HomeMy WebLinkAboutMay 7, 2007
Planning & Development Committee
Agenda
Monday, May 7, 2007
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor O'Connell
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORTS
(1) MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION
PAGES
1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PO 15-07
Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10/06
Coughlan Homes
2000 Brock Road
Part of Lot 19, Concession 1
City of Pickerina
1-34
1. That Report PD 15-07 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding
Coughlan Homes Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10/06 be
received;
2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10/06 submitted by Coughlan
Homes, on lands being Part of Lot 19, Concession 1, City of Pickering, to
amend the zoning to permit the development of the subject property for a
residential use that will contain 71 townhouse dwelling units be approved
subject to the conditions outlined in Appendix II to Report PD 15-07, and
3. Further, that the zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment
Application A 10/06, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 15-07, be
forwarded to City Council for enactment.
2.
Director, Planning & Development, Report PO 14-07
Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law Amendment
Act, 2006 Bill 51
35-48
1 . That Pickering Council receive and endorse Report PD 14-07 on the
Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006, Bill
51 ;
2. That Pickering Council direct City staff to proceed with the required
administrative changes to the planning process, as set out in the Planning
and Conservation Land Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006, Bill 51 ;
Planning & Development Committee
Agenda
Monday, May 7, 2007
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor O'Connell
3. That Pickering Council direct City staff to report, through the recently
initiated Official Plan Review, on the policy changes required to implement
various new development controls made available to municipalities
through the Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law Amendment
Act, 2006, including complete applications, zoning with conditions,
employment land redesignation, development permit system and
external/sustainable design elements;
4. That Pickering Council enact a by-law to delegate to the Director, Planning
& Development or his designate, responsibility for determining whether
certain Planning Act applications constitute complete applications, as set
out in Appendix I to Report PO 14-07, and
5. Further, that the option to establish a Local Appeal Body for decisions of
the Committee of Adjustment not be pursued at this time, due to the
associated administrative and financial requirements.
3.
Director, Planning & Development, Report PO 12-07
J.D.S. Investments Limited
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1231
Almack Construction Limited
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1427
Sandbury Building Corporation
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1437
Plan 40R-9929
Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision
49-58
1. That Report PO 12-07 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding
the Assumption of Plans 40M-1231, 40M-1427, 40M-1437 and 40R-9929,
be received;
2. That the highways being Diefenbaker Court, Pickering Parkway, The
Esplanade South and Valley Farm Road within Plan 40M-1231 be
assumed for public use;
3. That the highways being Livingston Street and Bovingdon Place within
Plan 40M-1427 be assumed for public use;
4. That the highways being Daylight Court, Cattail Court, Rainy Day Drive,
Edmund Drive, Sundown Crescent, Lightfoot Place and Steeple Hill within
Planning & Development Committee
Agenda
Monday, May 7, 2007
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor O'Connell
Plan 40M-1437, and the connecting link of Steeple Hill (Part 2, 40R-9929)
be assumed for public use;
5. That the services required by the Subdivision Agreements relating to
Plans 40M-1231, 40M-1427, 40M-1437 and a portion of 40R-9929, which
are constructed, installed or located on lands dedicated to, or owned by
the City, or on lands lying immediately adjacent thereto, including lands
that are subject to easements transferred to the City, be accepted and
assumed for maintenance, save and except from Blocks 19 to 24, Plan
40M-1231, the remainder of Block 25, Plan 40M-1231 and all of Block 22,
Plan 40M-1427;
6. That the Subdivision Agreements and any amendments thereto relating to
Plans 40M-1231, 40M-1427 and 40M-1437 be released and removed from
title;
7. That By-law 1416/82 (Places of Amusement) be amended to include the
roads being Diefenbaker Court, Pickering Parkway, The Esplanade South
and Valley Farm Road within Plan 40M-1231;
8. That By-law 1416/82 (Places of Amusement) be amended to include the
roads being Livingston Street and Bovingdon Place within Plan 40M-1427;
9. That By-law 1416/82 (Places of Amusement) be amended to include the
roads being Daylight Court, Cattail Court, Rainy Day Drive, Edmund Drive,
Sundown Crescent, Lightfoot Place and Steeple Hill within Plan 40M-1437
and the connecting link of Steeple Hill, being Part 2, Plan 40R-9929;
10. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate Blocks 17 and 18, Plan 40M-
1231 as public highway; and
11. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate that part of Block 25, Plan 40M-
1231, designated as Part 1, Plan 40R-21924 as public highway.
Planning & Development Committee
Agenda
Monday, May 7,2007
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor O'Connell
4. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 16-07 59-64
Street Name Change from Sheppard Avenue to Merritton Road
Being Sheppard Avenue east of Fairport Road, legally described as
KinQston Road (also known as KinQ's Hwv. No.2)
1. That Report PO 16-07 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding
the street name change of Sheppard Avenue east of Fairport Road, legally
described as Kingston Road (also known as King's Hwy. No.2) to
Merritton Road be received; and
2. That Council enact a By-law to formally change the name of Sheppard
Avenue east of Fairport Road, legally described as Kingston Road (also
known as King's Hwy. No.2) to Merritton Road.
(II) OTHER BUSINESS
(III) ADJOURNMENT
CUI{ ct
REPORT TO
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE
Report Number: PD 15-07
Date: May 7,2007
From:
Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
nr -,
t-~ ~~..j t
SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10106
Coughlan Homes
2000 Brock Road
Part of Lot 19, Concession 1
City of Pickering
Recommendation:
1. That Report PD 15-07 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding
Coughlan Homes Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10106 be received;
2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10106 submitted by Coughlan Homes,
on lands being Part of Lot 19, Concession 1, City of Pickering, to amend the
zoning to permit the development of the subject property for a residential use that
will contain 71 townhouse dwelling units be approved subject to the conditions
outlined in Appendix II to Report PD 15-07, and
3. Further, that the zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment
Application A 10106, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 15-07, be forwarded to
City Council for enactment.
Executive Summary: The applicant proposes to develop the 1.7-hectare property
for 71 townhouse dwelling units. The proposed use is a reduction in intensity from a
previous development plan approved by Council and zoned in 2003, which provided an
apartment/townhouse mix and significantly more units. While it is unfortunate that the
initial proposal is no longer being pursued, the current proposal is considered
compatible with surrounding land uses, proposes acceptable development at a
prominent location and conforms to the policies of the Official Plan. The proposed
density of the infill site is transit supportive and dwellings in the development will
achieve Energy Star compliance. A future draft plan of condominium is anticipated for
the proposed development.
Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the
approval of zoning for the townhouse development.
Report PD 15-07
Date: May 7,2007
Subject: Coughlan Homes (A 10/06)
(\~ r .,"',
::... ',; .:..
Page 2
Sustainability Implications: This development proposal is an infill project that
provides for residential intensification, makes efficient use of vacant lands, and takes
advantage of existing infrastructure within the City's urban area. The proposal adds to
the variety of housing opportunities in the City's urban area and assists to divert growth
pressures away from non-urban designated lands. The site is located within walking
distance of neighbourhood commercial uses and is located adjacent to two designated
transit spines. The dwellings are proposed to be constructed to Energy Star standards.
The proposal generally represents a sustainable approach for the development of the
subject lands.
Background:
1.0 Introduction
Coughlan Homes proposes to develop the subject land at the southwest corner
of Brock Road and Finch Avenue for a 71 dwelling unit townhouse complex (see
Location Map, Attachment #1). The townhouse development will be part of a
future condominium application as the dwelling units will be individually owned.
The townhouses are proposed to have their vehicle access from an internal
private road and the units that face onto Brock Road or Finch Avenue will also
have pedestrian access to sidewalks along the road frontage (see Attachment #2).
The proposed townhouse buildings will have a general height of 2 % to 3 storeys.
2.0 Comments Received
2.1 At the February 15, 2007 Public Information Meeting
Four area residents and property management representatives for the abutting
townhouse complex (1995 Royal Road) appeared at the Public Information
Meeting to voice their comments respecting the application. They raised
concerns related to: traffic on Brock Road and Finch Avenue; site access; tree
and vegetation preservation; sustainable development; shadowing; and location
of the visitor parking (see text of Information Report and Meeting Minutes,
Attachments #4 & #5).
2.2 Written Public Submissions on the application
Two written submissions were received from area residents. The concerns
identified in the correspondences related to: site density; access to property;
traffic congestion; road classification; negative impact on the value of abutting
townhouses; landscaping; and, value of the proposed townhouse units (see
Attachments #6 & #7).
Report PO 15-07
Date: May 7,2007
Page 3
Subject: Coughlan Homes (A 10106)
,\r",.
~. I '.' ,
L-"J ,)
2.3 Agency Comments
Toronto and Region
ConseNation Authority
Region of Durham
Durham Catholic
District School Board
- no objection to the land use, further information will
be required during any future planning process,
such as site plan or plan of condominium (see
Attachment #8);
- the proposal is permitted by the policies of the
Durham Region Official Plan;
- municipal water supply and sanitary sewer seNices
are available to the subject property;
- the applications have been screened in accordance
with Provincial Interests and Delegated Review;
- transportation and access requirements will be
concluded during site plan approval process, for
Brock Road a road widening will be required and the
access will be restricted to a right-in right-out, while
the Finch Avenue access will need to be
reconfigured (see Attachment #9);
- no objection (see Attachment #10).
No other agency that provided comment has objection to the application. Certain
technical issues and requirements related to the proposed use of the site can be
addressed during the site plan process, should this application be approved.
3.0 Discussion
3.1 Proposed Development is Compatible with Surrounding land Uses
The subject property is located at the southwest corner of Finch Avenue and
Brock Road. The Brock Ridge Community Park and open space associated with
West Duffins Creek are to the north of the subject site. Lands to the west have
been developed for townhouses. To the south, lands are occupied by existing
commercial development. A police station and land associated with an existing
vehicle dealership are on the opposite side of Brock Road.
The subject lands are designated Mixed Use Areas - Mixed Corridors in the
Pickering Official Plan that requires the land to be developed at a certain level of
intensity and scale. The subject lands are also prominent from a municipal urban
design perspective. These lands, while not within the Downtown Core, are
located on the "shoulders" of the downtown and mark a certain transition point
where the nature and intensity of land use changes. The proposed development
should create a gateway landmark to define the different land uses to the north
and south of the subject lands.
Report PD 15-07
Date: May 7,2007
Subject: Coughlan Homes (A 10/06)
Page 4
(". ':'
-. ,,1
Concern has been expressed by abutting property owners that the shadowing
and height of the building (three storeys) were too much for the site. The
proposed height of buildings is similar and compatible to the surrounding
buildings. Shadowing impacts would be minimal given the height of some of the
existing vegetation along the property line.
3.2 Proposed Development is Lower Intensity than Existing Zoning Permits
The proposed use is a reduction in intensity from a previous proposal that could
have been developed in compliance with the existing zoning. The existing
zoning on the property (RH/MU-5), which was enacted by City Council in 2003,
permits 30 townhouses and a 140-unit 7 -storey apartment building to be located
at the corner of Brock Road and Finch Avenue (see Attachment #3). The
previous development plan approved by Council provided for a building with
significant massing at the corner of the intersection of Brock Road and Finch
Avenue that would have provided a landmark building, denoting the transition of
land uses from the site and the downtown core. If this application is approved,
the site design must incorporate some form of landmark feature at the northeast
corner of the site that will provide a visual feature that will translate into the
objective goal of defining a transition between land uses. This will be addressed
through the site plan process.
3.3 The Proposed DensitylNumber of Townhouse Dwelling Units Complies with
the Official Plan
The Mixed Use Areas - Mixed Corridors designation of the Official Plan requires
the subject land to be developed within a density range of over 30 units per
hectare and up to 140 units per hectare. The proposal has a density of 44 units
per hectare which is at the lower end of the density range. Given the site's
prominent location in the City, a proposal that provides a greater degree of
intensification would be more in-keeping with direction of Provincial planning
policies. The previous proposal that the current zoning permits would also have
provided a broader range in housing types. However, as the proposal does
comply with the current Official Plan, it is considered to represent acceptable
development for the subject lands.
3.4 Site Access and Traffic Movements on Brock Road and Finch Avenue are
Acceptable with the Recommended Road Improvements
Brock Road, where it abuts the subject property, is designated as a Type A
Arterial Road in the Region's and City's Official Plans. Type A Arterial Roads are
the highest order arterial roads and are designed to carry large volumes of traffic
at moderate to high speeds. Brock Road is a five-lane cross-section in the
vicinity of the subject property. Finch Avenue, where it abuts the subject site, is
designated as a Type B Arterial Road in the Region's and City's Official Plans
which is designed to carry moderate volumes of traffic at moderate speeds and
have some access restrictions. Finch Avenue is currently a three-lane
cross-section adjacent to the subject lands.
Report PO 15-07
Date: May 7,2007
Subject: Coughlan Homes (A 10/06)
Page 5
" _. rj.'~
" l i!
'- ',J d
Site ingress/egress from both Brock Road and Finch Avenue will be designed to
have the least amount of impact on the abutting streets. The Brock Road
ingress/egress must be designed as a right-in/right-out access. The
Finch Avenue driveway will also have to be designed to ensure the level of
service on Finch Avenue is not compromised. These detail design matters can
be achieved through site plan and/or condominium process.
A traffic report was submitted with a previous application for the site. This study
examined the traffic movement that would be generated from the proposed
development and the impact on the existing traffic on both Brock Road and Finch
Avenue. The report recommended that certain road improvements be undertaken
to ensure the existing level of service that is provided by the two streets is not
impacted by the proposed development.
These improvements include a right-in/right-out access from the Brock Road
driveway and the existing centre median on Brock Road be extended. On
Finch Avenue the proposal is to re-stripe the street across from the proposed
driveway to create a left turn lane into the site from the westbound lane. It is
recognized that the traffic study was for the previous proposal that was for
170 dwelling units. Therefore, the reduction in the number of dwelling units to
71 townhouses should be less of an impact on traffic. The applicant has initiated
an updated traffic study that will be reviewed during the site plan approval stage
to conclude the required road improvements by the Region of Durham. As part
of the conditions of approval, it is recommended that any road improvements be
undertaken coincidental with development.
3.5 Visitor Parking
The issue of the location of the visitors parking was identified at the public meeting.
The concern raised is that the location along the western edge of the property is
not the most appropriate location, as this would have an impact on the abutting
townhouses due to noise and light concerns. All vehicle parking, both visitors and
parking for each dwelling unit, is at grade parking. The applicant indicated that the
parking location was chosen in order to reduce the impact on the existing
perimeter vegetation. The final location of the visitor parking will be investigated at
the site plan approval stage where alternative location can be explored to
determine if another location is more suitable and feasible in consideration of tree
preservation, grading and engineering matters and urban design principles.
3.6 Enhanced Building Design and Sustainable Elements Required
The massing, building location and design of the buildings must contribute
positively to the existing land use context. While detailed building designs have
not been submitted, the applicant has developed preliminary elevations and
building perspectives which exhibit an understanding of the need for a building
that reflects a high level of design. Attractive buildings that incorporate
significant sustainable elements in the building and site design must be achieved
to make a positive contribution to the surrounding area. The applicant has
agreed to build dwellings that achieve Energy Star compliance, and the site plan
will incorporate sustainable elements.
Report PO 15-07
Date: May 7,2007
S~?}~ct: Coughlan Homes (A 10/06)
'- ,,' U
Page 6
4.0 Technical Matters
Fencing/Buffering Required Adjacent to Existing Property
This development is an infill situation where new residential development is being
introduced next to existing development. The design of the plan is such that it
introduces townhouses, parking and driveways next to existing townhouse rear
yards. The concern for privacy for existing development was expressed at the
statutory public meeting for this application.
In order to lessen the impact of new residential development on existing
residents, it is recommended that the developer be required to ensure the
existing wood fence along the western property line is protected and maintained,
as well as the existing vegetative screening provided by the existing spruce trees
and shrubs. In the areas next to the driveway and parking areas (if they remain
in the current location) additional planting will be incorporated into the final site
design to enhance the buffering. The materials for this landscaping will be
determined during the site plan approval stage if the application is approved.
Along the southern property line, that abuts the existing commercial property,
there is an existing wood fence and row of mature spruce trees. The condition of
the wood fence will be reviewed during the site plan approval process. If this
fence needs to be replaced the owner would be responsible for the construction
of the new fence. The spruce trees should be assessed and all the healthy trees
should be preserved.
Development Agreement Required
A development agreement between the City and the owner of the lands will be
required to ensure that all matters of interest to the City are protected. This
required agreement, and other development implementation matters, will be
addressed through site plan and/or condominium process.
Sidewalks along Brock Road and Finch Avenue
A sidewalk currently exists along the south side of Finch Avenue and along the
west side of Brock Road. If these sidewalks are to be altered due to road
widening, the sidewalks will have to be replaced to the satisfaction of the City of
Pickering.
5.0 Applicant's Comments
The applicant has been advised of the recommendations of this report and has
no objection to any of the conditions of approval.
Report PO 15-07
Date: May 7,2007
Subject: Coughlan Homes (A 10106)
Page 7
,'\ r, 1"1
\... ~j t
APPENDICES:
APPENDIX I:
APPENDIX II:
Draft Zoning By-law Amendment
Recommended Conditions of Approval for A 10106
Attachments:
1 . Location Map
2. Applicant's Conceptual Site Plan
3. Previous Development Proposal
4. Text of Information Report
5. Minutes from February 15, 2007 Statutory Public Information Meeting
6. Resident Comment - Vanessa Neahr
7. Resident Comment - Cheryl England
8. Agency Comments - TRCA
9. Agency Comments - Region of Durham Planning Department
10. Agency Comments - Durham Catholic District School Board
Prepared By:
Approved I Endorsed By:
Rt:~:~
Principal Planner - Development Review
RP:ld
Attachments
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering C~ 0 iI
j'1.
;, ('. ~
\.. ..,0
DRAFT IMPLEMENTING ZONING BY-LAW
ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 10/06
APPENDIX I TO
REPORT PO 15-07
F PICKERING
" r ~
i . . ~ '4
-.... ',.' v
BY-lAW NO.
Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as
amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of
Durham in Part of lot 19, Concession 1, in the City of Pickering. (A 10/06)
WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering passed By-law 4081/92,
amending By-law 3036, to permit the establishment of an apartment residential, senior
citizens apartment residential, hotel, banquet hall, office, office support commercial and
hotel support commercial uses on the subject lands;
AND WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering passed
By-law 6153/03 amending By-law 4081/92 to permit the development of an apartment
building and townhouse uses on the subject lands;
AND WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering now deems it
desirable to further amend By-law 3036, as amended by By-laws 4081/92 and
By-law 6153/03 to permit only townhouse uses on the subject lands;
AND WHEREAS an amendment to By-law 4081/92 and By-law 6153/03 to By-law 3036,
as amended, is therefore deemed necessary;
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCil OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOllOWS:
1. AREA RESTRICTED
The provisions of this By-law shall apply to those lands in Part of lot 19,
Concession 1, designated "RH/MU-5" in By-law 3036.
2. GENERAL PROVISIONS
No building, land or part thereof shall hereafter be used, occupied, erected, moved,
or structurally altered except in conformity with the provisions of this By-law.
3. Text Amendment
(1) Section 5. PROVISIONS, Subsection (2) Uses Permitted ("RH/MU-5 Zone) of
By-law 4081/92 as amended by By-law 6153/03, is hereby amended by
deleting this Subsection and replacing it with the following:
..., .J' ,....,
, .. ,
:.... J. t
(2) (a)
~~f~
1:) (b)
-2-
Uses Permitted ("RH/MU-5" Zone)
No person shall within the lands designated "RH/MU-5" on Schedule I
attached hereto use any lot or erect, alter or use any building or
structure for any purpose except the following:
(i) Multiple Dwelling - Horizontal
Zone Requirements ("RH/MU-5" Zone)
No person shall within the lands designated "RH/MU-5" on Schedule I
attached hereto use any lot or erect, alter or use any building or
structure except in accordance with the following provisions:
(i) BUILDING HEIGHT
(ii) BUILDING LOCATIONS:
3 storey maximum
Not withstanding any other requirements of By-Law 3036, as
amended, the following requirements shall regulate building
locations on lands zoned "RH/MU-5".
A: The minimum yard depth from Brock Road shall be
3.0 metres and the maximum yard depth from Brock Road
shall be 5.0 metres;
B: The minimum yard depth from Finch Avenue shall be
3.0 metres and the maximum yard depth from Finch Avenue
shall be 5.0 metres;
C: The minimum yard depth from the western lot line shall be
6.0 metres;
D: The minimum yard depth from the southern lot line shall be
6.0 metres;
E: Notwithstanding any other requirement of this By-law,
balconies, covered or uncovered steps, porches and
platforms may project into any minimum yard depth to a
maximum projection of 1.5 metres;
(iii) NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS
A: The maximum number of multiple dwelling-horizontal units
shall be 71 dwelling units;
-3-
~...~ '1 ..:~
',-' ..l 1.
(3) Section 5. PROVISIONS Subsection (3) Parking Requirements of
By-law 4081/92, is hereby amended by deleting paragraph (d) and replacing
it with the following:
(d) For lands designated "RH/MU-5"
(i) For a multiple dwelling-horizontal use there shall be provided
and maintained on the lot a minimum of 2.0 parking space per
dwelling unit for residents and 0.3 parking spaces per dwelling
unit for visitors.
4. BY-LAW 3036
By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 4081/92 and By-law 6153/03 is hereby further
amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law
as it applies to the area as set out in Section 1 of this By-law. Definitions and
subject matters not specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by
relevant provisions of By-law 3036, as amended.
5. EFFECTIVE DATE
This By-law shall come into force in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act.
BY-LAW read a first, second, and third time and finally passed this _day of May 2007.
Debi A. Bentley, City Clerk
" ., "'''';
',' i ~
APPENDIX" TO
REPORT PO 15-07
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
APPLICATION TO AMEND ZONING BY-LAW A 10/06
~, 1 ""'..
' ,
'- -.J
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR
ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 10/06
1. That the owner enter into a site plan agreement with the City to reflect the
comments of the report of the Director, Planning & Development Report
PD 15-07. The site plan agreement shall ensure the fulfillment of the City's
requirements, financial and otherwise, which shall include, but not
necessarily be limited to:
(a) building of all the dwelling units to Energy Star compliance;
(b) the securing of funds for the construction of the internal roads;
(c) providing any required easements;
(d) satisfaction of the City financially with respect to the Development
Charges Act;
(e) construction management plan;
(f) traffic management plan;
(g) stormwater drainage and management system;
(h) design the development for 3-stream refuse handling;
(i) noise attenuation.
2. That the site plan agreement include a clause that the owner shall provide
to the City of Pickering a clearance letter from the Region of Durham that
advises that all of the Regional matters, financial and otherwise, have been
addressed.
3. That the site plan agreement include a clause that the owner shall provide
to the City of Pickering a clearance letter from the Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority that advises that all of TRCA matters have been
addressed.
I ! I
I I '
J~.r
~/~
_~~>/ I ,
~011 ~- &
m
w
:::>
....J
I I m
FINCH
" 1 ~
l' 'i
,:",:'1 It ,~ .~ -1 TO
.)", 1 PL: _.L:';' (..: -
- ~ II i i I I [[to. II (/J I I 1[2 0
-0:: I i,l ill I- 4:
-w '. '-----..! 0
~~'S ~\!fI7N/I.1t- .'~ /ll cr
.- /' . I / '1)-
I /
/ ~
-...J U
o
cr
m
,~
-
~
r~
~
CRESCENT I DTIIID -
~m~
mrrm rmm
AVENUE
~-
r'"
:::::::::::
~
~
I
wi
:::::~
O::e::::=-
0_
I ~
\
FINCH AVENUE
~ .-r- \
-
- -
-
0- -0
<{ -<{
0 0
0:: 0::
,
.--/ :-.,0'00
0 n~JECT ~
....J ~ IV
:::>
CJ
\ -, ~.
I \. \. I
~ I
0
<{
0
0::
of'-O
?-
/i'5=-
_ 0
0::
m-
z
<c -
m_
-
I--
-
-
w
>-
0::-
0-
-
-
-
w-
0-
(/J-
z_
~-
(0-
"
----j
BAINBRIDGE
/~ JI>---<~~\'0o~ %'
~ ~ .~
~ 1[1 ~C\..t. ~
'== ~_ z
- '" I ;;;: -_______
~ "'" ~
~\ ~x [
~ \ ~\'0o//1
-.:y J}
f--\ T 1 v/ ;0
:=:j ~
== ~o
== ~\.-~
~ c\ l ~ ,,\\\/1
City of Pickering Planning & Development Department
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PART LOT 19, CONCESSION 1, PART 3 40R-15638
:,(
u
o
0::
CD
OWNER COUGHLAN HOMES
FILE No. A 10/06
DATE JAN. 2, 2007
SCALE 1 :5000
DRAWN BY JB
CHECKED BY RP
r:;J~Q ~OU"'CCl!l;
Teronet Enterpriees Inc. and ita suppliers. All ri9hts Roserved. Not a pIon of survey.
2005 MPAC and its suppliers. All riahts Reserved. Not 0 plan of Survey.
-
-
-
-
COURT
!Iff E
==
l'
PN.9
ATTACHMENT'~ d _TO
flF'uRll1 PO j 5 -C.7
INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANTS
SUBMITTED PLAN -
A 1 0/06
EDGE (T PAVEl.I[ T
FINCH AVENUE
J os, 0 R E Y
-
'i'/:r"""
r-:l BRICK
~ GARBAGE
SHED
ASPHALT PARKING lOT
" 1 ....
~'..LJ
%
o
9:
?J
o
b
"
~
1l
THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING,
PLANNING &- DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
INFORMATION &- SUPPORT SERVICES,
JANUARY 2, 2007
JlTl ACt!i\:'HH *_
nE~'Uin f; PO ,_
3 TO
i 5'C)I~...,,~""
"1......
',,'\)
APPLICANT'S PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
A 24/01
J. COUGHLAN
;::ni!_):~N.w"t;.
~
THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT,
INFORMATION & SUPPORT SERVICES.
MAY 26. 2003.
f-, TT ACHMWT II _ 4..f TO
r;:j'();:;T # PO _ L5 .-0 ~1.....
CUll ()~
'. 1.....
r,- j ,
INFORMATION REPORT NO. 01-07
FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF
February 15, 2007
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS
OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13
SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10/06
Coughlan Homes
2000 Brock Road
Part of Lots 19, Concession 1
City of Pickering
1.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
- the subject lands are located on the west side of Brock Road, south of
Finch Avenue;
- a property location map is provided for reference (see Attachment #1);
- the majority of the subject lands are currently vacant, with one structure in the
south-east corner of the property used for a house sales presentation
pavilion;
- the property currently has access from both Brock Road and from
Finch Avenue;
- the topography has a slight depression in the middle of the property;
- the existing vegetation of the property consists of a line of hedge row of
mostly coniferous trees partially along the south and west property line and a
few trees surrounding the existing house sales presentation pavilion;
- surrounding land uses are;
north on the opposite side of Finch Avenue, the Brock Ridge
Community Park;
south - existing commercial plaza;
east on the opposite side of Brock Road, a police station and
lands that are currently used for vehicle parking related to the
existing vehicle dealership on Kingston Road;
west townhouse complex.
Infor~4<m, Report No. 01-07
'.' .1,j
ATTACHMENT #_ i1 TO
REPORT # PO / C;" (1 -7
.
Page 2
2.0 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL
- the application bein~J considered is to amend the zoning by-law to permit the
development of the subject property for a residential use that will contain
71 townhouse dwelling units;
- the applicant's submitted plan is provided for reference (see Attachment #2);
- the townhouses are proposed to have their vehicle access from an internal
private road and the units that face onto Brock Road or Finch Avenue will also
have pedestrian access to sidewalks along the road frontage;
- the applicant has advised that the site plan has been designed to have a
landscape focal point that will be located at the corner of Brock Road and
Finch Avenue;
- the proposed townhouse buildings will have a general height of 2 % or 3 storeys;
- the proposed access points are in the general locations of the existing
driveways into the property, being one access from Brock Road, north of the
existing sales presentation pavilion and the other off of Finch Avenue close to
the western property line;
- the majority of the parking will be accommodated within the individual private
garages and unit driveways with additional visitors parking on the west side of
the property;
- the house sales presentation pavilion is proposed to be removed;
2.1 Development Detail
Zoning
The following is proposed development detail for this application:
Existing
Proposed
Uses
Existing
Proposed
Site area
Building coverage
Parking area (including sidewalks)
Landscape coverage
Frontage on Brock Road
Frontage on Finch Avenue
Number of townhouse dwelling units
Net density
Townhouse parking residents
- visitors
Total parking
- RH/MU-5
appropriate to permit proposed
development
house sales presentation
pavilion and vacant land
residential development
consisting of 71 townhouses
1.707 hectares
38%
35%
27%
151.8 metres
95.2 metres
71
44 units/hectare
204
22
226
Information Report No. 01-07
#___':f i U
flEPJH'I Ii po--!. 5 0 "L.,_.
Page 3
r\ i ~
...lJ
2.2 Previous Applications
- when the current owner purchased the subject lands in 1994 the subject
lands were zoned "LCA-9" (Local Commercial Area) by Zoning By-law 3036
as amendment by By-law 4081/92;
- this zoning permitted a variety of commercial uses including hotel, offices,
restaurant, personal services and limited retail;
- this zoning required a portion of the building on the subject lands be a
minimum of 10 storeys in height, and permitted a maximum building height of
15 storeys;
in October 2001 the existing property owner submitted an application to
change the zoning on the subject property to permit only residential uses;
rezoning application A 24/01 resulted in the current zoning (RH/MU-5) being
enacted by City Council in 2003 for the current permitted uses of
30 townhouses and a 140 unit apartment building to be located at the corner of
Brock Road and Finch Avenue having a 7 storey design (see Attachment #3
for a copy of the development proposal).
3.0 OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING
3.1 Durham Regional Official Plan
the Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as within a
Living Area;
- the Durham Regional Official Plan states that Living Areas are intended to be
predominantly used for housing purposes;
Living Areas shall be developed in a compact form through higher densities
and by intensifying and redeveloping existing areas, particularly along arterial
roads;
Brock Road is designated as a Type A Arterial Road and Finch Avenue is
designated as a Type B Arterial Road in the Durham Regional Official Plan;
- the subject application will be assessed against the policies and provisions of
the Durham Region Official Plan during the further processing of the
applications;
3.2 Pickering Official Plan
- the Pickering Officiall Plan designates the subject lands as Mixed Use Area -
Mixed Corridors;
permissible uses within this designation include, amongst others, a variety of
residential uses including apartment buildings and townhouses;
- the Pickering Official Plan establishes a density range of over 30 and up to
and including 140 dwelling units per hectare for development within an
Mixed Use Areas - Mixed Corridors;
- the proposed development would provide a net density of 44 units per
hectare;
Information Report No. 01-07
, 4 .~._lU
i 5 '~.{.?:.I.._
Page 4
..., ,~' .-....
C" ,I
- the subject property is within the Village East Neighbourhood of the
Official Plan;
development guidelines are not considered a prerequisite for this proposal;
Schedule /I of thE~ Pickering Official Plan - Transportation Systems,
designates Brock Road where it abuts the subject lands as a Type A Arterial Road
and Finch Avenue as a Type B Arterial Road;
Type A Arterial Roads are designed to carry large volumes of traffic at
moderate to high speeds, have some access restrictions and generally have
a right-of-way width ranging from 36 to 50 metres;
Type B Arterial Roads are designed to carry moderate volumes of traffic at
moderate speeds, have some access restrictions and generally have a
right-of-way width ranging from 30 to 36 metres;
Schedule 11/ of the Pickering Official Plan - Resource Management designates
the subject lands as Shorelines and Stream Corridors and within Flood Plain
Special Policy Areas;
Shorelines and Stream Corridors identify lands that may be prone to
hydro-fluvial impacts and require an environmental report to be submitted that
appropriately addresses any environmental constraints on the subject
property;
Flood Plain Special Policy Areas identify lands where communities have
developed on lands susceptible to flooding, and recognizes the continued
viability of those areas by permitting some new development, subject to
appropriate flood protection measures as set out in the Official Plan;
- the Official Plan identifies that the City and Conservation Authority may require
the submission of Emgineering and stormwater management studies when
considering applications on lands designated Flood Plain Special Policy Area;
- the subject applications will be assessed against the policies and provisions
of the Pickering Official Plan during the further processing of the applications;
3.4 Zoning By-law 3036
- the subject lands are currently zoned RH/MU-5 by Zoning By-law 6153/03
which permits the development of the land for 30 townhouse units and a
140 unit apartment building;
- the existing zoning also contains certain performance standards (building
design and placement requirements) that were based on a specific
development proposal (see Attachment #3);
an amendment to the zoning by-law is required to implement the applicant's
proposal;
- the applicant has requested an appropriate zone that would permit the
proposed townhOUSE! development.
Information Report No. 01-07
'f1 t,GHMGH {I 4 TO
nEPORT # PO _ 15-o~7
Page 5
(~r. ..'"
:\.. {..~., .l
4.0 RESUL IS OF CIRCULA liON
4.1 Resident Comments
no resident comments have been received to date on the application;
4.2 Aaency Comments
Toronto Region
Conservation Authority
Durham Catholic District
School Board
- no objection to the land use, further information
will be required during any future planning
process, such as site plan or plan of
condominium (see Attachment #4);
- no objection (see Attachment #5);
4.3 Staff Comments
in reviewing the application to date, the following matters have been identified
by staff for further review and consideration:
. reviewing the application in terms of its level of sustainable development
components;
. as the previous proposal and existing zoning provided for a form of
development that would provide a landmark, a range of housing types and
a gateway/transition to the downtown area of the City this application must
be reviewed to determine if the previous vision may still be achieved;
. reviewing whethE~r the need for a land use change is more compelling than
leaving the existing use rights that provide for a variety of built forms on
the property;
. reviewing the proposed development in terms of compatibility with, and
sensitivity to, surrounding lands;
. reviewing the impact on the streetscape of Brock Road and Finch Avenue;
. reviewing the building location, noise attenuation, Iliving environment,
accessibility, massing and materials;
. reviewing the landscaping, fencing, and vegetation preservation;
. reviewing the stormwater management and flood control requirements;
. reviewing the driveway/internal road pattern to ensure proper vehicle flow
through the proposed development and in relation to abutting properties
and the location of visitor parking;
. reviewing the existing and emerging Provincial Policies related to urban
growth;
. reviewing the proposed development to ensure that adequate information
is provided, that technical requirements are met and that the proposed site
design is appropriate;
Information Report No. 01-07
-Lf
1,', L""'" -,',d'7
i:j'nn ,11: .:;J"
Page 6
."~ ri....
, .
'- too..~.."
- the Planning & Development Department will conclude its position on the
application and its design after it has received and assessed comments from
the circulated departments, agencies and public.
5.0 PROCEDURAL INFORMATION
- written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the
Planning & Development Department;
oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting;
all comments received will be noted and used as input in a Planning Report
prepared by the Planning & Development Department for a subsequent
meeting of Council and/or a Committee of Council;
if you wish to be notified of Council's decision regarding either the proposed
zoning by-law amendment application, you must request such in writing to the
City Clerk;
if a person or public body that files an appeal of a decision of the City of
Pickering in respect of the proposed zoning by-law amendment, does not
make oral submissions at the public meeting or make written submissions to
the City of Pickering before the zoning by-law is passed, the Ontario
Municipal Board may dismiss all or part of the appeal;
if you wish to reserve the option to appeal Council's decision of the proposed
zoning by-law amendment application, you must provide comments to the
City before Council adopts any by-law for this proposal.
6.0 OTHER INFORMATION
6.1 Appendix No. I
list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City
Departments that have commented on the applications at the time of writing
the report;
6.2 Information Received
- full scale copies of the Applicant's submitted plans are available for viewing at
the offices of the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department;
- the City of Pickering has not received any technical information / reports on
the proposed application;
- the need for additional information will be determined through the review and
circulation of the applicant's current proposal;
Information Report No. 01-07
'-f
15-07
Page 7
,C\ ri r.
:.-' ~'" .)
6.3 Company Principal
- the Zoning By-law Amendment application has been submitted by
Gary Templeton of Templeton Planning Limited on behalf of Coughlan Homes;
- the principal of Coughlan Homes is Jerry Coughlan.
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
ORIGINAL SIGNED BY
Ross Pym, MCIP, RPP
Principal Planner - Development Review
Lynda Taylor, MCIP, RPP
Manager, Development Review
RP:ld
Attachments
Copy: Director, Planning & Development
CiilJ 0#
.:~ r, .r.,'
, .:>t
I)
-.!-. ..
I 5 ~ (..? .-,
Minutes I Meeting Summary
Statutory Public Information Meeting
Council Chambers
Thursday, February 15, 2007
7:00 pm.
---~-----.__.. -----.~-...--.,.' _.- -. .~-,-,,_..._-_.._._~--_._._...__._--..... -- --~-.___ ___....._.._~_..__.___._..._._..._.u_..____...._._
Attendees: Councillor Dickerson - Chair
Councillor O'Connell
R. Pym, Principal Planner - Development Review
L. Roberts - Committee Coordinator
r:-;::;-".---- -. ----------------- ------------------------------------------.--
l'tem / Details & Discussion & Conclusion
'. F?ef # (summary of discussion)
1.1.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
1__....
CORP0228-2/02
-
Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10/06
Coughlan Homes
2000 Brock Road Concession 1
Part of Lots 19,
Cit of Pickerin
1. Planner Comments
Ross Pym, Principal Planner - Development Review provided an overview of the
applicant's proposal pertaining to this site, as ouHined in Information Report # 01-07.
He went over the details of the development and surrounding land uses. He also
explained the requirements of the Planning Act. He indicated in his outline that this
proposal was downsized in comparison to the previously planned development. He
discussed the written comments received to date in regards to this application:
. access to property
. road classification
· impact on sustainability of site
. property values.
Sustainability of the site was also discussed. Mr. Pym reviewed the importance of the
sign in sheets in order to be notified of any upcoming meetings pertaining to this
report. At this point, it was decided to have the comments from the residents next, so
that the applicant could respond accordingly.
Page 1
Item /
Ref#
5
----------------,-5..~..z:t-7_------
Details & Discussion & Conclusion
(summary of discussion)
(\f)~
'- :-J
I
I
I
I
!
I
I
I
I
i
i
I
i
I
L__.
CORP0228-2/02
2. Comments from Members of the Public
1) Peter Dowsett
1995 Royal Road, #113
Peter Dowsett appeared before the Committee with respect to the Zoning By-law
Amendment Application A 10/06. His concerns were as follows:
· traffic conerns with Brock Road and Finch Ave. West
· access off Brock Road North in the evening
· questioned whether a traffic study had been done would like to receive info
· trees/shrubs currently existing - would like to confirm that they will remain as a
buffer
2) Cheryl England
1995 Royal Road, Unit 103
Cheryl England appeared before the Committee with respect to Zoning By-law
Amendment Application A 10/06. She stated she was not opposed to the
development, but questioned whether the existing shrubs and tress would be staying.
She also questioned access into the development - there are only two ways in, you
cannot get in from northbound. Finch Avenue is a single lane road, it is difficult to turn
onto Royal Road. She questioned whether there were plans for Finch Avenue to
have a left hand lane, she was worried traffic would be using Royal Road as an
alternate route. She also questioned the road classification of Finch - Type C
designation for Finch, had it been changed since the 2003 application, as it is now
noted as a Type Broad.
3) David Loyst
1995 Royal Road, Unit 158
David Loyst appeared before the Committee and stated he was not opposed to the
development, but was concerned with traffic and the access in and out of the
development. He also noted there needed to be a center left turn lane on Finch
Avenue. He questioned what type of development was proposed, whether it would be
I an adult community or family oriented. He did not see a lot of open space for
I playgrounds, etc in the plans.
I
i
I
I
I
. __J
Page 2
"" "'1 ,..,
litem / f)ira'fls & Discussion & ConclusTo,,'-----------
i Ref # I (summary of discussion)
I ~
I
I
I
i
I
!
',5
.. j ~: o~2__.______
i
! Steve Phillips, Property Manager
Fuller Spicer and Associates Ltd.
o
Steve Phillips, Property Manager for Fuller Spicer and Associates Ltd. appeared
before the Committee. He questioned the height of the units. He noted there were
bungalows on the opposite side, and indicated his concern with shadowing problems.
He also questioned whether the units would be freehold or condos and requested
clarification on parking. Would this be underground or strictly visitor parking.
Mr. Phillips also questioned the price range of the proposed units.
Mark Speakman
1995 Royal Road Unit 150
Mark Speakman appeared before the Committee and questioned why visitor parking
was proposed on the west side as opposed to the south side of the site.
He asked about the landscape design and what was planned for this.
He also expressed concerns with the height of the second storey, and questioned
whether it would be higher than the existing units. He also questioned what the
square footage of the units would be and the number of parking spaces per unit.
He questioned the provisions for a walkway between the two units and noted he was
opposed to having this. He also questioned the elevation changes and what the
exterior finish would be.
3. Applicant Comments/Hesponses
Ron Halliday
2280 Whites Road
Ron Halliday appeared before the Committee on behalf of the applicant in regards to
the zoning by-law amendml~nt application. He explained the parking was planned for
the west side in order to save the existing trees. He indicated the height would be no
higher than the shadows. He stated that when the previous shadowing study had
been completed, there were no problems in this regard. The height to the top of the
roof on the three storey elevation would be 10.5 metres or approximately 36 - 39 feet.
Mr. Halliday indicated that a solid fence as well as trees already exist and made
assurances that the trees would be saved and the landscaping would be in keeping
with the previous development. He made note that there were colour drawings
available with considerable detail shown at the meeting, and indicated he would be
available after the meeting to go over the details.
Page 3
CORP0228-2102
i Iterii71-Details & Discussion & ConcTusion ----------. --- ...-- ---5- -----..
Ref # i (summary of discussion) / s~- <' 7
i Mr. Halliday stated that all the parking would be outside. There would be three
I parking spaces per unit. Each unit would have a single or double car garage,
i depending on the square footage of the unit.
I
I
I
I Mr. Halliday indicated that traffic studies had been done on Finch Avenue during the
I previously proposed project. He did state the need to look into another study. This
I will be revised and forwarded to the Region again. He also made note that this
i development would have fE!wer units as opposed to the previous plan for
I development, and stressed the high quality of these units. He commented on the
i high level of property management in the existing area.
n'"'1
.:: t
He indicated that the height of some of the existing trees would be in excess of 60
feet, quite possibly higher than the proposed units. He stated the units would be
condo style and the approximate values would range from $275,000 for 1,700 square
feet up to $325,000 to $350,000 for 2,600 square foot units. The exterior finish would
be composed of man made! stone and brick, which would be compatible with
surrounding units. He confirmed walk throughs would not be likely as these are
private units, there being no need to have public walkways. It was noted again that
this development was approximately 100 units less than the application previously
submitted.
Discussion ensued on the problems with walkways as well as the plans for garbage
removal. It was noted that this would be dealt with during the site plan approval
process, and that they were looking for direction in this regard.
4. Comments from the Chair
Councillor Dickerson thanked the applicant and the neighbours for coming out and
I voicing their concerns. He also reminded everyone to sign the sheets in order to keep
I informed on the matter.
I
I
i
i
. i
, I
~._---t
! I
i I
i '
I '
f---u___u ..1__._______..___
, I
l_______-..J
The meeting adjourned at 7:55 pm
Page 4
CORP0228-2102
Pym, Ross
(~ r. t;
'- ... l,)
t.Tl/l,CHMENT # _ h TO
FlU'ORT # PO /5 - 0 -7
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Vanessa Neahr
Thursday, February 08, 2007 8: 18 AM
Pym, Ross
2000 Brock Road, Part of Lots 19, Concession 1, City of Pickering
Further to your notice concerning the proposal of the 71 townhouse
dwelling units at the above mentioned location, my family and I wish to
voice our concerns.
Due to the fact that our 3 storey townhouse faces this lot with our
balcony being on the 2nd level of the building, we am very upset to see
how this will affect our standard of living and we strongly feel that
this will substantially lower the real estate value of our unit. We
have worked very hard in the past several years to live in the comfort
we have become accustom to which could be thrown out the window in one
fell swoop.
We don't see from the submitted plan where there is going to be any type
of landscaping in the area that faces our townhouse which to a certain
extent could enhance the view.
1i lon't know the type of townhouses that are being proposed. If the
plan is approved,we would like some consideration be given to see
townhouses which would at least be comparable to ours that are currently
valued in the neighbourhood of $300,000.
As mentioned, we are very distraught with this proposal and would ask
that council reconsider the plan to encompass the above mentioned items.
Thank you for your consideration.
Vanessa Neahr
209 - 1995 Royal Road
Pickering, ON
L1V 6V9
1
Page 1 of 1
e' . , .' ,. .," "T Jl 1-' " ,-
. ~ A~"_,h:..-..:J/, tf ___, U
,,,;. ,,'," PD' /5 ~ n. -z
r;,Lr~.)r"' ~ JJ f ____,...f.&<:........ ...__....
Pym, Ross
nnn
\. .:.."'')
From: Cheryl England
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2007 3:09 PM
To: Pym, Ross
Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment ,A,pplication - A 10/06
Ross:
I received the Jan 18, 2007 Notice re Zoning By-law Amendment Appliction - A 10/06 re Couglan
Homes 2000 Brock Rd., and will be a.ttending the Feb 15th public meeting.
Please find below the questions/comments I would like to raise at this meeting:
1. Net Density of 44 unitslhectare is higher than city target of25 units/hectare.
Density of 44 uph with 9 buildings and 71 dwellings is high.
2) Access to property - traffic congestion
a) Access to property's Finch Ave. driveway (from westbound on Finch) may create
traffic blockage as it is currently a 2 lane road, with no left turn lane. What are plans to
solve this?
b) Access to property's Brock Rd. driveway (from northbound on Brock) may create
traffic blockage, or cars will go nOlih to Finch and then problem a) will result.
What are plans to solve this?
c) Intersection at Brock Rd. & Kingston Rd (Type "A" Arterial Roads) is busy already and
to avoid a) and b) above, cars may bypass this intersection, and cut onto Royal Rd ( a
"Collector" Rd) for easier access to Finch eastbound and property's Finch driveway.
What are plans to solve this?
3) Road Classification
In the 2001 Zoning By-Law application A24/01 for this property - Finch Ave. was designated as a Type
"C" Arterial Rd, but in current application it is classed as a Type "B" Arterial Rd.
My concern ties in with question 2 above re Finch Ave, (which effectively terminates at Brock)
currently being a 2 lane road.
a) When was the classification changed re Finch Ave. and why?
b) Does this area on Finch Ave. hav\:: a right-of-way width ranging between 30 & 36 meters.
Regards
Cheryl England
1995 Royal Rd
Pickering, Ontario
2/13/2007
onserRvaNiWn
,.. '"'I
r~' ;'t~r The Living City
January 22, 2006
8
/5 0-7
.~
.;q
CFN 38708.01
X-REF CFN 32928.08
VIA FAX AND MAIL (905) 420-~r648
Mr. Ross Pym
Planning & Development Department
Pickering Civic Complex
1 The Esplanade
Pickering ON L 1 V 6K7
Dear Mr. Pym:
Re: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 10/06
Southwest Corner of Brock Road and Finch Avenue
.Part of Lot 19, Concession 1
(Cougs Investments Limited)
Thank you for your circulation of the above noted application. Staff at the Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) have now had an opportunity to review the application and wish
to provide the following comments:
Background
We understand that the purpose of the application is to amend the current zoning in effect on
the subject lands in order to remove the requirements related to multiple vertical dwellings and
to provide for the construction of 71 ground-related townhouse dwelling units on the site. TRCA
staff provided comment upon a previous zoning by-law amendment application (A 24/01) for the
subject lands in a letter dated August 16, 2002.
Applicable Regulation and Policy
To the north of the subject lands, beyond Finch Avenue, are the Duffins Creek and associated
valleylands. Due to this c10SenE!SS to the Duffins Creek, the subject lands are susceptible to
flooding and are within the Regional Storm Flood Plain. Accordingly, pursuant to Ontario
Regulation 166/06 (TRCA Regulation of Development, Interference with Wetlands and
Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses) the majority of the subject lands are within the
Regulated Area. As such, the owner is required to obtain a permit from TRCA prior to
Development taking place within the Regulated Area.
Development is defined as:
i) the construction, reconstruction, erection or placing of a building or structure of any kind,
ii) any change to a building or structure that would have the effect of altering the use or
potential use of the building or structure, increasing the size of the building or structure
or increasing the number of dwelling units in the building or structure,
iii) site grading,
iv) the temporary or permanent placing, dumping or removal of any material, originating on
the site or elsewhere.
In addition to the requirements of Ontario Regulation 166/06, the subject lands are within the
Flood Plain Special Policy Area and Shorelines and Stream Corridors designations as shown on
Schedule III to the City of Pickering Official Plan. The land use policies associated with these
."...=>,E:.1H9m51.\p-J!gEg\Plt\[~LQPJU\'lnt~,~1~E;!mQ"\J[J)a~~~g~qn\l3f.~~q~~~o9~~gR 1.;w.<L.~~",=.=~__"_..,,_~,._~ "'.0 ..~___~_=_>_~.."
5 5horeham Drive, Downsview.. Ontario M3N 154 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 ww:'.t~ca~o~.~a-' ., . ;'@\
B
15-07
Mr. Ross Pym
- 2 -
January 22, 2007
'\ f) <'I
C'..JJ.
designations provide for the development of these lands, despite the current flood risk, provided
that engineering studies related to the flood risk are submitted and appropriate flood proofing
measures can be employed in the design of the development.
Recommendation
. Based upon our review and our understanding of the application as articulated above, we have
no objection to the application. However, in considering future applications which may seek to
implement the proposed zoning, such as a site plan or plan of condominium, we will require the
following information to be submitted to TRCA for review and approval:
. 1. An engineering study, prepared by a qualified professional, which demonstrates that the
proposed development has been flood proofed to the elevation of the Regional Storm
Flood Plain plus an appropriate allowance for freeboard and that 'safe' ingress and
egress can be maintained to the site;
2. Plans and documents which describe the proposed stormwater management scheme
for the subject lands; and,
. 3. Erosion and sediment control and grading plans along with an application pursuant to
Ontario Regulation 166/06 for development within the Regulated Area.
We trust that this is of assistance. Please provide a copy of the Notice of Decision to the
undersigned should one be prepared. Please contact the undersigned if any clarification is
required.
Yours truly,
~r
Chris Jones, B.U.R.PI.
Planner II
Planning and Development
Extension 5718
CJ/
cc: Gary Templeton, Templeton Planning Ltd. (Via FAX 905-727-8890)
Steve Heuchert, TRCA
F:\Home\Public\Development Services\Durtlam Region\Pickering\2000 Brock Road_1.wpd
The Regional
Municipality
of Durham
Planning Department
605 ROSSLAND ROAD E
4TH FLOOR
P.O. BOX 623
WHITBY, ON L 1N 6A3
(905) 668-7711
Fax: (905) 666-6208
E-mail: planning@
19ion.durham.on.ca
www.region.durham.on.ca
A.L. Georgieff, MCIP, RPP
Commissioner of Planning
February 13, 200i'
" r, "
',-'~.::...
Ross Pym, MCIP, RPP
Planning and Development Department
City of Pickering
One The Esplanade
Pickering, Ontario
L 1V 6K7
q 1
/5-07
Sent via em ail to:
rpvm@citV.pickerinQ.on.ca
Mr. Pym:
Re: Zoning Amendment Application A 10/06
Applicant: Coughlan Homes
Location: 2000 Brock Road
Southwest corner of Brock Road and Finch Avenue
Municipality: City of Pickering
We have reviewed this application to amend the zoning of the subject property to permit
71 townhouse units. The existing zoning category permits an apartment building and
30 townhouses units. The following comments are offered.
Reaional Officia~ Plan
The lands subject to this application are designated "Living Area" in the Durham
Regional Official Plan. "Living Areas" are predominantly for housing purposes. Living
Areas should be developed in compact form through higher densities and by
intensifying and fl3developing existing areas, particularly along arterial roads. Living
areas should also be developed with particular consideration for supporting and
providing access to public transit.
Council adopted Amendment 114 designates lands adjacent to Brock Road as
"Regional Corridor" within the "Living Area". "Regional Corridors" are to be planned and
developed as mixed-use areas, which include residential, commercial and service areas
with higher densities, supporting higher order transit services and featuring a high
degree of pedestrian oriented design. "Regional Corridors" should provide efficient
transportation links to the Regional Centres as well as other centres in adjacent
municipalities. Amendment 114 further designates Brock Road and Finch Avenue as
"Transit Spines" which should compliment higher density and mixed uses.
Provincial Policies & Oeleaated Review Responsibilities
This application has been screened in accordance with the terms of the provincial plan
review responsibilities. As the subject property is adjacent to Brock Road and Finch
Avenue a noise study will be required to identify noise mitigation measures and warning
clauses from vehicular noise generated on Regional Roads. Regional traffic forecast
data is available from this department and is to be used in noise analysis calculations.
The noise study may be submitted to this department for review.
Reaional Servicles
Municipal water supply is available to the subject property by extending an existing 300
mm watermain on Finch Avenue. Sanitary sewer services are available from an
existing 250 mm sanitary sewer on Finch Avenue.
PL,,,.
9
..1.2,:.//7.
Page 2
f~I)'"
\.0d
Transportation and Access
Brock Road (Regional Road 1) is designated as a Type "An arterial road in the Durham
Regional Official Plan. Type "An arterial roads are typically comprised of a width of 36
to 50 metres. A minimum road width of 22.5 metres from the centre line of Brock Road
to subject property will be required. Finch Avenue (Regional Road 37) is designated as
a Type "B" arterial road and typically ranges from 30 to 36 metres in width. A minimum
of 18~0 metres will be required from the centerline of Finch Avenue to the subject
property.
In addition to the road width requirements identified in the Regional Official Plan, the
Works Department has provided preliminary requirements for access to the site.
Acce.ss from Brock Road is to be right-in / right-out movements only. Reconstruction of
the existing centre raised median and a southbound right turn lane into the site will be
required.
An eastbound right turn lane will be required for access from Finch Avenue. A
geometric design which accommodates back to back left turn demands for the
proposed Finch Avenue access and vehicles turning left at the west approach of Finch
Avenue and Brock Road will also be required. Detailed transportation comments
including access and sight triangle requirements will be provided upon submission of a
site plan application to the Works Department.
Comments
Based on the foregoing, the proposal appears to be permitted by the policies of the
Regional Official Plan. However, as the lands are located at a prominent intersection
and are of a size that could accommodate more intensive residential development, City
staff should consider the residential densities generated by this proposal. A high
density development, such as an apartment building, would facilitate the intensification
targets identified in Growth Plan policies as well as be more consistent with the Council
adopted policies of Amendment 114.
If you have any questions or require further information, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
/j/-''j /f
U4 Yl1 ~ hvV (
'.
Dwayne Campbell, Planner
Current Plannin~1
Cc (via email): Regional Works Department - Peter Castellan
. ~! f"; :
/0
/ 5..{) 7
" f)"
l'.::J,:t
o\..\C DIS1.tjl;.
~y: ('I'
v'?' &
~ q.
:E '6
a: r
=> . OJ
Rl C .r-r~r:"" ~ \ .f.l""" ~o 2
. ~_ .{.,. :F" . 1.f *"'" ~
~ ~ ~ ~~. G
The Durham Catholic District School Board
January 23, 2007
J!4r.j 2 5 10G7
City of Pickering
Planning & Development Department
Pickering Civic Complex
One The Esplanade
Pickering, ON L 1V 6K7
C;TY OF P!CKERING
~';.ANNl!\iG & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTP"lENT
Dear Mr. Ross Pym
RE: :ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT A10/06
Coughlan Homes
.2000 Brock Road
Part of Lots 19, Concession 1
City of Pickerin~l
Staff at the Durham Catholic District School Board have reviewed the above mentioned
application and have no objection.
The subject lands affected by this application fall within the catchment area of St. Wilfrid
Catholic Elementary School, located at 2360 Southcott Road in Pickering.
We wish to be notified of the passing of a zoning by-law or of the decision of the City
respecting the rezoning appliGation.
Should you have any questions or concerns, please call me.
Best regards,
.~/vr/lJ! ~fi~'
./
Anne Dobos
Assistant Planner
ad
cc: Debi Bentley, City Clerk
652 Rossland Road West, Oshawa, Ontario L 1 J 8M7
Tel 905 576-6150 Toll Free 1 877 482-0722
Patricia A. Manson B.A., M. Ed., Director of Education / Secretary / Treasurer
REPORT TO
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE
Report Number: PD 14-07
Date: May 7, 2007
From:
Neil Carroll
Director, Plannin!~ & Development
,... r) f"Ii'
c.',j,j
Subject:
Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006
Bill 51
Recommendation:
1. That Pickering Council receive and endorse Report PD 14-07 on the Planning and
Conservation Land Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006, Bill 51 ;
2. That Pickering Council direct City staff to proceed with the required administrative
changes to the plannin!~ process, as set out in the Planning and Conservation
Land Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006, Bill 51 ;
3. That Pickering Council direct City staff to report, through the recently initiated
Official Plan Review, on the policy changes required to implement various new
development controls made available to municipalities through the Planning and
Conservation Land Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006, including complete
applications, zoning with conditions, employment land redesignation,
development permit system and external/sustainable design elements;
4. That Pickering Council enact a by-law to delegate to the Director, Planning &
Development or his dE~signate, responsibility for determining whether certain
Planning Act applications constitute complete applications, as set out in
Appendix I to Report PD 14-07, and
5. Further, that the option to establish a Local Appeal Body for decisions of the
Committee of Adjustm€~nt not be pursued at this time, due to the associated
administrative and financial requirements.
Executive Summary: The Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law
Amendment Act, (the Act) Bill ~)1, received Royal Assent on October 19, 2006, and was
proclaimed on January 1, 2007. This Act introduces a number of changes to the
Planning Act and certain aspects of the land use planning process, provides additional
development control tools to municipalities, and sets out new rules related to Ontario
Municipal Board (OMB) appeals. Further, a number of new and revised Regulations
were filed on December 13, 2006, which provide greater detail on implementation of the
Act. Other Regulations have yet to be finalized. The focus of the Act is to provide
municipalities with greater control on the implementation of provincial policies and
supports more sustainable development and intensification while making the planning
process more open and transparent.
Report PO 14-07
Date: May 7, 2007
Subject: Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law
r' '" ,..Amendment Act, 2006 (Bill 51)
~,-' .:J \1
Page 2
Financial Implications: There may be additional costs associated with
advertising/mailing procedures resulting from the Act and its associated Regulations.
For privately initiated applications these additional advertising/mailing costs will be
minor, if any. For City initiated Official Plan amendments and rezoning applications,
additional cost will be incurred due to the requirement to host and advertise public
information meetings.
The immediate actions required by the Act and recommended in this report will not
have significant financial implications on the City. However, some of the requirements
of the Act will have financial implications on the City in the future. The requirement for
the City to update all its zoning by-laws will have an impact on City financial and staffing
resources as it is anticipated that a major zoning by-law review will be required. The
establishment of a local appeal body for decisions of the Committee of Adjustment
would also have major financial implications if implemented. However staff are not
recommending that such action be pursed.
Sustainability Implications: The Act provides new tools that will strengthen the
ability of the City to promote sustainable development and supports the City's recent
sustainability initiatives. The 113gislation enhances the principles of sustainability and is
reflective of the Provincial policy to promote and achieve a more sustainable future.
Background:
1.0 Introduction
As part of the Province's planning reform initiative to improve the land use
planning system and build strong communities, the Province has been
introducing changes to different aspects of the planning system. The Act is
intended to help municipalities to better address certain issues such as
environmental protection, brownfield redevelopment, intensification, sustainable
development and making the appeal process more effective. The Act represents
the Province's second phase of planning reform. The first phase of planning
reform was the introduction of the Strong Communities Act (Bill 26), the 2005
Provincial Policy Statements, and the Greenbelt Plan. The Act outlines several
long awaited reforms to the municipal land use planning process, including some
changes to the role of the OMB.
A number of changes will directly affect the way development applications are
submitted, processed by the City, approved by Council and appealed to the
OMB. One of the goals of the new legislation is to provide municipalities with
greater control over the development approval process. The Province has also
reviewed the role of the OMB to ensure that Ontario has an open, fair and
transparent land use planning appeal process. With the changes introduced
through the Act, the planning process should become more transparent and
accessible to the public.
Report PD 14-07
Date: May 7,2007
Subject: Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law
Amendment Act, 2006 (Bill 51)
Page 3
!"'~ rj (.-.1
C'\:) t
The Act received Royal Assent on October 19, 2006, and was proclaimed on
January 1, 2007. The purpose of the Act is to:
· Provide new planning rules and planning tools to strengthen implementation
of provincial policies and municipal priorities;
· Provide new rules for information, materials and parties at OMB hearings and
allow the option for municipalities to establish a local appeal board; and
· Provide other technical amendments to the Planning Act that would improve
administrative planning processes, and clarify existing provisions in the
Planning Act and related regulations.
2.0 Discussion
The main features of the Act are highlighted below for Council's information.
Certain aspects of the Act are of significant interest to the City and will warrant
more detailed investigation, which is proposed to be undertaken through the
recently initiated Official Plan Review.
2.1 Updating Official Plan and Zoning By-laws
The City is now required to update its planning documents (Official Plan and
zoning by-laws) on a re!Jular basis to ensure that the most current provincial and
municipal planning policy and objectives are incorporated into the planning
documents. The City is required to revise its Official Plan at least every five years.
The revised Official Plan must conform with Provincial plans, and be consistent
with Provincial Policy Statements. The five year review shall also consider polices
dealing with the removal of employment lands as these polices must be confirmed
or amended.
A review of the City's Official Plan has been initiated through Report PD 04-07
and the special meeting of Council is scheduled for May 22, 2007.
To ensure the City's zoning by-laws conform to the Official Plan, the City is now
required to update the zoning by-laws no later than three years after the Official
Plan revisions come into effect. The update is to ensure the zoning by-law
conforms to the updatEld official plan, thereby conforming to provincial plans,
matters of provincial interest, and the Provincial Policy Statements.
The need to update the City's zoning by-laws will require the City to undertake a
complete comprehensiv,e zoning by-law review to bring the zoning by-laws up to
date with the Official Plan. This would be a significant undertaking for the City
that would impact staffs work program, demand allocation of significant staff
resources, and impact the department workload and budget. The specific
financial requirements to undertake a full update of the City's zoning by-laws
requires further review.
Report PO 14-07
Date: May 7, 2007
Subject: Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law
_. ,..,Amendment Act, 2006 (Bill 51)
; 'Jd
Page 4
2.2 Development Application Processing
One of the intentions of the Act is to make the planning process more
transparent and accessible. The requirement for updated official plans and
zoning by-law will provide greater clarity for land use decisions. When a
municipality is preparing municipally initiated official plan and zoning
amendments, a public open house is now required in addition to the public
information meeting, thereby providing an additional opportunity for participation
and consultation by the public and stakeholders.
Pre-consultation
City Council has the opltion to pass a by-law, requiring applicants to consult with
the City before the formal submission of development applications. This
requirement is to ensure applicants are fully aware of minimum application
requirements, City development objectives and other agencies that should be
consulted in order to conduct an appropriate review of the application. Staff's
current practice is to highly encourage applicants to pre-consult in order to
identify potential issues and application requirements. This process is working
well. The need for this requirement to be included as Official Plan policy, will be
considered through the Official Plan Review. Staff will further review this issue
and report to Council if our experience changes.
Complete Application
The City may also establish by means of Official Plan policies, what information
is required to constitute a complete application. Currently the Planning Act only
requires basic minimum information and does not require detailed technical
information. The City now has the option to establish minimum requirements
that need to be submitted with development applications prior to the formal
commencement of the processing of the application. This will result in a more
open process as all required information will be submitted and available for all to
review at the front-end of the planning process. The establishment of 'complete
application' requirements will be reviewed through the Official Plan Review.
The Act now requires that Council determine if an application is complete within
30 days of submission of the application. It is recommended that this
responsibility for this determination be delegated to staff to ensure that
applications are processed in a timely matter and that Council is not burdened
with application processing matters. It is recommended that the Director,
Planning & Development, or his designate, be delegated the responsibility to
determine if applications are complete and appropriate to commence processing.
A draft by-law to delegate the authority of determining whether development
submissions constitute 'complete applications' is provided as Appendix I to this
report.
Report PO 14-07
Date: May 7, 2007
Subject: Plann;ng and ConservaUon Land Statute Law
Amendment Act, 2006 (Bill 51)
Page 5
n q.""
;.. .J.1
Complete Application Notice
The City is required to give notice that an application is complete and to make all
submitted information available to the public within 15 days of determining the
application is complete. The notice of a complete application must be given in the
same manner as notice of public meetings. The notice of a complete application
may be given together with notice of a public meeting provided the public meeting
can be scheduled within the required time frame. If it is determined that the public
meeting cannot be scheduled at the time of giving notice of the complete
application, then notice will be given separately. The notice will also state all the
information that has been submitted and available for review.
Applicabilitv of Provincial Policies and Plans
All new planning applications must be considered on the basis of the Provincial
plans and policies (i.e. Greenbelt Plan and Growth Plan for the Greater Golden
Horseshoe) in effect at the time of the decision, not those in place at the time of
application. This applies to all applications submitted on or after the date the
legislation came into effect, being January 1, 2007. Applications submitted prior
to this date will still be considered by the previous standard, being the Provincial
plans and polices in effe.ct at the time of the application submission. This means
all new applications will be considered in accordance with the most up to date
provincial plans and policies. All applications for subdivisions and amendments
to the Official Plan and zoning by-law require a statement from the applicant
whether the application is consistent with provincial polices and provincial plans.
Further, if any of these applications are appealed to the OMB, a statement from
City staff is required as to whether the Council decision is consistent with
provincial policies and plans.
Development Permit System
The Act allows the option for municipalities to establish a Development Permit
System (DPS), which is a development application review process that combines
zoning, minor variance and site plan applications into one process. The intent is
that a DPS would be used for very specific proposals that meet specific minimum
requirements.
In order to establish a DPS the City must adopt Official Plan polices related to
the specific circumstance that would need to be met and adopt a Development
Permit By-law. The DPS must describe the municipal goals, objectives and
policies in the enabling Official Plan polices. A development permit by-law must
set out and define the pl3rmitted uses and minimum and maximum development
standards. While a DPS will provide a very specialized planning tool for unique
land use considerations, its implementation would require significant upfront
planning. The utilization of DPS will be investigated further through the Official
Plan Review. At this time a DPS is not being recommended.
Report PO 14-07
Date: May 7,2007
Subject: Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law
(, ,A "Amendment Act, 2006 (Bill 51)
'- '"J: v
Page 6
2.3 Zoning with Conditions
The City will be able to impose conditions when approving zoning applications.
While the Act does not specify the nature of the conditions that can be imposed,
it does allow the Province to pass regulations prescribing the type of conditions
that can be imposed and the manner in which they can be imposed. The
Province has not yet issued a regulation setting out the types of conditions that
may be imposed. In order for the City to utilize conditional zoning it must first
adopt Official Plan policies. The City may require an applicant to enter into an
agreement related to the conditions of approval of a rezoning and may register
the agreement on title. Further review will be undertaken upon receipt of
regulations from the Province.
2.4 OMS Reform
Appeal Period
Currently, the Planning Act allows an indefinite appeal period for Official Plan
and zoning by-law amendment applications that are refused by the City. This
means applicants can appeal a municipality's decision to refuse an application
anytime after the Council decision. The Act now establishes a fixed 20-day
appeal period for thesH applications. This time period is consistent with the
appeal permitted on other decisions of Council on similar development
applications.
Employment Lands
The Act now allows the City to adopt Official Plan policies that restrict the
redesignation of employment land for another use. If such polices are adopted,
then there are no appeal rights related to the City's refusal of Official Plan
amendment or zoning by-law amendment applications to convert employment
lands to non-employment lands.
Appeal Riqhts
The Act provides clearer description as to who can file an appeal of a planning
application to the OMB. The Act confirms that only persons or public bodies who
made oral submissions at a public meeting or written submissions to Council, the
applicant or the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing will be permitted to file
an appeal or be a party to a hearing involving an official plan, zoning or
subdivision matter. New provisions allow the OMB to add a person as a party to
the hearing only if, in the Board's opinion, there are reasonable grounds to do so.
Report PO 14-07
Date: May 7,2007
Subject: Planning and ConsE~rvation Land Statute Law
Amendment Act, 2006 (Bill 51)
Page 7
"4 c
f .
\. . .I..
Council Decision
The Act includes a provision requiring the OMB and other approval authorities
(i.e. the Region with respect to local Official Plan Amendments) to have regard to
decisions made by municipal councils and approval authorities relating to the
same planning matters. This means that Council's position on planning
applications will carry more weight in the appeal deliberation by the OMB.
OMB Process
Other reforms to the OMB process include:
· Requires that appeals be based on material/information that was available
and before the municipal council at the time the council made its decision.
· If new information/material is permitted to be presented at an OMB hearing
due to special circumstances, the OMB will determine if this new information
would have had an impact on the council decision, and if this is the case, the
OMB may adjourn tine hearing and allow the municipal council an opportunity
to review the new information/material and reconsider its decision.
· Appeals to Ministers Zoning Orders may be restricted if the Minister is of the
opinion that all or any part of the change adversely affects matters of
provincial interest.
· Allows the OMB to dismiss an appeal without a hearing if it is determined the
appellant has persistently and without reasonable grounds commenced an
appeal.
· No appeals are allowed regarding Council's adoption of Official Plan policies
or the passing of zoning by-laws permitting accessory dwelling units.
· Allows municipalities the option to establish a local appeal body that could
hear appeals related to decisions of the Committee of Adjustment.
2.5 Sustainable Development
The Planning Act now includes sustainable development as a matter of
Provincial interest that all approval bodies shall have regard to. The Act
provides new planning rules and tools to facilitate intensification, brownfield
redevelopment, sustainable development, and environmentally sound
community/design features.
The strengthening of the legislation related to sustainable development is
welcomed, as it will enable municipalities to achieve increased levels of
sustainable development.
Report PO 14-07
Date: May 7,2007
Subject: Planning and Cons€~rvation Land Statute Law
C 4 ~mendment Act, 2006 (Bill 51)
Page 8
The Act provides clarity that municipalities may exercise control to regulate
density and the character and scale of development while supporting
intensification. This area of control relates to general urban design and built
form. Prior to the Act, the City exercised control over minimum and maximum
heights and density through some of its zoning by-laws. However, this legislative
change provides clarity that controls may be imposed in these important areas,
and will assist in the City's intensification initiatives.
In dealing with applications for approval of plan of subdivisions the efficient use
and conservation of energy is now part of the required considerations during the
approval process. Also dealing with subdivision applications, the City can now
require the dedication of land not only for roads, but also for transit rig ht-of-ways ,
pedestrian and bicycle pathways.
Under the existing Planning Act the City has only limited control over the exterior
design of buildings. The Act gives municipalities additional powers as part of the
site plan approval process. The City will have the ability to comment on matters
related to exterior design, including the character, scale, appearance and design
features of buildings, and their sustainable design. In order to address exterior
design the City must include related design elements in Official Plan polices.
The exterior/sustainable design requirements must also be include in the Site
Plan Control By-law. The legislation also provides clarification as part of the site
plan approval process respecting facilities designed to have regard for
accessibility for persons with disabilities.
This change would allow the City greater control in the site plan approval
process, upon the adoption by Council of Official Plan polices and revision to
the Site Plan Control By-law that will outline the specific design requirements.
This will permit the City to achieve a higher level of urban design. The objective
to strive for a greater degree of sustainable design is aligned with current City
initiatives.
2.6 Community ImprovemEmt Plans
The Act makes changes to Community Improvement Plan (CIP) to include costs
associated with energy efficient land use and buildings and for affordable
housing. Municipalities are now able to offer grants and/or loans as part of CIP
for development or redevelopment proposals that achieve these goals. The Act
allows upper tier muniClipalities to participate in lower tier CIP and vice versa,
through grants and loans. Certain administrative changes have been included in
the legislation that improves the implementation of CIP.
Report PO 14-07
Date: May 7,2007
Subject: Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law
Amendment Act, 2006 (Bill 51)
Page 9
" If'"
~. ':t ...J
2.7 Local Appeal Body
The Act allows municipalities to establish a local appeal body that would hear
appeals to decisions of the Committee of Adjustment. Local appeal bodies must
operate in the same manner as the OMB as they will have all the powers of the
OMB in dealing with the appeals that they hear.
The establishment of a local appeal body is not mandatory, but is optional.
Although the establishment of a local appeal body would allow for more local
decision making, the administration, functioning and cost of operating the local
appeal body would be the responsibility of the City. This will place demands on
the City's financial and staff resources to perform all the administrative duties
required for a local appeal body. While a local appeal body may work well in
very large municipalities, it is not recommended that the City take advantage of
this option. If the City chooses not to set up a local appeal body, then the OMB
would continue to hear all appeals. Currently there are not frequent appeals of
Committee of Adjustment decisions, and our experience has been that the OMB
process works well and efficiently for these matters. Any benefits gained by local
decision making are not considered sufficient to offset the costs associated with
establishing a local appeal body.
2.8 Conservation Land Act Reform
The changes to the Conservation Land Act enhance the usability of conservation
easements to protect water quality and quantity, including the protection of
drinking water sources and watershed protection and management and further
purposes as may be added by provincial regulation. The provisions in the
legislation enhance environmental conservation by improving the use of
conservation easements as a tool to support the long-term stewardship and
protection of agricultural lands, natural heritage areas and watershed features on
private lands.
A conservation easement is a restriction, registered on the title to a property,
which protects important natural features on that property by limiting
development and/or restricting certain land uses for the term of the easement.
3.0 Discussion
The Act modifies some of the land use planning process and provides additional
planning tools for the City to implement its Official Plan. The planning reforms
will assist the City in achieving to a greater degree sustainable development,
create a more transparent land use planning process, provide for more municipal
control of the decision making process and to provide municipalities increased
control over development design.
Report PO 14-07
Date: May 7,2007
Subject: Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law
(~4 /Amendment Act, 2006 (Bill 51)
'- ":t
Page 10
A number of the proposed reforms deal with issues/subject matters that are
already being put into practice in Pickering. These include the requirement for a
higher level of sustainable development, a more accessible planning process,
pre-consultations with applicants and the desire for greater control over the
decision making process. The overall vision and direction of the Act is
supported.
A number of the new planning tools and process reforms require some action by
municipalities in order to be utilized. This is either the adoption of Official Plan
policies such as defining the requirements for a complete application, regulating
external/sustainable building design and/or the passing of by-laws to implement the
requirement for pre-consultation. Appendix II is a chart that indicates if and what
action is required in order for the City to utilize some of the provisions of the Act.
APPENDICIE5:
Appendix I: Draft Delegation By-law
Appendix II: Planning Revisions Chart
RO~~IP'~
Principal Planner - Development Review
Approved I Endorsed By:
Neil~
Director, Planning & Development
Prepared By:
RP:ld
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering City C cil
rf
/I
DRAFT DELEGATION BY-LAW
APPENDIX I TO
REPORT PD 14-07
"4 -
, ~ .
< v
1~"4G
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING
BY-lAW NO.
DIlAFT
Being a By-law to delegate certain authority under the Planning Act
to the Director, Planning & Development.
WHEREAS Section 23.1 of the Municipal Act, S.D. 2001, c.25, as amended, a
municipality has the authority to pass a by-law to delegate certain responsibilities;
WHEREAS the Planning Act requires that Council within 30 days of the submission of
certain applications for approval under the Planning Act to notify the applicant whether
the application is complete;
AND WHEREAS in order to obtain greater efficiency in the administration of processing
certain applications for approval under the Planning Act, it is deemed expedient to
delegate the determination and notification of complete applications to the Director,
Planning & Development.
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCil OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING
HEREBY ENACTS AS FOllOWS:
1. The Director, Planning & Development is delegated all of the Council's authority
under Sections 22 (6.1), 34 (10.4) and 51 (19.1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O.
1990, c. P. 13 as amended.
2. The authority delegated to the Director, Planning & Development under Section 1
of this By-law may be assigned by the Director to one or more designates in
order to facilitate timely application processing.
BY-lAW read a first, second, and third time and finally passed this _ day of
May, 2007.
David Ryan, MayO~~
~~~
Debi A. Bentley, City Clerk
APPENDIX II TO
REPORT PD 14-07
PLANNING REVISIONS UNDER PLANNING AND CONSER VA TION
LAND STA TUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 2006
(~4 ~'"
'- t
C" 4 3 PLANNING REVISIONS UNDER PLANNING AND CONSER VA TION
LAND STATUTE LAW AMENDMENT ACT, 2006
Requires to be met prior to implementation
New Provision Effective Official Plan Implementing Up to Date
Immediately Policies By-law Official Plan and
ZoninQ By-law
Establishment of Local ~ ~ ~
Appeal Body for Minor
Variance Appeals
Limiting the appeal rights ~
for parties and public
bod ies
Limiting party status at ~
hearings
Allowing municipal
councils to make ~
recommendations where
new information is
presented at hearings
Defining the requirements ~
of a complete application
Establishing the
requirement for pre- ~
consultation prior to
application submission
Implement a Development ~ ~
Permit System
Implementing zoning with ~
conditions
Limiting appeal rights ~
regarding accessory
dwelling units
Limiting appeal rights ~
regarding employment
land conversions
Regulating design of
buildings for external ~
sustainable design
features
Regulating minimum ~
height and density
REPORT TO
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE
Report Number: PD 12-07
Date: May 7, 2007
('43
From:
Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
Subject:
J.D.S. Investments Limited
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1231
Almack Construction Limited
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1427
Sand bury Building Corporation
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1437
Plan 40R-9929
Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision
Recommendation:
1. That Report PD 12-07 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding the
Assumption of Plans 40M-1231, 40M-1427, 40M-1437 and 40R-9929, be
received;
2. That the highways being Diefenbaker Court, Pickering Parkway, The Esplanade
South and Valley Farm Road within Plan 40M-1231 be assumed for public use;
3. That the highways being Livingston Street and Bovingdon Place within Plan
40M-1427 be assumed for public use;
4. That the highways being Daylight Court, Cattail Court, Rainy Day Drive, Edmund
Drive, Sundown Crescent, Lightfoot Place and Steeple Hill within Plan 40M-1437,
and the connecting link of Steeple Hill (Part 2, 40R-9929) be assumed for public
use;
5. That the services required by the Subdivision Agreements relating to Plans
40M-1231, 40M-1427, 40M-1437 and a portion of 40R-9929, which are
constructed, installed or located on lands dedicated to, or owned by the City, or on
lands lying immediatoly adjacent thereto, including lands that are subject to
easements transferred to the City, be accepted and assumed for maintenance,
save and except from Blocks 19 to 24, Plan 40M-1231 , the remainder of Block 25,
Plan 40M-1231 and all of Block 22, Plan 40M-1427;
6. That the Subdivision Agreements and any amendments thereto relating to Plans
40M-1231, 40M-1427 and 40M-1437 be released and removed from title;
Report PD 12-07
May 7, 2007
Subject: Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision
'" w- -40M-1231 40M-1427 and 40M-1437
LJd '
Page 2
7. That By-law 1416/82 (Places of Amusement) be amended to include the roads
being Diefenbaker Court, Pickering Parkway, The Esplanade South and Valley
Farm Road within Plan 40M-1231;
8. That By-law 1416/82 (Places of Amusement) be amended to include the roads
being Livingston Street and Bovingdon Place within Plan 40M-1427;
9. That By-law 1416/82 (Places of Amusement) be amended to include the roads
being Daylight Court, Cattail Court, Rainy Day Drive, Edmund Drive, Sundown
Crescent, Lightfoot Place and Steeple Hill within Plan 40M-1437 and the
connecting link of Steeple Hill, being Part 2, Plan 40R-9929;
10. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate Blocks 17 and 18, Plan 40M-1231 as
public highway; and
11. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate that part of Block 25, Plan 40M-1231,
designated as Part 1, Plan 40R-21924 as public highway.
Executive Summary: The City entered into Subdivision Agreements with the
above-noted developers for the development of Plans 40M-1231, 40M-1427, 40M-1437
and a portion of 40R-9929. As all works and services within these plans have been
completed to the satisfaction of City staff, it is appropriate to assume the roads and
services within these plans under the jurisdiction of the City and release the developers
from the provisions of the Subdivision Agreements.
Financial Implications: There are no new financial implications to the City as a
result of this recommendation.
Sustainability Implications: The final assumption of these plans of subdivision is
an administrative process that legally concludes the City's acquisition of necessary
roads and other infrastructure. It does not directly impact the City's sustainability
initiatives.
Background: The City entered into Subdivision Agreements with the above-noted
developers for the development of Plans 40M-1231, 40M-1427, 40M-1437 and a
portion of 40R-9929. As the developers have now completed all works and services to
the satisfaction of City staff, it is appropriate to assume the roads and services within
these Plans, save and except from:
1. Blocks 19 to 23,
Plan 40M-1231
Pickering Parkway Reserve Blocks
- not to be dedicated at this time;
Report PO 12-07
May 7, 2007
Subject: Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision
40M-1231, 40M-1427 and 40M-1437
Page 3
...." r--'".a
l':.Ji
2. Block 24 and the remainder
of Block 25, Plan 40M-1231
Diefenbaker Court Reserve Blocks
- not to be dedicated; and
3. Block 22,
Plan 40M-1427
Reserve Block
- in the ownership of the Region.
Further, it is also appropriate to release the developers from the provisions of their
respective Agreements with the City, as follows:
1. Plan 40M-1231
Subdivision Agreement dated November 2, 1981 and registered as Instrument
No.LT138858,and
the Amending Subdivision Agreement dated November 20, 1981 and registered
as Instrument No. L T139432;
2. Plan 40M-1427
Subdivision Agreement dated April 21, 1986 and registered as Instrument No.
LT284833;and
3. Plan 40M-1437
Subdivision Agreement dated June 30, 1986 and registered as Instrument No.
LT302907,and
the Amending Subdivision Agreement dated February 19, 1987 and registered
as Instrument No. LT318771.
Accordingly, it is being recommended:
1. That the highways being Diefenbaker Court, Pickering Parkway, The Esplanade
South and Valley Farm Road within Plan 40M-1231 be assumed for public use;
2. That the highways being Livingston Street and Bovingdon Place within Plan
40M-1427 be assumed for public use;
3. That the highways being Daylight Court, Cattail Court, Rainy Day Drive, Edmund
Drive, Sundown Crescent, Lightfoot Place and Steeple Hill within Plan
40M-1437, and the connecting link of Steeple Hill (Part 2, 40R-9929) be
assumed for public use;
4. That the services required by the Subdivision Agreements relating to Plans
40M-1231, 40M-1427, 40M-1437 and a portion of 40R-9929, which are
constructed, installed or located on lands dedicated to, or owned by the City, or
on lands lying immediately adjacent thereto, including lands that are subject to
easements transferred to the City, be accepted and assumed for maintenance,
save and except from Blocks 19 to 24, Plan 40M-1231, the remainder of Block
25, Plan 40M-1231 and all of Block 22, Plan 40M-1427;
Report PD 12-07
May 7, 2007
Subject: Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision
C 5 ;~OM-1231 , 40M-1427 and 40M-1437
Page 4
5. That the Subdivision Agreements and any amendments thereto relating to Plans
40M-1231, 40M-1427 and 40M-1437, be released and removed from title;
6. That By-law 1416/82 (Places of Amusement) be amended to include the roads
being Diefenbaker Court, Pickering Parkway, The Esplanade South and Valley
Farm Road within Plan 40M-1231;
7. That By-law 1416/82 (Places of Amusement) be amended to include the roads
being Livingston Street and Bovingdon Place within Plan 40M-1427;
8. That By-law 1416/82 (Places of Amusement) be amended to include the roads
being Daylight Court, Cattail Court, Rainy Day Drive, Edmund Drive, Sundown
Crescent, Lightfoot Place and Steeple Hill within Plan 40M-1437 and the
connecting link of Steeple Hill, being Part 2, Plan 40R-9929;
9. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate Blocks 17 and 18, Plan 40M-1231 as
public highway; and
10. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate that part of Block 25, Plan 40M-1231,
designated as Part 1, Plan 40R-21924 as public highway.
Attachments:
1. Location Map - Plan 40M-1231
2. Location Map - Plan 40M-1427
3. Location Map - Plan 40M-1437
4. Draft By-law to dedicate Blocks 17 and 18, Plan 40M-1231 as public highway
5. Draft By-law to dedicate that part of Block 25, Plan 40M-1231, designated as
Part 1, Plan 40R-21924 as public highway
Prepared By:
Approved I Endorsed By:
1J f/3y-L
Denise Bye, Supervisor
Property & Development Services
Neil Carro P, RPP
Director, Planning & Development
DB:bg
Attachments
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Report PD 12-07
May 7, 2007
Subject: Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision
40M-1231, 40M-1427 and 40M-1437
Page 5
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering City Cou cil
. ./~~
\.--,.0' _
Recommendation approved:
Chief Administrative Officer
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
Director, Operations & Emergency Services
Director, Planning & Development
City Clerk
"\..... I......
r ,_" )
'- \.1. ~
;'t~-1I
ATTACHMENT I TO
REPORl # PO /2 - o'~
0:::
o
o
0:::
0:::
o
U
o
CL
o
>-
I
SUBJECT
SUBDIVISION
:;0
o
)>
o
AO\
d\f'Jp...'<
0\Gr'
Planning & Development Department
City of Pickering
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1231
OWNER VARIOUS
FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION
DATE MAR. 9, 2007 DRAWN BY JB
SCALE 1 :5000 CHECKED BY DB
o 0 ouree.:
Toronol Enterprise. Inc. ond it. .upplier.. All rights Roservod. Not 0 pion of survey.
2005 MPAC and its supplier.. All ri ht. Reserved. Not a plan of Survey.
l'
PN-B
l\TTACHMEfn fI 2. TO
RfJ\)R1 II PD,_L<~~ ~ .Q :.t.._,
" ~....
L~d
I UJI @j f--- I I I)
HENRIY I ST. '---
E rf- f-
- \Ul z VJ --
~ mCJi UJ - ::i
f--- x - 5 ~ -~ f---
I , rr i r - ~ CD
U 0::: 0:::
0::: u.. <( --./ '--
<( CD
CD-_
CENTRAL STREET
~ rBE~ tffi Ie r-
c..- O::: f---
It: 0
.--- I~
u.J . :-UNGTON
~-= "Z STREET
~ f---- U \ f--
0 ~
- . :::!;~ I .1 ,IAKI{1\ rlO~ T
0::: -- --to
l:- - f--- s:~
f--- U
- :>-
~ \ <:t
/ z ~
0 - Q;j
I-
a Ul
Ul Cl
Z Z
<( 0 = :>
u <C ::i
0 J
~ cr ~
ACORN LANE
::{ I/(f ~
'-- 0
0
cr
m
-
BO~NGJY //
PLACE
r~ SUBJECT
( SUBDIVISION
I
/
I /1
I I
City of Pickering Planning & Development Department
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1427 l'
OWNER VARIOUS DATE MAR. 9, 2007 DRAWN BY JB
FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION SCALE 1 :5000 CHECKED BY DB
ola .:source.: PN-RUR
g- Teronet Enterprise. Inc. and it. auppli.,... All rights Rl,served. Not 0 pion of survey.
2005 MPAC and its supplier.. All r;a-ht. Reserved. Not 0 pion of Surve)'.
(. r.-: ,..,
" ~o
I.,:'
...,
~ TO
t2 - o~
S{== ~~K~ if rl f
~== == ~~~= \\ R
= _/ /. tJ -~ SQUARE
U I===:J ~ f-- I ~- ~~
~ ~I CADr ~ =Irrm
1 r \Y I I
) r I WEYBURN
I \ \ - o II
t g I--
r--
Cl I- :;;
0 Z I~ _
0 w u =?):--
S: u -/~""-
~ Ul
W - / =
w ~
Q) U
:::!' /I I I--
<{ -
SQUARE
C.N.R.
D
lJJJ
I
"- - - - f-'- U
SHEPPARD - AVENUE
f-~g@j I I
~ -< DRIVE ~
/1 1 ~~~
~\' ~8C
""" I"-
SUNDOWN DAYLIGHT ~~ I
- \ \ ~ SUBJECT
f- \ \ [y SUBDIVISION
CRESCENT CATTAIL colJ\'<.\ J
W
RAINY DAY ~
J I II
\
Cl
<{
o
~
I
Cl
<{
o
~
I DUNFAIR STREET
I
I
I--
>....
/
~'
~Y_PLACE 0
_ ::0
<
fTl
- I- STEEPLE
_0
o
- LL-
1-0
~ Ul
w
I::
I
S:
f--
Of--
::or--
-f--
~f--
PART 2
40R-9929
~ol>-O
'i I
HILL
_!:2
-'
-
/
-(.o~
---:;:. 0 '?
l.-----' ~ Y- \~
I-- ! /
c-II~'\ /
RDADIT I / //
~ ~ /' ~V
City of Pickering
0"
f><
{fii;
1>--<
0~
0\0
Planning & Development Department
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1437 & PART 2, 40R-9929
OWNER VARIOUS
-'
FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION
DATE MAR. 9, 2007 DRAWN BY JB
SCALE 1 :5000 CHECKED BY DB
1
(] (] ~ourc..:
Terallot Entorprises Inc. and it. auppliera. All rights ~ouarvod. Not Q pion of survey.
2005 MPAC and a. aupcliera. All riohta Reserved. Net (] pion of Survey,
PN-6
,;\n
, ~.."~!d:.-~
.."",,1:.;'.: ,g:::t",.
,..~~.
~ ~,.
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING
BY-lAW NO.
DIA~;
Being a By-law to dedicate Blocks 17 and 18, Plan
40M-1231, Pickering as public highway.
WHEREAS The Corporation of the City of Pickering is the owner of Blocks 17 and 18, Plan
40M-1231, Pickering and wishes to dedicate them as public highway;
NOW THEREFORE, the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering HEREBY
ENACTS AS FOllOWS:
1. Blocks 17 and 18, Plan 40M-1231, Pickering are hereby dedicated as public highway
(The Esplanade South).
BY-lAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 22nd day of May, 2007.
David Ryan,.~
,~
Debi A. Bentley, City Clerk
Roadded.477
'<t ... f.....
C.OO
" C,.,
:;F",~............Ilita.r
j, i:'C .._..L2:: o::f-_"~"M""_"'"
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING
BY-lAW NO.
OIA,/
Being a By-law to dedicate that part of Block 25, Plan
40M-1231, Pickering, designated as Part 1,
40R-21924 as public highway.
WHEREAS The Corporation of the City of Pickering is the owner of that part of Block 25, Plan
40M-1231, Pickering, designated as Part 1, 40R-21924 and wishes to dedicate it as public
highway;
NOW THEREFORE, the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering HEREBY
ENACTS AS FOllOWS:
1. That part of Block 25, Plan 40M-1231, Pickering, designated as Part 1, 40R-21924 is
hereby dedicated as public highway (Diefenbaker Court).
BY-lAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 22nd day of May, 2007.
David R
Debi A. Bentley, City Clerk
Roadded.478
REPORT TO
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE
Report Number: PD 16-07
Date: May 7, 2007
C53
From:
Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
Subject:
Street Name Change from Sheppard Avenue to Merritton Road
Being Sheppard Avenue east of Fairport Road, legally described as
Kingston Road (also known as King's Hwy. No.2)
File: NC0602
Recommendation:
1. That Report PD 16-07 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding the
street name change of Sheppard Avenue east of Fairport Road, legally described
as Kingston Road (also known as King's Hwy. No.2) to Merritton Road be
received; and
2. That Council enact a By-law to formally change the name of Sheppard Avenue
east of Fairport Road, legally described as Kingston Road (also known as King's
Hwy. No.2) to Merritton Road.
Executive Summary: The road lying north of Merritton Road is presently
referenced as Sheppard Avenue, Kingston Road and Merritton Road. In order to avoid
confusion to emergency services and to clients accessing businesses in the area, it is
recommended that a By-law be enacted identifying that portion of the City's road
network as Merritton Road.
Financial Implications:
Registration of Street Name Change By-law
(Account 1416)
$100.00
Potential Cost to City to Replace Advance
Signage on Kingston Road
(Account 2320-2409) $500.00
(Approximately)
Sustainability Implications:
By confirming this portion of the City's road network as Merritton Road, there will be
improved ability for emergency services and clients to locate the businesses in the
area. This addresses both social and economic components of sustainability.
Report PD 16-07
May 7, 2007
Subject: Street Name Change to Merritton Road
'.' C'. '
L' \. .}
Page 2
Background:
Previous Renaminq Request
In the early 1990's, the City received requests from the owners of 944 Merritton Road -
(#1) and 975 Merritton Road - (#4) (see Attachment #1 - Location Map) requesting that
their addresses be changed from Sheppard Avenue to Merritton Road to eliminate the
confusion being experienced by their clients and emergency services when trying to
locate them.
Administratively, the change was made and properties #1 and #4 have been using a
Merritton Road address since.
In the mid 1990's, the Solicitor for the City forwarded a Report seeking Council's
authority to initiate the process to legally change this portion of road to Merritton Road.
Accordingly, Council passed Resolution #340/96, item #4 and the process of notifying
the affected parties of the City's intent to change this street name and, giving public
notice in the local newspaper (four consecutive weeks) was done.
Prior to reporting back to Council seeking authority for enactment of the required
By-law, staff received a notice from Richard Briscoe, owner of 950 Sheppard Avenue
(#2) - (Century 21 Briscoe Estates Ltd.) objecting to legally changing Sheppard Avenue
to Merritton Road, indicating that the change would be detrimental and costly to his
business. In an effort to accommodate this business, it was determined that the City
would delay the renaming of this road until the redevelopment in the immediate area
was done.
Current Renaminq Request
The redevelopment in the immediate area is now substantially complete and, with the
construction of the FordNolvo Dealership and the closing of the connection linking
Sheppard Avenue to Fairport Road, Richard Briscoe has recently advised staff that
clients are now experiencing difficulty finding his place of business and requests that
the process to change the name of Sheppard Avenue to Merritton Road be finalized.
In light of:
(a) the substantial completion of the redevelopment in the area;
(b) the City's receipt of an application for a medical office at 979 Sheppard Avenue -
(#3) for which the Owner has been notified that the property will receive a
Merritton Road address; and
(c) Richard Briscoe's support of the name change,
Report PD 16-07
May 7, 2007
Subject: Street Name Change to Merritton Road
Page 3
"641
C' 1.
it is now appropriate that the City enact the required By-law to legally change the name
of Sheppard Avenue east of Fairport Road, legally known as Kingston Road (also
known as King's Hwy. No.2) to Merritton Road.
Although staff is seeking enactment of the attached street name change By-law at this
time, Richard Briscoe has also requested that the By-law be held by staff and registered
in early September 2007. This timing will allow Richard Briscoe, his tenants and
associates the time needed to change their letterhead, business cards and internet
addresses, etc. to reflect the Merritton Road address. Staff supports this request.
Advanced SiQnaQe
Currently, there is signage on the south side of Kingston Road giving advanced notice
of Merritton Road. The spelling of Merritton Road on the sign is incorrect. Upon the
enactment of the attached By-law, Municipal Property & Engineering will make a
request of the Region (as the sign is located on a Regional road) to replace the sign
with one depicting the correct spelling of Merritton Road. Should the Region determine
that the sign will not be replaced at their cost (as it is no longer the Region's practice to
replace these types of signs) the cost to replace this sign will have to be absorbed by
the City.
It is recommended that a By-law be enacted to change the name of Sheppard Avenue
east of Fairport Road, legally known as Kingston Road (also known as King's Hwy; No.
2) to Merritton Road.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Draft By-law
f--Q . fv~
Denise Bye, Supervisor,
Property & Development Services
Approved I Endorsed By:
N~
Director, Planning & Development
Prepared By:
DB:bg
Attachments
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Report PO 16-07
Subject: Street Name Change to Merritton Road
(' G .^'
'" ....,
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering City Cou cil
/-- ,I
/"
May 7,2007
Page 4
-I
OVOCl M31A3iddV
ovotJ
W
::J
Z~
wC\j
~>-
oOrr:.f:IJ
~rr:.~=1l:
<(Z
o..w
o..()
w~
:c
(/)
ATTACHMENT'
REPORT I PO
TO
I C.- 0'+
C
o
o .E
<( arCil
?f ::2 III
"0....
mZC')Q):g
lJ;O=1l:C(I1
~ .~
C!J l/)(I1
Z (110
_ Q)1l:
~ .0
o
:t:::-
0::::
Z
c.J
o
<(
o
rr:.
Z
LOO"'"
lJ;~=1l:
a:
rr:.
w
::2
o
<(
o
rr:.
Z
"'"0"'"
~~=1l:
a:
rr:.
w
::2
o
<(
o
[(
z
o
I-
(f)
(J
Z
~
o
<t
~
5;
I
o
I
r-----
I
I
I
I
I
l____
;~ ~ "'.
~ UJ
~~
"
o
o
C\I
as
....
..J
D:
a..
<C
Iii
!;(
Cl
Ii >.ri >.
"'''1..0
~l~~
Q.:JQ.:J
a.1IIla.1fI
, ,
"'0 "'0
. .
~~~E
-00.'0 Q.
e e
0000
i~~j
;-0'-0
..10 0
'~~g~
~~;J
w
. .
.! 1:
ell' '"
~'';: '';:
0-
1-.(( ;c:
iIll
+-'
C
Q)
E
t::
CCI
a.
Q)
o
w
o
z
<(
::J:
U
w
:E
<(
z
c
~
a::
w
::>
z
w
~
c
a::
<C
c..
c..
w
W ::J:
::> (/)
z
w
~
c
a::
<(
c..
c..
W
::J:
(/)
C
z
<C
c
~
rr:.
z
o
1=
a:
a:: 0
W z
:E a:
W
z ~
o u
g ~ ii:
c: LL
() 0
fB ~
Cl C3
~
a:
w
Il.
o
a:
Il.
+-'
C
Q)
E
a.
o
Q)
>
Q)
o
~
0)
C
C
C
CCI
a..
ci
z
W
...J
u::
";::
Q)
~
"~
a..
..-
o
~
(5
a:
w
z
3::
o
~, f'>"
1,-' \) '1:
"""I
A TT ACHMENl ,,~ TO
REPORT tI PO 1 h - () '=1-
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING
BY I!IJI!JVI ~r
~..
Being a by-law to change the name of
Kingston Road (also known as King's Hwy.
No.2) to Merritton Road in the City of
Pickering.
WHEREAS pursuant to section 11 (3)1 of the Municipal Act, the Council of a local
municipality may pass by-laws for giving names to or changing the names of highways
under their jurisdiction;
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCil OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOllOWS:
1. Kingston Road (also known as King's Hwy. No.2) between CNR and Merritton
Road being the road allowance between Range 3, BFC, Pickering and
Concession 1, Pickering and Part lot 26, Concession 1, Pickering as in Hwy.
Plan 745 and lot 39A, RCP 1051, Pickering is hereby renamed Merritton Road.
BY-lAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 22nd day of May,
2007.
Oebi A. Bentley, City Clerk