the total tax rates had to be used for
comparison purposes.
Report CS 28-06
Date: June 12,2006 U 8 a
Subject: 2006 Tax Rates and Final
T ax Due Dates for All Realty Tax Classes Except for
Commercial, Industrial & Multi-Residential Realty Classes
Page 3
Re-Assessment Impact for 2006 Residential Properties
When property tax reform was introduced in 1998, one of the major improvements to
the existing system was the implementation of regular province-wide re-assessments.
The Province has implemented a re-assessment for the 2006 property taxation year
based upon property values as of January 1, 2005 (from the previous valuation base of
June 30, 2003). The average residential property increase in the City of Pickering is
9.9%. Although property values did increase, when the City developed its 2006 tax
rates, the tax rates were adjusted downward to reflect the higher assessment values.
When the City developed its 2006 budget, the City did not use the transit tax room
(approximately 8%) when transit was transferred to the Region. The City publicly stated
that its budgetary increase was 5.79%. When residents compare their 2005 City share
property taxes to 2006 City share, any property that experienced are-assessment
increase of less than 11.5% will be paying less in property taxes for the City portion.
2005 Farm Class Ratio
Last year, Regional Council approved a reduction in the "Farm" ratio, that would be
phased in over a three-year period. The 2006 ratio is 0.2167, down from the 2005 ratio
of 0.2333. For 2007, the ratio decrease will be fully phased-in to 0.2000. In other
words, those properties with the farm realty tax class will be paying 20% of the
residential tax rate.
Tax Due Date Instalments
Recommendation 3 provides for the due dates for the payment of residential taxes
being July 7, 2006 and September 28, 2006. The table below lists the tax instalment
due dates for the last three years. The 1 s1 instalment due date in 2003 was delayed
until August due to late receipt of information required to prepare the final billing.
Year
2005
2004
2003
1 S Instalment
Jul 15/05
Jul 16/04
Au ust 15/03
2" Instalment
Se tember 29/05
Se tember 29/04
Se tember 26/03
Other
Recommendations 2 and 3 provide for the levying of all tax rates on all classes of
property except for the non-residential properties where the tax rates and the property
taxes will be billed at a later date because the claw back percentages have not yet been
determined. Staff have received advice that the claw back percentages should be
081
Report CS 28-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Subject: 2006 Tax Rates and Final
Tax Due Dates for All Realty Tax Classes Except for
Commercial, Industrial & Multi-Residential Realty Classes
Page 4
included in the billing By-law. Therefore, staff will bring a separate report to Council
regarding the non-residential tax rates and tax billing hopefully for Council's summer
meeting. Staff's preliminary estimate for the final non-residential due date is October
13, 2006.
chanaes to the Billina Schedule
Recommendation 5 and 6, will allow the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer some
latitude, limited by Provincial legislation, in effecting whatever may be necessary in
order to ensure that the taxes are billed properly and in a timely fashion. It was always
staff's understanding that Recommendation 5 would be used to change the due dates
by a few days in order to meet Provincial legislation requirements. (Section 343,
subsection one of the Municipal Act states the property owner must have at least
twenty-one days to pay their taxes.) A report would be prepared to Council if there was
a substantial delay in the billing of the final taxes.
Attachments:
1.
By-law to Establish the 2006 Tax Rates and Final Instalment Due Dates for All
Realty Classes Except Non-Residential
Prepared By:
Approved I Endorsed By:
/~~
Susan Aitken ead
Coordinator, Taxation Services
~( ~ y-
~
Gillis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
GAP:vw
Attachment
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering Cit ou
,/
082
ATTACHMENT#--L- TO REPORT # CS' -l?- ø,
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING
BY-LAW NO. 6676/06
Being a by-law to adopt the estimates of all sums required to be
raised by taxation for the year 2006 and to establish the Tax
Rates necessary to raise such sums and establish the final due
dates for the residential, pipeline, farmland and managed forest
realty tax classes.
WHEREAS it is necessary for the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering,
pursuant to the Municipal Act, 2001, S.D. 2001, c25, as amended, to pass a by-law to
levy a separate tax rate on the assessment in each property class; and,
WHEREAS the property classes have been prescribed by the Minister of Finance under
the Assessment Act, R.S.O. 1990, ch.A.31, as amended and its Regulations; and,
WHEREAS it is necessary for the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering,
pursuant to the Municipal Act, to levy on the whole rateable property according to the
last revised assessment roll for The Corporation of the City of Pickering the sums set
forth for various purposes in Schedule "A", for the current year; and,
WHEREAS the Regional Municipality of Durham has passed By-law No. 26-2006 to
establish tax ratios and By-law 24-2006 to adopt estimates of all sums required by The
Regional Municipality of Durham for the Durham Region Transit Commission and By-
law 25-2006 to set and levy rates of taxation for Regional Solid Waste Management
and By-law No. 23-2006 to set and levy rates of taxation for Regional General Purposes
and set tax rates on Area Municipalities; and,
WHEREAS the Province of Ontario has provided the 2006 education tax rates for the
realty classes; and,
WHEREAS sub section 342(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001, S.D. 2001, c25, as
amended, permits the issuance of separate tax bills for separate classes of real
property for 2006; and,
WHEREAS an interim levy was made by the Council of The Corporation of the City of
Pickering (pursuant to By-law No. 6615-06) before the adoption of the estimates for the
current year.
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.
For the year 2006, The Corporation of the City of Pickering (the "City") on April
3, 2006, approved Council Report CS 16-06 and corresponding schedules and
attachments as presented including the budgetary levy of $33,943,944 and
assessment growth of $667,550 for a total tax levy of $34,611,494.
083
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
For the year 2006, the City shall levy upon the Property Classes set out in
Schedule "A", the rates of taxation as set out in Schedule "A", for the City of
Pickering, the Region of Durham and for Education purposes on the current
value assessment as also set out in Schedule "A". Where applicable, taxes
shall be adjusted in accordance with Bill 140, as amended and its Regulations.
The levy provided for in Schedule "A" shall be reduced by the amount of the
interim levy for 2006.
The Tax Levy due dates for the Final Billing be July 7, 2006 and September 28,
2006 for all classes excluding the non-residential tax classes (commercial,
industrial and multi-residential).
If any section or portion of this By-law or of Schedule "A" is found by a court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, it is the intent of Council for The Corporation
of the City of Pickering that all remaining sections and portions of this By-law and
of Schedules "A" continue in force and effect.
This By-law comes into force on the date of its final passing.
BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 19th day of June
2006.
David Ryan, Mayor
Debi Bentley, Clerk
084
By-law No 6676106
Schedule A
2006 Tax Rates
2006 City Region Education Total Pickering Region Education TOTAL
QJ.ß. Tax Rate Tax Rate Tax Rate Tax Rate Billina Billina .!2!!!l!m BILLING
Property Class
Residential 7,782,657,400 0.00329667 0.00699385 0.00264000 0.01293052 25,656,770 54,430,738 20,546,216 100,633,724
Farm 72,434,080 0.00071440 0.00151556 0.00066000 0.00288996 51,747 109,778 47,806 209,332
Managed Forest 1,965,140 0.00082420 0.00174847 0.00066000 0.00323267 1,620 3,436 1,297 6,353
Pipelines 22,960,000 0.00405290 0.00859824 0.01586577 0.02851691 93,055 197,416 364,278 654,748
Multi-Residential 63,523,410 0.00632570 0.01341980 0.00264000 0.02238550 401,830 852,471 167,702 1,422,003
Commercial 670,536,919 0.00478020 0.01014108 0.01487553 0.02979681 3,205,301 6,799,969 9,974,592 19,979,861
Commercial - Excess Land 12,568,480 0.00334610 0.00709876 0.01041287 0.02085773 42,055 89,221 130,874 262,150
Commercial Vacant Land 10,511,000 0.00334610 0.00709876 0.01041287 0.02085773 35,171 74,615 109,450 219,236
Shopping Centres 294,012,302 0.00478020 0.01014108 0.01487553 0.02979681 1,405,438 2,981,602 4,373,589 8,760,629
Shopping Centres Excess Land 299,140 0.00334610 0.00709876 0.01041287 0.02085773 1,001 2,124 3,115 6,239
Office Building 37,610,655 0.00478020 0.01014106 0.01487553 0.02979681 179,786 381,413 559,478 1,120,678
Office Building Excess Land 0.00334610 0.00709876 0.01041287 0.02085773
Industrial 159,157,695 0.00744980 0.01580471 0.01921809 0.04247260 1,185,693 2,515,441 3,058,707 6,759,841
Industrial Excess Land 3,464,140 0.00464240 0.01027327 0.01249176 0.02760743 16,775 35,588 43,273 95,636
Industrial Vacant land 28,765,000 0.00484240 0.01027327 0.01249176 0.02760743 139,292 295,511 359,325 794,128
Large Industrial 28,735,685 0.00827860 0.01756296 0.02171156 0.04755312 237,891 504,684 623,897 1,366,471
Large Industrial - Excess Land 680,315 0.00538110 0.01141606 0.01411251 0.03090967 3,661 7,767 9,601 21,028
Parking Lot Full 0 . OOOOOOOO 0 . OOOOOOOO 0 . OOOOOOOO 0.00000000
Parking Lots Excess Land 0 . OOOOOOOO 0 . OOOOOOOO o. OOOOOOOO 0 00000oo0
Total 9189881361 32,657,085 69,281,772 40,373,200 142,312,057
Pavments in Lieu Properties
Residential 100,651,895 0.00329667 0.00699385 0.00264000 0.01293052 331,816 703,944 265,721 1,301,481
Residential - Tax Tenant 64,098,195 0.00329667 0.00699385 0.00264000 0.01293052 211,311 448,293 169,219 828,823
Residential - General 48,657,510 0.00329667 0.00699385 0 . OOOOOOOO 0.01029052 160,408 340,303 500,711
Farm 56,578,600 0.00071440 0.00151556 0 . 0006600O 0.00288996 40,420 85,748 37,342 163,510
Farm - Tax Tenant 13,827,400 0.00071440 0.00151556 0 . 0006600O 0.00288996 9,878 20,956 9,126 39,961
Commercial Full 47,885,170 0.00478020 0.01014108 0.01487553 0.02979681 228,901 485,607 712,317 1,426,825
Commercial Full - Shared PIL 31,852,225 0.00478020 0.01014108 001487553 0.02979681 152,260 323,016 473,819 949,095
Commercial Full - Tax. Tenant 2,522,350 0.00478020 0.01014108 0.01487553 0.02979681 12,057 25,579 37,521 75,158
Commercial General 9,575,355 0.00478020 0.01014106 0 . OOOOOOOO 0.01492128 45,772 97,104 142,877
Commercial Full - Excess land 515,270 0.00334610 0.00709876 0.01041287 0.02085773 1,724 3,658 5,365 10,747
Commercial Full - Excess land Tenant 196,195 0.00334610 0.00709876 0.01041287 0.02085773 656 1,393 2,043 4,092
Commercial General Excess Land 1,419,550 0.00334610 0.00709876 0.000000oo 0.01044486 4,750 10,077 14,827
Commercial Gen - Vacant land 2,550,000 0.00334610 0.00709876 0.000000oo 0.01044486 8,533 18,102 26,634
Commercial Vacant Land Full 0.00334610 0.00709876 0.01041287 0.02065773
Office Building Full - Shared PIL 7,738,945 0.00478020 0.01014108 0.01487553 0.02979681 36,994 78,481 115,121 230,596
Parking Lot 0 . OOOOOOOO 0 . OOOOOOOO 0.OOOOOOOO 0 . OOOOOOOO
Industrial Full 0.00744980 0.01580471 0.01921809 0.04247260
Industrial General 0.00744980 0.01580471 0.00000000 0.02325451
Industrial Full- Shared PIL 7,512,005 0.00744980 0.01580471 0.01921809 0.04247260 55,963 118,725 144,366 319,054
Industrial Full- Tax Tenant 372,380 0.00744980 0.01580471 0.01921809 0.04247260 2,774 5,885 7,156 15,816
Ind. Excess Land - Shared PIL 7,626,805 0.00484240 0.01027327 0.01249176 0.02760743 36,932 78,352 95,272 210,556
Ind. Excess Land Tax Tenant PIL 329,620 0.00484240 0.01027327 0.01249176 0.02760743 1,596 3,386 4,118 9,100
Industrial Excess Land Gen 0.00484240 0.01027327 0.00000000 0.01511567
Industrial Vacant Land Full 0.00484240 0.01027327 0.01249176 0.02760743
Industrial Vacant Land Gen 0.00484240 0.01027327 0 . OOOOOOOO 0.01511567
Industrial Vacant Land Shared PIL 2,141,500 0.00484240 0.01027327 0.01249176 0.02760743 10,370 22,000 26,751 59,121
Large Industrial Full- Shared PIL 71,963,635 0.00827860 0.01756296 0.02171156 0.04755312 595,758 1,263,894 1,562,443 3,422,095
Large Ind. Excess Land - Shared Pll 1,028,885 0.00538110 0.01141606 0.01411251 0.03090967 5,537 11,746 14,520 31,802
Total PILS 479,043,490 1,954,409 4,146,252 3,682,221 9,782,883
Grand Total 34,611,494 73,428,025 44,055,421 152,094,940
085
CitJ¡ c~
REPORT TO
EXECUTIVE COMMMITTEE
Report Number: CS 30-06
Date: June 12, 2006
From:
Gillis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
Subject:
2005 Pre-Audit Balances of Reserves and Reserve Funds
Recommendation:
1. It is recommended that Report CS 30-06 of the Director, Corporate Services &
Treasurer be received and forwarded to Council for information.
Executive Summary: Based on the preliminary 2005 results, we can now report on
the pre-audit actual activities within the Reserves and Reserve Funds for 2005. A
summary is presented in Appendix A.
The purpose and 2005 financial transactions for each Reserve and Reserve Fund are
set out in Appendices Band C respectively.
Financial Implications:
Not applicable
Background: As in previous reports filed over the last four years, this report provides
specific information on each of the City's Reserves and Reserve Funds, including year-
end balances. The 2005 pre-audit Reserves and Reserve Funds balance of
$47,374,956 is one of the highest balances ever reported in Pickering. However, this
balance is not fully available for use due to the outstanding commitment of funds not yet
spent, the obligations connected with the collection of funds or other specific purposes
approved by Councilor under Provincial Legislation.
With regard to unspent commitments for capital projects, we are continuing the practice
of not transferring funding for commitments until the expenditures are incurred. This
procedure allows the Reserve Funds to earn interest income as long as funds are still in
the reserve fund's custody and is in compliance with Public Sector Accounting Board
(PSAB) for obligatory Reserve Funds. The combined unspent commitments for all
Reserve Funds are $3,939,289.
From 2001 to 2004, the City's share of collections from OPG related to properties under
assessment appeal was $7,705,240. In 2005 an additional amount of $1,631,589 was
086
Report CS 30-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Subject: 2005 Pre-Audit Balances of Reserves and Reserve Funds
Page 2
collected, bringing the December 31, 2005 value to $9,336,829 in the Reserve for
Contingency - OPG pending final decision of this appeal. At this time, we are still
unable to confirm the availability of these monies for corporate purposes. In the
meantime, these funds are being used for the temporary financing of the Don Beer
Arena expansion with the balance being invested.
The Development Charges, Parkland, Third Party/Developer Contributions, Ontario
Transit Renewal, Provincial Dedicated Gas and Federal Gas Tax Reserve Funds
represent funds received for specific purposes subject to legislative requirements and
based on developer agreements or agreements with any third parties. Funds available
in these Reserve Funds are obligatory in nature and should be treated as committed.
The balance in these obligatory Reserve Funds is $26,649,520. The combined total of
the unspent commitments, OPG assessment appeal, other restricted balances and
obligatory Reserve Funds of approximately $40 million reduced the "discretionary"
balance to approximately $7.3 million as at December 31,2005.
The City established two new reserves and a reserve fund this year, namely: Easement
Settlement Reserve, Provision for Eastern Branch Library Reserve and Federal Gas
Tax Reserve Fund. The Building Permit Stabilization Reserve Fund is included in this
Report for background information only, the official by-law to set-up this account is to be
made effective 2006. The purposes of the reserves and reserve funds are discussed
further in Appendices Band C.
Internal borrowings from the Reserve Funds commenced in 2001 to assist in funding
capital projects. Although the amount borrowed each year has declined, the
outstanding principal balance at December 31, 2005 is approximately $5.5 million.
These loans are undertaken from the Development Charges and Parkland Reserve
Funds. This provided the Reserve Funds with an attractive rate of interest compared to
current market investment rates while at the same time providing a cheaper cost of
borrowing to the capital fund. Interest earned on internal loans represents amounts
earned on the 2001 to 2004 internal borrowings. Repayment for 2005 internal
borrowings will commence in 2006 and interest earned will be reflected accordingly.
Attachments:
1.
2.
3.
Appendix A Summary of Reserves and Reserve Funds
Appendix B Description of Reserves
Appendix C Description of Reserve Funds
087
Report CS 30-06
Date: June 12,2006
Subject: 2005 Pre-Audit Balances of Reserves and Reserve Funds
Page 3
Prepared By:
Approved / Endorsed By:
~~~
Caryn Kong
Senior Financial Analyst
~b ,---
c..--
Gillis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
GAP:vw
Attachments
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering City ouncil
//'
APPENDIX A
088
ATTACHMENT#-l- TO REPORT # <!Sso-o(,
CITY OF PICKERING
SUMMARY OF RESERVE AND RESERVE FUND PRE-AUDIT ACTUALS
DECEMBER 31, 2005
Appendix B Summary Reserves
4610
4611/4623
4612
4613
4619
4620
4621
4622
4624
4625
4626
Working Funds
Replacement Capital
Contingencies-OPG, Election, Other 2
Self-Insurance 2
Rate Stabilization
Develop.Charges-City's Share 2
Region Transit 2
Continuing Studies 2
Vehicle Replacement
Easement Settlement - New
Library Eastern Branch - New 2
Total Reserves
Appendix C Summary of Reserve Funds
4225
4229
4228
4230
4232
4234
4235
4236
4237
4238
4239
4240
Community Facilities
Development Charges 1 & 2
Capital Works
Parkland' & 2
Public Works
Workers Safety Insurance Brd 2
Third Party/Dev. Contributions 1
Ontario Transit Renewal'
Squash Courts 2
Provo Dedicated Gas Tax'
Federal Gas Tax Revenue- New 1
Building Permit Stabilization Fees New
Total Reserve Funds
Total Reserves & Reserve Funds
Notes
, Obligatory
2 Restricted
Total Obligatory 1 & Restricted 2 -2005 =
CS30ck Appendix A
Pre Audit
2005
$400,000
722,844
10,774,909
915,514
3,388,965
484,204
237,106
342,533
75,000
1,095,129
20,000
$18,456,204
Pre Audit
2005
$265,492
21,135,306
309,872
2,103,061
1,038,206
589,575
1,819,264
19,166
66,087
722,039
850,684
$28,918,752
$47,374,956
$26,649,520
$ 40,079,448
Audited
2004
$400,000
758,175
9,053,320
940,514
2,619,565
1,921,332
1,025,741
233,159
25,000
Audited
2003
$400,000
730,713
7,813,558
940,514
2,177,209
2,685,297
1,106,634
141,884
$16,976,806 $15,995,809
Audited
2004
$380,604
19,496,777
302,610
2,166,696
1,152,444
378,731
1,601 ,076
14,035
33,713
161,515
Audited
2003
$386,726
15,804,668
535,849
1,959,087
1,465,425
181,023
1,024,691
14,957
7,450
$25,688,201 $21,379,876
$42,665,007 $37,375,685
Audited
2002
$400,000
615,800
6,791,047
949,106
2,421,909
2,812,214
1,242,507
67,400
$15,299,983
Audited
2002
$352,423
12,866,749
516,013
2,017,875
1,400,169
176,974
402,939
$17,733,142
$33,033,125
089
1.
2.
ATTACHMENT#..d.- TO REPORT#C.s' 3D ~ol::,
APPENDIX B
RESERVE FOR WORKING FUNDS 4610
Actual Balance December 31, 2004 $ 400,000
Transfers into the Reserve
Transfers out of the Reserve
Pre Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005 $ 400,000
Purpose of this Reserve:
The reserve for working funds is used to provide operating cash to assist in
avoiding short term interest expenses incurred on operations, typically during the
first months of the year prior to tax billing and at other times when cash inflows
and outflows do not match as occurs in any corporation.
The interest income on these funds form part of the annual Current Budget
General Government Revenue.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of the Reserve:
It is recommended as a "rule-of-thumb" that this reserve be 2% to 3% of total City
revenues. Based on an average annual revenue of $45 million, at 2%, the
amount to maintain for this reserve should be $900,000.
(-90
APPENDIX B
RESERVE FOR REPLACEMENT OF CAPITAL EQUIPMENT - G/L 4611/4623
Actual Balance December 31, 2004 $ 758,175
Transfers into the Reserve
Revenue Fund Contribution 155,669
Transers out of the Reserve
Transfer to Capital Fund -
Operation Centre (191,000)
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005 $ 722,844
1.
Purpose of this Reserve:
The purpose of this reserve is to reduce the need to levy for the full cost of major
equipment in the year of acquisition. The reserve acts as a stabilization factor
and helps to avoid both tax rate fluctuations and the issuance of long term debt
or other means of financing.
The interest income on these funds form part of the annual Current Budget
General Government Revenue.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve:
This reserve should be kept at a level that is equivalent to the replacement cost
of the assets for which they were established. Over the last couple of years, the
reserve balance has been kept at a minimum level.
Contributions to this Reserve are provided for annually in the Current Budget. In
2003, additional sub-categories were set up for accounting purposes to better
match the collection of funds to the application of these funds to particular
facilities as shown on the following page.
091
APPENDIX B
The balances pertaining to these sub-categories are as follows:
General Recreation Dunbarton Don Beer Rec Comp Rec Comp Rec Comp
Corp Use prgrms Pool Arena Core Pool Arena Total
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
Dec 31/04 84,653 129,760 29,772 62,500 62,893 136,312 252,285 758,175
Transfer in 40,207 18,500 4,962 30,000 27,000 15,000 20,000 155,669
Transfer out (71,000) - (120,000) (191,000)
Dec 31/05 53,860 148,260 34,734 92,500 89,893 151,312 152,285 722,844
092
APPENDIX B
RESERVE FOR cONTINGENcIES- G/L 4612
(OPG, Other Assessment Appeals, Election, Miscellaneous)
Actual Balance December 31, 2004
Transfers into the Reserve
Revenue re OPG Assmt. Appeal Properties
Transfer from Revenue Fund
$ 9,053,320
1,631,589
90,000
1,721,589
Transfers out of the Reserve
Settlement OPG Assessment Appeals
$
$ 10,774,909
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005
1.
Purpose of this Reserve:
Like the capital equipment replacement reserve, this reserve acts in a tax
stabilization capacity. It was established in anticipation of unknown, unusual or
extraordinary expenditures which occur from time to time.
The interest income on these funds form part of the annual Current Budget
General Government Revenue.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve:
In 2003, the large balances in this Reserve were reviewed and grouped into sub-
categories in the General Ledger, for accounting purposes only, to better
distinguish those amounts that are committed and those amounts available for
general corporate use. The sub-categories are as follows: OPG Assessment
Appeal, Elections, Other Assessment Appeals and Miscellaneous.
The transfer regarding Ontario Power Generation (OPG) in the amount of
$1,631,589 for the current year is the City's revenue for properties currently
under assessment appeal. This amount plus the last four years' net contributions
of $7,705,240 resulted in a combined total of $9,336,829. The availability of
these funds is undeterminable as the appeal is still outstanding and is considered
committed in the event repayment must be made.
The amounts pertaining to the other sub-categories are as follows: Election-
$180,000, Other Assessment Appeals - $682,594 and Miscellaneous - $575,486.
093
APPENDIX B
RESERVE FOR SELF INSURANCE - G/L 4613
Actual Balance December 31, 2004
Transfers into the Reserve
$
940,514
Transfers out of the Reserve:
Transfer to Capital
(25,000)
$
915,514
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005
1.
Purpose of this Reserve:
This reserve was established as a necessary form of asset protection.
Specifically, it is to cover insurance claims resulting from the increase in
deductible levels, costs of uninsured claims and other claim related costs. The
higher deductible reduced insurance premiums. Significant savings can be
realized through reduced premium costs and staff analyze the costs/benefits of
such actions on an annual basis.
The interest income on these funds form part of the annual Current Budget
General Government Revenue.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve:
This reserve should be maintained at a level to ensure that the funding is
adequate to meet future liabilities. This situation is analyzed by staff on a regular
basis. The $25,000 draw in the current year was necessary to partially pay for
the playground replacement costs resulted from vandalism.
094
APPENDIX B
RESERVE FOR RATE STABILIZATION - G/L 4619
Actual Balance December 31, 2004
Transfers into the Reserve
Excess Surplus Contribution
$ 2,619,565
1 ,769,400
Transfers out of the Reserve
2005 Current Budget Provision
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005
(1,000,000)
$ 3,388,965
1.
Purpose of this Reserve:
The purpose of this reserve is to act as a tax rate stabilization factor for annual
current budget funding.
The interest income on these funds form part of the annual Current Budget
General Government Revenue.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve:
The fund balance should be maintained at a level of 3 to 5 per cent of tax
revenues to provide tax rate stabilization for annual current budgeting purposes.
The 2005 Current Budget provided for a transfer in the amount of $1,000,000
from this Reserve to fund current expenditures.
095
APPENDIX B
RESERVE FOR DEVELOPMENT CHARGES - CITY SHARE G/L 4620
Actual Balance December 31, 2004
Transfers into the Reserve
2005 Current Budget Provision
Returned to source-completed project
$ 1,921,332
590,000
712
Transfers out of the Reserve
Transfer to Capital Fund
-External Subdivision Works
(2,027,840)
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005
$
484,204
1.
Purpose of this Reserve:
This reserve has been established to set aside funds for projected growth in the
City. From the 1999 and the 2004 Development Charges Studies it was
approved that a Reserve be established for the City's share (Le. the non-
development charge portion) of the costs of services included in the
Development Charges Study and that contributions be included in the annual
Current Budget for consideration by Council. For the City to meet its obligations
for the various capital projects an annual contribution of $2.4 million is required.
The interest income on these funds form part of the annual Current Budget
General Government Revenue.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve:
Funds continue to be budgeted in the Current Budget to build up this reserve to
fund future capital growth of the City. The draws in the current year were to
finance external subdivision works. This reserve should be maintained at a level
to ensure that the funding is adequate to meet future capital growth in the City.
096
APPENDIX B
REGION TRANSIT RESERVE - GIL 4621
Actual Balance December 31, 2004
Transfers into the Reserve
GO Transit Funding from Region
Transfer from Reserve Fund
Returned to source-project no longer require
$ 1,025,740
975,880
21,578
95,000
1,092,458
Transfers out of the Reserve
APTA Expenditures
(1,881,092)
$
237,106
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005
1.
Purpose of this Reserve:
This reserve fund was established in 2002 to capture funds raised by the Region
for transit purposes and not immediately required.
The interest income on these funds form part of the annual Current Budget General
Government Revenue.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve:
Transfer into the Reserve represents funding of $975,880 received from the
Region of Durham. Funds were transferred out of this reserve to finance the
2005 current and capital operations of Ajax Pickering Transit Authority (APT A).
The amount transferred-out in 2005 was $1,881,092 bringing the year-end
December 31,2005 balance to $237,106.
The balance of this Reserve is expected to be used for any unpaid commitments
or obligations related to APT A. With the transfer of APT A to the Region effective
January 1, 2006, this Reserve will eventually be closed-out upon settling all our
commitments and obligations.
097
APPENDIX B
RESERVE FOR CONTINUING STUDIES & CONSULTING - G/L 4622
Actual Balance December 31, 2004 $ 233,159
Transfers into the Reserve
Continuing Consulting Work or Studies 250,599
Transfers out of the Reserve (141,225)
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005 $ 342,533
1.
Purpose of this Reserve:
This reserve was established to capture any unspent annual Current Budget
provisions related to consulting, continuing studies, professional and legal fees.
Under Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, the approval to expend funds
for these efforts ceases at year-end, however work may continue beyond that
date. The establishment of this fund enables the transfer of unspent funds into
future year and accommodates this frequent timing difference between the
approval and the expenditure.
The interest income on these funds form part of the annual Current Budget General
Government Revenue.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve:
There would be no recommended maintenance levels. Funds transferred to this
reserve will be used to fund the balance of the expenditures still to be incurred for
incomplete studies or consulting contracts.
Expenditures incurred in 2005 in the amount of $141,225 pertained to consulting
work that was transferred into the Reserve in the prior year. An additional
amount of $250,599 has been transferred-in for future work.
098
APPENDIX B
RESERVE FOR VEHICLE REPLACEMENT - G/L 4624
Actual Balance December 31, 2004
Transfers into the Reserve
$
25,000
50,000
Transfers out of the Reserve
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005
$
75,000
1.
Purpose of this Reserve:
This reserve was newly established in 2004 to begin building up funds to finance
the cost of replacing the City's aging fleet.
The interest income on these funds form part of the annual Current Budget General
Government Revenue.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve:
There would be no recommended maintenance levels. Funds transferred to this
reserve will be committed to fund the purchase of new vehicles.
e9g
1.
2.
APPENDIX B
EASEMENT SETTLEMENT RESERVE - GIL 4625
Actual Balance December 31, 2004
Transfers into the Reserve
$
2,500,000
Transfers out of the Reserve:
2005 Capital Budget Expenditures
2005 Current Budget Expenditures
(969,534)
(435,337)
(1,404,871 )
$ 1,095,129
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005
Purpose of this Reserve:
This reserve was newly established in 2005 due to funds received from
easement settlement in February 2005. The amount collected was $2.5 million.
These funds will be used finance both the capital and operating expenditures of
the City. The 2005 expenditures included a draw of $969,534 to fund capital
expenditures and $435,337 to fund current expenditures, providing a year-end
balance of $1,095,129.
The interest income on these funds form part of the annual Current Budget General
Government Revenue.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve:
There would be no recommended maintenance levels. Whenever funds are
received due to easement settlement, this reserve will be credited accordingly.
Budgeted draws to fund City's expenditures will be dependent on the revenues
collected.
100
APPENDIX B
RESERVE - PROVISION FOR EASTERN BRANCH LIBRARY - G/L 4626
Actual Balance December 31, 2004
Transfers into the Reserve
$
20,000
Transfers out of the Reserve
$
20,000
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005
1.
Purpose of this Reserve:
This reserve was newly established in 2005 to begin building up funds for a new
library at the eastern part of Pickering. This provision may be used to fund the
new facility, capital cost, resource materials and any other related costs.
The interest income on these funds form part of the annual Current Budget General
Government Revenue.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve:
There would be no recommended maintenance levels. In 2002, the Board of the
Library requested $10,000 under the Capital Budget for the "Provision for
Eastern Branch". A similar request was made in 2005. The combined total of
2002 and 2005 is reflected in the year-end balance. It is the intention of the
Board of the Library to annually request for this provision to continue building up
funds for the proposed new facility. To reflect this intention, effective 2006
Budget year, the provision will be done by a "Transfer to Reserve for the
Provision for Eastern Branch".
101
ATTACHMENT #2- TO REPORT#~-ù,
APPENDIX C
RESERVE FUND FOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES - G/L 4225
Actual Balance December 31, 2004 $ 380,604
Transfers into the Reserve Fund
Capital Fund - Returned to Source $ 61 ,220
Interest Earned on External Investments 11,153 72,373
Transfers out of the Reserve Fund
Transfer to Capital Fund - Museum (187,485)
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005 $ 265,492
1.
Purpose of this Reserve:
This is a "discretionary" reserve fund established by Council to attempt to avoid
both tax rate fluctuations and the need for issuing long term debt for major
expenditures required for community facilities.
The interest income on these funds form part of the Reserve Fund as per the
Municipal Act, 2001.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve:
2.
The balances in this fund have fluctuated from the 2001 year low of $69,102 to
the high in 1998 of $773,483. Other than interest income earned and funds
returned from projects no longer required, there was no transfer to this reserve
fund in 2005.
Expenditures are transferred out of Reserve Funds only when incurred; therefore
the amount committed but not incurred at end of 2005 is $25,000. Taking these
commitments into consideration, the uncommitted balance of funds available is
$240,492. Additional amounts must be provided to this fund.
102
APPENDIX C
RESERVE FUND FOR DEVELOPMENT CHARGES - G/L 4227/4229
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005
$ 19,496,777
$ 1,672,209
17,266
420,714
215,648 2,325,837
(3,979)
$ (676,893)
(2,814)
(3,622) (687,308)
$ 21,135,306
Actual Balance December 31, 2004
Transfers into the Reserve Fund:
Net Developer Contributions
Returned to source
Interest Earned on External Investments
Interest Earned on Internal Loans
Transfers out of the Reserve Fund:
Transfer to Revenue Fund - Develop. Charge Study
Transfer to Capital Fund:
External Subdivision Works
Sidewalks
Senior Centre
1.
Purpose of this Reserve:
This is an "obligatory" reserve fund and as such is governed by Municipal Act
2001, Development Charges Act, 1997, Ontario Regulation 82/98, City By-law or
agreement and requires revenue received for the special purposes to be
segregated from the general revenues of the municipality. Obligatory Reserve
Funds must be created whenever a statute requires revenue received for a
special purpose to be segregated from the general revenues of the municipality
and the revenue is to be used solely for the purpose prescribed by statute, Le. in
this case the monies charged to developers must be held and used to fund
capital services required for new growth.
The interest income on these funds form part of the Reserve Fund as per the
Municipal Act, 2001.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve:
In accordance with development charge legislation, all development charge
revenue must be held within separate Reserve Funds and can only be used for
the financing of growth-related projects. As such, no reserve fund limits are
appropriate for Development Charge Reserve Funds because they are tied to
growth-related capital requirements.
This reserve fund has unspent commitments of $3,583,520. The pre-audit actual
balance of $21,135,306 would be reduced by this amount to reflect an
uncommitted balance of funds available of $17,551,786.
103
APPENDIX C
RESERVE FUND FOR CAPITAL WORKS - G/L 4228
Actual Balance December 31, 2004
Transfers into the Reserve Fund
Interest Earned on External Investments
$
302,610
7,262
Transfers out of the Reserve Fund
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005
$
309,872
1.
Purpose of this Reserve:
This Fund is a "discretionary" one and was established pursuant to section
417(1 )(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001 for specified purposes by Council related to
the acquisition of assets.
The interest income on these funds form part of the Reserve Fund as per the
Municipal Act, 2001.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve Fund:
Between the years of 1998 to 2000, the balances have been maintained at
$600,000 to $800,000. There has been no major contribution to this Reserve
Fund in the past four years. The value of the unspent commitments at the end of
2005 is $13,822. Taking these unspent commitments into account, the
uncommitted balance available at December 31, 2005 will be $296,050. Major
additional contributions will be required in future years.
104
APPENDIX C
RESERVE FUND FOR PARKLAND - GIL 4230
Actual Balance December 31, 2004
Transfers into the Reserve Fund
Developers Contributions
Returned to source
Interest Earned on External Investments
Interest Earned on Internal Loans
$ 2,166,696
$
256,333
176,721
54,441
22,811
510,306
Transfers out of the Reserve Fund
Transfer to Capital Fund
Parks-Tennis Court Resurfacing
Parks-Clubhouses
Playground Equipment
Parks-Purchase of land
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005
$
(94,322)
(20,156)
(259,463)
(200,000) (573,941)
$ 2,103,061
Purpose of this Reserve Fund:
This is an "obligatory" reserve fund and it was established pursuant to section
417(1 )(2) of the Municipal Act, 2001 as required by subsections 42(1), (5), (6),
(7), (8) and (9) of the Planning Act. This fund is governed by legislation,
regulation or agreement and requires revenues received for the special purposes
to be segregated from the general revenues of the municipality. Obligatory
Reserve Funds must be created whenever a statute requires revenues for a
special purpose to be segregated from the general revenues of the municipality
and the revenue is to be used solely for the purpose prescribed by statute.
The interest income on these funds form part of the Reserve Fund as per the
Municipal Act, 2001.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve Fund:
Due to the obligatory nature of this fund, there are no limits on this fund. The
value of the unspent commitments at end of 2005 is $202,031. The pre-audit
balance of $2,103,061, taking into account the unspent commitments, will
provide an uncommitted balance available of $1,901,030 as at December 31,
2005.
105
APPENDIX C
RESERVE FUND FOR PUBLIC WORKS - G/L 4232
Actual Balance December 31, 2004
Transfers into the Reserve Fund
Developer Contributions
Interest Earned on External Investments
$ 1,152,444
$
8,297
31,607
39,904
Transfers out of the Reserve Fund
Transfer to Capital Fund -
Property Maintenance
Roads
(9,161 )
(144,981 )
(154,142)
$ 1,038,206
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005
Purpose of this Reserve Fund:
This fund was established by Council pursuant to section 417(1 )(2) of the
Municipal Act, 2001. The purpose of the reserve fund is to acquire fixed assets,
e.g. storm sewers, without the need to fund on a long term nature through the
issue of debentures. The main purpose at this time is to fund the City's share of
the cost of subdivision works committed to under various subdivision
agreements.
The interest income on these funds form part of the Reserve Fund as per the
Municipal Act, 2001.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve Fund:
The "average" annual balance of this fund over the last four years has been
approximately $1.38 million. This reserve fund should be kept at least at this
level in the future. Staff will periodically review the need for this level with the
requirements contained in the capital budget and four year program and report
any different findings to Council.
The value of unspent commitments for 2005 is $114,916. The pre-audit balance
of $1,038,206 after taking into account the unspent commitments will provide an
uncommitted balance of funds available at $923,290 as at Dec. 31,2005.
106
APPENDIX C
RESERVE FUND FOR WORKERS SAFETY INSURANCE BOARD - G/L 4234
Actual Balance December 31, 2004 $ 378,731
Transfers into the Reserve Fund
Contribution from Current Fund $ 365,296
Interest Earned on External Investments 18,602 383,898
Transfers out of the Reserve Fund
Claims and Other Related Costs $ (61,400)
Insurance Costs (106,082)
Contribution to Health & Safety Program (5,572) (173,054)
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31,2005 $ 589,575
1.
Purpose of this Reserve Fund:
This Reserve Fund has been established to provide for the annual costs of
insurance coverage, contributions towards the health and safety program, and
the payment of claims and other related costs now that the City is a Schedule 2
employer. This Reserve Fund was created in 2001 further to the
recommendation passed in Council Resolution#127/01 and in compliance with
Workplace Safety & Insurance Act.
The interest income on these funds form part of the Reserve Fund as per the
Municipal Act, 2001.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve Fund:
In both 2004 and 2005, the contributions were more than double the claims
experience for the year, thus resulting to a built-up in the balance of the Reserve
Fund.
As Schedule 2 operates on the self-insured principle, any anticipated savings
between contributions and claims experience will be transferred to this Reserve
Fund to build up the fund balance in the event of any catastrophic claim-related
costs, which may occur. The average annual built-up of approximately $196,000
from 2003 to 2005 has resulted to the 2005 year-end balance of $589,575.
107
APPENDIX C
THIRD PARTY/DEVELOPERS CONTRIBUTIONS RESERVE FUND - GIL 4235
Actual Balance December 31, 2004
Transfers into the Reserve Fund
Contributions from Developers/Third Parties
Interest Earned on External Investments
$ 1,601,076
$
176,291
41,897
218,188
Transfers out of the Reserve Fund
Pre-Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005
$ 1,819,264
1.
Purpose of this Reserve Fund:
This reserve fund was established by Council pursuant to Section 417(1) of the
Municipal Act, 2001. The purpose of this reserve fund is to capture contributions
from developers or third parties per development agreements or cost sharing
arrangements for future capital projects.
Due to the externally restricted contributions, this Reserve Fund is treated as
obligatory. The collections are committed for a specific purpose and not
available for general use. Unless specified, the City is under no obligation to pay
interest to any developers or third parties.
The interest income on these funds form part of the Reserve Fund as per the
Municipal Act, 2001.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve
No reserve fund limits are appropriate for this fund as collection and commitment
of funds are dependent upon development agreements or cost sharing
arrangements.
108
APPENDIX C
ONTARIO TRANSIT RENEWAL RESERVE FUND - G'L 4236
Actual Balance DeceniJer 31, 2004 $ 14,035
Transfers into the Reserve Fund
Contribution from Ministry of Transportation $ 162,279
Interest on External Investments-reversal 5,130 167,409
Transfers out of the Reserve Fund
APT A Capital Expenditures (140,700)
Transfer to Region Transit Reserve (21 ,578) (162,278)
Pre Audit Actual Balance DecerriJer 31, 2005 $ 19,166
1.
Purpose of this Reserve Fund:
This is an "obligatory" Reserve Fund established to capture funding received
from Ministry of Transportation for the sole purpose of funding acquisition of
APT A vehicles or for any major vehicle refurbishment.
The interest income on these funds form part of the Reserve Fund as per the
Municipal Act, 2001.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve Fund:
No reserve fund limits are appropriate for this fund as availability of funds is
dependent on the amount of grant received.
The amount of $162,279 received from the Ministry of Transportation represents
City of Pickering's share of the grant under the Ontario Transit Renewal
Program.
Funds are provided from the Ontario Transit Renewal Program as expenditures
are incurred. With the transfer of APT A to the Region of Durham effective
January 1, 2006, this reserve fund will eventually be closed-out upon resolving all
outstanding matters. Note that the balance of $19,166 is a pre-audit amount
pending journal entries from year-end audit and thus, not the official 2005 year-
end balance.
If)9
APPENDIX C
SQUASH COURTS RESERVE FUND - G'L 4237
Actual Balance December 31, 2004 $ 33,713
Transfers into the Reserve Fund
Surcharge on Merrœrships 30,150
I nterest on External Investments 2,224 32,374
Transfers out of the Reserve Fund
Pre Audit Actual Balance Decer1'Œr 31, 2004 $ 66,087
1.
Purpose of this Reserve Fund:
This Reserve Fund was established to capture funds from Pickering
Squash Club memberships' surcharges, corporate sponsorships, third
party contribution and any such funds as the Council may approve. This
Reserve Fund shall be used for the purpose of paying expenses related to
the provision of double squash courts. This Reserve Fund was newly
created in 2003 further to the recommendation passed in Council
Resolution #79/03, Item 5 per Report to Council CS 40-03.
The interest income on these funds form part of the Reserve Fund as per
the Municipal Act, 2001.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve Fund:
No reserve fund limits are appropriate for this fund.
110
APPENDIX C
PROVINCIAL DEDICATED GAS TAX RESERVE FUND - GfL 4238
Actual Balance December 31, 2004 $ 161,515
Transfers into the Reserve Fund
Provo of Ontario 705,264
I nterest on External Investments 16,774 722,038
Transfers out of the Reserve Fund (161,515)
Pre Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005 $ 722,038
1.
Purpose of this Reserve Fund:
This Reserve Fund was established to capture funds from the Province of
Ontario for the new provincial gas tax revenue program. This Reserve
Fund shall be used for the purpose of paying eligible public transportation
expenditures, to offset Pickering's share of the costs for funding the Ajax
Pickering Transit Authority (APTA). This Reserve Fund was newly created
in 2004 further to the recommendation passed in Council Resolution
#167/04, Item 3 at the Council Meeting of December 20, 2004 per Report
to Council CS 56-04.
The interest income on these funds form part of the Reserve Fund as per
the Municipal Act, 2001.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve Fund:
No reserve fund limits are appropriate for this fund. Under this program,
the provincial government will provide one cent a litre of the provincial gas
tax funding in 2004. This rate has been increased to 1.5 cents in 2005 and
will be increased to two cents in 2006.
As the purpose for providing this Fund is for the public transportation
services, with the transfer of APT A to the Region effective 2006, the
balance of this Fund will be transferred to the Region once all matters are
resolved.
111
2.
APPENDIX C
FEDERAL DEDICATED GAS TAX RESERVE FUND - GlL 4239
Actual Balance December 31, 2004
Transfers into the Reserve Fund
Provo of Ontario
Interest on External Investments
$
849,577
1,107
850,684
Transfers out of the Reserve Fund
Pre Audit Actual Balance December 31, 2005
$
850,684
1.
Purpose of this Reserve Fund:
This Reserve Fund was established in 2005 to capture the transfer of gas
tax revenues from the Government of Canada through the Association of
Municipalities of Ontario under the New Deal for Cities and Communities.
The Council had approved under Report to Council CS 92-05, the
establishment of this new Reserve Fund under By-law 6609/05 and
Resolution 219/05. This new program is not application based and does
not require matching funding. Municipalities are allowed to invest in
environmental sustainable infrastructure in programs such as public
transit, storm water system, local roads and bridges.
The interest income on these funds form part of the Reserve Fund as per
the Municipal Act, 2001.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve Fund:
No reserve fund limits are appropriate for this fund. Under the Municipal
Funding Agreement, the schedule of funding payments is as follows:
Year July November
2005 $ 849,577.58
2006 $424,788.79 424,788.79
2007 566,321.81 566,321.82
2008 707,854.83 707,854.84
2009 1,415,709.67 1,415,709.67
Total $7,078,927.80
112
APPENDIX C
BULDING PERIVIT STABlUZATIOO RESERVE ~D
([ßvelq:>rrent Applications Approvals Process (DAAP) Fees)
Actual Balance Deœrrber 31, 2004
Transfers into the Reserve Fund
Building Code pemit Fees
Interest on Externa!l nvestrænts
$
Transfers out of the Reserve Fund
Pre Audit Actual BaliV1Ce Deœrrber 31, 2005
$
1.
Purpose of this Reserve Fund:
This Reserve Fund will be officially established in 2006 based on By-Law
6651/06. However, the Report to Executive Committee PO 41-05 was
forwarded to Council on December 1, 2005 such that the by-law will be
made effective January 1, 2006. Thus, this Reserve Fund will have a zero
balance as at year-end 2005. This reports provides the background
information for this new Reserve Fund.
The need for the establishment of this Reserve Fund arises as a result of
the significant changes to the building regulatory system in Ontario with
the introduction of the Building Code Statute Law Amendment Act, 2002
(known as Bill 124) and associated amendments to the Ontario Building
Code. The purpose of this fund is to secure funding to provide for service
delivery stabilization during an economic downturn. The source of funds
will be an annual portion of building code permit fees after related direct
and indirect costs are netted as defined and or adjusted by the Treasurer.
The interest income on these funds form part of the Reserve Fund as per
the Municipal Act, 2001.
2.
Recommended Maintenance Levels of this Reserve Fund:
Given the rationale for creating a fee stabilization reserve fund, the
targeted reserve fund balance should reflect the reduction in permits
witnessed during the last recession when compared to the long-run
development average - acknowledging the City's responsibility to manage
a portion of the costs associated with an economic downturn. Based on
the modeled activity based direct costs conducted by CN Watson; this
translates into a target balance of approximately $1.16 million (1.13 years
of direct operating cost).
113
CitJ¡ c~
REPORT TO
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Report Number: CS 31-06
Date: June 12, 2006
From:
Gillis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
Subject:
Change to User Fee By-law Due to Reduction in GST
Recommendation:
1.
It is recommended that Report CS 31-06 of the Director, Corporate Services &
Treasurer be received and:
2.
That Council enact the attached General Municipal Fees and Charges By-law
which provides for revised 2006 fees and charges, where applicable, adjusted to
reflect the reduction in the Goods and Services Taxes (GST); and
3.
That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take the
necessary actions to give effect thereto.
Executive Summary: In April of this year, Council approved By-law 6652/06 and
Council Report CS 16-06 which revised the City's fees and charges to reflect the 2006
Budget. The attached fee and charges schedule has been revised downward to reduce
those fees that included a 7% GST cost to the revised 6% rate effective July 1 , 2006.
Financial Implications:
None
Background: On May 2, 2006, the Honourable Jim Flaherty, MP, presented the
Federal Government's 2006-07 budget which provided for a one-point reduction to the
GST effective July 1,2006.
Starting with the 2004 budget, the City has had its user fees approved by Council
through the budget process. As part of this process, the City prepared a user fee
schedule which included all of the City fees and charges. The City adopted this
procedure in part to comply with Section 392 of the Municipal Act which basically states
"that a municipality shall establish and maintain a list for public inspection indicating
which of its services and activities are subject to fees or charges." This year, Council
approved By-law 6652/06 and Council Report CS 16-06 which revised the City's fees
and charges to reflect the 2006 fiscal plan.
114
Report CS 31-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Subject: Change to User Fee By-law Due to Reduction in GST
Page 2
After the Federal Government's GST reduction announcement, City staff conducted a
review of the current approved 2006 user fees and charges. This review revealed that
there are several fees that include the GST amount in the final fee charged. This is
referred to an "embedded GST" amount as illustrated below.
Current
Fee Revised
Pilates - (6) One Approved Fee
Hour Classes Bv Council GST (6%)
Basic Fee $70.09 $70.09
GST (7%) 4.91 GST (6%) 4.21
Total Fee $75.00 * $74.30
* The User Fee schedule approved by Council (in April) only shows
the $75.00 fee.
The current Council approved fee schedule has $75.00 as the pilates fee for six-one
hour classes. As shown above, this fee consists of the basic fee for $70.09 and the
(7%) GST component of $4.91. On July 1,2006 the City will be charging $74.30 which
includes the lower (6%) GST amount. The majority of the embedded GST fees are in
the Culture & Recreation Division.
Where the GST is in addition to the fee or charge, no change to the actual fee is
required other than staff will now charge the lower six percent tax. Recommendation 2,
seeks Council approval to pass the attached By-law and corresponding (revised) User
Fee Schedule. The attached user fee schedule has been revised to reflect the GST
reduction (where applicable) and includes new fees for new programs being introduced
by the Culture & Recreation Division. The corresponding revenues and expenditures
for these new programs were included in the 2006 Council approved budget but
program details were not finalized until recently. Culture & Recreation Division review
their offered programs throughout the year and revise or introduce new programs at the
request of the public or anticipated interest or demand.
The attached schedule shows the Council approved fees, as of July 1, 2006, adjusted
for the reduction in the GST where this tax is embedded in the fee. Any Council
approved fee adjustments occurring after July 1 are noted in the far right column. For
the 2007 Budget and Fees we anticipate removing the GST from the attached fee,
thereby eliminating the need for any such fee adjustment in the future.
I have discussed the foregoing with the Chief Executive Officer of the Library and am
pleased to advise that they are undertaking similar actions with their fees and charges.
115
Report CS 31-06
Date: June 12, 2006
Subject: Change to User Fee By-law Due to Reduction in GST
Page 3
Attachments:
1.
By-law to Change General Fees and Charges
Prepared By:
Approved I Endorsed By:
.~ ¡;?- c /
Stan Karwowski
Manager, Finance & Taxation
-~/Q -2--
Gillis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
GAP:vw
Attachment
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Director, Operations & Emergency Services
Director, Planning & Development
Chief Executive Officer, Library
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering City Council
,J'
ATTACHMENT # -L TO REPORT#.t?3...I-o~
THE COB.EØRATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING
116
BY-LAW NO. 6677/06
Being a by-law to amend By-law 6191/03 to
confirm General Municipal Fees and Charges
pursuant to the Municipal Act, 2001.
WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering enacted By-law No.
6191/03, as amended, on October 14, 2003 to confirm general municipal fees and
charges pursuant to the Municipal Act, 2001;
AND WHEREAS Schedule A to By-law 6191/03 was updated and replaced under By-
law 6338/04, By-law 6519/05 and By-law 6652/06.
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1.
Schedule "A" to By-law 6191/03 is hereby deleted and Schedule "I" attached
hereto is substituted therefore.
BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 19th day of June,
2006.
David Ryan, Mayor
Debi Bentley, City Clerk
117
Schedule I
SUMMARY OF FEES & CHARGES
PURSUANT TO SECTION 392
OF THE MUNICIPAL ACT
APPROVED ON APRIL 3, 2006
REVISED TO REFLECT
REDUCTION IN GST
(FROM 7% to 60/0)
Corporate Services Department
As Submitted to Executive Committee Meeting, June 12, 2006
Disclaimer:
The following are a list of the cuffent fees and charges in place in the City of Pickering at the time
of printing. These fees and charges are subject to review and change. Please contact the
appropriate City Department for the actual fees in place at any specific time, or if you require any
further information.
E.&O.E.
118
CLERKS DIVISION
* GST exempt
Council Approved July 1, 2006,
Fee (7% GST where Proposed Fee
User Fee or Charge applicable) April 3, (6% GST where Effective Date
2006 applicable)
Body Rub Licences
Owner/ODerator - * $500 $500 No Increase
Owner - not oDerator * $250 $250 No Increase
Operator - not owner * $2501vr $2501vr No Increase
Attendant * $1501vr $150/vr No Increase
Business Licence
Wreckina Yard * 20lvr 20lvr No Increase
Markets «100 stalls) * 200/dav 200/dav No Increase
Markets (>99 stalls) * 1000/dav 1000/dav No Increase
Public Hall * 10/vr 10lvr No Increase
Amusement * 25/vr 25lvr No Increase
Pet Shoes * 100/vr 100lvr No Increase
Taxi Licences
Owners licence * $500 $500 No Increase
Driver - oriainal * $100 $100 No Increase
Owner - oriqinal * $1 000 $1 000 No Increase
Broker - oriainal * $1 000 $1 000 No Increase
Driver - renewal * 100 $100 No Increase
Owner - renewal * 125 $125 No Increase
Broker - renewal * 125 $125 No Increase
Driver - reDlacement * 10 10 No Increase
Owner - reDlacement * 10 10 No Increase
Plate - ReDlacement * 10 10 No Increase
Broker - ReDlacement * $50 50 No Increase
Tariff Card * $5 $5 No Increase
Cat & Dog Licence
Sterilized * 20lvr $201vr No Increase
Unsterilized * 40lvr $401vr No Increase
MicrochiD - Sterilized * 15/vr $15/vr No Increase
MicrochiD - Unsterilized * 35/vr $35/vr No Increase
ReDlacement * $5 ea. $5 ea. No Increase
Adult Video
Owner/ODerator * 1500/vr 1500/vr No Increase
Owner - not operator * 1400/vr 1400/vr No Increase
Operator - not owner * 100/vr 100lvr No Increase
Hawker / Peddler Licence
TemDorarv Use (Per day / Der location) * $20 $20 No Increase
Stationary Use * $250 $250 No Increase
1
119
CLERKS DIVISION
* GST exempt
Council Approved July 1, 2006,
Fee (7% GST where Proposed Fee
User Fee or Charge applicable) April 3, (6% GST where Effective Date
2006 applicable)
Horse Riding Establishment Licence
Oriclinal Licence * $250 $250 No Increase
Annual renewal * 1$1001vr $1001vr No Increase
Late renewal penalty * $25 $25 No Increase
Signs
Sian * 1$150 ea $150 ea No Increase
Temporarv Sian - 3 Months * 1$150 ea $150 ea No Increase
Commissioning & Certification of Documents $10/job $10 up to 3 July 1, 2006
(Commissioning for Pension forms is unofficially Signatures.
exempt) *
$5 per
signature after
~
Lotteries * .75% of gross prize .75% of gross No Increase
value Drize value
Marriaae Licence * $100 each $100 each No Increase
Marriaae Ceremonies * $250 each $250 each No Increase
Burial Permits * $25 each $25 each No Increase
Tree Cuttino Permit * $100 each $100 each No Increase
Photocopying *
UP to five paaes free - additional paces $.54/paae $.53/paae No Increase
Compliance Letters * $125/response $125/response No Increase
2
1 r) '..)
~- '.
CORPORATE PROJECTS & POLICY DIVISION
*GST
exempt
Council
Approved Fee July 1, 2006 Proposed Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Where
applicable) Applicable) Effective Date
April 3, 2006
Business Directory * $20.00 $20.00 No increase
Business Directory - Special Report * $20.00 $20.00 No increase
Business Directory - Mailing Labels * $100.00 $100.00 No increase
Filming Fees: No increase
Parks and Facilities * $500.00 $500.00
Fire * Actual Costs Actual Costs
Museum Fees: No increase
Prep/Strike Fee $80.25 $79.50
Filming $160.50 $159.00
Overtime $214.00 $212.00
3
121
LEGAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT
*GST
exempt
Council
Approved Fee July 1, 2006 Proposed Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Where Effective Date
applicable) April Applicable)
3 2006
Notarv * $10 $10 No increase
4
122
CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT
* GST exempt
Council
Approved Fee July 1, 2006 Proposed Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Where
applicable) Applicable) Effective Date
April 3, 2006
Bidders cost to pick up tendering Range: Range: No increase
cackaae *
Price range based upon the size of the $30 to $100 $30 to $100
tendering document package, drawings,
soils report, consulting reports - relative
to the size of the project *
NSF Cheques * $30 $35 July 1, 2006
Electronic Payment Correction * $0 $35 July 1, 2006
Tax Certificates * $65 $65 No increase
357/358 Applications * $25 $25 No increase
(Depending on value of rebate)
Tax Collection/T ax Registration Letters * $25 $25 No increase
Tax Billing for Mortgage Company * $10 $10 No increase
(Annual fee for Final Payment Listing -
cer roll number)
,...
:>
123
CULTURE & RECREATION
. GST EXEMPT
Counc:;iI July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee (6% GST Proposed Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
Fitness Services Personal Trainina
Fitness Consultations One Hour
- Members $41.29 $40.90 July 1 2006
- Non-Members $49.55 $49.09 Julv 1 2006
Personal Trainina Intro Pack
- Members $100.27 $99.33 Julv 1 2006
- Non-Members $120.33 $119.21 July 1 2006
Personal Trainina 6 oack
- Members $353.90 $350.59 Julv 1 2006
- Non-Members $424.68 $420.71 July 1 2006
Personal Trainina 12 oack
- Members $637.02 $631.07 July 1. 2006
- Non-Members $764.43 $757.29 Julv 1 2006
Personal Trainina 16 oack
- Members $754.99 $747:93 July 1. 2006
- Non-Members $905.99 $897.52 Julv 1 2006
Personal Trainina 18 Dack
- Members $910.04 $901.53 Julv 1 2006
- Non-Members $1 092.04 $1 081.83 July 1 2006
Personal Trainina 24 oack
- Members $1 061.71 $1 051.79 July 1 2006
- Non-Members $1 274.05 $1 262.14 Julv 1 2006
Personal Trainina Other
FIT Club Fast Track $ 212.34 $210.36 Julv 1 2006
FIT Test - Non-Member $ 121.33 $120.20 July 1 2006
Individual Session $44.94 $44.52 Julv 1 2006
Buddy Trainina - 2 DeoDle $67.40 66.77 JulY 1 2006
Buddv Trainina - 3 oeoole $84.27 83.48 July 1 2006
Proaram DeveloDment $67.40 66.77 July 1 2006
Nutritional Consultina
Introductory Session - Member $117.97 $116.87 Julv 1 2006
Introductory Session Family/Friend Member $168.52 $166.95 July 1, 2006
Keep on Track Six - 15 minute consults. $117.97 $116.87 July 1, 2006
Member
Full Service Twelve - 30 minute $421.88 $417.94 July 1, 2006
consults, Member
Full Service One - 30 minute session, $41.29 $40.90 July 1, 2006
Member
Full Service One - 15 minute session, $23.59 $23.37 July 1, 2006
Introductory Session - Non-Member $141.56 $140.24 July 1 2006
Introductory Session Family/Friend Non- $202.23 $200.34 July 1, 2006
Member
Keep on Track Six - 15 minute consults, $141.56 $140.24 July 1, 2006
Nnn-
6
. * GST EXEMPT
CULTURE & RECREATION
User Fee or Charge
Full Service
Full Service
Full Service
Babvsittina Service
Babvsittina 1 Hour *
Babvsittina 6 Hour *
Babvsittina 10 Pass *
Babvsittina 1 Hour *
BabvsittinCl 15 Hour Pass *
Proarams
Fitness Proarams
Nia
Family Fit Challenge *
Family Fit Challenge *
Fat Off
Fat Off 2
Family Fat Off
Family Fat Off
Quick Fat Flush
Fast Food
Weight Loss For The Stuck
Tai Chi
Yoaa
Intermediate Pilates
Beainner Pilates
Beainner Pilates
Twelve - 30 minute
consults, Non-Member
One - 30 minute consults,
Non-
One - 15 minute consults,
Non-Member
- Member
- Member
- Member
- Non-Member
- Non-Member
Twelve, 1 1/4 hour
classes
Six, 1-hour classes, 1
adult & 1 child
Six, 1-hour classes, 1
additional family member
Twelve, 75-minutes per
week
Twelve, 20-minutes per
week
Twelve, 75-minutes per
week, 1 family member
Twelve, 75-minutes per
week, 1 additional family
Four, 55-minute classes
Four, 55-minute classes
Four, 55-minute classes
Ten - 1 hour classes
Eiaht - 1.5 hour classes
Six - 1 hour classes
Six - 1 hour classes
Six - 45 minute classes
7
Council
Approved Fee
(7% GST where
applicable) April
3,2006
$495.46
$49.55
$28.31
$2.50
$15.00
$25.00
$4.50
$40.00
$151.42
$35.33
$10.09
$89.88
$89.88
$89.88
$44.94
$84.79
$84.79
$84.79
$83.46
98.44
80.00
75.00
$65.00
July 1, 2006,
(6% GST
where
applicable)
$490.83
$49.09
$28.05
$2.50
$15.00
$25.00
$4.50
$40.00
$150.00
$35.00
$10.00
$89.04
$89.04
$89.04
$44.52
$84.00
$84.00
$84.00
124
Proposed Fee
Effective Date
July 1, 2006
July 1, 2006
July 1, 2006
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
July 1, 2006
July 1, 2006
July 1, 2006
July 1, 2006
July 1, 2006
July 1, 2006
July 1, 2006
July 1, 2006
July 1, 2006
July 1, 2006
$82.68 Effective Sept. 1,
2006, fee increased to
~Rn R1
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
$97.52
$79.25
$74.30
$64.39
125
CULTURE & RECREATION
. GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Proposed Fee
where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
F.I.T. Club Fifteen hour program $89.88 $89.04 Effective Sept. 1,
2006, fee increased to
<1""> A"
Pre-Teen Workout Five - 1 hour classes $44.94 $44.52 Effective Sept. 1,
2006, fee increased to
<l:il¡::7r:.
Weiaht Trainina for Women Eiaht - 1 hour classes $98.00 $97.08 No Increase
Aauatic Proarams
Swim Preschool * Ten - 30 minute classes $77 .00 $77.00 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
~R1 nn
Swim Kids 1-5 * Ten - 30 minute classes $77.00 $77.00 Effective Sept. 1,
2006, fee increased to
Cl:A1 nn
Swim Kids 6-10 * Ten-45 minute classes $87.00 $87.00 Effective Sept. 1,
2006, fee increased to
~Q1 nn
Summer Swim (DIP) Session * Nineteen - 45 minute $131.00 $145.00 July 1 2006
Youth Proarams * Ten - 45 minute classes $87.00 $87.00 No increase
Jr. Lifeguard Club * Ten -1 hour classes $87.00 $87.00 Effective Sept. 1,
2006, fee increased to
Cl:Q1 nn
Canadian Swim Patrol * Ten -1 hour classes $87.00 $87.00 Effective Sept. 1,
2006, fee increased to
~Q1 nn
Bronze Star * Ten -1.5 hour classes $101.00 $101.00 Effective Sept. 1,
2006, fee increased to
$10R 00
Bronze Medallion & Emergency Twenty-four hour program $209.00 $209.00 Effective Sept. 1,
First Aid * 2006, fee increased to
<1:')1 a nn
Bronze Cross' Twenty-four hour program $156.45 $156.45 Effective Sept.1 2006,
fee increased to
5>1R.d nn
NLS Forty hour program $262.00 $259.55 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
~?7? .d~
Leader/Assistant Instructor Forty hour program $220.00 $217.94 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
<I:??A Ail
Red Cross/Lifesaving Society Forty-five hour program $275.00 $272.43 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
Water Safety Instructor fee increased to
<I:')~¡:: nr:.
Aqua Adults Ten - 55 minute classes $89.00 $88.17 No Increase
8
126
CULTURE & RECREATION
* GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee (6% GST Proposed Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
Private Classes * Five - 30 minute classes $123.00 $123.00 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
$12900
Semi-Private Classes * Ten - 30 minute classes $148.00 $148.00 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
$15500
Aquafit Ten - 55 minute classes $86.00 $85.20 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
$89 16
Aquafit Twenty - 55 minute $149.00 $147.61 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
classes fee increased to
$11';41';4
Aquafit Thirty - 55 minute classes $173.00 $171.38 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
<!:1An ':In
Specialty Aquafit, Nice'n Easy Ten - 40 minute classes $68.00 $67.36 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
<!:7n ':14
Specialty Aquafit, Nice'n Easy Twenty - 40 minute $109.20 $108.18 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
classes fee increased to
$11? ç¡~
Aquafit for Arthritis Ten - 40 minute classes $73.03 $72.35 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
$7628
Aquafit for Arthritis Twenty - 40 minute $109.20 $108.18 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
classes fee increased to
$11?ç¡~
Museum Outreach Proarams
Weaving Wizards, Wordsmith, One - 2 hour class $100.00 $100.00 No Increase
Christmas Past, Sheep to
~h<>\AJ1 *
Buzzsaws & BuildinCl Blocks * One - 90 minute class $95.00 $95.00 No Increase
Wonderful Wool * One - 45 minute class $55.00 $55.00 No Increase
Thinaamiiias * One - 1 hour class $70.00 $70.00 No Increase
Settlers WorkshoD Fraktur * 2 Hours $105.00 $105.00 No Increase
Preschool Proarams
Song/Splash, Fun/Sun * Twelve - 1 hour classes $83.00 $83.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$86.00
School's Coming * Twelve - 2 hour classes $117.00 $117.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$121.00
Craft Club * Twelve - 2 hour classes $117.00 $117.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$121.00
9
127
CULTURE & RECREATION
* GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Proposed Fee
where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
Artful Toddler * Twelve - 1 hour classes $81.00 $81.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
~R<S nn
Tots In Action * Twelve - 2 hour classes $112.00 $112.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
~11R nn
Family Fun * Twelve - 1.25 hour $98.00 $98.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
classes fee increased to
S10200
Wiggles'n Giggles * Twelve - 30 minute $56.00 $56.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
classes fee increased to
'I:"R nn
Tumble Tots * Twelve - 45 minute $70.00 $70.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
classes fee increased to
'l:7? nn
Bouncin' Buddies * Twelve - 45 minute $70.00 $70.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
classes fee increased to
A_- --
Jumpin' Jax * Twelve - 45 minute $70.00 $70.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
classes fee increased to
S7? nn
Junior Gym * Twelve - 1 hour classes $83.00 $83.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
saBOO
Afternoon Play Group * Twelve - 1 hour classes $100.00 $100.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
'1:1 n.ll nn
land of Fairy tales * Twelve - 1.5 hours $100.00 $100.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$104.00
Parent & Tot Skate * Twelve - 30 minute $67.00 $67.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
classes fee increased to
S7n nn
Beginner Pre School Skating * Twelve - 30 minute $67.00 $67.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
classes fee increased to
~7n nn
Advanced Skating * Twelve - 45 minute $79.00 $79.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
classes fee increased to
SR<S nn
Creative Steps * Twelve - 30 minute $55.00 $55.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
classes fee increased to
S~7 nn
Pre-Ballet * Twelve - 45 minute $70.00 $70.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
classes fee increased to
~7? nn
Rhvme Time PMV * Four - 60 minute classes $36.00 $36.00 No Increase
Creative Babies * $84.00 Julv 1 2006
10
128
CULTURE & RECREATION
* GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Proposed Fee
where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
Pre Schoolers Writinq is Fun * $84.00 July 1. 2006
Children & Youth Programs
Dance - Primary Ballet * Twelve - 45 minute $70.00 $70.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
classes fee increased to
~7? nn
Hip Hop Dance * Twelve - 45 minute $70.00 $70.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
classes fee increased to
$72.00
Jazz * Twelve - 45 minute $68.00 $68.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
classes fee increased to
~7n nn
Children's Art * Ten -1.25 hour classes 63.00 63.00 No Increase
Youth Art * Ten -1.5 hour classes 69.00 69.00 No Increase
Cartoonina * Ten -1.25 hour classes 59.00 59.00 No Increase
Jewellerv Makinq * Five - 1.5 hours classes 55.00 55.00 No Increase
Babvsittina Course * Eiaht - 1.5 hour classes 55.00 55.00 No Increase
Home Alone * Four - 1.5 hour classes 29.00 29.00 No Increase
Breakdancina * Eiaht - 80 minute classes 55.00 55.00 No Increase
Youth Leadership * Nine - 1.5 hour classes 53.00 $53.00 No Increase
Mad Science * Eiaht - 1 hour classes 92.00 $92.00 No Increase
Children's Guitar - Level 1 * Eight - 1 hour classes $60.00 $60.00 No Increase
Children's Learn to Sew * Eiqht - 2 hour classes 81.00 81.00 No Increase
Youth Spanish * Ten weeks - 1 hour 39.00 39.00 No Increase
Girlz Niqht * Seven weeks - 2 hour 55.00 57.00 July 1 2006
Karate * 2 Months - 45 minute 40.00 40.00 No Increase
Youth Karate * 2 Months - 1 hour classes 55.00 $55.00 No Increase
Badminton * Twelve - 1 hour classes $47.00 $47.00 Effectiye Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$4900
Raptor Ball * Ten - 1.25 hour classes $67.00 $69.00 July 1 2006
Summer Hockey School * Ten - 1 hour classes $92.00 $92.00 No Increase
Summer Assistant Counsellor * Minimum 2 sessions or 4 $65.00 $70.00 July 1, 2006
weeks
Summer Youth Leadership * Nine - 3 hour classes $115.00 $115.00 No Increase
Ten - 3 hours classes $125.00 $125.00 No Increase
Recreational Basketball Clinic * Eight - 2 hour classes $43.00 $44.00 July 1, 2006
Recreational Volleyball Clinic * Eight - 2 hour classes $43.00 $44.00 July 1, 2006
Ball Hockey * Ten - 1.5 hour classes $52.00 $53.00 July 1 2006
The Drama Club * $160.00 July 1. 2006
Jewellerv Makina * $55.00 July 1 2006
Pickleball * $48.00 Julv 1 2006
11
129
CULTURE & RECREATION
* GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee (6% GST Proposed Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
Adult Programs
Art Ten - 2 hour classes $77.00 76.28 No Increase
Art - Acrvlics Seven - 3 hour classes $ 100.00 99.07 No Increase
Evenina Watercolour Seven - 3 hour classes $ 100.00 99.07 No Increase
Adult Guitar Eiaht - 1 hour classes $60.00 59.44 No Increase
Ballroom Dance Ten - 2 hour classes $87.00 $86.19 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
9;8817
Bellydance Twelve - 1 hour classes $70.00 $69.35 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
9;7133
ScraDbookina One - 3 hour class $37.00 $36.65 No Increase
SDanish Beainner/lnt. Ten - 2 hour classes $73.00 $72.32 No Increase
Photography, Beginner Ten - 2 hour classes $75.00 $74.30 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
~77 ?7
Photography, Intermediate Ten - 2 hour classes $85.00 $84.21 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
~Rñ 1 Q
Sewing Ten - 2 hour classes $95.00 $94.11 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
~Qñ nQ
Creative Arts for the Soul Eight - 2 hour classes $70.00 $69.35 No Increase
Art Historv Ten - 2 hour classes 47.00 $46.56 No Increase
Creative Journalina Eiaht - 2 hour classes 70.00 $69.35 No Increase
Cake Decoratina Seven - 2.25 hour 70.00 $69.35 No Increase
Lowfat Cookina 3 weeks - 2.5 hours 73.00 $72.32 No Increase
Knittina for BeQinners Ten - 2 hour classes 80.00 $79.25 No Increase
Karate Two months - 1.5 hour 62.00 $61.42 No Increase
Skating Twelve - 45 minute $80.00 $79.25 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
classes fee increased to
9;8321
Men's Power Hour Twelve - 1 hour classes $40.00 $39.63 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
9;4260
Badminton Twelve - 1.5 hour classes $61.00 $60.43 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
9;63.40
Volleyball, Competitive Ten - 2 hour classes $65.00 $64.39 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$67.36
Volleyball Recreation Twelve - 1.5 hour classes $61.00 $60.43 No Increase
12
130
CULTURE & RECREATION
* GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Proposed Fee
where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
Older Adult Proarams
Spanish Ten - 2 hour classes 34.00 33.68 No Increase
KeeD Fit Ten - 1 hour classes 35.00 34.67 July 1 2006
Keep Fit Ten - 1 hour classes 35.00 34.67 July 1 2006
Line Dancina Ten - 1 hour classes 28.00 27.74 No Increase
Art (Bea. & Adv.) Ten - 2.5 hour classes 48.00 47.55 No Increase
Summer Fit Ten - 1 hour classes 33.00 32.69 Julv 1 2006
Tai Chi 4 month - 1 hour classes 55.00 55.00 No Increase
Stretch & Strenathen Ten -1 hour classes 35.00 34.67 Julv 1 2006
Creative Arts for the Soul Eight - 2 hour classes $70.00 $69.35 No Increase
Jewellerv Makina Five - 1.5 hour classes $50.00 49.53 No Increase
Pickleball 34.00 July 1. 2006
ScraDbookina 24.75 Julv 1 2006
Jewellerv Makina 49.53 July 1 2006
Museum Proarams
Introductory Sketching One - 3 hour class $35.00 $34.67 Effective Jan. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
'I:~7 Ft4
Needle Crafts (Tatting) One - 3 hour class $35.00 $34.67 Effective Jan. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
'I: ':!. 7 1=:.4
Needle Crafts (Tied Quilt) One - 2.5 hour class $66.00 $65.38 Effective Jan. 1,2007,
fee increased to
$7133
Woodworking (Walking Stick) One - 3 hour class $35.00 $34.67 Effective Jan. 1,2007,
fee increased to
$3764
Woodworking (Shop) One - 3 hour class $52.00 $51.51 Effective Jan. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
'1:"" .4A
Paper Handicrafts (Quilling) One - 2.5 hour class $35.00 $34.67 Effective Jan. 1,2007,
fee increased to
$37.64
Paper Handicrafts (Children's) One - 3 hour class $35.00 $34.67 Effective Jan. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
$37.64
Paper Handicrafts (Christmas) One - 3 hour class $35.00 $34.67 Effective Jan. 1,2007,
fee increased to
$37_64
Rug Hooking One - 5.5 hour class $33.00 $32.69 Effective Jan. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
'I:~" RR
13
131
CULTURE & RECREATION
. GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Proposed Fee
where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
Chair Caning Two - 3 hour class $49.00 $48.54 Effective Jan. 1,2007,
fee increased to
$52.50
Crazy Patch Frame Two - 2.5 hour class $49.00 $48.54 Effective Jan. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
$52.50
Cooking with Herbs One - 3.5 hour class $33.00 $32.69 Effective Jan. 1,2007,
fee increased to
$~!'1 RR
Herb Garden One - 2.5 hour class $33.00 $32.69 Effective Jan. 1,2007,
fee increased to
CI:~¡:; ¡:::¡:::
Intro. To Blacksmithinq Two - 7 hour class $160.00 $158.50 No Increase
Christmas Ornaments One - 3 hour class $35.00 $34.67 Effective Jan. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
$~7 R4
Bread Makinq 30.00 Julv 1 2006
Chocolate: An Edible Historv 40.00 Julv 1 2006
Rhvme Time 40.00 Julv 1 2006
Carnes
March Break Came
Extend a Camp. 5 Days $54.00 $54.00 Effective Nov. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$!'1R nn
Full Day Program. 5 Days $137.00 $137.00 Effective Nov. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
'l:1.4? nn
Half Day Camp. 5 Days $70.00 $70.00 Effective Nov. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
'l:7~ nn
Museum
Heritage Half-Day Camp. 5 half days $61.00 $61.00 Effective Mar. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
$7300
Heritage Half-Day Camp. 9 half days $102.00 $102.00 Effective Mar. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
'l:1?~ nn
Heritage Half-Day Camp. 10 half days $118.00 $118.00 Effective Mar. 1,2007,
fee increased to
$142.00
Pioneer Camp. 5 days $130.00 $130.00 Effective Mar. 1,2007,
fee increased to
~1 A'> nn
14
132
CULTURE & RECREATION
* GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee (6% GST Proposed Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
Pioneer Camp * 9 days $228.00 $228.00 Effective Mar. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
ct'M~ nn
Pioneer Camp * 10 days $245.00 $245.00 Effective Mar. 1,2007,
fee increased to
~?71 nn
Girls' Camp * 5 days $130.00 $130.00 Effective Mar. 1,2007,
fee increased to
'l:1A,) nn
Extended Camp * 5 days $52.00 $52.00 Effective Mar. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
$56.00
Extended Camp * 9 days $88.00 $88.00 Effective Mar. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
$99.00
Extended Camp * 10 days $103.00 $103.00 Effective Mar. 1,2007,
fee increased to
~1 n7 nn
Summer Camps - Adventure/Art/Sports
Full Day Program * 5 Days $137.00 $137.00 Effective Mar. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
S;14? nn
9 Days $235.00 $235.00 Effective Mar. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
ct,)A~ nn
10 Days $262.00 $262.00 Effective Mar. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
'I:?71 nn
CamD Mini Pidaca
Half Day Program * 5 Days $70.00 $70.00 Effective Mar. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
'l:7Q nn
9 Days $119.00 $119.00 Effective Mar. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
ct1,)~ nn
10 Days $137.00 $137.00 Effective Mar. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
ct1A,) nn
Extend-a-CamD
5 Days * $54.00 $54.00 Effective Mar. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
'I:",ç: nn
9 Days * $96.00 $96.00 Effective Mar. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
~ç ç nn
15
133
CULTURE & RECREATION
* GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Proposed Fee
where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
10 Days * $103.00 $103.00 Effective Mar. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
g;1 n7 nn
Mad Science Camp
Half Day Program 5 Days $125.00 $125.00 Effective Mar. 1, 2007,
fee increased to
$129.00
Memberships: Pickerina Recreation Complex
Health Club
Adult full Annual $449.40 $445.20 No Increase
Seasonal $191.81 $190.02 No Increase
Adult, daytime Annual $306.49 $303.63 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
"""'A ð ð^
Seasonal $122.35 $121.21 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
$1?7 ?7
Adult, full, corporate Annual under 15 $404.46 $400.68 No Increase
Annual, over 15 members $381.99 $378.42 No Increase
Adult, daytime, corporate Annual, under 15 $275.84 $273.26 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
members fee increased to
"""ðl> ^'"
Annual, over 15 members $260.52 $258.09 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
C!:')7n aa
Youth Annual $182.84 $181.13 No Increase
Seasonal $88.47 $87.64 No Increase
Sauash
Adult Full Annual $554.86 $549.67 No Increase
Full, Seasonal $227.30 $225.18 No Increase
Adult Davtime Annual $394.59 $390.90 No Increase
Daytime, Seasonal $163.93 $162.40 No Increase
Adult full comorate Annual under 15 $504.72 $500.00 No Increase
Annual, over 15 members $479.66 $475.18 No Increase
Adult daYtime comorate Annual under 15 $360.49 $357.12 No Increase
Annual, over 15 members $343.13 $339.92 No Increase
Youth Annual $212.24 $210.26 No Increase
Seasonal $88.48 $87.65 No Increase
Familv Annual $1 012.25 $1 002.79 No Increase
Raca uetba II
Adult Full Annual $476.59 $472.14 No Increase
Full Seasonal $189.97 $188.19 No Increase
16
* GST EXEMPT
CULTURE & RECREATION
User Fee or Charge
Adult
Adult full corcorate
Adult, daytime, corporate
Youth
Familv
Combination
Adult
Adult
Adult full. corcorate
Adult davtime comorate
Youth
Familv
Tennis
Adult
Adult
Youth
Familv
Tennis
Adult
Daytime, Annual
Daytime, Seasonal
Annual under 15
Annual over 15 members
Annual, under 15
members
Annual, over 15 members
Annual
Seasonal
Annual
Full Annual
Full Seasonal
Davtime Annual
Davtime Seasonal
Annual under 15
Annual over 15 members
Annual under 15
Annual over 15 members
Annual
Seasonal
Annual
Resident Full Annual
Resident Full Seasonal
Resident, Daytime,
Annual
Resident, Daytime,
Seasonal
Resident Annual
Resident Seasonal
Resident Annual
Non-resident Full Annual
Non-resident Full
17
Council
Approved Fee
(7% GST where
applicable) April
3,2006
$324.51
$128.95
$428.92
$405.10
$292.06
$275.84
$212.34
$88.47
$915.97
586.71
302.48
418.08
173.82
533.38
$506.73
381.62
389.20
212.34
$88.47
$1 074.78
$476.59
$191.10
$311.43
$123.86
$212.34
$88.47
$915.43
$539.11
$215.87
July 1, 2006,
(6% GST
where
applicable)
134
Proposed Fee
Effective Date
$321.48 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
~~~7 ,,~
$127.74 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
$1~.4 1~
$424.91 No Increase
$401.31 No Increase
$289.33 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
~~n~ 71:1
$273.26 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
~'HU~ Q')
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
$210.36
$87.64
$907.41
$581.23
$299.65
414.17
172.20
528.40
501.99
378.05
385.56
&210.36
$87.64
$1 064.74
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
$472.14 No Increase
$189.31 No Increase
$308.52 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
CI:':I?':I aLl
$122.70 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
11:1 ')$1 $1':1
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
$210.36
$87.64
$906.87
$534.07
$213.85
No Increase
No Increase
135
CULTURE & RECREATION
* GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Proposed Fee
where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
Adult Non-resident, Daytime, $367.05 $363.62 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
Annual fee increased to
~~R1 Rn
Non-resident, Daytime, $147.07 $145.70 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
Seasonal fee increased to
~1 I:i? QR
Youth Non-resident Annual $224.13 $222.04 No Increase
Non-resident. Seasonal $94.37 $93.49 No Increase
Familv Non-resident Annual $1 033.40 $1 023.74 No Increase
Golden
Adult Full Annual $1 061.71 $1 051.79 No Increase
Full Seasonal $424.68 $420.71 No Increase
Adult Daytime, Annual $722.97 $716.21 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
A__- ~~
:b '~/ IJ:i
Daytime, Seasonal $289.19 $286.49 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
CI:~nn A1
Adult full corporate Annual under 15 $1 006.36 $996.95 No Increase
Annual over 15 members $953.27 $944.36 No Increase
Adult, daytime, corporate Annual, under 15 $650.68 $644.60 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
members fee increased to
~R7R R?
Annual, over 15 members $614.52 $608.78 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
'l:R~Q ??
Youth Annual $424.68 $420.71 No Increase
Seasonal $169.87 $168.28 No Increase
Familv Annual $2037.29 $2 018.25 No Increase
Fitness Class Membershios
Fitness Memberships Annual $352.78 $349.48 No Increase
3-Month $142.68 $141.35 No Increase
MembershiDs: Pickerina Rec. ComDlex and Dunbarton
Aauatic Membershios
Adult Annual $130.94 $129.72 No Increase
Familv Annual $247.73 $245.41 No Increase
YouthlDisabled/Senior Annual 94.37 $93.49 No Increase
Adult Seasonal 57.80 $57.26 No Increase
Familv Seasonal 93.19 $92.32 No Increase
Youth/Disabled/Senior Seasonal $40.11 $39.74 No Increase
Pickerina Museum Villaae
Membership Season Family $48.00 $48.00 No Increase
Memberships Season Sinale $22.00 $22.00 No Increase
18
* GST EXEMPT
CULTURE & RECREATION
User Fee or Charge
Pre-teen Dance Membershin
MembershiD Five Pass
Admissions & Passes
Combatants Room
Our Snecial Place
Fitness Admissions
Fitness Class
Fitness Class
Fitness Room
Fitness Room
Fitness Room
Arena Admissions
Public Skatina
Parent & Tot
Senior Skate
Shinnv
Raouet Snorts Admissions
SQuash/RacQuetball
Tennis
Swimmino Admissions
Pre-Teen Swim
Youth/Senior/Disabled
Youth/Senior/Disabled
Adult
Adult
Familv
Familv
Sinale Admission
Sinale Admission
Five-Pass
Sinale Admission
Five-Pass
Ten-Pass
Sinale Admission - Youth
Ten-Pass - Youth
Sinale Admission - Adult
Ten Pass - Adult
Familv Pass
Familv 10 - Pass
Sinale Adult Admission
Sinale Admission
Sinale Admission
20 - Pass
Prime Time
Non-Prime- Time
Prime Time
Non-Prime- Time
Single
Admission
Single
Admission
Ten-Dass
Sinale
Ten-Dass
Sinale
Ten-Dass
19
Council
Approved Fee
(7% GST where
applicable) April
3,2006
$42.00
$4.50
$7.50
37.45
10.70
53.50
$107.00
$3.00
$24.00
$4.00
32.00
10.00
50.00
2.00
1.00
5.00
$80.00
$11.80
$9.50
$26.80
$21.00
$2.25
$2.25
$20.00
$3.25
$30.00
$6.50
$60.00
July 1, 2006,
(6% GST
where
applicable)
$42.00
$4.50
$7.50
37.45
10.70
53.00
$106.00
$3.00
$24.00
$4.00
32.00
10.00
50.00
2.00
1.00
5.00
$80.00
136
Proposed Fee
Effective Date
July 1 2006
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
$11.80 No Increase
$9.50 No Increase
$26.55 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
~?7 7F.
$20.80 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
~?1 An
$2.25
$2.25
$20.00
$3.25
$30.00
$6.50
$59.00
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
No Increase
137
CULTURE & RECREATION
. GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Proposed Fee
where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
Museum Admissions
Adults Single $4.00 $4.00 No Increase
Admission
StudenUSenior Single $2.50 $2.50 No Increase
Admission
Children Single $2.00 $2.00 No Increase
Admission
Family Single $12.00 $12.00 No Increase
Admission
School Tours Half day, per $5.50 $5.50 No Increase
student
School Tours Full day, per $10.50 $10.50 No Increase
student
School Tours - Candlemaking Full day, per $10.25 $10.25 Effective Jan. 1,2007,
student fee increased to
'l:1n Qn
School Tours - Blacksmithing Full day, per $11.25 $11.25 Effective Jan. 1, 2007,
student fee increased to
$1? ::If!
Rental Fees: Pickerina Rec. Comolex and Don Beer
Ice Rental Rates
Pickerina Youth Affiliate Prime time 150.00 $148.60 July 1. 2006
Non-Prime time 112.35 $111.30 Julv 1 2006
Adults & Residents Affiliate Prime time 170.00 168.41 July 1 2006
Non-Prime time 130.00 128.79 Julv 1. 2006
Commercial & Non-Resident Prime time 195.00 193.18 Julv 1 2006
Non-Prime time 150.00 &148.60 Julv 1. 2006
Elementarv Schools Prime Time 150.00 $148.60 July 1 2006
Non-Prime Time $70.00 $69.35 July 1 2006
Hiah School/Industrial Prime time 170.00 $168.41 Julv 1. 2006
Non-Prime time 100.00 $99.07 July 1 2006
Summer Ice Prime Time 190.00 $188.22 July 1 2006
Pad Rental
Leaaues Hourlv Rate $70.00 $69.35 No Increase
General Flat Rate Full Day $1 685.00 $1,669.25 No Increase
General Hourlv $75.00 $74.30 No Increase
Pickerina Museum Villaae
Schoolhouse Flat rate 2 Hours day c 275.00 $272.43 No Increase
ChaDel Flat rate 2 Hours day 275.00 $272.43 No Increase
Hall Flat rate 2 Hours day 330.00 $326.92 No Increase
Bandstand Flat rate 2 Hours day 250.00 $247.66 No Increase
Grounds/Photos Flat rate 2 Hours day $80.00 $79.25 No Increase
CamDina Per niahUPer Derson $3.75 $3.75 No Increase
Redman House Flat Rate non-resident 8 $350.00 $346.73 No Increase
Redman House Flat Rate resident. 8 $300.00 $297.20 No Increase
20
138
CULTURE & RECREATION
* GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Proposed Fee
where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
Redman House Non-resident hourlv 65.00 64.39 No Increase
Redman House Resident. hourly 50.00 49.53 No Increase
Redman House Communitv arOUDS hourlv 30.00 29.72 No Increase
Pickerina Rec. Comclex & Dunbarton Indoor Pool
Pool Rentals
Private Rental Hourly, max 19 (RC) $84.00 $83.21 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$R7 :\R
Private Rental Hourly, max 19 (DIP) $73.50 $72.81 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$762R
Private Rental Hourly, max 50 (RC) $102.00 $101.05 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$106-00
Private Rental Hourly, max 50 (DIP) $88.00 $87.18 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$A1 14
Synchronized Pool Rental Hourly, non prime (DIP) $56.53 $56.00 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$~A 41
Synchronized Rental Hourly, diving well (RC) $32.38 $32.08 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$~~ 6R
Pickering Swim Club Hourly, prime time (RC) $55.27 $54.75 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$57 46
Pickerina Swim Club Hourlv (DIP $59.97 $59.41 No increase
Master Swim Program Hourly (DIP) $73.40 $72.71 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$76 ?A
Extra Lifeguard Hourly $17.00 $16.84 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$1783
Instructor Hourly $21.00 $20.80 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$2179
Board of Education Hourly $47.00 $46.56 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$4R ~4
Pickerina Rec. Comclex Facilities
Combatants Room
Off Court Training Hourly $16.06 $15.91 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
$19.81
21
139
CULTURE & RECREATION
* GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Proposed Fee
where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
Martial Arts Hourly $21.40 $21.20 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
!l;2477
After Hour Tennis Rentals
Four Courts Hourly rate $44.94 $44.52 Effective Aug. 1, 2006,
fee increased to
!I;!')Ç 44
Pool Meetina Room
Swim Party Rental Flat rate 1.5 hours $34.24 $33.92 No Increase
Meetina Room 1
Resident Flat rate Whole Dav $ 151.94 $150.52 No Increase
Non-resident Flat rate Whole Day $ 196.88 $195.04 No Increase
Resident Hourlv rate 28.89 28.62 No Increase
Non-resident Hourlv rate 41.73 41.34 No Increase
Davtime business resident Flat rate Business Hours 95.23 94.34 No Increase
Daytime, business, non- Flat rate, Business Hours $129.47 $128.26 No Increase
resident
CommunitY GrouD Flat rate Max. 4 hours $28.89 $28.62 No Increase
Meetina Rooms 1 & 2
Resident Flat rate Whole Dav $247.17 $244.86 No Increase
Non-resident Flat rate Whole Day $337.05 $333.90 No Increase
Resident Hourlv rate $41.73 $41.34 No Increase
Non-resident Hourlv rate $58.85 $58.30 No Increase
Davtime business resident Flat rate Business Hours $129.47 $ 128.26 No Increase
Daytime, business. non- Flat rate, Business Hours $173.34 $171.72 No Increase
resident
CommunitY GrouD Flat rate Max. 4 Hours $58.85 $58.30 No Increase
Meetina Rooms 1 2 & 3
Resident Flat rate Whole Dav $404.46 $400.68 No Increase
Non-resident Flat rate Whole Day $506.11 $501.38 No Increase
Resident Hourlv rate $62.06 $61.48 No Increase
Non-resident Hourlv rate $82.39 $81.62 No Increase
Davtime business resident Flat rate Business Hours $185.11 $183.38 No Increase
Daytime. business, non- Flat rate, Business Hours $252.52 $250.16 No Increase
resident
CommunitY GrouD Flat rate Max. 4 Hours $62.06 $61.48 No Increase
New Year's Eve resident Flat rate Whole Dav $803.57 $796.06 No Increase
O'Brien Meetina Room A or B
Resident Flat rate, Whole Dav $214.00 $212.00 No Increase
Non-resident Flat rate Whole Day $269.64 $267.12 No Increase
Resident Hourlv rate $41.73 $41.34 No Increase
22
140
CULTURE & RECREATION
. GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Proposed Fee
where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
Non-resident Hourly rate $62.06 $61.48 No Increase
Davtime business resident Flat rate Business Hours $88.81 $87.98 No Increase
Daytime, business, non- Flat rate, Business Hours $129.47 $128.26 No Increase
resident
Communitv Groue Flat rate Max. 4 Hours $34.24 $33.92 No Increase
O'Brien Meetina Rooms A & B
Resident Flat rate Whole Day $432.28 $428.24 No Increase
Non-resident Flat rate. Whole Day $528.58 $523.64 No Increase
Resident Hourly rate $82.39 $81.62 No Increase
Non-resident Hourly rate $117.70 $116.60 No Increase
No Increase
Davtime business resident Flat rate Business Hours $185.11 $183.38 No Increase
Daytime, business, non- Flat rate, Business Hours $258.94 $256.52 No Increase
resident
Tournament bookinas Flat rate eer day $206.51 $204.58 No Increase
Community Groue Flat rate Max. 4 Hours $62.06 $61.48 No Increase
New Year's Eye Flat rate Whole Day $898.80 $890.40 No Increase
Pickerina Rec. ComDlex East or West Salon
Resident Flat rate Whole Day 674.10 $667.80 No Increase
Non-resident Flat rate Whole Day 876.33 868.14 No Increase
Friday resident Flat rate Whole Day 506.11 501.38 No Increase
Friday. non-resident Flat rate Whole Day 656.98 650.84 No Increase
Sunday resident Flat rate Daytime 404.46 400.68 No Increase
Sunday. non-resident Flat rate Daytime 506.11 501.38 No Increase
Children's BanQuets Flat rate Max. 4 Hours 117.70 116.60 No Increase
New Year's Eye resident Flat rate Whole Day $1.483.02 $1469.16 No Increase
Pickerina Recreation ComDlex East & West Salons
Resident Flat rate $1 246.55 $1 234.90 No Increase
Non-resident Flat rate $1 517.26 $1 503.08 No Increase
Friday. resident Flat rate $926.62 $917.96 No Increase
Friday. non-resident Flat rate $1 137.41 $1 126.78 No Increase
Sunday. resident Flat rate (Daytime) $758.63 $751.54 No Increase
Sunday. non-resident Flat rate (Daytime) $926.62 $917.96 No Increase
New Year's Eye resident Flat rate $2 247.00 $2 226.00 No Increase
Petticoat Creek Communitv Centre
Paris or Franklin Meetina Room
Resident Flat rate $371.29 $367.82 No Increase
Non-resident Flat rate $561.75 $556.50 No Increase
Davtime business resident Flat rate $95.23 $94.34 No Increase
Daytime, business, non- Flat rate $129.47 $128.26 No Increase
resident
Community Groue Flat rate $29.96 $29.68 No Increase
Resident Hourly rate $47.08 $46.64 No Increase
Non-resident Hourly rate $82.39 $81.62 No Increase
23
141
CULTURE & RECREATION
* GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Proposed Fee
where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
Paris & Franklin Meetina Rooms
Resident Flat rate 674.10 667.80 No Increase
Non-resident Flat rate 877.40 869.20 No Increase
Davtime business resident Flat rate 176.55 174.90 No Increase
Daytime, business, non- Flat rate $266.43 $263.94 No Increase
resident
Communitv GrouD Flat rate $29.96 $29.68 No Increase
Resident Hourly rate $82.39 $81.62 No Increase
Non-resident Hourly rate $117.70 $116.60 No Increase
New Year's Eve resident Flat rate $1 297.91 $1,285.78 No Increase
Don Beer/West Shore CommunitY Centre
Banauet Halls
Resident Flat rate 506.11 501.38 No Increase
Non-resident Flat rate 618.46 612.68 No Increase
Davtime. business resident Flat rate 176.55 174.90 No Increase
Daytime, business, non- Flat rate $248.24 $245.92 No Increase
resident
Sunday to Thursdav. resident Hourly rate $35.31 $34.98 No Increase
Sunday to Thursday, non- Hourly rate $47.08 $46.64 No Increase
resident
Fridav. resident Flat rate 378.78 375.24 No Increase
Friday non-resident Flat rate 463.31 458.98 No Increase
Sunday. resident Flat rate (Davtime) 371.29 367.82 No Increase
Sunday non-resident Flat rate (Davtime) 506.11 501.38 No Increase
Children's Banauets resident Flat rate 117.70 1116.60 No Increase
Tournament Rate Flat. daily. Don Beer only 206.51 204.58 No Increase
New Year's Eve resident Flat rate 943.74 $934.92 No Increase
New Year's Eve non-resident Flat rate $1,197.33 $1 186.14 No Increase
East Shore Communitv Centre
Rentals
Room 2 or Room4 - Meetina
Resident Hourly $21.40 $21.20 No Increase
Non-Resident Hourlv $26.75 $26.50 No Increase
Gymnasium - Meetina/SDorts
Resident Hourlv $32.10 $31.80 No Increase
Non-Resident Hourlv $42.80 $42.40 No Increase
Room 2 and Room 4 - Social
Resident Flat rate $192.60 $190.80 No Increase
Non-Resident Flat rate $267.50 $265.00 No Increase
New Years Eye - Resident Flat rate $385.20 $381.60 No Increase
New Years Eve - Non-Resident Flat rate $535.00 $530.00 No Increase
Gvmnasium- Social
24
142
CULTURE & RECREATION
* GST EXEMPT
Council July 1, 2006,
Approved Fee
User Fee or Charge (7% GST where (6% GST Proposed Fee
where Effective Date
applicable) April applicable)
3,2006
Resident Flat rate $374.50 $371.00 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
~,:\Q7 ~n
Non-Resident Flat rate $481.50 $477.00 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
cu;n~ ¡:;n
New Year's Eve. resident Flat rate $749.00 $742.00 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
~7a¡:; nn
New Year's Eve, non-resident Flat rate $936.00 $927.25 Effective Sept. 1 , 2006,
fee increased to
~aAn ¡:;n
CommunitY Room
Meetina - Resident Hourlv 32.10 31.80 No Increase
Meetina - Non-Resident Hourlv 42.80 42.40 No Increase
Social - Resident Hourlv 53.50 53.00 No Increase
Social - Non-Resident Hourlv 64.20 63.60 No Increase
Rental Extra Fees Listina
Community Groucs 12 bookinas $ 117.70 $116.60 No Increase
Administration Fee $30.00 $29.72 No Increase
Maintenance Fee Hourlv $30.00 $29.72 No Increase
Events
Pre-teen Dance Sinale Admission 6.75 $7.00 Julv 1 2006
Poinsettia Tea Sinale Admission 3.00 $5.00 Julv 1 2006
Bia Band Sinale Admission 5.00 $5.00 No Increase
Bi!:1 Band Single Admission $2.00 $3.00 No Increase
(Seniors Month)
Museum Events Adults 5.00 $5.00 No Increase
Museum Events Students/Seniors 4.00 $4.00 No Increase
Museum Events Children 3.00 $3.00 No Increase
Museum Event Familv $ 15.00 $15.00 No Increase
A Soirit Walk $15.00 $15.00 No Increase
Settlers at Sunset $10.00 $10.00 No Increase
Miscellaneous
Reclacement Access Card $10.00 $10.00 No Increase
Museum Filmina/Photo Shoots Set Dressina & Clean Uc. $75.00 $75.00 No Increase
Museum Filmina/Photo Shoots Shootina Time. Hourlv 150.00 $150.00 No Increase
Kinderavm Birthdav Parties 108.00 $107.00 No Increase
Creative Play Birthdav Parties 139.00 $137.70 No Increase
Program Administration Fee GST will be added to $10.00 $10.00 No Increase
aoolicable oroarams
Membership Administration $16.05 $16.05 No Increase
Fee
NSF Charae Percheaue $30.00 $35.00 Julv 1 2006
Additional Receiot Charae Per Familv $5.00 $5.00 No Increase
Marketina Promotions
25
143
CULTURE & RECREATION
* GST EXEMPT
User Fee or Charge
Council
Approved Fee
(7% GST where
applicable) April
3,2006
593.85
428.00
Ci Brochure Advertisin
July 1, 2006,
(6% GST
where
applicable)
588.30
424.00
O:\F-2000 Budgets - GeneraI\F-2000-003-05 User Fees\C&RFeesChargesDec192005.DOC
26
Proposed Fee
Effective Date
No Increase
No Increase
144
FIRE SERVICES
* GST exempt
Council Approved July 1, 2006
Fee (7% GST Proposed Fee
User Fee or Charge where applicable) (6% GST Where Effective Date
April 3, 2006 Applicable)
Multi-Residential Inspections * $125 $125 No Increase
Legal Inspections. (Generally $125 $125 No Increase
requests from legal firms) *
File Searches, (Searches from our $125 $125 No Increase
existine filine network). *
Sales of Supra Key Boxes * $80 $80 No Increase
Malicious False Alarms * $350 $350 No Increase
Garbaee container Fires * $350 $350 No Increase
Occupancy load Inspection * $125 $125 No Increase
False Alarm Penalty * $350 $350 No Increase
Commercial Inspections * $125 $125 No Increase
Industrial Inspections * $125 $125 No Increase
Day Care Inspections * $125 $125 No Increase
Standby for movie -shoots * Actual costs Actual costs
Fuel tank inspections * $125 $125 No Increase
Fire Works Permits * $125 $125 No Increase
Fire Display inspections * $125 $125 No Increase
Federal Property * $300 $300 No Increase
**Canadian Pacific Railway Lands Actual costs Actual costs
for Fire Services *
LLBO Permits * $125 $125 No Increase
File Searches, (Searches from our $125 $125 No Increase
existina filina network) *
False Alarms due to failure to $350 $350 No Increase
maintain a fire alarm system or
emergency system, per fire vehicle
dispatched *
Fire Truck on scene of a Motor $350 $350 No Increase
. . jilt-! *
MTO Rates
** Request for reimbursement for railway company for costs for overtime vehicles and staff
27
14r;
MUNICIPAL PROPERTY & ENGINEERING DIVISION
*GST
exempt
Council Approved July 1, 2006
Fee (70/0 GST Proposed Fee
User Fee or Charge where applicable) (6% GST Where Effective Date
April 3, 2006 Applicable)
Sports Tournaments- User Fee * $500 (per $500 (per No Increase
weekend) weekend)
Sport Camps- User Fee * $500 (per week) $500 (per week) No Increase
Park Permit Fee * $0 $25 July 1, 2006
Sports Field Booking Permit Fee * $0 $25 July 1, 2006
Road Occupancy Permits * $25 $25 No Increase
Driveway Entrance Curb Cut * $36.00/metre $36.00/metre No Increase
Minimum Charge
is $198.00
Driveway Entrance 9 metres x 400 $1,370 $1,370 No Increase
millimetres *
Driveway Entrance 9 metres to 15 $1,370 $1,370 No Increase
metres * Plus $145 per Plus $150 per
metre in excess of metre in excess of
9 metres plus $40 9 metres plus $40
per coupler when per coupler when
required. required.
Driveway Entrance extension of existing $150 per metre $150 per metre No Increase
culvert * Plus $40 per Plus $40 per
coupler. Minimum coupler. Minimum
charge is $190 charge is $190
Driveway Entrance, culvert other than as Contract Cost Contract Cost No Increase
described above (time and material) (time and
materian
Commemorative Tree and Plaque * $500 $500 No Increase
Commemorative Bench and Plaque * $1,000 $1,000 No Increase
Hydro/lighting charges for tennis courts * $200 (per court :þ;¿uu{percourt No Increase
Inl'>r per season)
Seniors Snow Removal Program * $0 $100 per season November 1, 2006
(subject to
additional Council
approval)
Encroachment Agreement (New) - must $1,000 $1,000 No Increase
be registered *
Encroachment Agreement (Renewal) - $200 $200 No Increase
must be registered *
28
146
MUNICIPAL PROPERTY & ENGINEERING DIVISION
* GST exempt
Council Approved July 1, 2006
User Fee or Charge Fee (7% GST (60/0 GST Where Proposed Fee
where applicable) Applicable) Effective Date
April 3, 2006
Registration of Encroachment $250 $250 No Increase
Agreements *
Assignment of Encroachment $200 $200 No Increase
Agreements *
29
147
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
* GST exempt
Council Approved July 1, 2006
Fee (7% GST where Proposed Fee
User Fee or Charge applicable) April 3, (60/0 GST Where Effective Date
2006 Applicable)
¡These fees are imposed under the authority of thePlanning Act, RS.O. 1990, c.P.13
DEVELOPMENT CONTROL
Curb Cut - new development not Min charge Min charge No Increase
assumed by municipality $198.00/m (5.5m or $196.15/m (5.5m or
less) less)
$36.00/m (5.5m $35.66/m (5.5m No Increase
Dlus) Dlus'
Municipal Consent * $300/application $300/application No Increase
Curb Infill $155.00/m $153.55/m No Increase
Sidewalk Repair $250.00/m $247.66/m No Increase
Pre-installed Storm Sewer Connection Contract cost + Contract cost + No Increase
admin fee admin fee + GST
Fill/Topsoil Permit One Year Permit * $500 + $25/hectare $500 + July 1, 2006
$1000/hectare to a
m:; )( ~4~on
One Year Extension * $300.00 $500.00 Julv 1 2006
Newspaper Box Pad Permit Application * $50/box $50/box No Increase
Newspaper Box Installation * $250-$500 $250-$500 No Increase
Newspaper Box Annual Maintenance * $15/box $15/box No Increase
Road Cleaning Contract cost + 15% Contract cost + No Increase
15% + GST
Damage Deposits
Pool * $500.00 $500.00 No Increase
Water/Sewer Connection * $500.00 $500.00 No Increase
Residential Building Permit-Rural * $1,500.00 $1,500.00 No Increase
Residential Building Permit-Urban * $2,000.00 $2,000.00 No Increase
Commercial Buildinq * $2000-$5000 $2000-$5000 No Increase
Residential Development Review Fee * $40/unit $40/unit No Increase
Storm Water Maintenance Fee * $1600/hectare $1600/hectare No Increase
Development Inspection Fee * Based on total cost Based on total cost No Increase
of works of works
< $500,000 = 4.5% < $500,000 = 4.5%
$500,000-$1 mil = $500,000-$1 mil =
4% 4%
> $1 million = 3.5% > $1 million = 3.5%
Pool Enclosure Permit * $150.00 $150.00 No Increase
PLANNING DOCUMENTS
Pickerinq Official Plan * $75.00 $75.00 No Increase
Official Plan Compendium * $25.00 $25.00 No Increase
Development Guidelines * $5-$10 $5-$10 No Increase
Special Studies * $10-$20 $10-$20 No Increase
Zoninq By-laws * $5-$10 each $5-$10 each No Increase
Summarv Residential Applications * $20.00 $20.00 No Increase
Mappina * $5-$25 $5-$25 No Increase
30
148
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
* GST exempt
Council Approved July 1, 2006
Fee (7% GST where Proposed Fee
User Fee or Charge applicable) April 3, (6% GST Where Effective Date
2006 Applicable)
Address Booklet * $25-$50 $25-$50 No Increase
Fiche Prints * Price Varies Price Varies No Increase
Scecial Maccina Reauests $50/hr $49.53/hr No Increase
Photococies - 6 or more caaes $.54 each $.53 each No Increase
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
Minor Variance
Accessory Structure * $200.00 $200.00 No Increase
Existing Building * $350.00 $350.00 No Increase
Vacant land * $1,500.00 $1,500.00 No Increase
Application Tabling * $200.00 $200.00 No Increase
Scecial Meetina * $750.00 $750.00 No Increase
Zoning By-law - Amendment * $5,000.00 $5,000.00 No Increase
Zoning By-law - Recirculation * $500.00 $500.00 No Increase
Oak Ridges Moraine Premium * $500.00 $500.00 No Increase
Zoninq By-law - Removal of Holdinq * $2 225.00 $2 225.00 No Increase
Minister Zoning Order Amendment
Minor * $1,000.00 $1,000.00 No Increase
Maior * $1 600.00 $1 600.00 No Increase
Pickering Official Plan - Amendment * $8,000.00 $8,000.00 No Increase
Pickering Official Plan - Recirculation * $500.00 $500.00 No Increase
Oak Ridaes Moraine Premium * $500.00 $500.00 No Increase
Regional Official Plan - Amendment * $5,000.00 $5,000.00 No Increase
not part of a Pickerinq OPA)
land Division
Comments * $700.00 $700.00 No Increase
Clearance of Conditions * $300.00 $300.00 No Increase
Draft Plan of Subdivision
Base Fee * $10,000.00 $10,000.00 No Increase
Per Unit Fee * $135.00 $135.00 No Increase
Agreement Fee $3,210.00 $3,180.00 No Increase
Approval Package Fee (Rei to RO) $374.50 $371.00 No Increase
Assumption Package Fee $1,070.00 $1,060.00 No Increase
Clearance Release Fee * $1,000.00 $1,000.00 No Increase
Recirculation * $500.00 $500.00 No Increase
Amending Subdivision - Major $1,284.00 $1,272.00 No Increase
Amendinq Subdivision - Minor $0.00 $424.00 Julv 1 2006
Draft Plan of Condominium * $6,500.00 $6,500.00 No Increase
Recirculation * $500.00 $500.00 No Increase
Agreement Fee $2,140.00 $2,120.00 No Increase
Clearance Release Fee * $1,000.00 $1,000.00 No Increase
Approval Package Fee (Rei to RO) $0.00 $530.00 July 1, 2006
Conversion * $1,000.00 $1,000.00 No Increase
Revisions to a Draft Approved Plan * $1,000.00 $1,000.00 No Increase
(Red Line Revisions)
31
149
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
* GST exempt
Council Approved July 1, 2006
Fee (70/. GST where Proposed Fee
User Fee or Charge applicable) April 3, (6% GST Where Effective Date
2006 Applicable)
PLANNING APPLICATIONS
Site Plan
Residential * $2500 + $175 per $2500 + $175 per No Increase
dwellina unit dwellina unit
Commercial * $2500 + $850 for $2500 + $850 for No Increase
each 2 000m2 each 2 000 m2
Industrial * $2500 + $500 for $2500 + $500 for No Increase
each 2000m2 each 2000m2
Minor Revision * $750.00 $750.00 No Increase
Maior Revision * $2.500.00 $2 500.00 No Increase
Clearance * $250.00 $250.00 No Increase
Minor Revision to Approved Condo $50.00 $50.00 July 1, 2006
Site Plan (by unit owner I.e. decks,
c:h..rlc: fF!n(".F!!'; *
Agreement Fee $802.50 $795.00 No Increase
Amendina Site Plan Aareement $428.00 $424.00 No Increase
Part Lot Control By-law
Base Fee $535.00 $530.00 No Increase
Per Unit Fee * $25.00 $25.00 No Increase
Secondary Processina Fee $0.00 $106.00 Julv 1 2006
AGREEMENTS & BY-LAWS
License Letter $53.50 $53.00 No Increase
Develooment - Maior $3210.00 $3,180.00 No Increase
Develooment - Minor $0.00 $1 060.00 Julv 1 2006
Develooment - Amendment - Major $1 284.00 $1 272.00 No Increase
Develooment - Amendment - Minor $0.00 $424.00 July 1, 2006
Assumotion Packaae Fee - Maior $1 070.00 $1 060.00 No Increase
Assumotion Packaae Fee - Minor $0.00 $530.00 July 1 2006
Model Home
Aareement $802.50 $795.00 No Increase
Riaht of Re-entrv Letters $160.50 $159.00 No Increase
Road Dedication/Namina Bv-Iaw Proc. $321.00 $318.00 No Increase
Road Closing Process (Preparation of all $535.00 $530.00 No Increase
documents to stop-up and close Le.
RTC Bv-l::Jw!';)
Transfer of Land/Easements $160.50 $159.00 No Increase
Miscellaneous Agreements (Road $0.00 $1,272.00 July 1, 2006
Imorovements/Servicina- etc.)
Release of Aareements $160.50 $318.00 July 1 2006
Release of Easements (Preparation and $214.00 $212.00 No Increase
processing of By-laws, RTC,
-
Transfer Release & Abandonment $160.50 $159.00 No Increase
Miscellaneous Reporting/ Disbursement $80.25 $79.50 No Increase
Fees Letter
32
"'~o
IJ
REPORT TO
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Report Number: CS 32-06
Date: June 12, 2006
From:
Gillis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
Subject:
Cash Position Report as at March 31, 2006
Recommendation:
It is recommended that report CS 32-06 from the Director, Corporate Services &
Treasurer be received for information.
Executive Summary: The attached schedules provide the City of Pickering's cash
position, continuity of taxes receivable, outstanding investments, development charges
collected and other development contribution information for the three months ended
March 31,2006.
Financial Implications: The cash position of the Corporation for three months
ended March 31, 2006 was a net increase in cash of $2,754,337 to $5,298,272.
Sources of Funds totalled $59,021,350 and Use of Funds totalled $56,267,013.
Background: The discussion below describes the purpose and the information
contained in each of the attached schedules.
Statement of Cash Position: Attachment 1 reflects the sources and uses of funds for
the first quarter of 2006. Subcategories have been identified to highlight those cash
transactions that are significant in nature or large dollar value transactions for the City
of Pickering. Year to year periodical comparisons may not be useful due to timing.
Continuity of Taxes Receivable: Attachment 2 summarizes the tax related transactions
from January 1 to March 31, 2006 and provides the outstanding taxes receivable as at
March 31, 2006. This balance represents all three levels of taxes billed, such as City,
Region and School Boards. This amount has steadily increased for the same period
over the past several years but may vary where due dates and amounts for
supplementary billings change from year to year.
1~1
-¡report CS 32-06
Date: June 12,2006
Subject: Cash Position Report as at March 31, 2006
Page 2
Outstandina Investments: Attachment 3 reflects the short-term and long-term
investments for both the Current Fund and the Reserve Funds outstanding as at
March 31, 2006. There has been a steady increase in investments over the past few
years primarily a result of use of funds on hand due to pending assessment appeal and
timing of collection and remittance of development charges.
Development Charaes Collected: Attachment 4 indicates the total development
charges for the City, Region and School Boards, as the City is responsible for collecting
development charges on behalf of all levels of government. The total amount collected
of $1,310,721 agrees with the balance indicated under Sources of Funds on
Attachment 1. However the remittance of development charges to the Region and
School Boards indicated under the Use of Funds is different than the total collected on
Attachment 4. This variance is a result of timing differences because payments to the
Region and School Boards are due 25 days following the month collected.
Other Development Contributions: Attachment 5 is provided to show other significant
development contributions that have been received.
Attachments:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Statement of Cash Position
Continuity of Taxes Receivable
Outstanding Investments
Statement of Development Charges Collected
Other Development Contributions
City Portion of Development Charges Collected 2003 - Mar. 31, 2006
Building Permits Issued 2000 - March 31,2006
City Portion of Development Charges Collected 1991-2005
Prepared By:
A~
Audit Analyst
Approved I Endorsed By:
~~~~
Gillis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
Attachments
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering Ci Co
ATTACHMENT#--L- TOREPORT#~~ -of..
152
City of Pickering
Cash Position Statement
for three months ending March 31, 2006
Sources of Funds:
Total
$ 302,041
1,310,721
12,987,246
384,739
383,654
3,102,394
269,614
3,618
42,899
542,123
148,500
39,454,690
89,111
$ 59,021,350
Accounts Receivable collected
Development charges collected
Operating
Grants-in-lieu:
Federal
Provincial
Ontario enterprises
Municipal enterprises
Linear Properties
Federal specific grants
Ontario specific grants
Interest Income
Sale of land
Tax payments received
POA Revenue
Use of Funds:
Total
$ 22,445,215
6,454,518
17,430,260
91,578
9,671,224
10,360
73,998
89,860
$ 56,267,013
$ 2,754,337
Operating and Capital Expenditures
Payroll
Region Levy
Regional portion of Dev. Charges
School Board Levies
School Board portion of Dev. Charges
Debenture payment to Region
APTA Funding
Net Cash Increase (Decrease)
FINANCIAL POSITION
Bank Balance
Janua 1,2006
Bank Balance
March 31, 2006
Current Fund
$
2,543,935 $
2,754,337 $
5,298,272
TOTAL $ 2,543,935 $ 2,754,337 $ 5,298,272
Note: Includes City, Region and School Boards
Cash Position first quarter 2006.xlsNET CHANGES
City of Pickering
Continuity of Taxes Receivable
for three months ending March 31, 2006
!-~
U1
W
Dec. 31/05 Penalty and Taxes Supplementary Tax Payments and
Receivable Interest Added Billed Taxes Billed Write Ofts Adjustments
$ $ $ $ $ $
I
Current Year
Taxes 1 --I I 69,196,748
Penalty and Interest 69,057
2005
Taxes 5,218,075 I I I (22,847)
Penalty and Interest 287,746 196,209
2004
Taxes 2,378,555 I I I (10,720)
Penalty and Interest 256,850 76,326
Prior Years
Taxes 2,275,282 I I I (184,583)
Penalty and Interest 338,349 55,046
TOTAL 10,754,857 396,638 I 69,196,7481 0
Mar 31/06
Receivable
$
32,259,300
23,203
4,004,614
297,681
1,916,917
236,005
Total Taxes levied in 2006 including Region and School Boards: $69,196,748.00 (Interim only)
1,990,673
302,669 I I>
~
~
()
:r:
3:
rn
-7
É-
.".J
2006 Tax installment due dates:
Residential: (Interim) February 27 & April 27, 2006
Commercial: (Interim) February 27 & April 27, 2006
~
--I
()
~.~
-..,
()
~
..,
~
I~
N
,
0::-
Ô'"
2006 Supplementary Tax due dates:
N/A
Tax Write Ofts reflects "Minutes of Settlement", Assessment Review Board Decisions and Council approved adjustments under
Section 357 & 358 of the Municipal Act, 2001.
City of Pickering
Outstanding Investments
as at March 31, 2006
Name of Financial Purchase Maturity Interest Principal Interest #Of Days Value at
Security Institution Date Date Rate Amount Payable O/S Maturity
SHORT TERM INVESTMENTS
Current & Reserve Fund Investments
Nesbitt Burns FIRSTBANK BA 06-Jan-06 06-Apr -06 3.34% 3,604,310.22 29,689.78 90 3,634,000.00
Nesbitt Burns FIRSTBANK BA 13-Feb-06 12-May-06 3.61% 3,037,588.32 26,411.68 88 3,064,000.00
Nesbitt Burns TDBA 27-Feb-06 15-May-06 3.60% 2,039,505.30 15,494.70 77 2,055,000.00
Nesbitt Burns CIBC BA 03-Mar-06 15-Jun-06 3.75% 3,892,417.62 41,582.38 104 3,934,000.00
Nesbitt Burns FIRSTBANK BA 10-Mar-06 03-May-06 3.64% 6,999,352.05 37,647.95 54 7,037,000.00
Nesbitt Burns FIRSTBANK BA 10-Mar-06 09-Jun-06 3.74% 3,624,200.08 33,799.92 91 3,658,000.00
Nesbitt Burns FIRSTBANK BA 15-Mar-06 15-Jun-06 3.76% 5,571,190.64 52,809.36 92 5,624,000.00
Nesbitt Burns RBC BA 31-Mar-06 29-Jun-06 3.77% 3,828,412.56 35,587.44 90 3,864,000.00
Nesbitt Burns RBC BA 31-Mar-06 20-Sep-06 3.90% 3,800,702.64 70,297.36 173 3,871,000.00
TOTAL SHORT TERM INVESTMENTS $ 36,397,679.43 $ 343,320.57 $ 36,741,000.00
LONG TERM INVESTMENTS
Current & Reserve Fund Investments
SEMI-ANNUAL (JUN 27 & DEC 27)
Nesbitt Burns FARM CREDIT CORP 27-Jun-03 27-Jun-13 3.70% $ 250,000.00 Initial Maturity (June 27/05) $ 250,000.00
Nesbitt Burns PROVINCE OF ONTARIO 04-Nov-03 08-Sep-06 3.50% 1,579,418.00 SEMI-ANNUAL (MAR 8 & SEPT 8) 1,580,000.00
Nesbitt Burns PROVINCE OF ONTARIO 04-May-05 08-Sep-06 3.50% 1,349,070.90 SEMI-ANNUAL (MAR 8 & SEPT 8) 1,335,000.00
Nesbitt Burns PROVINCE OF ONTARIO 05-May-05 08-Sep-06 3.50% 93,967.20 SEMI-ANNUAL (MAR 8 & SEPT 8) 93,000.00
MONTHLY (29TH DAY)
Nesbitt Burns PROVINCE OF ONTARIO 29-0ct-04 29-0ct-14 4.20% 3,500,000.00 Initial Maturity (Oct 29/06) 3,500,000.00
Nesbitt Burns EXPORT DEV CORP 04-May-05 04-May-06 5.00% 643,128.52 SEMI-ANNUAL (MAY 4 & NOV 4) 628,000.00
Nesbitt Burns PROVINCE OF ONTARIO 03-Jun-05 08-Mar-07 5.20% 493,173.30 SEMI-ANNUAL (MAR 8 & SEPT 8) 474,000.00
Nesbitt Burns PROVINCE OF ONTARIO 21-Jun-05 21-Jun-10 3.05% 4,300,000.00 SEMI-ANNUAL (JUN 21 & DEC 21) 4,300,000.00
Nesbitt Burns CIBC 10-Feb-06 10-Feb-11 4.20% 2,000,000.00 SEMI-ANNUAL (FEB 10 & AUG 10) 2,000,000.00
TOTAL LONG TERM INVESTMENTS $ 14,208,757.92 $ 14,160,000.00
TOTAL INVESTMENTS $ 50,606,437.35 $ 50,901,000.00
Intemallnvestments to Capital Projects Yield: 3.67 - 4.37% $ 5,556,429.00 Term: 3 - 10 years
..
~
1;
:r:
3
m
Z
--I
f
à
:;:1:1
m
-0
0
~
ê
Iv
\
()
6'
Cash Position first quarter 2006.xlsSECURITIES ~
City of Pickering
Development Charges Collected
for three months ending March 31, 2006
Durham District Durham Catholic
City's Portion Region of Durham School Board School Board Total
$ $ $ $ $
AMOUNT COLLECTED
January 49,151 62,855 5,748 2,022 119,776
February 17,342 25,142 1,916 674 45,074
March 481,090 651,831 9,580 3,370 1,145,871
TOTAL 547,583 739,828 17 ,244 6,066 1,310,721
!-'
CJ1
C)1
~
~
()
I
~
m
Z
-f
=It
~
d
:;0
m
-0
0
~
~
~
\
C1
~
ÁTTACHMENT#~ TO REPORT # CS- :J>.;¿- O'
156
City of Pickering
Other Development Contributions
March 31, 2006
CONTRIBUTIONS:
Cash - In - Lieu of Parkland $124,000
TOTAL CASH-IN-LiEU OF PARKLAND $124,000
Cash Position first quarter 2006.xlsOther Dev.Contrbtns
1,400,000.00
1,200,000.00
1,000,000.00
800,000.00
600,000.00
400,000.00
200,000.00
0.00
City Portion of
Development Charges Collected
2003 - March 31, 2006
-+- City Portion I
1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1st
Qtr Qtr Qtr Qtr Qtr Qtr Qtr Qtr Qtr Qtr Qtr Qtr Qtr
2003 2003 2003 2003 2004 2004 2004 2004 2005 2005 2005 2005 2006
I-;'
CJ1
-J
;;.
()
:r:
3:
m
Z
-!
I:'
-I
0
;;0
m
"'0
0
~
~
I~
tv
,t,
6
"
900
850
800
750
700
650
600
550
500
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Building Permits Issued
2000 - March 31,2006
I ~ No. of Permits I
- Á
/""" ."'"
/ '"
/ ~
/ ~
~ / \
~ / \
y \
\
\
\
\
\
\
.
I I I I I I
~
~
()
::r:
3:
m
Z
-I
F
-I
0
;::c
m
-()
0
;;:::
.~,
2000
2003
1st
Quarter
2006
:t:',.
.r:.
V\ t-..
'fj(.)1
\ ~
v
(S'..
2004
2005
2001
2002
4,000,000
3,500,000
3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
1,000,000
500,000
City Portion of
Development Charges Collected
1991 - 2005
f-!>.
U1
CD
I-+- City Portion I
~
-I
0
;xl
m
-0
0
~
=It
~
~
,
V
6"-
0
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005