HomeMy WebLinkAboutJuly 7, 2008 (Joint)
Joint Planning
& Development Committee
And Executive Committee
Agenda
Monday, July 7,2008
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor Pickles
PART "A"
PLANNING INFORMATION MEETING
INFORMATION REPORT NO. 12-08
PAGES
SUBJECT: Information Report No. 12-08
Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 05-04/P
Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 33/05
Kinsale Properties Ltd.
(Part of Lot 4, Concession 6)
City of Pickerinq
1-11
Deleqations:
a) Pierre Chauvin, MHBC Planning
INFORMATION REPORT NO. 13-08
SUBJECT: Information Report No. 13-08
City Initiated Application
Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 12/08
Dunbarton Village Zoning Review
City of Pickering
12 -64
PART "B"
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORTS
1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PO 21-08
Landford Dixie South Ltd.
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1706
65-74
Joint Planning
& Development Committee
And Executive Committee
Agenda
Monday, July 7,2008
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor Pickles
Cougs Investments Ltd.
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1713
Garthwood Homes Ltd.
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1719
Garthwood Homes Ltd.
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1727
Keleck Investments (Pickering) Incorporated
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1728
Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision
RECOMMENDATION
1. That Report PD 21-08 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding the
Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision 40M-1706, 40M-1713, 40M-1719,
40M-1727 and 40M-1728 be received;
2. That the highway being Windgrove Square within Plan 40M-1706 be
assumed for public use;
3. That the highway being Amberwood Crescent within Plan 40M-1713 be
assumed for public use;
4. That the highway being Pine Grove Avenue within Plan 40M-1719 be
assumed for public use;
5. That the highways being Meldron Drive and Sandhurst Crescent within Plans
40M-1727 and 40M-1728 be assumed for public use;
6. That the services required by the Subdivision Agreements relating to Plans
40M-1706, 40M-1713, 40M-1719, 40M-1727 and 40M-1728, are constructed,
installed or located on lands dedicated to, or owned by the City, or on lands
Joint Planning
& Development Committee
And Executive Committee
Agenda
Monday, July 7,2008
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor Pickles
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 Block 46, Plan 40M-1706 and Block 18,
Plan 40M-1728;
7. That the Subdivision Agreements and any amendments thereto relating to
Plans 40M-1706, 40M-1713, 40M-1719, 40M-1727 and 40M-1728, be
released and removed from title; and
8. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate Block 45, Plan 40M-1706 as public
highway.
2. Director, Planning & Development, Report PO 25-08
Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 9/08
Fairport Inc.
692,700-702 Front Road
(Lot 9 Plan 917 and Part of Lots 8 and 9 Plan 65)
City of PickerinQ
75-1 01
RECOMMENDATION
1. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 9/08 submitted by Fairport
Inc., on lands being Lot 9 Plan 917 and Part of Lots 8 and 9 Plan 65, City of
Pickering, to amend the zoning to permit the development of the subject
property for three detached dwelling units be approved as outlined in Appendix
I to Report PO 25-08; and
2. Further, that the amending zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law
Amendment Application A 9/08, as set out in Appendix I to Report PO 25-08,
be forwarded to City Council for enactment.
3. Director, Planning & Development, Report PO 27-08
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
-Durham ReQional Official Plan Amendment, File: OPA 2007-006
102-110
Joint Planning
& Development Committee
And Executive Committee
Agenda
Monday, July 7,2008
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor Pickles
1. That Report PD 27-08 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding an
application to amend the Durham Regional Official Plan, File: OPA 2007-006
be received;
2. That Council advise the Region of Durham that it supports the application to
amend the Durham Regional Official Plan, File: OPA 2007-006, submitted by
the Duffin Heights Landowners Group to:
a) delete the future east-west Type C arterial road connection from Church
Street in the Town of Ajax (extension of Williamson Drive) to the CP rail
line in Duffin Heights;
b) delete the remnant portion of Old Taunton Road as a Type C arterial
road designation from Taunton Road to the future east-west Type C
arterial road; and
c) realign the possible extension of Valley Farm Road, a Type C arterial
road, north of the Third Concession Road including crossing the
Ganatsekiagon Creek easterly to connect to Brock Road; and
3. Further, that a copy of Report PD 27-08 be forwarded to the Region of
Durham, Town of Ajax, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and
Sernas Associates (representing the Duffin Heights Landowners Group) for
information.
4. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 29-08
Downtown Pickering Program
- Continuation of Urban Desiqn Consultinq Services
111-113
RECOMMENDATION
1. That Report PD 29-08 of the Director, Planning & Development respecting
urban design consulting services for the Downtown Pickering program be
received;
Joint Planning
& Development Committee
And Executive Committee
Agenda
Monday, July 7,2008
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor Pickles
2. That the Director, Planning & Development be authorized to continue with the
engagement of Young + Wright / IBI Group Architects to act as the City's
urban design consultant on the Downtown Pickering program to an upset
limit of $70,000 using professional and consultative services funds approved
by Council in the 2008 Department budget; and
3. That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the necessary action
to give effect hereto.
5. Director, Planning & Development, Report PO 30-08 114-118
Request from Matlamy (Brock Road) Limited for Exemption to Section 10 (b) of Fill &
Topsoil Disturbance By-law 6060/02
Duffin Heiqhts Neiqhbourhood
RECOMMENDATION
1. That the request of Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited for exemption from
Section 10 (b) of Fill & Topsoil Disturbance By-law 6060/02 to allow pre-
grading of its lands in the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood be approved; and
2. Further, that the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the necessary
actions to give effect thereto.
PART "C"
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REPORTS
1. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 22-08
Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Dump Truck
- Q-32-2008
119-130
RECOMMENDATION
Joint Planning
& Development Committee
And Executive Committee
Agenda
Monday, July 7,2008
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor Pickles
1. That Report OES 22-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services
regarding the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck be received;
2. That Quotation No. Q-32-2008, as submitted by Scarborough Truck Center
Inc. for the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow and
Wing, and Electronic Salt Metering, in the amount of $158,809.00 (PST, GST
and license extra) be accepted;
3. The total gross purchase cost of $179,454.17 and a net purchase cost of
$171,513.72 as outlined in Report OES 22-08 of the Director, Operations &
Emergency Services, be approved; and
4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to
finance the purchase through the issuance of debt;
a) that debt financing through the Regional Municipality of Durham in the
amount of $171,000.00 for a period not exceeding five (5) years, at a
rate to be determined, be approved and the balance of approximately
$513.72 plus financing costs be financed from current funds; and
b) that financing and repayment charges in the amount of approximately
$39,500 be included in the annual current budget for the City of
Pickering commencing in 2009 and continuing thereafter until the loan is
repaid; and
c) that the Director, Corporate Services and Treasurer has certified that
this loan and the repayment thereof falls within the City's debt and
financial obligations approved annual repayment limit for debt and other
financial obligations for 2008 as established by the Province for
municipalities in Ontario; and
d) that the Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary in order
to effect the foregoing; and
e) staff at the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto.
Joint Planning
& Development Committee
And Executive Committee
Agenda
Monday, July 7,2008
7:30 pm
Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor Pickles
2. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 34-08
Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act - Adiustment to Taxes
1 31 -1 34
RECOMMENDATION
1. That Report CS 34-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be
received;
2. That the write-offs of taxes as provided under Section 357/358 of the
Municipal Act, 2001 be approved; and,
3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the
necessary action to give effect thereto.
(II) OTHER BUSINESS
(III) ADJOURNMENT
\ ~1
~ I
Citq ()~
INFORMATION REPORT NO. 12-08
FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF
July 7, 2008
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS
OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13
SUBJECT: Official Plan Amendment Application OPA 05-04/P
Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 33/05
Kinsale Properties Ltd.
(Part of Lot 4, Concession 6)
City of Pickering
1.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
- the subject site is located west of the Hamlet of Kinsale, generally at the north-east
corner of the intersection of Highway 7 and Balsam Road (Sideline 4), a property
location map is provided for reference (see Attachment #1 );
- the eastern portion of the subject land is covered by a large mound of fill that
was the result of extensive filling by the property owner; the filling operation
ceased in 2002;
an intermittent stream, which is an unnamed tributary of Carruther's Creek
traverses the site from north to south;
a small portion (approximately 1.2 ha) of the site was used for commercial
purposes, most recently a marine service operation/truck maintenance facility,
one structure from this operation remains on the site, and the remainder of
the site is vacant;
- the surrounding land uses are:
north - agricultural land, hydro corridor and the recommended route
alignment for Highway 407;
south - Highway 7, a vacant residential dwelling, and agricultural land;
west residential dwelling, a property maintenance company, active
agricultural land and a hydro corridor;
east agricultural land (orchard), a vacant parcel and the Hamlet of
Kinsale.
I ,: .
Information Report No. 12-08
'>"1 r",
:, I
Page 2
2.0 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL
the applicant has submitted an application to amend the City of Pickering
Official Plan and zoning by-law in order to implement the proposed golf
facility/course;
the applicant has also submitted an application to amend the Region of
Durham Official Plan in order to redisignate the property from Prime
Agricultural Area to Major Open Space Area in order to permit the golf course;
the applicant is proposing to develop a 12-hole golf course with maintenance
buildings, a clubhouse with limited food services, and a separate building with
an indoor golf simulator;
the design of the golf course utilizes the existing fill mound with a number of
golf holes, two ponds and the clubhouse proposed to be on top of the mound;
the site design incorporates a buffer strip of 30.0 metres on either side of the
stream;
a new entrance to the site is proposed to be established from Balsam Road,
the existing driveway from Highway 7 is proposed to be altered and not used
for the day-to-day operations but rather used for emergency vehicles only;
proposed buildings include a clubhouse, maintenance buildings and an indoor golf
building for a golf simulator (see Attachment #2 - Applicants Submitted Plan);
2.1 Development Detail
The following are the proposed development details for this application:
Official
Plan
Existing - Agricultural Areas, Open Space Systems - Natural
Areas for the area in proximity to the stream and a
portion of the site has an exception to permit a
farm implement dealership and vehicle repair and
service establishment;
Proposed - Active Recreational Area and delete the exception;
Existing - "A" - Agricultural and "A(FID)" - Agricultural-Farm
Implement Dealership in Zoning By-law 3037 as
amended by By-law 1751/83;
Proposed - "A/GC" in order to permit proposed golf course and
accessory uses and "OS-HL" that recognizes the
stream corridor;
Existing - former agriculture land that have been filled and is
currently vacant land;
Proposed - 12 hole golf course;
Zoning
Uses
Gross site area
Frontage on Balsam Road
Frontage on Highway 7
Commercial gross floor area
Clubhouse parking spaces
Golf simulator building parking spaces
Total parking spaces
29.9 hectares
548 metres
363 metres
321 square metres
100
28
128
Information Report No. 12-08
Page 3
'Z
3.0 OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING
3.1 Durham Regional Official Plan
the Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as Prime
Agricultural Area, where prime agricultural lands are predominate, they also
include areas of lesser agricultural significance (Canada Land Inventory
Classes 4 to 7 soils) and additional areas where there is a local concentration
of farms which exhibit characteristics of ongoing agriculture;
the Durham Regional Official Plan states that new and expanding major
recreational uses, shall not be permitted in Prime Agricultural Areas, the
definition of major recreational uses includes golf courses, therefore the
proposed use is not permitted in the current land use designation;
the application proposes to redesignate the site to Major Open Space Area,
this designation includes key natural heritage features or hydrologic features,
prime agricultural lands as well as lands of lesser agricultural significance;
the Durham Regional Official Plan states that "new and expanding major
recreational uses and accessory facilities may be permitted in the Major Open
Space Areas by amendment to the Regional Official Plan, or an area
municipal official plan";
The Region of Durham is currently evaluating the proposed official plan
amendment and hosted a public meeting on June 3, 2008;
3.2 Pickering Official Plan
the Pickering Official Plan designates the majority of the subject lands as
Agricultural Areas, for the area in proximity to the stream the lands are
designated Open Space Systems - Natural Areas and a small portion of the
site along Highway 7 has an exception to permit a farm implement dealership
and vehicle repair and service establishment;
permissible uses within the Agricultural Areas designation include, amongst
others, primary agricultural uses, farm related agricultural dwellings, and
complementary and supportive agricultural uses;
permissible uses within the Open Space System - Natural Areas designation
includes conservation passive recreation and agricultural uses outside of the
valley and stream corridors;
for the lands covered by the exception a farm implement dealership and road
vehicle repair and service establishment is permitted along with the uses
permitted by the underlying Agricultural Areas uses;
the applicant has submitted an application to amend the Official Plan to change
the deSignation to Open Space System - Active Recreational Areas in order to
permit the proposed golf course (see Attachment #3 - applicants proposed
amendment);
the application will be assessed against the policies and provisions of the
Pickering Official Plan during the further processing of the application;
Information Report No. 12-08
!' 4
Page 4
3.3 Zoning By-law 3037
the subject lands are currently zoned "A" - Agricultural Zone and "A(FID)" -
Agricultural-Farm Implement Dealership in Zoning By-law 3037 as amended by
By-law 1751/83;
the "A" - Agricultural Zone zoning permits, amongst other things, agricultural
uses, a detached dwelling and agricultural related business;
the "A(FID)" - Agricultural-Farm Implement Dealership zoning permits a farm
implement dealership and an automobile repair shop;
an amendment to the zoning by-law is required to implement the applicant's
proposed development;
the owner has requested an "A/GC" - Agricultural/Golf Course zone for the
lands to be used for the golf course and an "OS-HL" - Open Space Hazard
Land zone for the stream corridor and buffer strip.
4.0 RESUL IS OF CIRCULATION
4.1 Resident Comments
- no resident comments have been received to date;
4.2 Agency Comments
no agency comments have been received to date;
4.3 Staff Comments
in reviewing the applications to date, the following matters have been
identified by staff for further review and consideration:
· ensuring that the proposed development is compatible with, and sensitive
to, existing surrounding development including traffic, noise, level of
activity, scale and intensity of the uses;
· reviewing the application in terms of its level of sustainable development
components;
· reviewing the application in terms of the land use to determine if a golf
course is needed or whether the lands should remain for agricultural uses;
· reviewing the application in terms of the constraints and benefits the
application will have on both the subject property and on the surrounding
community, given the function of the surrounding community;
· need to consider the environmental impacts on the tributary of Carruther's
Creek from the proposed development;
· reviewing that adequate information has been provided, that technical
requirements are met and that the proposed development is appropriate at
this location;
Information Report No. 12-08
Page 5
r:
, "
the Planning & Development Department will conclude its position on the
applications after it has received and assessed comments from the circulated
departments, agencies and public.
5.0 PROCEDURAL INFORMATION
5.1 Official Plan Amendment Approval Authority
the Region of Durham is the approval authority for local official plan
amendments when there is a Regional Official Plan amendment required;
5.2 General
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 Councilor a Committee of Council;
if you wish to be notified of Council's decision regarding the 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;
if you wish to be notified of Council's adoption of any official plan amendment,
you must request such in writing to the City Clerk;
if you wish to be notified of the decision of the Region of Durham with respect
to the proposed amendment to the official plan, you must make a written
request to the Commissioner of Planning, Region of Durham Planning
Department.
6.0 OTHER INFORMATION
6.1 Appendix No. I
list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City
Departments that have commented on the application at the time of writing
the report;
Information Report No. 12-08
;,] 0
Page 6
6.2 Information Received
- full scale copies of the applicant's submitted plan are available for viewing at
the offices of the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department;
- the following reports were submitted in support of the application:
· Planning Report (MHBC Planning, April 2008);
· Agricultural Justification Report (Miller Golf Design Group, April 2008);
· Golf Course Design and Management Plan (Miller Golf Design Group, July 2007);
· Golf Market Study (Miller Golf Design Group, March 2008);
· Traffic Impact Study (C.C. Tatham & Associates Ltd., July 2007);
· Environmental Impact Study (Gartner Lee Limited, July 2007);
· Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment (Green-Tech Environmental
Engineering Ltd., October 2002);
· Environmental Site Inspection (Green-Tech Environmental Engineering
Ltd., March 2008);
· Hydrogeological Assessment (Golder Associates, May 2006);
· Well Construction and Testing Report (Golder Associates, July 2007);
· Sustainability Report (Miller Golf Design Group, February 2008); and
· Stage 1 and 2 Archaeological Assessment (October 2007);
- the need for additional information and/or technical reports will be determined
through the review and circulation of the applicant's current proposal;
6.3 Owner I Applicant Information
- the owner of the subject lands Kinsale Properties Ltd.;
James Sabiston is the principal of Kinsale Properties Ltd.;
Pierre Chauvin of MHBC Planning is the agent for the application.
Ro1bP~
Principal Planner - Development Review
/y (~ y
~/~2"'C" c.-.
Lynda Taylor, MClP, RPP
Manager, De~elopment Review
RP:ld
Attachments
Copy: Director, Planning & Development
, r""
/
APPENDIX NO. I TO
INFORMATION REPORT NO. 12-08
COMMENTING RESIDENTS AND LANDOWNERS
(1 ) none received to date
COMMENTING AGENCIES
(1) none received to date
COMMENTING CITY DEPARTMENTS
(1) none received to date
'-, ()
t)
An~CHMENT#~TO
'''",FOHMATION RF:"PORT# 11--08
-_.._~ -~--_._- z
g
Vi
--------~--l
\
<
z
~
SUBJECT
P OPERTY
-==]
HIGHWAY
ARC LAY
__m__u_____ '---_."----.',----------
ESTATES ~
City of Pickering
KI SALE
\
. __1_ __
~
Planning & Development Department
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PART LOT 4, CONCESSION 6
OWN~ KINSALEPROPER~ ==--~ ---=r~A~E MA~29,2008 rRAW~"Y JB
FILE No. OPA 05-04/P & A 33/05________ j-~~_~_=__~~~OO~____ ....~~ECKED ..s~__ RP
oto ::'0 urces',--- .-....-------.------------.-.,----.-.-----.------.--..-_.-.._-
Teronet Enterp.-i~e:5 Inc. and it~ :suppliers. All right:!l Re:sc.-ved Not Q plan of !!IUl"vey
2005 MPAC and it~ suppliers, All rights ~_eserved Not 0 ,plan. o! Survey.
l'
-.-
PN-RUR
ATIACHMENT#~lO
RCTJORT# /2 "'08
INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANTS
SUBMITTED PLAN - KINSALE PROPERTIES LTD.
A 033/05 OPA 05-04
~ 9
l'
THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THe CITY OF PfCKERNG.
PtANNINC 4 OEIIflOPllENT DEPARTMENT.
/IIIFORMATlON tk S1.JPPORT SElMCES.
..or 28. 2008.
r\
t..J
~nACHMENT#~lO
"'~""\(~( 11/'TiON f~:poFIT# /2.> 08
AMENDMENT XX TO PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN
PURPOSE:
LOCATION:
BASIS:
ACTUAL
AMENDMENT:
IMPLEMENTATION:
INTERPRETATION:
The purpose of this amendment is to permit a golf course and related
indoor facilities through a change in designation of the subject lands to
'Active Recreational Areas'.
The subject lands are approximately 30 hectares in area and located on
the north side of Highway 7, immediately east of Balsam Road (Sideline
4). The subject lands are municipally known as 3160 Highway NO.7 and
more specifically include Part of Lot 4, Concession 6 and Part 1 of 40R-
6439.
That Council of the City of Pickering is satisfied that this Amendment to
the Pickering Official Plan to permit a golf course through redesignation of
the subject lands to 'Active Recreational Areas' is an appropriate land use,
complies with the general intent of the Official Plan and is consistent with
Provincial policies.
The Pickering Official Plan is hereby amended by:
1. Revising Schedule 1 (Land Use Structure) Sheet 3 of 3 to redesignate
the lands identified on the attached Schedule A from 'Agricultural
Areas', 'Natural Areas' and Exception E1 to 'Active Recreational
Areas' .
2. Removing Exception 3.20(a) text that reads, "on lands identified by the
symbol "E1" on Schedule I, a farm implement dealership and road
vehicle repair and service establishment in accordance with the
Durham Regional Official Plan".
The provisions set forth in the City of Pickering Official Plan, as amended,
regarding the implementation of the Plan shall apply in regard to this
Amendment.
The provisions set forth in the City of Pickering Official Plan, as amended,
regarding the interpretation of the Plan shall apply in regard to this
Amendment.
I 1
City of Pickering, Proposed Official
Plan Amendment
Schedule A
,.........
~ Subject Lands
Lands to be Redesignated
from Agricultural Areas, Natural
Areas and Exception (E1-3.20.a)
to Active Recreational Areas
(i)
June 2. 2008
Scale:
500 1000n
I I
K:\93060 _ KINSALE\RP1\OFACIAL_PlAN_AMENDMENT.DWG
, , ')
L.
PI
INFORMATION REPORT NO. 13-08
FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF
July 7, 2008
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS
OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13
SUBJECT: City Initiated Application
Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 12/08
Dunbarton Village Zoning Review
City of Pickering
1.0 BACKGROUND
on November 19, 2007, Pickering City Council considered Planning &
Development Report PD 32-07 respecting Dunbarton Village Zoning Review,
and City Council, through Resolution #212/07, provided direction to staff to
hire a consultant to undertake a work program to review the zoning for
Dunbarton Village and to host a Public Information Meeting to consider a
Zoning By-law amendment to address zoning within Dunbarton Village;
lands within Dunbarton Village currently have a variety of zoning and the
majority of the properties were zoned with the adoption of the original Zoning
By-law 3036 which was passed by Council and approved by the Ontario
Municipal Board in 1966;
certain properties that are used as detached dwellings, were and are still zoned
General Commercial - "C-2", this zoning permits a wide variety of commercial
uses including retail store, restaurant, office, automobile service station, taxicab
stand, clinic, hotel and other commercial uses and one of the properties still
holds an agricultural zoning;
concern with the existing commercial zoning for some properties was
highlighted in the fall of 2006 with the submission of a Committee of
Adjustment application PICA 68/06 for 1047 Dunbarton Road, this application
requested an extension of a legal non-conforming use and the establishment of
a commercial and residential building on the property and was tabled by the
Committee of Adjustment;
concerns were expressed by neighbours respecting the appropriateness of the
proposed land use, and the scope of uses permitted by existing zoning;
Information Report No. 13-08
Page 2
I (1 !
I Z
,
a comprehensive zoning amendment for the area is now considered
appropriate to ensure land use conflicts do not result given the majority of
properties are used for detached dwellings;
1.1 STUDY AREA LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
the subject properties are located along the north and south side of
Dunbarton Road and the east and west side of Dunchurch Street in the
Dunbarton Village area of the City of Pickering, a property location map is
provided for reference (see Attachment #1);
the subject area represents the remaining portion of the former village of
Dunbarton which was initially established in the early 1800's;
the King's Highway, Highway #2, used to run through the village until the
1960's when Highway #2 (now Kingston Road) was moved south to its
current location due to the construction of the CNR railway line;
some of the lots are still occupied with the original homes while other lots
have been redeveloped over the years;
the Dunbarton-Fairport United Church anchors the eastern boundary of the
study area and Dunbarton Creek is the western boundary (see
Attachment #3 - Existing Zoning - Dunbarton Village map).
2.0 PUBLIC CONSULTATION
this application has been subject to a public consultation process and
comments have been received on the zoning review;
two neighbourhood meetings have been held, the first on February 26, 2008
and a follow-up meeting on May 14, 2008;
the public comments that have been received all acknowledge the need to
change the zoning of the area;
there was a range of opinions from the residents as to the extent of
commercial uses that would be appropriate for the area;
some residents expressed the opinion that the area should be for only
residential uses that would include a commercial component only by means
of the home occupation provisions of the zoning by-law;
- there was also the comment that very limited commercial may be considered
by allowing tea rooms, professional offices or other discreet business;
some residents have also commented that the zoning should be very restrictive to
residential uses only;
the community expressed a strong opposition to permitting a contractors
yard/operation or similar uses;
prior to the formal public consultation commencing on this zoning review a
Committee of Adjustment application precipitated the organization of a
neighbourhood working group that prepared and submitted a discussion paper on
the historical Village of Dunbarton in which certain residents expressed the opinion
of the need to change the current "C2" zone to one that is more reflective of the
current residential uses of the area (see Attachment #3);
a Public Information Centre on this application is scheduled for June 23, 2008;
Information Report No. 13-08
Page 3
4
3.0 OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING
3.1 Durham Re~ional Official Plan
the Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as within
Urban Areas - 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;
in addition to housing purposes Living Areas may permit home occupation
and convince stores which are compatible with their surrounding;
the proposal appears to conform to the Durham Regional Official Plan;
3.2 Pickerin~ Official Plan
the Pickering Official Plan designates the subject lands as Urban Residential
Area - Low Density Area;
permissible uses within the Urban Residential Area - Low Density Area
designation include, among others, residential uses and home occupations;
the subject lands are within the Dunbarton Neighbourhood of the Official Plan;
the Dunbarton Neighbourhood contains Official Plan policy 11.9 (b) which
states:
"11.9 (b) encourage opportunities to rejuvenate the historical Village of
Dunbarton, including considering permitting the introduction of
small scale enterprises on suitable sites, provided the historical
character of the area and the interests of neighbourhood residents
are respected, and considering undertaking a Community
Improvement Plan of Project in accordance with section 15.32 of
this Plan"
Schedule II of the Pickering Official Plan - Transportation Systems designates
Dunbarton Road as a Type C Arterial Road;
Type C Arterial Roads are designed to carry lower volumes of traffic at lower
speeds than high order arterial roads while providing access to properties;
Dunchurch Street is designated as a Local Road which provides access to
individual properties and carries local traffic;
Schedule III of the Pickering Official Plan - Resource Management designates
lands in proximity to Dunbarton Creek as Shorelines and Stream Corridors;
Shorelines and Stream Corridors identify lands that may be prone to flooding,
sloppy instability and/or erosion impacts and require an environmental report
to be submitted that appropriately addresses any environmental constraints
on the subject property;
the application will be assessed against the policies and provisions of the
Pickering Official Plan during the further processing of the application;
Information Report No. 13-08
Page 4
L':
I
3.3 Zonin~ By-law 3036
the study area is currently zoned the following in Zoning By-law 3036;
. C2 - Commercial;
. C2-2 - Commercial;
. A - Agricultural;
. R3 - Residential;
. R3-DN - Residential with Day Nursery;
· S3-8 - Residential;
· I(C)-DN - Institutional with Day Nursery;
· OS-HL-3 - Open Space - Hazard Land;
the properties that are zoned commercial and agricultural are the main focus
of the zoning review;
an amendment to the zoning by-law is required to implement any proposed
changes to the zoning for the study area.
4.0 RESUL IS OF CIRCULA liON
4.1 Resident Comments
- numerous public comments have been received throughout the study process
and have been included in the consultants report (see Attachment #3);
- since the formal notification of the public meeting one additional comment has
been received, that related to an objection to the definition of "Domestic
Business Type-A" that included the use "custom workshop" (see Attachment #4);
4.2 A~ency Comments
no agency comments have been received to date.
5.0 DISCUSSION
5.1 Consultants Examination
the planning consulting firm of Macaulay Shiomi Howson Ltd. was hired to assist
City staff in the zoning review, Peter Cheatly was the lead consultant on the
project;
the zoning review by the consultant consisted of reviewing the official plan
policies, land uses in the area, the street pattern, the existing zoning
categories, and public consultation;
the consultant has recommend enacting a zoning by-law amendment which
creates a detached dwelling residential zone which also allows home
businesses, and recognizes the atypical setbacks of some of the buildings in
the village;
the consultant has prepared a report on the Dunbarton Village Zoning review,
dated April 29, 2008 which includes the background information, residents
comments, and a draft of a proposed zoning by-law amendment (see
Attachment #3);
Information Report No. 13-08
Page 5
/
b
the consultant's recommendation is to replace the "C2" zone between
1 019 and 1 059 Dunbarton Road, including both sides of Dunchurch Street
and the "C2-2" zone at 1 051 Dunbarton Road with a new residential zone that
will permit detached dwellings and also allow domestic business and bed and
breakfast establishments;
the domestic business is based on a uses permitted in the Village of
Whitevale zoning, a draft definition is as follows:
Domestic Business - Type A shall mean an antique store, an arts and
crafts shop, a book store, a business office, a clothing boutique, a custom
workshop, a professional office, a tea room or a specialty home furnishing
shop, which is:
(a) operated from a detached dwelling on the lot, or a building or structure
accessory to the detached dwelling on the lot;
(b) managed, directed or conducted by one or more of the occupants of
the detached dwelling on the lot; and,
(c) occupies no more than 25% of the total gross floor area of the
detached dwelling and any accessory building or structure on the lot;
for the lands that are currently zoned "A" - Agriculture at 1062 Dunbarton, the
recommendation is to use the "S3-8" zone, which is the zone that already is in
existence on the north side of Dunbarton Road (see Attachment #3 - Proposed
Zoning - Dunbarton Village map);
the draft zoning also proposed performance standards that would capture the
existing majority of the dwellings on the lots while still respecting the
municipal standard for residential uses;
5.2 General Overview
the Dunbarton Village zoning resulted from an existing land use conflict with
zoning provisions, being lands that have been used for residential purposes
for a very long time yet the lands are zoned commercial and agricultural;
elements of current zoning in the study area are not conducive to a village
character and could jeopardize initiatives to protect and enhance the village
setting, the objective of this initiative is to review the existing zoning of the
Village of Dunbarton and consider potential zoning changes that better reflect
the existing built condition, help guide and foster new development, and
support the historical character of the Village;
this zoning review is a scoped review to address incompatible activities that
may affect achieving the Official Plan vision, the review is not a
comprehensive development review and is not intended to establish
development guidelines, architectural controls or the establishment of a
Community Improvement Area for the purpose of facilitating infrastructure
funding;
Heritage Pickering has on its work program the 'Dunbarton Heritage
Designation Study' which may result in a more comprehensive investigation
related to heritage matters;
the recommendation of the consultant is generally what was envisioned from
a land use perspective in terms of permitted use;
Information Report No. 13-08
7
Page 6
the recommended draft by-law by the consultant is in keeping with the
specific Official Plan policy for the area (see Attachment #3);
staff will be reviewing the draft by-law in terms of the definitions, permitted
uses, performance standards, the lots that are proposed to be rezoned and
the lots in the study area that are not proposed to have any zoning changes;
staff will be considering the proposed zoning from a sustainability perspective
in terms of impacts the zoning will have on the community;
the Planning & Development Department will conclude its position on the
application after it has received and assessed comments from the circulated
departments, agencies and public.
6.0 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 Councilor a Committee of Council;
if you wish to be notified of Council's decision regarding the 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;
7.0 OTHER INFORMATION
7.1 Appendix No. I
list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City
Departments that have commented on the application at the time of writing
the report;
Information Report No. 13-08
Page 7
'" g
7.2 Information Received
- the City is in receipt of the Dunbarton Village Zoning Review report dated
April 29, 2008 prepared by Macaulay Shiomi Howson Ltd.;
- the need for additional information and/or technical reports will be determined
through the review and circulation of the applicant's current proposal;
RO~'~
Principal Planner - Development Review
L uJiif,-_~... t'~
Lynda Tor, MCIP, RP
Manager, Developme t Review
RP:ld
Attachments
Copy: Director, Planning & Development
,; I
'; 0
! J
APPENDIX NO. I TO
INFORMATION REPORT NO. 13-08
COMMENTING RESIDENTS AND LANDOWNERS
(1) Resident comment - Boyd Penny
COMMENTING AGENCIES
(1 ) none received to date
COMMENTING CITY DEPARTMENTS
(1) none received to date
ATIACHMENT#--L-TO
iNFORMATlONREPORT# i::,. C'~
EXHIBIT 1
') ,-)
,_ l"
1/
\~
\
\ ~
\0
F=
I
f---j
f---J
u~
r--o
ex:
o
<(
o
CL
r--
~
i7"-
l=-
f-
~
~
::>.-,
IIII
---4
J
I
GOLDEN RIDGE
I III
-
:=j
T
-
_AJ
o
-p
o
-
-
-
;--- f---
f--- t-i
\
II
-
-
I
RUSHTON
II
KOAD
1
J--
~
-
o
<t
o
ex:
g'C
J
D~
"
~
KINGSTON ROAD
n-! ~
~ AO'
~--' \['J f>-.--<
0\G0
<^v>
,~
,.-------
S\?-((\
gf>-. --< L --< ...----\ I .- I
~ \dcl'~~r~
I
l______
City of Pickering
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION DUNBARTON VILLAGE
OWNER VARIOUS
FILE No. A 12/08
Planning & Development Department
DATE MAY 27,2008 DRAWN BY JB
SCALE 1 :5000 CHECKED BY RP
l'
~ o~~r~:::tC~~~c,..prises Inc. and its s.....ppliers. All riQhts Reserved. Not a plan of survey.
2005 MPAC and its suppliers. All ril';;)hts Reserved. Not 0 plan of Survey.
PN-7
It! .1
.-) 1
"
ATTACHMENr#~TO
INFORMATlONREroRT# / ~ C xr
EXHIBIT 2
DUNBARTON
UN/TED
CHURCH
z
o 0
I- <t
0::: 0
~ 0:::
Z
:J
o
-<
y..-'2-'2-
0Q0
o
G \-- '\
0'2-
GO
AO"
rI\N f'-.-{
rllG
City of Pickering
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION DUNBARTON VILLAGE
OWNER VARIOUS
FILE No. A 12/08
Planning & Development Department
DATE MAY 27, 2008 DRAWN BY JB l'
SCALE 1 :5000 CHECKED BY RP
o 0 ources:
Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All ri9hts Reserved. Not 0 plan of survey.
2005 MPAC and its suppliers. All ri9hts Reserved. Not 0 pion of Survey.
PN-7
.ATTACHMENT# 3 :TO
''''FORMATION REPORT#. 13-o~
. It I 22
GrTY OF.PIGKEf,UNG
DL1I~B/-\l:X'I"OI~ \llL'L/-\GE
ZOI~lI~G 1=XE\11E\I\7
DRAFT - FOR DISCUSSION
, SU131\'llTrFD l3"Y~ l\{A.GA.uL!'~Y' SHIOl\ll l--lO\VSON LorD. !-\'Pl=XlL 29, 2003
.')
ATTACHMENT# J TO
'N~OR!\4.ATlONREPORTf#. 1_-3 'Cy~
_ -'Tl
/,1 ,~
II
Draft Report to Planning Staff
II
From:
Peter Cheatley, MCIP, RPP
Macaulay Shiomi Howson Ltd
Subject:
Dunbarton Village Zoning Review - Draft for Discussion
Date:
April 28, 2008
Recommendation
1. That the City of Pickering rezone lands along Dunbarton Road from C2, C2-2, R3
and A to S2-xx, and S3-8, as set out in the attached draft zoning bylaw, Attachment #5.
~
Executive Summary
~
This report outlines the findings of research and public consultation into the zoning that
applies to the old Dunbarton Village. The lands on either side of Dunbarton Road,
between Dunbarton Creek on the west and Cloudberry Court on the east have been
zoned variously in commercial, agricultural and single detached residential zones.
These zone categories have endured for many years, even as land use in the village
has become less commercial, less agricultural and more residential.
As a result of this long-standing land use/zoning conflict, the City commissioned
Macaulay Shiomi Howson to review the zoning of the village and to report on the most
appropriate zoning categories.
A public consultation session was held at Dunbarton United Church on February 26,
2008, at which 29 interested members of the community attended and provided
comments. The general consensus was that residential zoning, which would allow for
home businesses, was most appropriate for the village. Not all members of the public
,') "
/ Ll
rJ
ATTACHMENT# -=-) TO
INFORMATION REPORT#. I ~~ ,(.~'.
agreed, with a few wanting more commercial uses permitted, and another small group
wanting only residential uses with no home businesses,
After reviewing the official plan policies, land use in the area, the street pattern, the
existing zoning categories, and listening to resident input, we recommend enacting a
new zoning bylaw which creates a single detached residential zone which allows home
businesses, and recognizes the atypical setbacks of some of the buildings in the village.
Attachment #1 shows the proposed zoning. Attachment #2 shows the existing zoning.
ATTACHMENT#....:L TO
INFORMATION REPORT#. 1.3-0~
C', r-o
/ I".....
.: ...)
1. Background
Lands within the Dunbarton Village currently have a variety of zoning designations (see
Attachment # 2). The majority of the properties were zoned with the adoption of the
original zoning by-law 3036 which was passed by Council and approved by the Ontario
Municipal Board in 1966. Certain properties that are used as detached dwellings, were
and are still zoned General Commercial - "C-2". This zoning permits a wide variety of
commercial uses including retail stores, restaurants, offices, automobile service
stations, taxicab stands, clinics, and hotels. It also permits institutional uses such as
clubs, lodges, fraternal organizations, religious institutions and "other social uses". One
property still holds Agricultural - "A" zoning, while other properties have been rezoned
over the years for site specific uses and buildings. The existing zoning categories no
longer reflect the predominant land use, which is single detached residential.
Concern with the existing commercial zoning was highlighted in the fall of 2006 with the
submission of a Committee of Adjustment application (PICA 68/06) for 1047 Dunbarton
Road, seeking the extension of a legal non-conforming use, and the establishment of a
commercial and residential building on the property. The applicant intended to run a
landscaping business from the property.
The application was tabled by the Committee of Adjustment. Many of the neighbours
who appeared at the February 26, 2008 public consultation meeting spoke at the
Committee of Adjustment meeting in opposition to the landscaping business. Concerns
were expressed by many of the neighbours respecting the appropriateness of the
landscaping business on the street, and the scope of the uses permitted by the existing
"C-2" zoning.
The Committee of Adjustment meeting precipitated the organization of a neighbourhood
working group that prepared and submitted a discussion paper on the historical village
of Dunbarton (see Attachment #3). The position presented in the paper is that the
current commercial zoning of "C-2" is inappropriate. That position was put forward by
the same residents at the February 26, 2008 public workshop.
I.
. t, I
r) I'
! b
,
ATT,~CHMENT# ,-5 TO
INFORMAT!()N REroRTf# / ~3 -DerA
2. Public Workshop on Feb 26, 2008
The City of Pickering held an informal public workshop on February 26, 2008.
Approximately 29 people attended, and 10 provided written comments. Also in
attendance were Councillors Doug Dickerson and Bill McLean, Ross Pym, and Lynda
Taylor from the Pickering Planning Dept.
Many of the objectors to the landscaping application at the Committee of Adjustment
attended the February 26, 2008 consultation meeting, along with the applicant for the
landscaping business at Committee of Adjustment meeting. That applicant is a resident
on the north side of Dunbarton Road
The general consensus at the meeting was that the heritage village elements of
Dunbarton Village are worth keeping. At the same time, there was reluctance to agree
to an actual heritage designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. While most people in
attendance appreciated the history of the Village, there was a reluctance to be bound by
the perceived limitations that a district or individual property designation might place on
the lands. Several people actively spoke against any kind of heritage preservation,
while a few said they might welcome it, if it were done properly. There is a definite lack
of knowledge of the processes, rights and obligations involved with heritage
designations.
There was a range of opinions regarding the extent of commercial uses that should be
permitted on the Village lands. Several people wanted the area to be strictly residential,
with no more than the standard home occupations permitted. A few people thought that
allowing small shops, tea rooms and professional offices would be appropriate. A
member of the church expressed a desire to allow small artisan shops to ring the
frontage of the church. One resident thought that a pub would be an appropriate use of
the propery at the corner of Dunbarton and Dunchurch St.
There was a discussion about the economic viability of some of the possible commercial
uses, and there was a sense among some of the group that uses that rely on passing
trade, such as tea rooms, coffee shops and retailing might not have sufficient draw to be
successful. There was a stronger sense that use of buildings by professionals,
architects, lawyers or accountants, might be more practical. There was a sense that
this would be appropriate.
In contrast, with the exception of one resident, there seemed to be a preference that
there should be no businesses that would cause disruption to the character of the
street, or to residential neighbours. The one resident had tried to operate a landscaping
business on Dunbarton, and the majority of those who spoke thought that the
landscaping business was inappropriate because of the truck traffic, noise, dust and
potential for injury to residents and damage to neighbouring properties.
2.
r;
ATTACHMENT# ~:j TO
~Nro~MATION REroRT# C 3 -C0 ~
There was a lengthy discussion of the need for traffic calming on Dunbarton, that was
addressed by the Councillors.
A copy of all written comments received is attached as Attachment # 4.
3.
,', "7
' ,
') g
ATTACHMENT#~lO
1-) C"
INFOR.MATION REPORT#. .:.c .
3. Discussion
3.1 Land Use
The purpose of this study was to consider the removal of incompatible land uses from
the uses currently permitted by the existing zoning, and their replacement with more
suitable zoning permissions. Limited compatible commercial uses such as those found
in other historical village settings in Pickering were to be considered, in keeping with the
intent of the Official Plan statement for Dunbarton Villiage.
Section 11.9 (b) of the Official Plan states:
"encourage opportunities to rejuvenate the historical Village of Dunbarton,
including permitting the introduction of small scale enterprises on suitable sites,
provided the historical character of the area and the interests of neighbourhood
residents are respected, and considering undertaking a Community Improvement
Plan or Project in accordance with section 15.32 of this Plan."
This study deals with the land use elements of this policy and does not comment on the
Community Improvement Plan.
We are recommending a new zoning category of S2-x for most of the lands in the old
Village area. The S2-x zone will replace the C2 zone between 1019 and 1059
Dunbarton Road, including both sides of Dunchurch Street and the C2-2 zone at 1051
Dunbarton Road. An S3-8 zone, similar to that already in existence on the north side of
Dunbarton, will replace the A zone at 1062 Dunbarton. A draft by-law is attached as
Attachment # 4.
The proposed S2-x zone would permit detached dwellings and accessory buildings,
home businesses, subject to the provisions set out in Section 6.3 of By-law 3036, and a
limited range of "domestic businesses" currently permitted in the hamlet of Whitevale,
defined in By-law 2677/88. These uses include antique stores, arts and crafts shops,
book stores, business offices, clothing boutiques, custom workshops professional
offices, bed and breakfast establishments and tea rooms, provided the use is operated
from a detached dwelling or accessory building on the lot and is managed by one or
more of the occupants of the home. A floor space limit of 25% of the total floor area on
the lot is applied to all uses except the bed and breakfast establishment. The inclusion
of these very restricted commercial operations implements the direction of the Official
Plan noted above.
We are not recommending any zoning change for the lands recently zoned S3-8, as that
zone reflects recent development on the north side of Dunbarton Road. We are also
4.
ATTACHMENT#____lO
I~:FORMAT!ON RE:l~r~ I"')
(..'
LC
)9
not recommending any change to the zoning of Ounbarton United Church, as the
current I (C)-ON seems to adequately reflect the use of the church building. Finally, we
are not recommending a change to the R3-DN zoning of 1089 Dunbarton Road, as it
accurately reflects the home and daycare located there.
3.2 Performance Standards
3.2.1 South Side of Ounbarton Road
The proposed new zone establishes basic performance standards that attempt to reflect
the standards of the existing buildings on the south side of Dunbarton Road. Hence,
front yard setbacks are 3.0 metres and side yards are permitted to be 0.6 metres,
provided that the other side is 1.2 m. The remainder of the proposed provisions reflect
the "S2" zoning found to the north.
No additional parking requirements have been proposed, as it seems likely that the
small amount of parking that might be generated by small scale home occupancy
business can be accommodated either on the lots or on the streets. The imposition of
additional required parking might discourage any new uses from occurring on the lands.
The intention is to provide zoning standards that do not render these dwellings legally
non-conforming. The by-law will propose a "non-compliance provision" that will deem
all lot sizes and yard depths for existing structures to comply with the zoning by-law.
The basic standards noted above would make most of the lots non-complying in lot
area, frontage or yards. Given the significant variations in these elements on the
ground, it is proposed to establish some basic provisions that would apply to
redevelopment of the lots, along with a specific non-compliance provision that deems all
of the buildings and lots to comply, as long as they continue to exist.
3.2.2 1062 Ounbarton Road
The lot at 1062 Dunbarton Road, currently zoned "A"-Agriculture, is proposed to be
zoned to S3-8, the zoning of the lands to the west. It is of approximately the same size
as the properties to the west, and it exhibits development that is consistent with the
pattern of development that exists on the north side of the street. The 83-8 zone would
be appropriate if the City feels that there is sufficient opportunity for infill and
intensification elsewhere in the City to meet provincial policy directions.
The owner of this property has written a lengthy letter in which he says he has no
intention of moving or redeveloping the property. It is therefore likely that no changes
will occur in the near to medium term. In the long term, it may be that the lot becomes
available for redevelopment. A rezoning would be necessary to further develop the lot
at that time.
No matter what zone is applied to 1062 Dunbarton Road, an analysis of the rear of the
property needs to occur, to determine whether the "OS-HL-3" zone, found at the rear of
5.
1__ ;r.)
.U
ATTACHMENT# ~?; TO
INFORMATION REPORrtF ! ~
{.
'?""",
the properties immediately to the west, should also apply to 1 062. This investigation will
occur during the formal processing of this City-initiated zoning by-law amendment.
3.3 Commercial Viability
Despite including limited commercial uses in the proposed zone, we don't expect there
to be any major changes in the residential nature of the old village. There is insufficient
passing traffic to support all but the smallest retail uses. A few properties might lend
themselves to professional or business offices of the type that many people now have in
their homes. The intent of the limited permissions is to further the goal of the Official
Plan for the former Dunbarton Village, and to reflect the intent of recent provincial policy
regarding the creation of complete communities that contain a mix of uses.
3.4 Heritage Designation
The scope of this study was limited to changes to the zoning by-law. We were not
engaged to conduct a heritage assessment of the old village. Nonetheless, it is clear
that there are significant heritage resources in the village, and we understand that the
Pickering Heritage Committee intends to undertake such a study.
Many members of the public who came out in February 2008 were not aware of the
nature of heritage designations, nor of the limitations and opportunities they provide for
an area. Indeed, many saw heritage designation only as a negative impact on their
property values. We suggest that an education campaign on heritage be targeted to
property owners in the City's former heritage villages, in order to better explain the
advantages and restrictions of the various types of heritage designation.
6.
ATTACHMENT#_-j TO
INFORMATiON R'i::PORT# (-~ . {> p
. fl.
7 1
"J
4. Conclusion
It is appropriate to rezone the lands on the south side of Dunbarton Road to remove the
"C2" zoning that currently applies there. The appropriate zone for these lands should
be predominantly residential, with limited opportunities for small scale retail and office
uses in the buildings. Performance standards should be modified to reflect the existing
conditions and to minimize the opportunity for legal non-conforming status to occur.
It is also appropriate to rezone the "A" zoned lands at 1062 Dunbarton Road on the
north side to reflect the existing development through an extension of the "S3-8" zone to
the west.
Attachments:
1. Existing Zoning and Study Area boundaries
2. Residents' submission
3. Comments from February 26, 2008 Public Workshop
4. Draft amending zoning by-law
Submitted by:
MACAULAY SHIOMI HOWSON LTD.
Per: Peter Cheatley, MCIP, RPP
7.
z 2
,) -
AITPICHMEN'UL_ TO
INFORlvlATION REPOHTtJ I
r
,(",
Attachment #1
LL
~
i ~
I _~,i
~i
.
S2-X
~
<(-0
O~
0~
o
~~
c.1V. f?
\"IIG\"I
Proposed Zoning
Dunbarton Village
ArTACHMENT#=3 TO
REf,>',)RY # 1-') I y)
Attachment #2
u..
ROAD
C. tv. f?
rI\GrI
Existing Zoning
Dunbarton Village
ATIAC~IME\\ll#=--"O, "(-
I .., . , .".-
n"")"n'~\T,f& c.', (('
!,\~::;i).,.jl!...Jr'\!. ~ 'z..... .
7, L1
.....} \
l
"i .'.., '32?~1
... ~.~. ..._---~...._-..
Attachment #3
Dunbarton Village Land Use & Zoning
~ !
A historic view looking east beside the same shot from today. Note tbe sidewalk location & narrowness of the st
A.
~.'.:.'J'
r
Executive Summary
This paper has been assembled by some of the residents of the Village of
Dunbmion to assist the Planning Department of the City of Pickering in
determining a suitable future for infill development among the several dozen
properties that presently exist in this tiny community. The premise taken in this
pap\.l is that the remnants of this historic enclave exist presently in a purely
residential environment and it is the belief that the majority of the residents and
owners of the properties within Dunbart(',n desire that this use be protected.
.This paper further maintains that the present C2 zoning is obsolete and
inappropriate given the various structural changes that have taken place within
the village over the past 50 years. The basis of this argument is supported
Historically, Environmentally, from principles good Traffic Access, standards
of Sound Planning and Design, and Socially. These are subjects that Inake up
the subsequent segments of this paper. We are at a unique juncture in the history
of the village in that there has been virtually no change in use of the existing
properties for over 40 years.
Z.
32'07
J
~-'\
Ar'tt\f.:Hr,)]ET~r#:::..:- "0 ._
1. . r
INa::o,:re1" ""f'f"", V0"'.:f''C'.''.u I )'C,'~
~ ' ~\,fib<;'\ ' h.Jd r(fkS""';('( ~ ';'~ I - -- / ,
7 5
",
"'-' \..
History
The Village of Dunbarton was initially occupied in the early 1800's and was
established around the major land holding of the Dunbar family from whence the
village drew its name. It existed as a minor commercial centre supporting a
primarily rural farming community well into the 1950's and may have survived
as a viable village until the destruction of the village by the incursion of the CN
freight line which was completed in the early 1960's. Prior to this event, the
village was very different .
The Kings Highway # 2 now known as Kingston Road ran through the village
and commercial property lined both the north and south sides. From Fairport
Road through to Dunchurch existed numerous commercial establishments
including a Butcher, a Grocer, a General Store, a Restaurant, a Radio and TV
Repair, two Auto Repair and Gasolene Sales, a Police Station, a Lumber Yard, a
Taxi Stand, a Post Office, a Doctors Surgery and a Real Estate office as well as a
healthy mixture of residential properties including the Manse associated with the
United Church. All of this changed with the intrusion of the railway and the
relocation of the Kings highway to bypass the village. For the most part the
Commercial enterprises were expropriated and their sites ended up beneath the
tracks and even the two or three that survived were short lived and none survived
on the north side of the CNR line beyond 1963.
The land south of the railIine has developed appropriately in a commercial
manner being still adjacent to the relocated highway. The land on the north side
of the tracks developed in a different direction and despite the C2 zoning, only
residential infil has taken place since that time. One could argue that the zoning
should have been corrected many years ago by the former Township or later the
Town of Pickering. It is now time to correct this abenation and establish the
Village as residential which is what it has evolved to in any event and what it
should have been zoned since the incursion of the eN rail line.
A"li""l'.I\f"H~..W~~iC~,,,, :5 ''If'1'll
1", ~ ; r\J ,:t':lz,;"._,~'i; ~ 'U'.C:~' Y
7 /'
jD ll~7
. Environment, Tree and \Vatercourse Protection
-0
<:..
r-~LP'fJFr{ #
1.1 t'y;
\ \ \ \\ \ \. \ I r- -' j
\ \ I . \. \\ \ 'I : I ;
'\ \\ I '\.:-.:~~ I \~.' 1/' J
,I I . . "\- / I
\1 I', . I, \ I \
\1 ., .).,l II j
ii>\\\( '. \~/
! ~ - -,
-~ . '''1 . I' \. \~'~" ~
f-=:::~~~ ~,._- . '-'J':"" ,\,,,,, /
I ..' I: . " I
\ ','" ~ l . ", '\
: . . "'~-- ---:-:---:-1-.. .'. ~. ./
,l\. \/~~~ ----\J~~~~>1~!0:~~~~:~-~~ /~
\,' \ i r. _~~~SE.;!!. ')}_\(:<s-
:n=~=~~~:==~~
.Y"" '..~_~~_../-"'~....-' "'-. ,~?;~~." .-
, \' ---- "-, -' ,
--,"_';' \\::,.\."'-: ./.-_..----- ~~..,.y"..----..--~' """..
~ IA \..,- \ ," --~... ~,.'.~~-.:::~~:::::-__,,---/--- ~---- ~':-', ....'.. c"" ,.,
r ~_ ./~" \ _---..----- . - _ _ ,_
The Dunbarton Tree Protection Plan
Although the land in question is very small, almost 50% of the land that is zoned
C2 is part of the Dunbarton Creek watershed and falls under a special bylaw
provision restricting the cutting of trees and was designed to protect the
watershed area from unsuitable uses.
Planning and Design
The Pickering Official Plan under City Policy, Dunbarton Neighbourhood
Policies, Section 11.9 specifically states under subsection (a) that "in the
established areas... including Dunbarton Road.. ..encourage and.. .require (that)
new development be compatible with the character of existing development"
and under subsection (b) "encourage opportunities to rejuvenate the historic
Village.. ..including small scale commercial enterprises on suitable sites,
provided the historic character of the area and the interests of neighbouring
residents are respected..."
2
32. -07
I
""il"'l"'~I"H~U~!\IT,It.) 1.'~
''''U ~kV{'l; .;.,.lli,.."J>.l ti<",.o~_""" U , I
I.' ',(..;
;:;~jcCin tj!. _) c v'
""1 f-'"
, I
,,' !
i~('.'}':'~fr'\
"I'..'.' .......,_.0:.'..' '
..)./ ;~~_::w':.'':: ";:'::_~':~ j~:.~'.
,:Ii..".,.......'...~ !h"
!' f:':~,:';:,<:',\'" . .
;.. 'f . "~;;.':::'.~c .
..,,;;. .,
Pictures of the zero lot line issue
.]\10st of the residential buildings within the old village are on a zero lot line with
minimal front or side yard setbacks. In many cases, driveways, sidewalks and
even road allowances border these struct1lfes. The structures themselves are on
foundations constructed in the mid 1800's and are typically of fieldstone
mortared with lime. Although these structures have withstood the past hundred
plus years of use, they were not designed to handle heavy truck or machinery
loads. Permitting commercial uses requiring the use, movement and storage of
heavy trucks, equipment and supplies within this precinct would be ill advised if
not dangerous and are certainly NOT either compatible with existing
development or respecting the interests of neighbouring residents.
2
, ., .Pla~~ing and Design c~m,~~\nEN'fiL_.~~TO .~2-~,~,
"j () l"I1:"'''i\~f\''"'it'',;.\ tj\:~}."""r>',1i I,) { ~
1~lnJrl!.ii1Jl?1.~ ~~~.~1ij ~ \r.&"'~ ~" to ~ .t~
Many of the existing property owners have made substantial investments in
residential improvements to their properties. Commercial uses incompatible with
the historical residential evolution of this environment would be detrimental to
their property values and to their right to enjoy the quiet undisturbed use of their
homes.
The City has supported the evolution of the existing land use toward a purely
residential construct. This is evidenced by the new residential construction at the
western limits of Dunbarton Rd as well as the redevelopment of the original
Dunbar property into several executive homes in a style compatible with the
historic nature of the village. The city has also periodically supported the
uniqueness of the village setting by investments in suitable street scaping and
. improved lighting. To permit incompatible commercial uses would fly in the face,
of not only the local residents wishes but also is contrary to the previous actions
of the Town and the City in the past.
City investments on landscaping and old style street lamps are in context with historic village setting.
7
32-0)
~:. 0
'.-' ,/
Socially
FiL.T:.{)~x~\' tJ
,'."',')
,"') L->~;i
.
It is appropriate that the City take steps to protect the residential nature of the
Dunbarton Village and support the wishes of the maj ority of local residents to
remove the existing C2 zoning and enact a local community bylaw to that effect
for certainty going forward.
The cornmunity is a small enclave and door to door polling has been taken in an
ad- hock fashion that universally supports such an undertaking. The singular
wishes of the one resident who is seeking leave to develop a commercial use (re
notice of Public Hearing PICA 68/06) is not supported and would be out of
character with the development of the village since the early 1960's. Even prior
to that time, no commercial use ever existed on the property in question and had
it been proposed, it would likely have been rejected. The situation of an existing
C2 zoning is an aberration that should have been corrected long ago but should
not be permitted to stand and confuse matters from this point forward.
The applicant of PICA 68106 has not owned the site for any length oftime and its
value has not changed since its acquisition within the last 12 months. Its value at
the time was due to a residential use, not having a commercial value.
Conclusion
The City of Pickering needs to take steps in accordance with the Official Plan of
the City of Pickering to protect the historic nature of the Village of Dunbarton.
The present C2 zoning is inappropriate and is not in accordance with wishes of
the community. The impetus for a suitable amendment is supported Historically,
Environmentally and from the Principals of Good Design and Sound Planning.
" ,
4(']
u
)
ATI;,~m-1MEN'f#,,~m "
. ~... I ~)('f,:
,#, ---,',. '"
~~
rlCiFRiNG
PL>\J'J'NlL'JG &. DEVELOPMENT DF.PARTMENT
Department 905.42tJ,~617
F~~imil~ 905.410,7648
pl.1n&devl@city pick.uing.on.~
F"'I'J ny
~. ,- 1
.:',u"rin;j Civlc Cllmpl,
One The Esplana.J
Pickering, OntiJri
Clll'lada LlV 6K
Di1-c:t kCe55 905,4.20.466
Toll m'1:: 1.86",683,276
cityofpickering.con
Attachment #4
February 8. 2008
-':0 Property Owner/Resident:
Subject: .
Dunbarton Village Zoning Review .
Public Consultation Meeting.
The City of Pickering is currently reviewing the zoning farthe historical Village of Dunbarton
in the City of Pickering. It is anticipated that a City initiat.ed rezoning application may be
processed in the future to implement new zoning for the area that better reflects the existing
built form and the Official Plan policies. The Official Plan includes a policy for the area that'
. encourages opportunities to rejuvenate the historical Village of Dunbarton. '
.' In orderJo initiate this project the Planning & Developm~nt Department is. hosting a
public consultation meeting'to receive inp'ut from the, area residents on 'the zoning'ofthe
. Dunbarton Village. You are therefore invited to' attend the following meeting: , '.
, Date:
Time:
. Place:
FebruarY 26, 2008
7:00pm . '... '. : .
Dunbarton United Church, 1 066 Dunba~on Road, Pickering
. .' ,
, "Thesubjet.t lands are general.lylocated north of Kingston ROad, west ofDixieHoadand
. east' of.the DunbartonCreek. The subject lands are located on Dunbarton Road. . The'
lands are within the Dunbarton Neighb.ourhood. Lands within' Dunba'rtori Village
currently have a variety of zoning (see Attachment #1). The' majqrity of the properties
were zoned with the adoption of the original Zoning By-law 3036 which was passed by
'. Council and app.roved by ~he Ontario MunicipalBoard in 1966.
For further information, 'pleasecontact me at 905.420~4660 extension 2034, or by email .
at rpym(Wcit'{.pickerinQ.on.ca: .
....YO/?lrUIY~
'K~.~
Ross Pym, MCIP, RPP .
'. Principal Planner - Development Review
RP:jf .
. rpI~.. '~atr1",...,.."" "m"'fIg
Attachment (see reverse)
FEB-19-2008 14:43
905 420 7648
98%
P.02
.--
.;
;2- TO_, ..' c
'rc~~r~~);;~:V\j\~~(;r~~ Ft~0"'Of~~h'tI. In) -(<'(-:"
.". '1
Ll
,
CITY OF PICKERING
DUNBARTON VILLAGE ZONING REVIEW
Public Workshop
February 26, 2008
SIGN-IN SHEET
NAME
ADDRESS
..... ,,(' <- (I" ,
,/J <- '" ,; _, .c"'~' /'1.4- ,""" " t..--: c' :::;; ~'. -. /.0. . ..c
~L) ';: t) I ( I lv' ~) ('
I "
I'\!J'v '.~.i'l> .: ib0 (,.1" Zrh ( r u " - 'n ( l.' .' fC't::-
) ,
') )
1.:) I/r"
~LJ
Of\((r,St \R
i/ I'll jj I1~TU It) f( L
i'i\:'''"
)f
I) ,. t., ,,',
!" \,.,.^'-'V"\. t:) "'-','- I "I, I
h L:C
I /
Di) /'vbc(/~r?J/V'
i
t\ '
Jt h^'.1 /,d
C,1
,"'\.' \.4.-'t
I ~ II -('. n"ll d.,; (/,,'-;7
! i;;: t,. { /-1 e,.. -1/.,1" t-k. (,":C./.J
/'
f)'Y'v. :e..
L,/ ~' \-
. . )
,r :- J,
/ .'
I,...-!..."..."
. "\"; :;'t"\ " .<. ('K t",. D ~"-<.
/(; Lf{ {)".~ &.!rh", 1 td L J \,/- I Gf 8
..1 . ,.(",
R,iC;1{i#. L) C (T I
42
CITY OF PICKERING
DUNBARTON VILLAGE ZONING REVIEW
Public Workshop
February 26, 2008
SIGN-IN SHEET
NAME
ADDRESS
" \' ,.. , ",'<'", '(
(I i~' i< tt Ii: I')L(.LAl. (< '.' C "
i)!( ~{ 7. IN C c:rsf-
r.. . ,t: C k " L VI vi
!\
_1 l/Ii:1JV /1 g;;'u7'-
({C'l-V f( I)
! f "J
/ (I / (,.1' I~ ,( Ii t' Ci r '{ ) Ii P
fic,
?~() r I) .e. /v', (f",
;. l1{t',,) & it{ .~alJ~
(~
- f\) rl
/ <Ji Q,Ct \. /
<)
/O,,/,,/ -117t)j "1 I ,D ,!
G ):J llJ I t....GV Ct9-J ~
02. y f.A/'f /1 c'E6 6112--1 4
(v1.'/ 1~/~{f.yi/2A'Y /~
'- ( (.'-'; T7"'n-'
i(\/,'-!l
~. '" I '
JIU .!I.I/
(J v IGf
(III ]/...[,
'(:),1,) r~((C"''Jr-.i -FiT ill.{'>C.,.t.'r l;,j\'CC{) CV"'PC",I
{/ ",)''/...1.-.
I u <; ("=t" ' ') t. r-1c) ,,"R (A ~ \ V l \~ I
, ,; <:, ,; \ '~r.j ~) (-""t<'" <..) '0 L \ vi i c/t
J (i 0 (, l').J.J v"j/
.*
~
I "';-)
'- c' : \:)r{'"
-'.j l, (,. 'cel. \-, ' \ f\ (.{ ,,\
~ I (\.., {'" -...' /~ : J.
,,(\) I,...',; c.L,vr '.
j\"l"'fl'rl.!~~r;v'r, ,u_ T^
"'H~"',A...."~.,,, fr,.,.,_~. V - ,C
"!'~"""""'i""""'C" ""';',n",>, a I ) -[y)
~~~V"'\ir'i;'dlt.'H c 1,"';l \f~~;~~-(;L i ~ 'it.. - .-
/1 'Z
(i ,)
CITY OF PICKERING
DUNBARTON VILLAGE ZONING REVIEV\R E eEl V ED
Public Workshop
February 26, 2008 FEB 2 9 2008
COMMENT SHEET
CITY OF PICKERING
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
The City welcomes any comments and suggestions you may have about the proposed
Zoning by-law amendment. Please indicate your thoughts below and leave them with us
or send to: Mr. Ross Pym, Principal Planner, Planning Department, City of Pickering, One
The Esplanade, Pickering, Ontario L 1V 6K7.
o ~ a~ 'fcJCcncJUo.A '{- --9 ~cLicJ
~ ~O~::'I~ m\~ c\\-'0::4 WCJ:/J \-uid on ~t .J("joJ,
~ Q~ ~j(0ULA.(\j ,--,r(r~)Q/zd. '\0 ~ f ~ c
6~ Y\O~ ~. ~ '+' ~O-A'd Wh~
~ C?'\GUAf (l\. ~S1eJL\ c~ /)0. (I q Ji~ /:i) l/ )'PI A\.Jl".
6 ~ _'-'..JI...J'" ..J-J
GAl?" J CAfY'\ o.\~~ ~ ~ 0~N~ 3~J
OJ) \\~./~-uJL~'\C..Q11 (O/V\ AcA 0J~ ~c:C:IO l.lU'j /
Dv::A I, 9 G-(V\. \)OJ.-V\ (-G(\U2/lnud ~ 0JJ~fv\'\'\~"d
\ -~ )
:)0 - ,30 r-b).(\ \~~ U Dl ~,j ~ bLuJ~ ~ r/.-JAYGlJ
~ lI\Jj \\OQ~ G--~~J~I/. g Lr\C00 ~~
, ~ \ -
c.~n~~u;I'/'ieiA S\r\~/~c- ~ccJd ~ CZLA(Xfirrf)
____9 \.)0 ~ll \ \ Q~ (\ G (0 :9 ~ n Qpj (\haJJ (Y\. ~
\lAo~,rd~ \!~ \JjOl~C~ clQrLQ(~ ~J 3 ..~-tA
~ \-ecA ~ ,_O-e W Ml ""~ + r+- LJJ(L, NJ/x-J-
o\our ~ ()\. S 'r\ c~ ~
~ ~ ""~\ L~'~ h~ 0~ DuO\b~)-
c\- c~ 1 r\sLQcL ~ bz (\~ ~ d ch -r -f 01.-tfrYl J
~C1V\- G ~____ J\.JW \ ~\ ~ ~ClI.:L)} w~ h~ ~
, ,If 1
' (1. i
I '
)
':'"T'CHMFJ,>['T~L~,::...,,:TO? , ,. (
.. I', C /")
~o::r-'": -.' ~,.
0~1j~W h,~ O:J bWcoJl \/cU-t.u ~
O\:~QMO _ .9 ~ ~L0 ~ \0\ ~ ~\rn6'-lf1-.'1
fc^,- ~{\' s- 'S''0--fu tfM'( ~6~ ~ ~bc'~1r\ oj
ffi'1 S~e.e t ~ ~ \~QQ'5 ~A' J-
WG-~wot 0-\ ~J-lln~ ~mfL CJQuf\ ~ 1Uf/~d
W~ ~ G" ~y- i - {J\e)C ~. GJ..J2.. {VCU - rnWJ'lJ
II. Ll Y\ 6Ao.Jo D:0 ~ QM o-~ d MS,G ~ n\.
c1 CWr'\ \ Wt W ~ V\JLlS-Ul ~CJi..A,e Q,rn } ~t \-]07 Lf
'-'--'J W\2. ~ c4~--rccr"d {- N[}q 0/1~1J']
~cA ~ --\ L\./LLI ~ oJl--1ClV) 0 lJA ~ o::JJ
I\.A " \0 t C oJ. b LAA J c-0" nor
r JLt Ci/.lR LO fL--M' 1l LeI ~ IUvf LW
~ CI\ \~o't <Y~ (J C\JA r l CU\~D -
S'i " CSucM.. '? _
:9~ R: cJ..~ .
. )
ATIflcCH~.p;r~tr# .~.!...".,.O
I j ()r:.'
f#
Page I of I
, I:
',f ,)
Dave Yauk
From: Pym, Ross
Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 1:36 PM
To: Peter Cheatley; yauk@mshplan.ca
Subject: Dunbarton Village Zoning Review
More comments on the Dunbarton Village Zoning Review,
Thanks
Ross
From: kathybridges
Sent: Thursday, March 06,20081:00 PM
To: Pym, Ross
Subject: Dunbarton Village Zoning Review
Dear Ross Pym,
My wife and I have been in the Dayeare business on Dunbarton Road since we purchased
in 1984. We bought our house and Nursery School business from Jim and Clare Martyn
and sometime later expanded to the church across the street. We feel that the
zoning which was in place at the time of purchase should remain, as probably some of our
neighbours do. However, the commercial zoning in the old village should be change to
accommodate a somewhat lighter use ????
We feel that any hope of restoring the historical village of Dunbarton was lost when the
old Blacksmith Shop was demolished to make way for the new houses by Gwillimbury
construction, and shortly after that high voltage power lines where routed through the old
village. Sincerely Dave and Kathy Bridges
1089 Dunbarton Rd.
Pickering, ON L IV 1H1
************************************************************************************
This electronic message and all contents contain information from which may be privileged, confidential
or otherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible
for delivering the e-mail to the intended recipient, any disclosure, copy, distribution or use of the
contents of this message is prohibited. If you have received this electronic message in error, please
notifY the sender immediately by return emaiJ and destroy the original message and all copies.
************************************************************************************
3/6/2008
..1 ?.
I_~ \.)
"""1''''Llq~,.~~!4'',\,) TO
PH !nvnh!..,~; I ..._r,.~.~._...,... ........, J / 'r.. <;>
HU{),-.i ft._ I) -
Page 1 of2
Dave Yauk
From: Pym. Ross{rpym@city.p<:kenng,Ofl.ca]
Sent: Thursday. Marcl1 06. 2008 11 02 AM
To: Peter Cheatley, yauk@mshplan.ca
SUbject: FW Dunbarton Village
Comments received on the proposed zoning review
Thanks
Ross Pym
Principal Planner - Development Review
Planmng & Development Department
City of Plckenng
Direct Dial 905420.4660 exl. 2034
Toll Free 1.006 6832760
FaCSimile 905.420.7648
email rpYI1l@cjty_plckering,on,G:B
Websde. cityofplckenng.com
from; Dickerson, Doug, Coondllo<
Sent: Sunday, March 02,2008 11:10 AM
To; Mclean, Bill, CO'-"ollo<; Boyd Penny
CC; Michaud, Renee; Pym, Ross; Taylor, Lynda; Carroll, Neil
SUbject RE: Dunbarton ViIl"9<'
HI Boyd.
Thank you for your well though1 out beliefs and concerns 1 especially wish to say "hanks" for your comments respecting your own property You are correct in that you probably have the
masl to loose following re-zoning to Residential of your personal property That is also very generous of you to agree to thai on behalf of your l161ghbours
And, speaktng pefsonally, I agree wlth your comnents respectlng a '1lemage distnt.1" designation
It might also be useful If you woukj pass your comments on to Rick and Bonnie for their notes
Pe~onal Regards,
Doug
From; McLean, Bill, Councillor
Sent: 5013/1/200812:17 PM
To; Boyd Penny; Dickerson, Doug, Coonclllar
Cc; Michaud, Renee
SUbject; RE: Dunbarton Village
Thank you for your comments, I will forward thiS to planning
from: Boyd Penny [mailto:b,penny@sympalico,ca]
Sent: Sal 01/03/2008 11:07 AM
To: Dickerson, Doug, Councillor; Mclean, Bill, Councillor
Subject; Dunbarton Vil~
Thank you for accepting my comments regarding the future zoning Of Dunbarton Village. Our primary position and belief is that the village is a residential
neighbourl1ood. And it should remain resldenliat The current hodge-podge zoning is an outdated legacy: the consequence of qUickly changing times and
other higher priorities faced by the City
As owners of the property zoned for agriculture, it could be argued that we have the biggest amount to lose in a pure residential zoning., However, we believe
this is the most appropriate zoning far the Village of Dunbarton, the abutting community and the City of Pickering.
We believe our property should be designated residential and we have every intention to continue living in our home for the next 30+ years (we hope)
However we believe it is practical and prudent far the City to consider some alternative low density residential usage of the property currently zoned
agricultural.
The current generic "residential" zoning in Pickering allows for small home businesses These businesses are generally unobtrusive, create limited traffic and
parking concerns, and if we are not mistaken must be earned out by the owner(s) and occupants of the residence. We believe these regulations are
reasonable and sufficient to satiSfy entrepreneur activity while maintaining a purely residential enVIronment
It has been raised that the Village has a unique opportunity to create a special status and become a "destination" within PIckering, similar to that of the bottom
of Liverpool. We do not believe this to be practocal or realistiC. VVhile the Liverpool setting had space (acres) to develop and accommodate new bUSinesses,
parking, an eXisting restaurant. a manne, a well funded waterfront park and the lake to create a critical mass of interest, Dunbarton Village has none of this
Realistically there are only 8-10 reSIdences in a 200-400 mete span which could accommodate small business such as tea room, antique store, or similar
enterpnse. There is no other area to expand. There are no ather areas of Interest There is already limited parking. VVhile Dunbarton Village is Indeed
unique, we do not View this potential "opportunity" as realistiC. We believe the generic residential zoning code as adequate and appropriate.
By expanding the ZOning to enable "ather business (and in particular If not carried out by the owner and occupant of the residence), the City also potentially
creates a future situation similar to what II faces today: an aggressive entrepreneur who blatantly and flagrantly ignores the laws of the City and the wishes of
his/her neighbaurs. Any rezoning by the City should be very specific and be scrutinized from the perspective of a selfish and self-serving lawbreaker to
enable the City to take immediate corrective action to protect the interests of the residents Of the Village and surrounding community.
The Village is in the middle of a residential community. This is fact The legacy zoning is almost irrelevant and an error or oversight of past reviews/studies.
We believe it should be zoned purely residential However, in no case should a commercial zoning be continued or conSidered. As evidenced by the actions
and words of the owner of 1047 Dunbarton, the property was not acquired far residential purposes but far purposes of a landscaping business. He stated at
the public workshop that the property was not worthy of on-going maintenance and not likely to be standing in 10 years. The limited commercial use has
already negatively impacted the indiViduals, the quality of life and the structures and infrastructure of the Village. These Issues are well known and
documented by the City We believe such commercial activity is the thin edge of the wedge and continued commercial zoning will result in the eventual and
qUick deterioration of the Village as it IS now known. The fact that a commerCial enterprise (or planned venture) is owned or managed by a resident andlor
owner of a home in the Village IS irrelevant The nature of the business actiVity and not ownership is the crux of the issue.
The Village is unique and should be maintained as a reflection of the past. However, having said that. we would not be in favour of a "heritage district"
designation We are concerned that such a designation could be constnctlve and remove many rights and pnvlleges that ordinarily come with home
3/6/2008
"~l ,''''qr~f'~''1.r# TO
1'~. ~,y\,;"t{~,"'k~,,~t"\;" .,.>:~ ',(
"l';'~',f\,,:' '.IS I" )
t\i.J ",-}U~N ..i".~
ownership
I ask that you please forward this to the Plannong Department
Again, I would like to thank you for soliciting our input and giving consideration to our wishes
Boyd and Nancy Penny
1062 Dunbarton Rd
-C,y
Page2of2
............................... "'.. '" "'.......... '" '" '" '" "'.... "'............................ "'.................................................... .......... "'..... "'...... '" "'............................".................... "'...................... "'..............................
lbis electronic message and all contents contain information from which may be privileged, confidential or utherwise protected from disclosure. If you are not the intended
recipient or tm: person responsible for dellVenng the e-mail to the intended rec,pient, any disclosure, copy, dIStribution or use of the contents of this message is prohibited If
you have received thIs electromc message In error, please notiry the sender immediately by return email and destroy the original message and all C<lpies
.......................... "'.......... "'............................................................... "'.... ill........ "'......... "'................................................................................................................................................................................
3/6/2008
Ii '--7
,:{<
:; T^
.--- OJ ,2 _ ,')
fLL) (y,:
4 g
~6 27/~o
Mr. Cheatley:
Thank you for the presentation yesterday at Dunbarton Church regarding the above
subject matter. After reviewing the plans and listening to the other people in attendance
my husband have discussed the matter privately and we would like to express our
concern over Zone A.
We live on Rambleberry Avenue and if/when Zone A would ever be reviewed it would
definitely affect us and the value of our home. There wasn't too much discussion
regarding Zone A except for the ideas of an executive retreat, or a small hotel for the stars
etc. We want to express our total disagreement to these ideas. My husband and I are of
the same opinion that we would have no issues if this area was rezoned from Agricultural
to Single home dwelling (residential) however with the proviso that the houses would
need to be built with the same structure and format of the houses to the North.
We object to townhomes or apartments or even smaller size homes. This would devalue
our property. We've worked very hard in maintaining our home through upgrades, as I
know' most of our neighbours have done, and would appreciate Zone A to be mirrored to
the homes to the North.
Insofar as the Rezoning C2 and R3; we have no objections about having small discreet
businesses operating out of people's homes (no disruption to the neighbourhood would be
prudent and no businesses that will create and/or escalate crime - e.g. - pubs,
convenience store, pool hall etc.). Having small businesses such as for an accountant or
lawyer etc. would be fine with us.
Good luck in your endeavour and wish you luck and look forward to the next meeting in
April.
Kind regards,
Colomba Yani
John Lynn
",
", T1'l.
. ;"..;..._ v ':..:. .' (j
R,}{h,," #. I ) '(/(/
/1 Q
,+ -'
CITY OF PICKERING
DUNBARTON VILLAGE ZONING REVIEW
Public Workshop
February 26, 2008
COMMENT SHEET
The City welcomes any comments and suggestions you may have about the proposed
Zoning by-law amendment Please indicate your thoughts below and leave them with us
or send to: Mr. Ross Pym, Principal Planner, Planning Department, City of Pickering, One
The Esplanade, Pickering, Ontario L 1V 6K7.
C L "-~
/~(
10-6((
Ie' ( ~ ~ k
Lv 0G\.-(~ ck i.-~ lvLlcG
! \
c~ul\ l'\A (UIA 'd"DL ~~ \0 Tlr,
vi 'iJU.. tJ'\l ~ ~ ~" flGr ~Gl~
\~1 v\U:L\ 0-,\. Q ClJ-f' ~~\'V'\l't, \J'i'-
~Clc~
.../
L( )V/J
~ike
./\
/
~Jli>~U\
< ,
..L,.TO ,
. ft_I)DY'
.: .' 5 [I
CITY OF PICKERING
DUNBARTON VILLAGE ZONING REVIEW
Public Workshop
February 26, 2008
COMMENT SHEET
The City welcomes any comments and suggestions you may have about the proposed
Zoning by-law amendment. Please indicate your thoughts below and leave them with us
or send to: Mr. Ross Pym, Principal Planner, Planning Department, City of Pickering, One
The Esplanade, Pickering, Ontario L 1V 6K7.
I.........
/j
( /1_ ,.-L/)
C Z{!;',''l <C;:r'
!i
'--. I
v
Iv
l
r~~, 1
CITY OF PICKERING
DUNBARTON VILLAGE ZONING REVIEW
Public Workshop
February 26, 2008
COMMENT SHEET
The City welcomes any comments and suggestions you may have about the proposed
Zoning by-law amendment. Please indicate your thoughts below and leave them with us
or send to: Mr. Ross Pym, Principal Planner, Planning Department, City of Pickering, One
The Esplanade, Pickering, Ontario L 1V 6K7.
tJ fr17, \
- ,. -. 7 ).,'" ~., J," _ '
It-i~ _<, t .( l.l4 e0 -c;/ 4c' I. ;
c/ ;) .) 0'
~-(~ //)/'Tr::', // /~~/. ,
/
Ii
'I.
j
."",_..10
,~, . r.
~L' ~(/;
March 20, 2008
Thank you for the opportunity to address the issues of
zoning and theming along Dunbarton Road. Several officials of our
church attended, and we would like to make the following submissions.
The church is particularly concerned to ensure that zoning
will allow us to expand our facility in the future. It may be that we
will want to redevelop the older structure on the south end of the
property, creating office space for lease or rent to other non-profit or
charitable organizations. We would be happy to be able to cooperate in
keeping the village theme by perhaps maintaining the fayade of the older
sanctuary facing south. Assuming that the interior would be expanded
east, occupying more property, we would also be interested in keeping
appropriate facades there, as well.
In addition, we would like to have the freedom to develop a
private/public financed community centre for the area, also occupying
more of the east lawn. Whatever the architectural style, this could be
of interest to the city as well as the neighbourhood.
We look forward to discussing these and other ideas at the
next meetings.
Glenn R. Brown
Pastor
.",,)..,.10
I ~- ,-,C;:
#. -, '-, C"
z
,)
From: Harold & Phyllis QUinton [mailto:hpquinton@sympatico.ca)
Sent: Monday, March 24, 200811:47 AM
To: Pym, Ross
Cc: Dickerson, Doug, Councillor; McLean, Bill, Councillor
Subject: Dunbarton Village Zoning, Public Workshop of Feb 26, 2008
1024 Rambleberry Ave
Pickering,Ont
l1V 5X6
March 24,2008
Ross Pym
Planning Department
City of Pickering
One Esplanade
Pickering, Ontario
L 1V 6K7
Dear Mr. Pym
Thank you for the City's efforts to address the zoning irregularities within the community of
Dunbarton and for organizing the workshop held on February 26, 2008. I should apologize for the
tardiness of my response to your request for feedback following the meeting. I have been out of
the Province since the weekend following the meeting and only just returned.
I am not presently a resident on Dunbarton Road, however, I am a long time resident of the
Dunbarton Community. I was born in Dunbarton in 1951 and have lived here most of my life. I
was also a previous President of the now defunct Dunbarton Ratepayers Association and
participated in the development of the segments of the Official Plan that pertain to the history of
the village. I now live immediately adjacent to Dunbarton Road and wish to see it maintained in
the manner to which it has evolved. That is to say, it should be restricted to residential uses
only.
I have lived in Dunbarton when it was able to thrive as a small commercial centre. This was
irrevocably altered when the rail line bisected the village and destroyed most of the commercial
properties in the 60's. This also caused the relocation of Kingston Road to bypass Dunbarton and
run immediately south of the remaining village. The present hodge podge of C2, Residential and
Agricultural Zoning is a left over from these days. When the Official Plan failed to deal with this
enigma in the late 70's, I think it was because there was still a glimmer of hope that some of the
quaintness of a small village could return. It has taken me 45 years to realize that it just isn't
going to happen. In fact, the miss match of zoning has left in its wake a degree of uncertainty and
has led to some inappropriate property uses which contravene both the Official Plan intentions
and the communities wishes.
Zoning exists to delineate conflicting objectives between land uses and to afford the property
owners some certainty as to their rights and obligations. In its present state of mixed zoning,
Dunbarton sits in a state of uncertainty. luckily, over the past 50 years, there has been no conflict
because the community has evolved as a residential neighbourhood. Now that there is some
4
- /"
')C'D
desire by one resident to make use of one property in a manner that is not compatible with
this residential use, it is time to correct the uncertainty,
There is really only one direction that land use in this small enclave can take, Agricultural zoning
is no longer appropriate because all of the surrounding property has become single family
residential, Commercial zoning is not supportable as has been proven by the fact that no
commercial enterprise has established itself in the community for over 50 years, This is because
the road, parking and other infrastructure necessary for such zoning does not exist The only
solution that is viable is that the entire village can only reasonably support Residential zoning,
By aligning the Dunbarton Village under Residential Zoning, I believe there are numerous
benefits that will accrue to the community, Uncertainty will be removed and allow property
owners to invest in their properties in a suitable manner, Existing residential investments will be
protected, Parking and commercial vehicle intrusions can be addressed which will create a safer
and more environmentally pleasing environment for residents. To the City of Pickering's credit,
staff will no longer be plagued with conflicting objectives between residential and commercial
interests and zoning bylaw enforcement will have clear direction,
I look forward to hearing the final recommendations,
Harold Quinton
'7
;2.. .1'0
~! I ~~)
.'R"--
I c-;..~
L L;
[
,)
From: Erwin Hoerdt [mailto:erwin.hoerdt@sympatico.ca]
Sent: Monday, March 24, 2008 9:25 AM
To: Pym, Ross; Dickerson, Doug, Councillor
Cc: McLean, Bill, Councillor
Subject: Fw: Zoning Review
To whom it may concern;
Sorry for the delay in responding to the zoning review. The day after the Town Meeting, as per
previous arrangements, we were out of the country, until recently.
Trust we are not too late in voicing our opinions.
Mr. Ross Pym,
Principal Planner,
Planning Department, City of Pickering,
One Esplanade, Pickering, ON L 1 V 6K 7
Cc Doug Dickerson, cc Bill McLean
Re: Public Workshop, February 26, 2008, City of Pickering/ Dunbarton
Village Zoning Review.
Dear Mr. Pym,
We appreciate the efforts of The City to take steps, in accordance with the
Official Plan of The City of Pickering, to protect the historic nature of the
Village ofDunbarton.
For the record, we support residential zoning, throughout the Village, with
the usual allowance for 25% business use. Although, it is an appealing
concept to visualize our Village dotted with cute teashops, charming little
stores, and "the like", we feel it is unrealistic to imagine these enterprises
survIvmg.
When Kingston Road traveled by the door many such shops thrived; C2
zoning made sense, and even (possibly) added value.
Today is a different time, the Village uses are residential in nature, and have
been for over 40 years. In order for us (as owners) to safeguard our property
values and (as residents) our rights to the quiet use and enjoyment of our
properties, we feel, residential zoning is the only choice.
With residential zoning we can have some protection from owners who have
no respect for the historic nature of the Village, or the wishes of their
neighbours.
:~) 6
.~ 1'0
, ~,-" . . I ..:..A.....,.) .(, L,"';
, A> ~.' .,'
'ir,,-,w
In 2000 (with the appropriate permits) we made extensive restorations and
improvements to our property, at 1043 Dunbarton Rd. We over-looked (on
the East side) a lovely country garden. We would not have invested so
dearly had we known that a few years later a landscaping and construction
yard would replace the garden. Since 1950 (of family ownership) of this
property, we have never experienced a situation like this.
In closing, we also believed that in an environmentally sensitive area (such
as ours) the total removal of trees and landscaping, and substantial changes
to grading would have restrictions.
With this in mind, as well as seeking protection, for the future (by way of
residential zoning) we also ask The City that the unsightly and inappropriate
changes to the yard at 1047 Dunbarton Rd (in place today) be halted and
reversed.
Thank you for your time, and for consideration of our wishes.
Sincerely,
Gwendolyn Broadmore (nee Quinton)
Erwin Hoerdt
Owners 1043 Dunbarton Rd., Pickering
(905) 475-8682
..) '7
Attachment #5
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING
BY-LAW NUMBER
/08
Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law
3036, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of
Pickering Planning Area, Region of Durham in the former Dunbarton
Village.
WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it
desirable to regularize the zoning of the former Dunbarton Village;
AND WHEREAS an amendment 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. SCHEDULE I
Schedule I attached hereto with notations and references shown
thereon is hereby declared to be part of this By-law.
2. AREA RESTRICTED
The provisions of this By-law shall apply to those lands in Part of Lot
25, Concession 1, Pickering designated "S2-x" and "S3-8".
3. 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.
')
t,
, <_..TO
4{;';)f(<
~i""._ . ~ L'
4.
DEFINITIONS
Use the definitions in bylaw Whitevale By-law 2677/88, plus:
Domestic Business - Type A shall mean an antique store, an arts and
crafts shop, a book store, a business office, a clothing boutique, a
custom workshop, a professional office, a tea room or a specialty
home furnishing shop, which is :
(a) operated from a detached dwelling on the lot, or a
building or structure accessory to the detached dwelling on the
lot;
(b) managed, directed or conducted by one or more of the
occupants of the detached dwelling on the lot; and
(c) occupies no more than 25% of the total gross floor area
of the detached dwelling and any accessory building or
structure on the lot.
Bed and breakfast establishment shall mean a home occupation within
a single detached dwelling wherein not more than two rooms are
rented and meals are served to overnight guests, which is:
(a) operated from a detached dwelling on the lot, or a
building or structure accessory to the detached dwelling on the
lot; and
(b) managed, directed or conducted by one or more of the
occupants of the dctached dwclling on the lot.
5. PROVISIONS
(a) Uses Permitted ("S2-x" Zone)
No person shall, within the lands designated "S2-x" on
Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter or use any
building or structure for any purpose except the following:
(i) detached dwelling residential use
TO
) ,,!!,,",
.u (~. /y
~t..~ . ~. ~ \,., .
9
(ii) home business as set out in Section 6.3 of By-law 3036
(iii) Domestic Business - Type A
(iv) Bed and breakfast establishment
(b) Zone Requirements ("S2- x" Zone)
No person shall, within the lands the lands designated "S2-x"
on Schedule I attached hereto use any lot or erect, alter or use
any building except in accordance with the following
prOVISIOns:
(i) LOT AREA (minimum):
350 m2
(ii) LOT FRONTAGE (minimum):
12.0 m
(iii) FRONT YARD DEPTH (minimum): 3.0 m
(iv) INTERIOR SIDE YARD WIDTH (minimum):
1.2 m, on one side, and 0.6 m on the other side.
(V) REAR YARD DEPTH (minimum): 7.5 m
(vi) LOT COVERAGE (maximum):
for all buildings and structures on a lot 38%
(vii) BUILDING HEIGHT (maximum): 9.0 m
(viii) DWELLING UNIT REQUIREMENTS:
maximum one dwelling unit per lot
(ix) PARKING REQUIREMENTS:
minimum one parking space per lot, which shall be
located within the rear yard or side yard
t~Tl~t'
;1. {') C y^'
"1
6 l)
(x) SPECIAL REGULATIONS:
all accessory buildings which are not part of the main
dwelling shall be erected not less than 1.0 m from any lot
line, save and except that a private detached garage may
be located not less than 0.6 metres from any side lot line.
(xi) Notwithstanding the provisions of this by-law, any lot in
the S2-x zone, which existed on the date of passing of
this by-law, and has insufficient lot area, parking, lot
frontage, front, rear or side yards, or exceeds the
permitted lot coverage or building height, shall be
deemed to comply with this by-law. Nothing in this by-
law shall prevent the erection of an addition to any such
dwelling, provided the addition conforms to the
provisions of this by-law.
6. PROVISIONS ("S3-8" Zone)
Lands known as 1 062 Dunbarton Road shall be zoned "S3-8" as
shown on Schedule 1 hereto and be subject to all of the provisions of
that zone, as set out in By-law 3036, as amended.
7. BY-LAW 3036
By-law 3036, as amended, 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 set out in Schedule I attached hereto. Definitions
and subject matters not specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be
governed by relevant provisions of By-law 3036, as amended.
8. ENFORCEMENT
standard clause
8. EFFECTIVE DATE
This By-law shall take effect from the day of passing hereof subject to
the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board, if required.
BY-LA W read a first, second and third time and finally passed this day
of , 2008.
Mavor
"'
Clerk
6 1
/-j
,;::-~, 30 . -' ,_ , (~
!! I ~)( ,f
III "'_.:;;"!L-
62
DUNBAR TON
UNITED
CHURCH
C.N.R.
SCHEDULE I TO BY-LAW
PASSED THIS
DAY OF 2008
~Q
6
ROAD 0::
z
o
l-
n::
<(
co
z
::)
o
I
MAYOR
CLERI<
t;n:<\CHMENT#.!L.- TO
"~''''V''''.h ".-'f)'" 15rr""'l"""B",i".!I /3-08
,....~ ;J'l~~ h,.,H, ~ h ~\lJ ttlt:rvn ~ w:
Pym, Ross
From:
Sent:
To:
Boyd Penny
Thursday, June 12, 20084:17 PM
Pym, Ross
6,3
Subject:
Zoning application A 12/08
Below is a copy of a submission I made to the City a few months ago, when the "community" was providing input to the
consultant. I am providing this written submission again to ensure that I meet the "Planning Act Requirements".
In addition, I want to repeat an issue that I raised with you via email on May 15, 2008. In reading the proposed by-law I
take exception to definition of Type A to
include "custom workshop". I believe it is too vague and could easily
become a "loophole". Even though there are other restrictions (eg. managed by "occupant", occupies no more than 25%)
almost anything could be a custom workshop. Anything being noisy, dirty, messy, polluting, odd hours, excessive traffic, a
workshop requiring industrial equipment, raw materials including stacks of wood, etc.
All of which could be "legal". Isn't there a better alternative?
"Custom" is "made to order", unique, special, etc and hence I am very concerned that "custom" workshop could be
abused
Dunbarton Village
Thank you for accepting my comments regarding the future zoning of Dunbarton
Village. Our primary position and belief is that the village is a
residential neighbourhood. And it should remain residential. The current
hodge-podge zoning is an outdated legacy: the consequence of quickly
changing times and other higher priorities faced by the City.
As owners of the property zoned for agriculture, it could be argued that we
have the biggest amount to lose in a pure residential zoning. However, we
believe this is the most appropriate zoning for the Village of Dunbarton,
the abutting community and the City of Pickering.
We believe our property should be designated residential and we have every
intention to continue living in our home for the next 30+ years (we hope).
However we believe it is practical and prudent for the City to consider
some alternative low density residential usage of the property currently
zoned agricultural.
The current generic "residential" zoning in Pickering allows for small home
businesses. These businesses are generally unobtrusive, create limited
traffic and parking concerns, and if we are not mistaken must be carried out
by the owner(s) of the residence. We believe these are reasonable and
sufficient to satisfy entrepreneur activity while maintaining a purely
residential environment.
It has been raised that the Village has a unique opportunity to create a
A??~A~!a9~~~~ II ~
H~ 1>'\;".!\Ji,\;;;,'\l i V?~V'" J.. '2 (jR
INFCfI.Mi\T;:e'!l\I19E1:JOfIT# U - ..
/ i1
1::) <+
special status and become a "destination" within Pickering, similar to that
of the bottom of Liverpool. We do not believe this to be practical or
realistic. While the Liverpool setting had space (acres) to develop and
accommodate new businesses, parking, an existing restaurant, a marine, a
waterfront park and the lake to create a critical mass of interest,
Dunbarton Village has none of this. Realistically there are only 8-10
residences in a 200-400 mete span which could accommodate small business
such as tea room, antique store, or similar enterprise. There is no other
area to expand. There are no other areas of interest. There is already
limited parking. While Dun barton Village is indeed unique, we do not view.
this potential "opportunity" as realistic. We believe the generic
residential zoning code as adequate and appropriate.
By expanding the zoning to enable "other" business (and in particular if not
carried out by the owner and occupant of the residence), the City also
potentially creates a future situation similar to what it faces today: an
aggressive entrepreneur who blatantly and flagrantly ignores the laws of the
City and the wishes of his/her neighbours. Any rezoning by the City should
be very specific and be scrutinized from the perspective of a selfish and
self-serving lawbreaker to enable the City to take immediate corrective
action to protect the interests of the residents of the Village and
surrounding community.
The Village is in the middle of a residential community. This is fact. The
legacy zoning is almost irrelevant and an error or oversight of past
reviews/studies. We believe it should be zoned purely residential.
However, in no case should a commercial zoning be continued or considered.
As evidenced by the actions and words of the owner of 1047 Dunbartofl, the
property was not acquired for residential purposes but for purposes of a
landscaping business. He stated at the public workshop that the property was
not worthy of on-going maintenance and not likely to be standing in 10
years. The limited commercial use has already negatively impacted the
individuals, the quality of life and the structures and infrastructure of
the Village. These issues are well known and documented by the City. We
believe such commercial activity is the thin edge of the wedge and continued
commercial zoning will result in the eventual and quick deterioration of the
Village as it is now known. The fact that a commercial enterprise (or
planned venture) is owned or managed by a resident and/or owner of a home in
the Village is irrelevant. The business activity and not ownership is the
crux of the issue.
The Village is unique and should be maintained as a reflection of the past.
However, having said that, we would not be in favour of a "heritage
district" designation. We are concerned that such a designation could be
constrictive and remove many rights and privileges that ordinarily come with
home ownership.
Again, I would like to thank you for soliciting our input and giving
consideration to our wishes.
Citq (/~
REPORT TO
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE
Report Number: PO 21-08
Date: July 7, 2008
I::' r::;
'..) "'-"
From:
Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
Subject:
Landford Dixie South Ltd.
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1706
Cougs Investments Ltd.
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1713
Garthwood Homes Ltd.
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1719
Garthwood Homes Ltd.
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1727
Keleck Investments (Pickering) Incorporated
Plan of Subdivision 40M-1728
Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision
Recommendation:
1. That Report PO 21-08 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding the
Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision 40M-1706, 40M-1713, 40M-1719,
40M-1727 and 40M-1728 be received;
2. That the highway being Windgrove Square within Plan 40M-1706 be assumed
for public use;
3. That the highway being Amberwood Crescent within Plan 40M-1713 be assumed
for public use;
4. That the highway being Pine Grove Avenue within Plan 40M-1719 be assumed
for public use;
5. That the highways being Meldron Drive and Sandhurst Crescent within Plans
40M-1727 and 40M-1728 be assumed for public use;
6. That the services required by the Subdivision Agreements relating to Plans
40M-1706, 40M-1713, 40M-1719, 40M-1727 and 40M-1728, 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 Block 46, Plan 40M-1706 and Block 18, Plan 40M-1728;
Report PO 21-08
July 7, 2008
Subject: Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision
- ~ 40M-1706, 40M-1713, 40M-1719, 40M-1727 and 40M-1728
:~.) b
Page 2
7. That the Subdivision Agreements and any amendments thereto relating to Plans
40M-1706, 40M-1713, 40M-1719, 40M-1727 and 40M-1728, be released and
removed from title; and
8. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate Block 45, Plan 40M-1706 as public
highway.
Executive Summary: The City entered into Subdivision Agreements with the
above-noted developers for the development of Plans 40M-1706, 40M-1713,
40M-1719, 40M-1727 and 40M-1728. 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-1706, 40M-1713, 40M-1719, 40M-1727
and 40M-1728. 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 Reserve Block 46, Plan 40M-1706 and Reserve Block 18,
Plan 40M-1728.
Further, it is also appropriate to release the developers from the provisions of their
respective Agreements with the City, as follows:
1 . Plan 40M-1706
Subdivision Agreement dated May 4, 1992 and registered as Instrument No.
LT618179;
2. Plan 40M-1713
Subdivision Agreement dated May 4, 1992 and registered as Instrument No.
L T629293;
Report PO 21-08
July 7, 2008
Subject: Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision
40M-1706, 40M-1713, 40M-1719, 40M-1727 and 40M-1728
Page 3
;:; '7
3. Plan 40M-1719
Subdivision Agreement dated April 19, 1993, registered as Instrument No.
LT651757 and the Amending Subdivision Agreement dated August 1, 1997,
registered as Instrument No. L T822489;
4. Plan 40M-1727
Subdivision Agreement dated October 5, 1992 and registered as Instrument No.
LT650561;and
5. Plan 40M-1728
Subdivision Agreement dated October 5, 1992 and registered as Instrument No.
L T651777.
Attachments:
1 . Location Map - Plan 40M-1706
2. Location Map - Plan 40M-1713
3. Location Map - Plan 40M-1719
4. Location Map - Plan 40M-1727
5. Location Map - Plan 40M-1728
6. Draft By-law to dedicate Block 45, Plan 40M-1706 as public highway
Prepared By:
Approved/Endorsed By:
.")
/J<' yjy~
Denise Bye, Supervisor
Property & Development Services
pp
ng & Development
DB:bg
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration
of Pickering CitCocfnci!\
/ (
,/A-~
..e.:----. -,! (
,/It'/7 ~/ / j .'
"j
Report PO 21-08
July 7, 2008
Subject: Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision
40M-1706, 40M-1713, 40M-1719, 40M-1727 and 40M-1728
Page 4
;:.., >~
'~l \...
Recommendation approved:
{!-~:l=-~
-~-----.. I
, / .....Ol~,:, C ~ _
L/.C:..............>t,..J
~
~. _y)~v:,J~_)
Chief Administrative Officer
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
Director, Office of Sustainability
Director, Operations & Emergency Services
Director, Planning & Development
)v-\:,'(\ City Clerk
'1 If I TO
fOC :-11 _ v; (1
L' ,",.>,,~......~...L...~_....~..____,
69
" II II I~ 7 '\
~~VMmEADDWIANE~_N ~8ER cou~~
D:"~ ~ C')"
w ~ z_ - w;:
x ~ -i r-------- 1----____ N
is r- MAPLE GATE :fio/li) '--:-'- I T/
f- e-- I r-::: ItTRAILw~
t= tj ~ CRtf9:
I-- U , ~ WE
I-- (f) ________ "---
I-- ~r=---- 0 "---
----
\ "" -- CEDARWOOD
~=== COURT
I I
RIGBY
II
RA NE
SUC!'E ~T H
~S(]BaV/C-'ON YDRO
~"1. ~
~~~r-- ~ ~\~---
'\ "~/:= L ~ == lIIJTr77
~ f--.- I---- - HARVE --.....S -..
_ CRESctN-- f-- t--- _ r-::-:r=I ~ ~
MAN ~~ r-.,~~r-,r\~ D SQUARE == = L::J =~ '-- FFlJJ]/ELQSTONE1 BRAMBL[W
'\ *' r-,J \ ~ / - - 0... -f---- 0 CRr 0
~ r--, <( -f---- ;;';I
0- 1111 / :"- < -- 0
\ ~ COLONIAL-.J~ I II fTlh1N~t:- - E
ESCENT 1\ t tmr-r.2.r~REET MAPLE RIDGE DRIWJ-I ~'" MAPLE
I I I I 'r-~ 0 I I f- I .-----' veLie
l....J <( I c..------
i::JHTS - BENTON '(------- ~ ~ t--J...-----i ________ ~ ~
iL ~c t=:: == r--] /' PEBBLESTONE}--- ~r \ l
',-,-1 f-- - - t ~t==V / '-- f------ - u BU
I--- '-- - 0 W f- / '-- f---- - r e-- 1---_ II T I
--LL - - === 0:: ~'--- - fTl tj~ I wHir
~ f'-...ar -=- == == ~ w_ - - - ~ e--- ""\
_ f-----..-. - _ 0 5:::: - _ - W f---- '- ""
e------1 - - - W ~ - CRES. ;:a - 5 f---- ~y
-----1 - - - u - 6 e---
- 0 e-- - == === == ST Ie-MC 1L (.) f---- -----'
_;:a - =---= ~ ~, fTl-_w
- < - ==;:=.==- r - JOGUES - l-
e-- fTl - ==== == ST. ISAAC SEPARATE - (3
- r---- =-------:: f---- JOGUES SCHOOL _
2-Jj \\ES ~ ~ ~ 1 I ~~ ~:i:~g~ == ~ r"7 ~1
FINCH AVENUE Flr:EHAL~ FINCH AVENUE_
~\J(
CORRIDOR
'\
~~\ 111I
I$\~ HLrCESTER
f~J~ II ~{
I I
City of Pickering
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1706
Planning & Development Department
OWNER VARIOUS
FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION
DATE JAN. 18, 2008 DRAWN BY JB
SCALE 1 :5000 CHECKED BY DB
l'
Ii
o 0 ~ources:
8- Teronet EntorpriSCII Inc. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not 0 plan of survey.
o 2005 MPAC ond its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not c plan of Survey.
PN-12
7D
T:'j .2 TO
P[;_c,,~ I - ~~
...:;; l j,
PUBLIC SCHOOL ~ffino ~~ ~~ F ~
-~ /jW! 0
== 0 :::=.- ::0 I 0':
_r r--:l::
_^ \--r
~ SQUARE FLAVELLE COURT
'- A MBERLEA // I II\~ II
PARK ~ j /~ r-.J 'r /
-........( '--LJ.
&"l ~
- I f--- ~ r...,}'F'I[; I
/== tJ;: WC-- _I -......,) (0 ~
BRAEBURN ',...--- 0 0-: ,.--....... ST.
-;;: <t_ 0-...,
~ 5 - I-
- o-==~ Ul ~-
- L;:g- CD _ -j-
~ ~g ~ ~=~;= V" ~
tf/ ! (~M ~ :::;;; / COURT ~
WMARK~ rl ( X/..::'AIL 10 WEYBURN
p~C:= \\ 1--\ ~ g I I-
i3- ~ SQUARE g !z - ~~\_
I ~- es~ ~ ~ '-~-
URIERI~;=lom -i 5 = i :=
SQUARE )
-
1--
i3-
u-
Ul_
~-
u-
-
~ANK
RVOIR
D
C.N.R.
- 1-- L I
D -- AVENUE
~~~8-'- I
~ -< DRIVE ~=( ~
/17 ===1" I- I--- DUNBARTON~
/ ~ ~ == SWIMMING POOL
~\ \ t= 8~
= SUNDOWN DAYLIGHT A~ I
~ ~ \ CATTAIL~
7 ~
k " \ , PLACE RAINY 1~
City of Pickering
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1713
OWNER VARIOUS
FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION
DUNBAR TON
HIGH SCHOOL
DUNFAIR STREET
~~~~
- ) '-" /\\\\ ~ ::=:
- ~r;f-
- ~ of-
- I--- 0 '---
== ~-
-~'-- jTj-
== iY ::;:-
-0_ -
== 1---
f--- _-
f--- - -
~ =f-j AV
~ =/ /7
~ /
-
- f----
-
== ~E
- 1-
-~ 0==
-0 0_
- 01---1-- [0_
==gs ~-
- >- fTl-
f---O- ;:o-
r--- <t - uj-
f--- I -
f--- Ul _
- - ----' -
f== CO
;::= =//7
- - / I
S ~ II
\
SHA
TOT Lrr ,
I
LJ
I
SHEPPARD
\ 0
<t
o
0-:
... -
'\
r
, (
, ~
...n,
~--C:;' !--
>
-'
CD
<t
f-
-'
W
o
Planning & Development Department
DATE MAY 5,2008
SCALE 1 :5000
~'a a ::sources:
Teranet Enlerpril'Ses Inc. and its suppliera. All rights Reserved. Not 0 plan of survey.
2005 MPAC ond its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not 0 pion of Survey.
DRAWN BY JB
CHECKED BY DB
l'
PN-6
~
~c
roREST __
/" iI~-H
/" ~ RO\'JGS ~ ~
---\ 0
----j 0
---r 0
- ~
---\ CRESCENT
J//; II
I I
PINE
I
/
o
--<\)\<-
'0
'r-
W
:::J
Z
~ I
<(
I
~ \illR~~ ~~ ) ~
/~ ~~ I _7 I [ <(
- =- 14 ~=:: MELDRON .- - ~ J
00 ~..-r / _ :J-
-:--L 0 I -
, ;0 0 c---
;;; Z r---- ~
SANDHUR~ HI <!i r---- ~\j
rTl771 "- - --- ~
. ~:~\r_E~ 1\
~;~~ '&(~~iLD
-~l w /!!!l ~ 0= \
AVENUE ---------1\ / = ~
r= -~ /- /
== ~ c- = "rTIfr ~~QUIL CRT J" ~
llID CL -( (
==tJ -/ SQUARE B=
-~=il ~~
~ WESTCREEK ~DRIVE ~
I ~~ ~
WESTCREEK 'ALLEYVIJ\ ~
PUBLIC SCHOOL PARK - '\
T
GROVE
_w
>
- CL I--
o
I--
- '------'-<
o
o
o
~
~
u
o
CL~ -w
\~=3
>
<(
w
:?: I
CL
0
PROHILL ST.
0
0
w 0
> ~
0 ~
CL U
l.') 0
CL
,..-..,
:5
,) 1- 0<;;
~
?-\VO?-
CO?:
,-1
-
I
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
Z=~
CL
:J
Q)
~
<(
o
'7 1
/
~~
~ rffiL
~
1-t0MMI
J
L
SP~
~
=r
\
\
,1--
7/'-:SUTIERNUT CRT.,/!!!7
STREET / I~ I - ~
w-
> -----, (
f--- I C2 S'R
CL f--- 0 r---f r---!:i..J
Of---- f---I :\ /-.......
Planning & Development Department
DATE MAY 5,2008
SCALE 1 :5000
DRAWN BY JB
CHECKED BY DB
w
Z
[l l
City of Pickering
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1719
OWNER VARIOUS
FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION
o~o ::..ourC8!i1:
a - Taronet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not 0 pion of survey.
15 2005 MPAC and its suppliers. All ri9hts Reserved. Not 0 pion of Survey.
l'
PN-l0
0. BUTTERNUT CRTf1. ~
STREET '</ ~I~ ~Il~ I-- ~
WI--
I >1-- {
~ I - srROU
r- (Y ~ I 15--1
I-- S' f-- -:::::: --I \ ~
Planning & Development Department
r~' 2
,I ...
t
,;;, - tf:.;s
~
?-\VO?-
co~
I
~1\I k-\ L Vfj)
~~~.
s~ -dr'mt \WL
/~ ~~ ~~ I I
~ J::- - " j / - (
\\ '\ f-- == r;;;~s (f) \
\\\\\ f--- 00 ~~ III ~_
tO~EST --, " !!JJll == ~ ~ r-
/' il5:-H -fTl <(r--- _\\CrV
/' ~ 0GS W T ~ SANDHURST - (f) I-- \-
~ ~o 8 Cl?cs: 'PINE GROVE ~
~ CRESCENT ~ - (Y 111&\ - ~ 1\ ~D
/jj I ~; , ~
J I I T ~~H\ Z:e:::==~~"-
PINE GROVE AVENUE Z~, /. = - ~\
I ~ - /-
-=~~ == ~ ~: ~MrrmOK ~~QUll CRT J
o urn (Ye---( (
g r==t;:; _/ SQUARE 0=
~ -~=J I 5:11~
(Y~ - (f)r- I J /\
\ ~ = ~ f-- WESTCREEK DRIVE ~
lYo~ I" = ~ WESTCREEK ~LLEYVIE'r\ 1 ( ~
== PUBUC SCHOOL PARK' '\ ~
PROHILL ST. _
-
/'
o
~Q'?-
o
'L
W
::J
Z
~ I
<(
------
w
>
o
(Y
l?
o
o
o
5:
y:
u
o
IY
(Y
::J
rn
y:
<(
o
Z=~\
w
Z
[l
I
I
City of Pickering
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1727
OWNER VARIOUS
FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION
DATE MAY 5,2008
SCALE 1 :5000
DRAWN BY JB
CHECKED BY DB
01_0 :::'Ources;
a - T.,r-onClt Enlcrpri:5i015 Inc. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not a plan of survey.
is 2005 MPAC and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not 0 pion of Survey.
/
0 ~
<(
0 t,
0::
I
SP~
<(
Z
0 ~
f-
-'
<(
~
\
~
\
l'
PN-10
'7 -~
p ! ,
~ /
0 ~
<{
0 l
cr
?-\\)o?-
co~ I
I
,(--f- J/ I
-_ ~\~s .- (J) ~
~.\J<'\~,\~;2r. -0 ~~
~, ;0 01--
< Zr--- S
SANDHUR~ ." ~ r--- r~\:j
- LI?C.s:~ PINE GROVE ~
j-J. . = 1\
~: / r~ i 0
_<t: ,-~w=
~~t==r\ :::- \
AVENUE Z --------~,l' ~= ~ /
== ~ c-- ~ MffiTIK - ~T~QI~J ~
== tJ -V SQUARE ~ ~
~~-y I ~
(J)~, I I
t-- WESTCREEK ~DRIVE ~
-WlJ ~~ ~
= WESTCREEK 'ALLEYVIE \ ~
== PUBLIC SCHOOL PARK
-
-
=~
Z
(Y
:::J
m
~
<t:
o
v
o
--<Q?--
'0
~
~~
I ~ ffIItOREST ~I-- T-
V :::s ROUGS ~
---I 0
_ 0
- 0
- ~
---I CRESCENT
J/// II I I
II
PINE
I
,~
GROVE
W
:::J
Z
W
>
<t:
_W
>
-~-
-
- L--'-<
D
o
o
~
~
u
o
\~=~
~
-
f-----i
w
>
(Y I
D
PROHILL SI-
D
0
w 0
> ~
0 ~
(Y u
(::J 0
(Y
.-
7/':. BUTTERNUT CRT"~
STREET ~I~ I LlJ 1
w-
_ I fi- (
- (Y r-- D ----1 ~
_ ~ r- -== ----1
~
<t:
Z
o
t-
-'
<t:
~
~
~
\
w
Z
0.. I
City of Pickering
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1728
I
I
~
~
Planning & Development Department
OWNER VARIOUS
FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION
DRAWN BY JB
CHECKED BY DB
DATE MAY 5,2008
SCALE 1 :5000
o a ~ou,.ces:
Teronel Enterprises Inc. and its Suppliers. All dghts Reserved. Not 0 pion of survey.
2005 MPAC and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not 0 pion of Survey.
l'
PN.10
'7 4
tv
,.:;2 I Ul,
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING
BY-LAW NO.
Being a By-law to dedi
Plan 40M-1706, Pickering as pu
highway (Dixie Road).
WHEREAS The Corporation of the City of Pickering is the owner of Block 45, Plan
40M-1706, Pickering 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. Block 45, Plan 40M-1706, Pickering, IS hereby dedicated as public
highway.
(Dixie Road)
BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 14th day of July,
2008.
David Ryan,
Oebi A. Wilcox, City Clerk
Roadded.496
REPORT TO
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE
Report Number: PD 25-08
Date: July 7, 2008
75
From: Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 9/08
Fairport Inc.
692, 700-702 Front Road
(Lot 9 Plan 917 and Part of Lots 8 and 9 Plan 65)
City of Pickering
Recommendation:
1. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 9/08 submitted by Fairport Inc.,
on lands being Lot 9 Plan 917 and Part of Lots 8 and 9 Plan 65, City of
Pickering, to amend the zoning to permit the development of the subject
property for three detached dwelling units be approved as outlined in Appendix I to
Report PD 25-08, and
2. Further, that the amending zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law
Amendment Application A 9/08, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 25-08, be
forwarded to City Council for enactment.
Executive Summary: The applicant proposes to rezone the subject property for
three detached dwelling lots, providing a minimum frontage of 10.3 metres. While the
proposed infill project of creating three residential lots is considered appropriate land
use, the frontage of the lots and the resulting structures need to be more reflective of
the character of the area, therefore the recommendation is for lots having a minimum
frontage of 15.0 metres. Approval of this application will establish a zoning for the
subject property which will permit development that is compatible with the surrounding
neighbourhood and conforms to the Pickering Official Plan. The proposed by-law
contains performance standards for dwelling height, side yard widths and front yard
depth to further assist with compatibility of the development. A future land severance
application is anticipated for the proposed development. The City's development
requirements will be addressed through the land severance application.
Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the
approval of zoning for three detached dwellings.
Report PD 25-08
Date: July 7, 2008
Subject: Fairport Inc. (A 9/08)
7/
,n
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 proposed zoning
will provide the opportunity to increase the residential density of the existing lot and will
utilize existing services. The proposal generally represents a sustainable approach for
the development of the subject lands.
Background:
1.0 Introduction
The owner of the subject property, Fairport Inc. proposes to develop the subject
land at 692, 700-702 Front Road for three detached dwelling lots (see Location
Map, Attachment #1). The three lots are proposed to be created through a future
land severance process. The proposed lots include two smaller lots on the south
end of the property and one larger lot on the northern end of the property. Only
the larger northern lot is proposed to have water frontage on Frenchman's Bay
(see Attachment #2). The two proposed southern dwellings have a proposed
height of two storeys.
2.0 Comments Received
2.1 At the April 7, 2008 Public Information Meeting
No public spoke in support or opposition to the application at the public meeting.
(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. One resident
expressed opposition related to environmental impacts on aquatic life and avian
populations. It was stated that the proposed development will spoil the
Frenchman's Bay waterfront.
The other correspondence from the abutting property owners to the south noted
their support for the proposed redevelopment of the site however, made the
request that a minimum side yard width requirement of 1.5 metres be established
(see Attachments #6 & #7).
2.3 Agency Comments
Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority
- no objection to the land use, TRCA has reviewed
and issued a permit for shoreline restoration works
that addressed both slope stability and flooding
hazard; further information will be required during
any future development (see Attachment #8);
Report PO 25-08
Date: July 7,2008
Subject: Fairport Inc. (A 9/08)
Page 3
77
Region of Durham
- the proposal is permitted by the policies of the
Durham Region Official Plan;
- municipal water supply and sanitary sewer services
are available to the subject property;
- the application has been screened in accordance
with Provincial Interests and Delegated Review;
- the subject property is within an area of limited
transit service due to existing street widths and
configuration (see Attachment #9 and #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 will be
addressed during the implementation process, should this application be approved.
3.0 Discussion
3.1 Proposed Lots Should Provide a Minimum Lot Frontage of 15.0 Metres to
Ensure Compatibility with Neighbourhood Character
The subject property is located along the west side of Front Road, north of
Commerce Street. The surrounding area is generally zoned "R4" - Residential
Zone, which requires lots to have a minimum 15.0 metre lot frontage and a
minimum lot area of 460 square metres. The surrounding lotting pattern is
generally reflective of this lot size and helps to establish the overall character of
the neighbourhood. The other major contributor to the neighbourhood character
is the housing stock in terms of size, style and massing. Generally, larger lots
having a frontage of 15.0 metres support dwellings with a size and mass that is
different from smaller size lots. Larger lots generally have a greater building
separation and achieve an increased sense of "openness" between buildings.
Two of the three new lots proposed by the applicant provide a lot frontage of
10.3 metres (perpendicular lot width of 9.6 metres) and do not match the general
neighbourhood character. Further, the proposed dwellings on these two lots are
6.6 metres wide, which is more reflective of a townhouse dwelling unit width.
The proposed third lot provides a width of 31.0 metres and a house width of 13.7
metres which is not comparable to other development the neighbourhood and
certainly not comparable to the two proposed 6.6 metre wide dwellings.
The proposed lots have an irregular lot shape. Therefore, the lot frontage (which is
measured as a line parallel to the front lot line and 7.5 metres back from the front lot
line) is slightly greater than the perpendicular lot width. As noted above, the
applicant's two proposed lots provide a lot frontage of 10.3 metres and lot width of
9.6 metres. Staff recommendation of a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres will in
fact produce lots having a width of 13.9 metres (see Attachment #3).
Report PO 25-08
Date: July 7, 2008
Subject: Fairport Inc. (A 9/08)
'iB
3.2 Zoning Standards are Proposed that Ensure House Design is Compatible
and Provides Appropriate Openness
Page 4
The recommended zoning performance standards are ones that will maintain the
character of the neighbourhood and try to ensure some degree of openness of
the lots. As noted the minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres is recommended
along with a minimum lot area of 460 square metre. The minimum side yard
width being proposed is 1.5 metres. This would provide a minimum of 3.0 metres
between buildings thus creating some openness and possible view corridors from
the street to Frenchman's Bay. Given the properties are next to Frenchman's
Bay, a proposed maximum building height of 9.0 metres is being recommended.
This height would allow a two storey house but would not allow an overly tall
house to be constructed. A minimum front yard depth of 4.5 metres is proposed
in order to allow the opportunity to bring the massing of the house forward on the
lot to maximize the rear yard depth. The garage will be required to be set back a
minimum of 6.0 metres from the front lot line, to accommodate vehicle parking in
front of the garage.
3.3 Portion of Property is a Water lot and will be Zoned to Recognize
Environmental Constraints
The subject property is not restricted to the land area only. A portion of the
subject property covers open water pf Frenchman's Bay. The portion of the lot
that is not land is proposed to be zoned Open Space - Hazard Land to reflect the
environmental constraints of activities on open water.
4.0 Technical Matters
All Development Matters Concerning the City will be Addressed Through
the Land Severance Process
The applicant proposes to demolish the existing dwelling and sever the property
into three lots for the construction of three new detached dwellings. In order to
ensure appropriate development of the proposed lots, all requirements of the City
will be included as conditions of approval for any associated land severance
application. These conditions will address matters such as, but not limited to,
grading & drainage, parkland dedication, and securities. The applicant intends to
submit a severance application to the Region of Durham Land Division
Committee should Council approve this application.
5.0 Applicant's Comments
The applicant has been advised of the recommendations of this report.
Report PO 25-08
Date: July 7, 2008
Subject: Fairport Inc. (A 9/08)
Page 5
, I! I
'7 q
APPENDICES:
APPENDIX I: Draft Zoning By-law Amendment
Attachments:
1 . Location Map
2. Applicant's Conceptual Site Plan
3. Staff Recommended Plan
4. Text of Information Report No. 09-08
5. Minutes from April 7, 2008 Statutory Public Information Meeting
6. Resident Comment - B. Taylor
7. Resident Comment - K. D. Van Evans & W. E. Van Evans
8. Agency Comments - TRCA
9. Agency Comments - Region of Durham Planning Department
10. Agency Comments - Region of Durham Planning Department
Prepared By:
Approved/Endorsed By:
~R
Ross Pym, MCIP, RPpi
Principal Planner - Development Review
" tl~~l'fP
Neil Carroll,' OfP, RPP
Director, Planning & Development
I
i
RP:ld
Attachments
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Directors
Recommended for the consideration
of Pickering C~ty Council
/
"
/"
-'-) ,.-\
(; lJ
APPENDIX I TO
REPORT PO 25-08
DRAFT IMPLEMENTING ZONING BY-LAW
ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 9/08
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING
1
BY-LAW NO.
,. -1
{-~ I
Being a By-law to amend ed Area Zoning By-law
2511, to implement the Offici' Plan of the City of Pickering,
Region of Durham, Lot 9, Plan 917 and Part of Lots 8 & 9,
Plan 65, in the City of Pickering. (A 9/08)
WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to
amend the existing zoning of the subject lands to a residential zone in order to permit
the establishment of three future residential lots for detached dwellings on the subject
lands, being Lot 9, Plan 917 and Part of Lots 8 & 9, Plan 65, in the City of Pickering;
AND WHEREAS an amendment to By-law 2511, is therefore deemed necessary;
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. SCHEDULE I
Schedule I attached to this By-law with notations and references shown thereon
is hereby declared to be part of this By-law.
2. AREA RESTRICTED
The provisions of this By-law shall apply to those lands in the City of Pickering,
designated "R4-21" on Schedule I attached to this By-law.
3. 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.
4. DEFINITIONS
In this By-law,
(1) (a) "Dwellinq" shall mean a building or part of a building containing one
or more dwelling units, but does not include a mobile home or
trailer;
(b) "Dwellinq Unit" shall mean one or more habitable rooms occupied
or capable of being occupied as a single, independent and
separate housekeeping unit containing a separate kitchen and
sanitary facilities;
82
- 2 -
lIin Detached or Detached Dwellin " shall mean a single
e ing which is freestanding, separate and detached from other
main buildings or structures;
(2)
(a)
"Floor Area - Residential" shall mean the area of the floor surface
contained within the outside walls of a storey or part of a storey;
(b) "Gross Floor Area - Residential" shall mean the aggregate of the
floor areas of all storeys of a building or structure, or part thereof as
the case may be, other than a private garage, an attic or a cellar;
(3)
(a)
"Lot" shall mean an area of land fronting on a street which is used
or intended to be used as the site of a building, or a group of
buildings, as the case may be, together with any accessory
buildings or structures, or a public park or open space area,
regardless of whether or not such lot constitutes the whole of a lot
or block on a registered plan of subdivision;
(b) "Lot Frontaqe" shall mean the width of a lot between the side lot
lines measured along a line parallel to and 7.5 metres distant from
the front lot line;
(4)
(a)
"Private Garaqe" shall mean an enclosed or partially enclosed
structure for the storage of one or more vehicles, in which structure
no business or service is conducted for profit or otherwise;
(5)
(a)
"Yard" shall mean an area of land which is appurtenant to and
located on the same lot as a building or structure and is open,
uncovered, and unoccupied above ground except for such
accessory buildings, structures, or other uses as are specifically
permitted thereon;
(b) "Front Yard" shall mean ayard extending across the full width of a
lot between the front lot line of the lot and the nearest wall of the
nearest main building or structure on the lot;
(c) "Front Yard Depth" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of
a front yard of a lot between the front lot line and the nearest wall
of the nearest main building or structure on the lot;
(d) "Rear Yard" shall mean a yard extending across the full width of a
lot between the rear lot line of the lot, or where there is no rear lot
line, the junction point of the side lot lines, and the nearest wall of
the nearest main building or structure on the lot;
(e) "Rear Yard Depth" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of
a rear yard of a lot between the rear lot line of the lot, or where
there is no rear lot line, the junction point of the side lot lines, and
the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot;
fl. A s1 Yard" shall mea-n 3a- yard of a lot extending from the front yard 8 3
flf' 0 the rear yard, and from the side lot line to the nearest wall of the
nearest main building or structure on the lot;
(g) "Side Yard Width" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of
a side yard of a lot between the side lot line and the nearest wall of
the nearest main building or structure on the lot;
(h) "Flankaqe Side Yard" shall mean a side yard immediately adjoining
a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a
street;
(i) "Flankaqe Side Yard Width" shall mean the shortest horizontal
dimension of a flankage side yard of a lot between the lot line
adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of
which is a street, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building
or structure on the lot;
(j) "Interior Side Yard" shall mean a side yard other than a flankage
side yard.
5. PROVISIONS
(1) (a)
Uses Permitted ("R4-21" Zone)
No person shall, within the lands zoned "R4-21" on Schedule I
attached to this By-law, use any lot or erect, alter or use any
building or structure for any purpose except the following:
(i) detached dwelling residential use
(b) Zone Requirements ("R4-21" Zone)
No person shall within the lands designated "R4-21" on Schedule I
attached hereto use any lot or erect, alter or use any building
except in accordance with the following provisions:
(i) Lot Area (minimum): 350 square metres;
(ii) Lot Frontage 15.0 metres;
(minimum):
(iii) Front Yard Depth 4.5 metres;
(minimum):
(iv) Rear Yard Depth 7.5 metres;
(minimum):
(v) Side Yard Width 1.5 metres;
(minimum):
- 4-
zj4
,'" f' ftiJ
BA (vii)
Flankage Side Yard
Width (minimum):
Building Height
(maximum):
(viii) Garage Requirements minimum one private garage per
lot attached to the main building
and vehicular entrance of which
shall be located not less than
6.0 metres from the front lot line
and not less than 6.0 metres from
any side lot line immediately
adjoining or abutting on a reserve
on the opposite side of the street;
2.7 metres;
9.0 metres;
(ix) Garage Projection
(maximum):
3.0 metres beyond the wall
containing the main entrance to
the dwelling unit;
(x) Uncovered steps and 1.5 metres for any uncovered
platform projection into steps and platform not exceeding
rear yard (maximum) 2.0 metres in height;
6. BY-LAW 2511
By-law 2511, is hereby amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to
the provisions of this By-law as it applies to the area set out in Schedule I
attached hereto. Definitions and subject matter not specifically dealt with in
this By-law shall be governed by relevant provisions of By-law 2511, as
amended.
7. 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
,2008.
T
Dave Ryan, Mayor
Debi A. Wilcox,
F.r...........
<'
.,""'""""
, '
, '
, '
: :__u___________nn
, '
: I :
',:: : :: ::: \
"\ - -- - J __ _ __ _ ___ _l_ _ __ _ __~ __ _ _ ~ __,- n_~_ -- - -~- ---1- - - - -_ ____ _~_ _ _ _ _ __ __ _ _ __ _ _ _ ___
\ I I I I
\ I I I I
\ I I I I
\ I I I I
\ I I I I
\ I I I I
1 I I I I
\ I I I
\ I I I
l I I I
I I I I
\ I I I
I I I I
\ I I I
I I I I
1 I I I
I I I L___________________
I I I I
I I I I
I I I I
I I I ,
I I I I
I I I I
I I 1 I
I I I I
I I' I
\ I I I
WATERPOINT STREET
46.9m
E
r-..
U1
'"
55.0m R4-21
E OS-HL
U1
<Xl
'"
84.2m 50.9m
,
... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -1_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __:
'1
::::0
o
Z
-j
-:D
o
d
~-- -- - - -- - -- -- - -- -- - -- -- - - - - -- - -- - -- - - - - - - - -- --- -- -- -- -- - - -- -- -- --- - -- - ----
FRENCHMANJS
BAY
SCHEDULE I TO BY-
PASSED THIS
DAY OF
2008
l'
N
:~ '
, ~.'.',
\.1 ...
- - -- - -- - -r -- - ---
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
n-----n-J1
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
~
~ /
" b
I ,
'i3-.:e 8
~
~~
uu __~
~'v ~ ~-==
" --~ ~~-
'0'<' ~-~
J(;V
c:=/}0
AVENUE
I
~.-
c-----~
_u~~~~ ~u~~
---.--
~-~-~----____~ _~~.=-= ~~---~-~-== ~rJJ1L
U) > :::>
-~=f~-::=~~ i~- --=-= ~ ~.~~~~ -=-~== g=-=:~=:~
L_ ~'),~ ~ _rJ:~~NINC__ :4,~"
z ~- -- l>J:::l _ I 1 \1-----(
- -- O:::uJ
~-'\:;: 1-- ~- ~--
tt=J ,I ~'l-~~
~t' 1~41 ~1R~ ~ ._~ f--
WA TEi~~~~i---j
~--- ....
OLD
ORCHAI~D AVENUE
I.
MONICA COOK
j
I
"J-~
ILONA PARK
mHIJ
ROAD
---== t- JJJL
~_./~
n~~rl'-' f--rtj-r IU ITr-
SUBJECT
PROPERTIES
>
-;Q
o
U
FRENCHMAN'S
City of Pickering
OWNER
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
FILE No.
FAIRPORT INC.
A 009/08
BAY
~~
,,::=\ -
Planning & Development Department
PLAN M-917 LOT 9 & PLAN 65 LOT 9 & PLAN 65, PT LOT 8, 40R-8654 PART 1,2
DATE FEB 12,2008
SCALE 1 :5000
DRAWN BY JB
CHECKED BY CP
o. 0 ~ourceG
Tcronct Entcrpri~e~ Inc. and its suppliers All right", Reserved. Not a plan of survey
2005 MPAC and it!!! suppliers All rights Reser~ed Not 0 plan of Survey
PATN
L
.-=
-
--
- ---
~O_
~<{-
~-O_
0:::
=== -
-- -
-
'-
~ -
._-
--
------
'\
/
..J
o
~~
>
_.Jtu
dI
I--~
I--
I--
~-
I---~
~ -
'--
--
-
l'
PN-3
FRENCHMAN'S
BAY
INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANTS
SUBMITTED PLAN
A 09/08 - L. GRAY
WATERPOINT STREET
43.0m
PROPOSED LOT 3
PROPOSED
LOT 2
BUILDING
ENVELOPE
! E PROPOSED LOT
~ 1 "
CI'I
45.6m
$
~{ 7
\,' I
It
:;0
o
Z
-\
:;0
o
):>
o
THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING &
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PLANNING INFORMATION SERVICES
DIVISION MAPPING AND DESIGN, MARCH 4, 2008
i
~J, .'''~
;1<-"1';'
\\t~
",'\ ..
...~,!%
"'\
"-
------~
\,r\
, '"
\ '0
\~
...~:,..,,,..
ATTACHMENT ,
REPORT' PO
s
TO
,51s' -OB
."... (~"
M ()
STAFF RECOMMENDED PLAN
A 09/08 - L. GRAY
WATERPOINT STREET
43.0m
. PROPOSED LOTt'BUIL~::~S ..1
L ENVEL~:~J
_u,..', _
- -
..
- - -
.
I
~
.,,4"') I aL
or" - ;..-~,
FRENCHMAN'S
BAY
~,L _
I
->-
C'! I
M
or-:
I
_ _ _ _ STAFF RECOMMENDED LOTS
-n
;0
o
Z
-1
;0
o
):>
o
~
THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING &
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PLANNING INFORMATION SERVICES
DIVISION MAPPING AND DESIGN, MARCH 4, 2008
4-
I~~.:
.-" ) "-- c.._-
Citlf o~
..- 0
K ";
INFORMATION REPORT NO. 09-08
FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF
April 7, 2008
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 9/08
Fairport Inc.
Lot 9 Plan 917 and Part of Lots 8 and 9 Plan 65
Front Road
City of Pickering
1.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION
- the subject lands are located west of Front Road, with water frontage on
Frenchman's Bay;
a property location map is provided for reference (see Attachment #1);
- the subject lands contain one detached dwelling that is proposed to be
removed if this application is successful;
part of the subject land is used for a boat storage business;
- the topography of the lot is flat and the exist vegetation is typical urban
residential landscape planting;
- the surrounding land uses are:
north - Waterpoint Street
south - detached dwelling
west - detached dwellings on the opposite side of Front Road
east Frenchman's Bay
2.0 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL
- the applicant has submitted an application to amend the zoning by-law in
order to facilitate a future severance to create two new lots for the
construction of three detached dwellings;
- the proposed lots frontages are 10.3 metres for two lots and 31.6 metres for the
third lot (see Attachment #2 - Submitted Plan);
- the actual lot width of the two small lots is 9.6 metres.
Information Report No. 09-08
I I, . C) r~
/ \.J
'f
,:I.::)
Page 2
3.0 OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING
3.1 Durham Regional Official Plan
the Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as Greenland
System Waterfront Areas, which are intended to be developed as people places;
development shall not negatively impact key natural heritage or hydrologic
features;
Frenchman's Bay shore area is also designated as Waterfront Place which
are intended to be developed as focal points;
residential opportunities may be permitted and the scale of development shall
be based on and reflect the characteristics of the Waterfront Place;
the proposal appears to conform to the Durham Regional Official Plan;
3.2 Pickering Official Plan
the Pickering Official Plan designates the subject lands as Open Space
System - Marina Area;
permissible uses within the Open Space System - Marina Area designation
include, among others, limited residential uses in conjunction with marinas
and yacht clubs;
the Open Space System - Marina Area designation also permits existing
lawful residential dwellings and a new residential dwelling on a vacant lot;
the zoning of any lands designated Open Space System - Marina Area shall
apply appropriate performance standards restrictions and provisions;
the subject lands are within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood of the Official Plan;
- the application will be assessed against the policies and provisions of the
Pickering Official Plan during the further processing of the application;
3.3 Zoning By-law 2511
the subject lands are currently zoned "R4" - Detached Dwelling Zone and
(H)OB3 - Waterfront Zone by Zoning By-law 2511;
the "R4" zoning permits one detached dwelling per lot on a lot having a
minimum lot area of 460 square metres and a lot frontage of 15.0 metres;
the (H)OB3 zoning permits yacht club, marinas and a variety of recreational
uses, all without buildings until the holding provision is lifted;
an amendment to the zoning by-law is required to implement the applicant's
proposed development.
4.0 RE5UL 15 OF CIRCULA liON
4.1 Resident Comments
- no resident comments have been received to date;
Information Report No. 09-08
'I
(0
Page 3
:) '1
4.2 Agency Comments
no agency comments have been received to date;
4.3 Staff Comments
in reviewing the application to date, the following matters have been identified
by staff for further review and consideration:
· ensuring that the proposed development is compatible with, and sensitive
to, existing surrounding development;
. ensuring that the proposed lotting size and resulting house sizes are
compatible and comparable to surrounding lots;
. given the surrounding residential area is predominantly zoned 'R4' which
requires a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres, the need to establish a
similar zoning for new lots to ensure the character of the area is maintained;
. reviewing that adequate information has been provided, that technical
requirements are met and that the proposed development is appropriate at
this location;
. reviewing the application in terms of its level of sustainable development
components;
the Planning & Development Department will conclude its position on the
application 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 Councilor a Committee of Council;
if you wish to be notified of Council's decision regarding the 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.
Information Report No. 09-08
q?
"" li._...
/~. ~~,?~(,::-F::.,.
Page 4
6.0 OTHER INFORMATION
6.1 Appendix No. I
list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City
Departments that have commented on the application at the time of writing
the report;
6.2 Information Received
- full scale copies of the applicant's submitted plan are available for viewing at
the offices of the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department;
- the need for additional information and/or technical reports will be determined
through the review and circulation of the applicant's current proposal;
6.3 Owner I Applicant Information
- the owner of the subject lands is Fairport Inc.;
Lee Gray is the principal of Fairport Inc.
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
if
,') -/~
I \ j
,,?~-) ((c,
APPENDIX NO. I TO
INFORMATION REPORT NO. 09-08
COMMENTING RESIDENTS AND LANDOWNERS
(1) none received to date
COMMENTING AGENCIES
(1) none received to date
COMMENTING CITY DEPARTMENTS
(1) none received to date
'j ,1
5
!
/) -, Excerpts from
Planning & Development Committee
Meeting Minutes
Monday, April 7, 2008
7:30 pm - Council Chambers
Chair: Councillor Littley
(I) PART lA' - PLANNING INFORMATION MEETING
1. Information Report 09-08
Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 9/08
Fairport Inc.
Lot 9 Plan 917 and Part of Lots 8 and 9 Plan 65
Front Road
City of Pickerin~
A public information meeting was held under the Planning Act, for the purpose of
informing the public with respect to an application submitted by Fairport Inc. for
property being composed of Lot 9, Plan 917 and Part of Lots 8 and 9, Plan 65
(Front Road).
Lynda Taylor, Manager, Development Review, gave an outline of the
requirements for a Statutory Meeting under the Planning Act. She also noted
that if a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions to the
City before a by-law is passed, that person or public body are not entitled to
appeal the decision of City Council to the Ontario Municipal Board, and may
not be entitled to be added as a party to the hearing unless, in the opinion of the
Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so.
Ross Pym, Principal Planner - Development Review, gave an overview of
zoning amendment application A 9/08.
Lee Gray, 693 Front Road the applicant, appeared before the Committee in
support of zoning amendment application A 9/08.
No members of the public in attendance at the public information meeting spoke
in support or opposition to zoning amendment application A 09/08.
1
ilL
;"frn..~t',iS'.iRl-JoU/- -I
~...._u.. ... [IE
h
'(
'; 'j
6/:7 < t:. ..~# /) r
/ ~u~xz./ k~-, - >~)
X;;hU':!1 (2~~
~/;V/ ;Vf'
1Jfz~ ;:. 7/;tX .z tit! f
r. ;l.:. ._..~-" .-
r''i ., ':::: D
CITV ..,,,,,...
:r"~. _ f-.' .,. _ ..'-" :," '. C. .i~"~ :: j ~~ ;\.;:t
r-LAI'>lr,;,',. . '-'iEl.oPfyiENT
DEPARTl\i~cNT
~.~ /d~~~~
/(:e ~~. ~ ,. t /J "
. /!~;,t17t7l- <-7~~~~~~~~
:lP<~, v- <./~V ck ~~ "e'-h'/ I~"~-Lb
de:w~-#~ r Yk</~~~Xe~
dft0?~.~, c12~bb1 ~4/ dk~.//~)
.4 au- ,Iud :Z:-.fl?~' ~r,d~~
~'.~ ',.1Li?/ C:~~.-a/. ~de~. ~.~. ~'. ' ~:zu/ ~~
~ M~U-J"a::,~/v?~~/~
Jct~v4Pu/ ~.~//b/ ~;'7'~.b
~;/~~*.-/~z.
~/~~~~~vP<M~~ . . "
UV?V d &/~~/ ~~~/'<<~ ~~C-..,..
JAj~:z~tfivv~~~~; "
~~~':!/~~#~::;.
, ..~~~. J~v;~q/?r' 7
" \.
~
, ~ J/
7
" .-
'f b
. c.
< '-..
April 7, 2008
Mr. & Mrs. W. Van Evans
690 Front Road
Pickering, ON L 1 W 1 N8
q
~
,.
City of Pickering
One The Esplande
Pickering, ON LIV 6K7
FH,;!<ERING
&. DEVELOP!vlENT
GEP,l\p; rMENT
Attention: Ross Pymm, Principal Planner and Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk
Re: Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 009/08
Dear Sirs:
You have asked for comments from affected parties regarding this application. As the
owners of the adjacent property municipally known as 690 Front Road, Pickering, ON we
would like to state that we are in favor of development of this property. The application
shows side yard set backs of 1.52 meters or more. As the applicant has the ability to
make these lots any size they choose we would like to see that this side yard set back is
maintained at 1.52 meters. That would mean there would be no opportunity for a
committee of adjustment hearing, or other process to decrease this set back by this or any
other applicant. To request a reduced set back in the future would mean that this
application was fraudulent and deceitful of the true goal. We realize that the current
house located on 692 Front Road is located considerably closer to the property line. We
would like to see this situation rectified and any future development be in accordance
with the proposed 1.52 meter side yard set back.
Kar Dianne Van Evans
Willi m Elbert Van Evans
B
)ConseFvaoon
for The Living City
97
April 14, 2008
CFN 40223.01
BY FAX AND MAIL
Ross Pym, Principal Planner
Pickering Civic Complex
One the Esplanade
Pickering, ON
L 1V 6K7
Dear Mr. Pym:
RE: Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 009/08
692 and 700 - 702 Front Road
Fairport Inc. /Lee Gray
City of Pickering
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) staff has reviewed plans for a zoning
amendment on the above referenced property and offers the following comments.
Background
The subject property is located at 692 and 700 - 702 Front Road, on Frenchman's Bay, in the city of
Pickering. It is our understanding that the applicant is requesting permission to amend the zoning by-
law in order to permit future development of three lots with lot frontages ranging from 10.0 metres to
31.0 metres.
Applicable Policy
The subject property is affected by the Lake Ontario shoreline. TRCA aims to prevent new
development from areas that may introduce a risk to life and property associated with flooding,
erosion and slope stability concerns.
TRCA staff has previously reviewed and issued permit number C-07080 on March 2, 2007 for
shoreline restoration works on the property. These works addressed both slope stability and flooding
hazard on the site. As such the zoning for the proposed three lots does not need to address any risk
from natural hazard.
Ontario Regulation 166/06
As the property is entirely located within TRCA's Regulated Area pursuant to Ontario Regulation
(Development, Interference with Wetlands and Alterations to Shoreline and Watercourse
Regulation), an Ontario Regulation 166/06 permit is required for any development proposed on site.
In accordance with Ontario Regulation 166/06 (Development, Interference with Wetlands and
Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses), a permit is required from the TRCA prior to any
development, if in the opinion of the authority, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches or
pollution or the conservation of land may be affected by the development.
Development is defined as:
Member of Conservation Ontario
5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3N 154 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca
m.o"'O"".'.
'''4;1'
~..~~5
i) 0
,/ ()
g
(
Mr. Pym
-2- ApMI 14,2008
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.
Recommendations
!n light of the above, TRCA staff have no objection to zoning by-law amendment application A
009/08.
We trust that this is of assistance. Please contact me should you have any further questions.
A~
. Shannon McNeill BA, BURPI
Planner I
Planning and Development
Extension 5744
CJ/srtf
f:\home\public\development services\durham region\pickering\700 front road_1.doc
The Regional
Municipality
of Durham
Planning Department
605 ROSSLAND ROAD E
4TH FLOOR
PO BOX 623
WHITBY ON L 1 N 6A3
CANADA
905-668-7711
Fax: 905-666-6208
-mail: planning@
I egion.durham.on.ca
www.region.durham.on.ca
A.L. Georgieff, MCIP, RPP
Commissioner of Planning
"Service Excellence
for our Communities"
q
:) 0
,r ../
( C.
,
April 15, 2008
Ross Pym, Principal Planner
Planning and Development Department
City of Pickering
One The Esplanade
Pickering, Ontario
L 1 V 6K7
Mr. Pym:
"Re: Zoning Amendment Application A09/08
Applicant: Fairport Inc./Lee Gray
Location: 692,700-702 Front Road
Municipality: City of Pickering
We have reviewed this application to amend the zoning on the above noted
properties. The following comments are offered for your consideration.
The purpose of the application is to permit the future development of three
single detached dwellings.
Regional Official Plan
The subject site is within the "Greenlands System" and is designated
"Waterfront Area" in the Durham Regional Official Plan. Waterfront Areas are
to be protected for their special natural and scenic features, their roles as
predominant landscape elements in the Region and the recreational
opportunities that they facilitate.
The subject site within the Frenchman's Bay area, which is designated
'Vvaterfront Place" in the Pian. \/Vaterfront Piaces are to be developed as
focal points along the Lake Ontario waterfront. The predominant uses may
include marina, recreational, tourist, and cultural and community uses. The
scale of development shall be based on and reflect the characteristics of
each Waterfront Place. Residential opportunities may be permitted, which
support and complement the predominant uses.
As the subject site is adjacent the waterfront, an Environmental Impact Study
(EIS) is required for the Region's review prior to the approval of the
application, to address the following:
a) the location and nature of the development;
b) the mapping of the location and extent of the environmental
conditions which may include key natural heritage or hydrologic
features;
@
100% Post Consumer
q
) ,
~/- )
(1 ;'1
'.) '..j
c) the degree of sensitivity of the environmental conditions and an
evaluation of such conditions;
d) an assessment of the potential impacts including cumulative impacts
on the environment;
e) the need for any mitigating measures to protect key natural heritage
or hydrological features and functions and the surrounding
environment, and definitions of such measures;
f) impact on the shoreline, creeks, wetlands and near-shore wildlife
habitat and aquatic characteristics;
g) opportunities for the appropriate portions of the subject lands to be
included in a natural corridor system along the waterfront and creek
valleys;
h) impact on lake water quality; and
i) the acceptability of soil quality if the development proposal involves
lakefilling.
Provincial Policies & DeleQated Review Responsibilities
This application has been screened in accordance with the terms of the
provincial plan review responsibilities. There are no matters of provincial
interest applicable to this application.
Regional Services
Water and Sanitary Sewers
Municipal water supply and sanitary sewer services are available to the
subject site.
Durham Region Transit
The subject site is within an area of limited transit service due to street
widths and configuration.
Please contact me should you have any questions or require any additional
information regarding this matter.
/
i.il
.. /
+ ""...,-,..,:........" --
1\"/ ......,...-----
He(li\ry Tang, Planner
Current Planning
cc: Regional Works Department -Pete Castellan
Durham Region Transit - Phil Meagher
The Regional
Municipality
of Durham
Planning Department
605 ROSSLAND ROAD E
4TH FLOOR
PO BOX 623
WHITBYON L 1 N 6A3
CANADA
905-668-7711
Fax: 905-666-6208
mail: planning@
legion.durham.on.ca
www.region.durham.on.ca .
A.L. Georgieff, MCIP, RPP
Commissioner of Planning
"Service Excellence
for our Communities"
JJ2
(
May 5, 2008
Ross Pym, Principal Planner
Planning and Development Department
City of Pickering
One The Esplanade
Pickering, Ontario
L1V 6K7
Mr. Pym:
Re: Zoning Amendment Application A09/08
Applicant: Fairport Inc./Lee Gray
Location: 692,700-702 Front Road
Municipality: City of Pickering
1
I
RECEIVED
MAY 0 7 2008
CITY OF PICKERING
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT
Through correspondence between City staff, and Toronto Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA), the following revised comments are offered.
Comments from the Region dated April 15, 2008 indicated the need for an
Environmental Impact Study (EIS). As per Regional Policy, the area
municipality has the lead role for an EIS related to rezoning applications. As
the City indicated there is no need for an EIS be conducted, the Region's
original comments is now revised to delete the requirement for the submittal
of an EIS for the Region's review.
. j ---.-...
~"
r// - _ .
~~ner
C'urrent Planning
@
100% Post Consumer
!
REPORT TO
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE
Report Number: PD 27-08
Date: July 7, 2008
CitJI 0#
From:
Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
Subject:
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
Durham Regional Official Plan Amendment, File: OPA 2007-006
Recommendations:
1. That Report PD 27-08 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding an
application to amend the Durham Regional Official Plan, File: OPA 2007-006 be
received;
2. That Council advise the Region of Durham that it supports the application to
amend the Durham Regional Official Plan, File: OPA 2007-006, submitted by the
Duffin Heights Landowners Group to:
i) delete the future east-west Type C arterial road connection from Church
Street in the Town of Ajax (extension of Williamson Drive) to the CP rail
line in Duffin Heights;
ii) delete the remnant portion of Old Taunton Road as a Type C arterial road
designation from Taunton Road to the future east-west Type C arterial
road; and
iii) realign the possible extension of Valley Farm Road, a Type C arterial
road, north of the Third Concession Road including crossing the
Ganatsekiagon Creek easterly to connect to Brock Road; and
3. Further, that a copy of Report PD 27-08 be forwarded to the Region of Durham,
Town of Ajax, Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and Sernas
Associates (representing the Duffin Heights Landowners Group) for information.
Executive Summary: The Duffin Heights Landowners Group engaged Sernas
Associates to conduct an Environmental Servicing Plan (ESP) for the Duffin Heights
Neighbourhood. One element of the ESP is the review of the road network necessary
to service the Neighbourhood and broader area. The transportation component of the
ESP concluded that the Type C arterial road structure in the current Durham Regional
Official Plan (DROP) is neither necessary nor appropriate. Rather, Sernas
recommends that the Neighborhood be serviced by a network of collector roads.
Report PD 27-08
Date: July 7, 2008
Subject: Durham Regional Official Plan Amendment (OPA 2007 -006)
Page 2
:I~
Consequently Sernas submitted an amendment application to the DROP to delete
segments of three Type C arterial roads consisting of: the east/west road from Church
Street in Ajax to the CP rail line in Duffin Heights, the extension of Valley Farm Road
from the Third Concession Road connecting to Tillings Road and the easUwest road,
and the remnant portion of Old Taunton Road from Taunton Road connecting to the
east/west road.
Through consultation with the City and Region, Sernas is no longer proposing to delete
the Valley Farm Road extension as a Type C arterial road, but instead is recommending
the realignment of the extension of Valley Farm Road to connect to Brock Road. This
revised alignment provides for connectivity to and from the neighbourhood, modest
capacity relief from Brock Road, and emergency access through the neighbourhood.
The Central Pickering Development Plan does not show any road crossing of the
Ganatsekiagon Creek into Seaton, south of the CP rail line from Duffin Heights. The
absence of the creek crossing negates any future mid block east-west Type C arterial
road connection from Seaton to the A9 Community. A future east-west Type C arterial
road is depicted within the hydro corridor of the Ajax A9 Community Plan and extends
westerly from Church Street to the eastern limit of the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood.
Subsequently, Hydro One has commented that the proposed Williamson Drive
extension will not be permitted to travel longitudinally inside the Hydro One corridor
within the hydro corridor is unlikely to be supported by Hydro One. Ajax Council
supports the Duffin Heights Landowners Group private initiated amendment application
proposing to delete the extension of the east-west Type C arterial road (Williamson
Drive).
It is recommended that Council support the application to amend the Durham Regional
Official Plan (File: OPA 2007-006) submitted by the Duffin Heights Landowners Group
to: delete the future east-west Type C arterial road connection from Church Street in
the Town of Ajax (extension of Williamson Drive) to just west of the CP rail line in the
City of Pickering; delete the Type C arterial road designation on the remnant portion of
Old Taunton Road from Taunton Road to the future east-west Type C arterial road; and
realign the possible extension of Valley Farm Road, a Type C arterial road, north of the
Third Concession Road including crossing the Ganatsekiagon Creek easterly to
connect to Brock Road.
Financial Implications: There are no direct costs to the City at this time related to
the recommendations contained within this report. However, staff notes that the
Municipal Class Environmental Assessment process will be required to be completed
before the northerly extension of Valley Farm Road can proceed to construction. This
project is a Schedule C project requiring Phases 3 and 4 of the five phase Class EA
planning process to be carried out prior to completion of detailed design and
construction. In the 2007 Capital budget for External Subdivision Works (account 2321)
Council approved $350,000 for the Class EA work to be undertaken. Council approval
will be required to retain a consultant to undertake the Class EA work. These matters
will be addressed in a future report to Council.
Report PD 27-08 Date: July 7,2008
1S!~~~ect: Durham Regional Official Plan Amendment (OPA 2007 -006) Page 3
Sustainability Implications: The deletion of the two Type C arterial road connections
eliminates the potential for negative environmental impacts to the Urfe Creek as well as
significant municipal costs related to land acquisition and road construction.
1.0 Background:
1.1 Duffin Heights Environmental Servicing Plan has recommended changes to
the transportation system
In December 2007, Sernas Associates (Sernas), on behalf of the Duffin Heights
Landowners Group submitted the Duffins Heights Environmental Servicing Plan
(ESP) to the City. Subsequently, staff requested additional information to
address the comments on the ESP. Sernas is preparing responses to address
the comments provided by the public agencies respecting the ESP and expect to
submit a revised ESP in the near future.
The findings of the ESP transportation component supports a preferred road
network of collector road connections to Brock Road rather than Type C arterial
roads as currently reflected in the Durham Regional Official Plan (DROP) (see
Attachment #1). Further, the traffic component concluded that the extension of
Williamson Drive into Pickering from Ajax is not required in terms of a road
network capacity or intersection operations. There are also significant
environmental constraints to implement the Type C arterial road at creek
crossings.
1.2 Sernas Associates, on behalf of the Duffin Heights landowners Group,
submitted an application to amend the Regional Official Plan to delete
segments of three Type C arterial roads
The ESP's transportation analysis provided the foundation for Sernas Associates
to submit an application to amend the DROP to delete all Type C arterial roads
in Duffin Heights and a portion in the Town of Ajax (OPA 2007-06). Approval of
this Regional amendment at this time will enable the City's Duffin Heights
amendment to be exempt from Regional approval, thereby expediting ESP
implementation.
The amendment application initially submitted by Sernas proposes to delete
segments of three Type C arterial roads as follows:
· the east/west road from Church Street in the Town of Ajax (extension of
Williamson Drive) to just west of the CP rail line in the City of Pickering;
Report PD 27-08
Date: July 7,2008
Subject: Durham Regional Official Plan Amendment (OPA 2007 -006)
Page 4
c
,)
· the extension of Valley Farm Road from the Third Concession Road
connecting to Tillings Road and the east/west road;
· the remnant portion and extension of Old Taunton Road from Taunton
Road connecting to the east/west road (see Attachment #2). It is noted
that only the Regional Type C arterial road desiqnation is being deleted,
as Old Taunton Road is identified as a collector road in the Pickering
Official Plan.
As part of the Region's review process, further information supporting the
application was requested. In March 2008, Sernas submitted a report
supplementing, revising, and updating information contained in the ESP relating
to the transportation component.
1.3 Following discussions with Regional and City staff, Sernas recommends
retaining the Valley Farm Road extension as a Type C arterial road from the.
Third Concession Road, east to Brock Road
The ESP transportation analysis concluded the extension of Valley Farm Road north
from the Third Concession Road would have minimal impact on the operation of the
broader road network. However, in light of recent discussion with Regional and City
staff, Sernas is supporting the extension of Valley Farm Road as it would provide a
north-south link into and from the neighbourhood, opportunity for increased transit links
to the south and modest capacity relief off Brock Road. Also, a Valley Farm Road
extension as a minor by-pass, provides an emergency access route through the
neighbourhood should the intersection of Brock Road and Rossland Road be blocked.
The recommended road pattern now redirects Valley Farm Road easterly to a
signalized intersection at Brock Road where it provides options for road capacity,
connectivity and secondary (emergency) access (see Attachment #2). A Class
Environmental Assessment will have to be undertaken by the City before
construction of the road extension and crossing of the Ganatsekiagon Creek can
proceed.
2.0 Discussion:
2.1 The Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP) deleted the mid-block
east-west Type C arterial road connection to Seaton from the Duffin
Heights Neighbourhood
Currently, the DROP designates a future east-west Type C arterial road segment
with connections to Seaton, Old Taunton Road and the Town of Ajax. Since the
approval of the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood in 2003, the Central Pickering
Development Plan (CPDP) has come into force and does not show any road
crossing of the Ganatsekiagon Creek into Seaton, south of the CP rail line from
Duffin Heights. The removal of this Type C arterial road connection in the CPDP
means that a continuous road connection from Seaton to the A9 Community in
Ajax is no longer possible.
Report PO 27-08 Date: July 7,2008
Subject: Durham Regional Official Plan Amendment (OPA 2007 -006) Page 5
'f1h
I " '-,
2.2 The extension of Williamson Drive within the hydro corridor lands from
Church Street to Duffin Heights is impractical due to current and future
hydro tower locations
On April 24, 2008, a meeting was held with representatives from the Region,
City, Town of Ajax and Landowners Group to discuss the future alignment of
Williamson Drive within the hydro corridor. Subsequently, Hydro One has
commented that the proposed Williamson Drive extension will not be permitted
to travel longitudinally inside the Hydro One corridor.
2.3 Ajax Council supports the Duffin Heights Landowners Group Regional
Official Plan Amendment application (ROPA 2007-006)
On April 28, 2008, Ajax Council passed a resolution to support the Duffin Heights
Landowners Group private initiated amendment application proposing to delete
the extension of the east-west Type C arterial road (Williamson Drive). Ajax staff
also supported the amendment application given the potential negative impacts
to the Duffins and Urfe Creeks, limited traffic benefit, significant municipal land
acquisition and capital costs, and unlikely municipal implementation.
2.4 The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority supports deleting the
extension of Williamson Drive from Church Street to the CP rail line in
Duffin Heights due to negative impacts on the Urfe and Duffins Creek
including loss of significant forest cover
In a letter dated January 28, 2008, responding to the Region's proposed
Regional Official Plan amendment application, the Toronto and Region
Conservation Authority (TRCA) supports deleting the Williamson Drive
extension. There are significant negative impacts on the natural heritage system
including lost of forest cover from constructing the required infrastructure across
the Urfe Creek.
To facilitate a transportation connection from the A9 Community to Duffin
Heights, it would require the extension of Williamson Drive northerly from the
hydro corridor, crossing the Urfe Creek, and then redirected westerly through the
Pickering Golf Course lands. This potential link through the natural heritage
system of Duffin Heights is not supported by TRCA staff.
Report PO 27-08 Date: July 7,2008
Subject: Durham Regional Official Plan Amendment (OPA 2007 -006) Page 6
! ) '7
3.0 Recommendation:
Staff supports the application to amend the Durham Regional Official Plan,
File: OPA 2007-006, submitted by the Duffin Heights Landowners Group to
delete two of the three segments of Type C arterial roads. Further, staff is
recommending the realignment of Valley Farm Road (Type C arterial road) to
connect to Brock Road as it provides for connectivity to and from the
neighbourhood, modest capacity relief from Brock Road, and an emergency
access through the neighbourhood.
It is recommended that Council support the application to amend the Durham
Regional Official Plan, File: OPA 2007-006, submitted by the Duffin Heights
Landowners Group to:
· delete the future east-west Type C arterial road connection from Church
Street in the Town of Ajax (extension of Williamson Drive) to just west of
the CP rail line in the City of Pickering;
· delete the remnant portion and extension of Old Taunton Road, a Type C
arterial road designation, from Taunton Road to the future east-west Type
C arterial road; and
· realign the possible extension of Valley Farm Road, a Type C arterial
road, north of the Third Concession Road including crossing the
Ganatsekiagon Creek easterly to connect to Brock Road.
Attachments:
1. ESP - Recommended Road Network
2. ESP - Proposed Amendments to the Arterial Road Designation of the Durham
Region and City of Pickering Official Plans
Report PO 27-08 Date: July 7,2008
Subject: Durham Regional Official Plan Amendment (OPA 2007 -006) Page 7
~l (1~
Prepared By:
Approved/Endorsed By:
(\...
Grant McGregor, MCIP, RP
Principal Planner - Policy
~{~cllP
18, RPP
Ing & Development
/ - I
r-' '- ie/l(fo~C{/ UV- ,
Lynda 1 ylor, MCIP, R
Manager, Develop ent Review
GM:ld
Attachments
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration
of Pickering City Counc'l
//
-r--7---r-
'-',n _.~_..".... -<;.-7 I_~>_..:;
\
)
,.
...."
!)VI"..y", ,
<''''''<':t ...
." ; ......
,
I
\
-...
...
........
,
I
Co""'iP"
#0
,-
\
RIP Dote
, ,.
APR. 02, 2008 File: C6154--DurFlNH[lGHTS~P~Gl~;-2-J-APR
TAUNTON ROAD
,.
....
/
...,'"
./
....
....
....
C'
7t.
-.;.
~
Y"
~,
'",
~
"
...
...
...
....
...,...
;0
...
'"
...
,.
'"
...
...
... '
f,
oH.
Ir'
ill
1i
!~ .'. ...
"'\1
jit
I~
fiERSo _ ,
,/
,/,','
...'
...'
...
...
...
. ...
, ...
......... ,
,
.
,
.
,
,
.
.
.
\
.
\ -
k'-'
~'<. ~\.
< ~ .
" \...."'...
.........
,
.
,
"
\
.
.
,
,
:
..,-" --..-.. --.. -..... '"'C,_ _ ...."'__........_
.
,
:
.
.
.
.
: i:!
. /Ii ,,0J:""
: ~ GO~):~C;<*... -
: ~ j).~1-...""
. .'
. --
.--
.
.
I
,
. ...
....'
I
I
I
I
I
I
"'1 :
... I
... .
." I I
,..................""=.~__ .=__ __' __ --.<l.-- -.Y.... - __ u._ __ _. -. _.... - -~.
.",,~;cM;~:,:"",:,~~,.-,;:,- __,'rH_~"""'~-:;';""'c~~_,*","""~~_"~f:",::,;j.,h;,~\t;;~:~;'j;:iIJ.:~:_::,;;,_i::;';ii.~:::";!-,k:::J.;::;:;:Y:.t.::;i;!~~,::~
AJAX MULTI-USE TRAIL CONNECTION
.
.
"
y"
...
...
,,~\l"'O
c..o,-,-\OO9.
...
...
~''''''o\~'''
.,,' ",\o~\\
...
l~
<'
'0
jj
I~
-'<
to
i
i=
lEW:m.
Pr-,yUna
, - Duffin Helghta Boundary
..u._ Prcpooed Ijajor p_
Rout.. Ae Per CIty of
Plcl<erlng COld ESP
* Sl9"a11zed Int.-..ctlon
. . . . Proposed Tranlft Route
Rood Network
Realanal Official Plm.
_ T)po 'j,,' Arterial Road
T)I>O 's' Arterial Road
T)po 'c' Arterial Road
Rotad Network
CitvOftlcldlPlan
_ CoIector Road
...
=== Local Road
= = = = u_g Roode
.....-- .A55OC....T5S
{A, ..",."~,,, ~f Th. s.c~JS i;r"",p 'n<)
~"_~ 'm~
14.., INj: f~11I7
""'~-~ --
l1l(fIl
RECOMMENDED
ROAD NETWORK
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
Environmental Servicing Plan
(ESP)
--
a<<QIO)lT:
1!..::MI::I!l' 1~ I~ _ qolFlG 10.3
~
o
'-0
--
..j
c)
~~
1iiiG.tIc1'.....
ClIll14
N
~
~
Vi TAUNTON ROAD
r DELETED BYCPDPj
"
/
/
"
;
.t"./
6;
;
...
...
...
...
...
...
...-
...
...
;
'0,
(;.t'~~,
q>,,~.....
-....
; ....-
, J
... \
" ....
"
...
"
)
~
DELETE MIDBLOCK
ARTERIAL ROAD TYPE:9:.
...
...
...
l!
'It;
If:
,I:
.1 . ,'.......
Ir,<< ,-- , ' ... ' ... ' ... ' ...~... ,
r ,...'~" ,,-
... ... ...\
I" -
fif~~~ ~~/ ·
til;Ll RECLASSI _n
,~~ ARTERIAL ';io TYPE "CO
, COLLECTOR :8 TO
!; AD
If
...
RECLASSIFY TYPE "CO
ARTERIAL ROAD TO
COLLECTOR ROAD
...
...
,"
~
~
I,
'I
E~~~~~~~~ct1\
~ II
~ 'II
'-' II
3 I!
;: -ii
I'
IL---------
l,--__._____.___---c-
l' OERSAN STf~UT
II
I
'I
I
\
C>
~
~
~
"'"
%
...
'1-
CP9...\Q09-
y,~09-0
"'"
"",'
...
..........
RIP Dote - APR. 02, 2008 File 06154-DUFFiNHEIGHTS-ESP-FIG10-1-2-J-APR-
...
;
<
> "
,,'
...
,"
"
....
;,"
"
"
...
"
;
...
,....."
...__ \ 1
~
~"
~..
,,"
..to
1
1
1
1
I
I.
-<
~
-.
~
1
1
1
1
1
I
I
I
I
I
...
"
..0
/
.::
II;
"
It:-
~
...
(.0",,,\00"
...
",'"
.....;:.i~
"
, ... '
J.E.QE/W.
P~y Un_
- - Duffin Height. Boundary
Road N.twotk
R.::JkJnal Offield PIoan
_ T~. .... Morial Rood
T~. 's' Morial Rood
T~ 'C' Morial Rood
" -~ = = ulotinv Roado
5E~N4.S ASSOCIATES
~",',"
~"~:,
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
TO THE ARTERIAL ROAD
DESIGNATIONS OF THE
DURHAM REGION AND
CITY OF PICKERING
OFFICIAL PLANS
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
Environmental Servicing Plan
(ESP)
:::v,:, S-R:S.
oseo...r~ 100 1~ 100 ~)(lIFIG 10.2
-:.
-'>
C:J
:t"~,.
I
.-l
:'1;:0-
c:'
;";:"'
r:'
~
!
\iilb
-Ji
6'
Q'
PItO.I:cr.....
06154
Citlf 01
REPORT TO
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE
Report Number: PO 29-08
Date: July 7, 20081 i '1
From:
Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
Subject:
Downtown Pickering Program
Continuation of Urban Design Consulting Services
Recommendation:
1. That Report PO 29-08 of the Director, Planning & Development respecting urban
design consulting services for the Downtown Pickering program be received;
2. That the Director, Planning & Development be authorized to continue with the
engagement of Young + Wright IIBI Group Architects to act as the City's urban
design consultant on the Downtown Pickering program to an upset limit of
$70,000 using professional and consultative services funds approved by Council
in the 2008 Department budget; and
3. That the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the necessary action to
give effect hereto.
Executive Summary: In August 2007, through our normal Request for Proposals
process, the City hired Young + Wright Architects (Y+W) as the City's urban design
consultants for the Downtown Pickering program. The 2007 budget allocation for this
assignment had an upset limit of $40,000, a portion of which was carried over to 2008.
This allowed Y+W to provide consulting assistance to the end of June 2008.
Downtown Pickering is one of only two Urban Growth Centres in Durham Region. This
designation, along with the heightened level of development interest in our downtown
makes it critically important that the City maintain qualified urban design consulting
assistance with respect to our Downtown Program. Staff have been extremely pleased
with the work completed to date by Y+W (now Young + Wright IIBI Group Architects)
and recommend that Council approve the continued use of this firm for the remainder of
2008 to an upset limit of $70,000, in accordance with the 2008 approved budget.
Financial Implications: The approved 2008 budget includes an allocation of $70,000
for urban design work, vision workshops and community consultation in relation to the
Downtown Pickering project (account 2611-2392).
Report PO 29-08
July 7, 2008
Subject: Young + Wright / 181 Group - Downtown Pickering Program
.11 2
I !.
Page 2
Sustainability Implications: Not applicable
Background: In August 2007, the City engaged the consulting services of Y+W
through the City's Request for Proposal's process to undertake urban design work in
relation to our Downtown Pickering program. The 2007 upset limit for this work was
$40,000. Some of this money was carried over into 2008, which allowed the consulting
assignment to continue to the end of June 2008.
Since we engaged them, Y+W has completed a number of projects for the City
including preliminary design concepts for the Ministry of Transportation property at
Highway 401 and Liverpool Road, the Civic Precinct, and other downtown sites. They
have also attended various meetings, presentations and events, including Sustainable
Pickering Day, and have completed significant background research and photographic
inventories.
Development interest in the Downtown Pickering program is increasing significantly,
particularly in relation to lands south of Highway 401 and with respect to development
of the Pickering Town Centre Office Tower, pedestrian bridge and GO Station link.
Given this heightened development interest, and the fact that Downtown Pickering is
designated an Urban Growth Centre, it is vitally important that the City maintains a high-
level of urban design expertise to assist our downtown program through the remainder
of 2008. Work to be undertaken over the remainder of the year includes:
· Developing design concepts, sketches and vision plans for the Downtown
South and our emerging "Mobility Hub";
· Reconstructing a visionary 3D model of the Downtown (developed through
recent public consultation);
· Conducting research and providing design advice for contemplated "landmark"
downtown facilities (i.e. pedestrian bridge and a performing arts centre); and
· Providing urban design advice to the City respecting a number of downtown
projects and proposals.
As funds provided by the initial 2007 purchase order are now essentially exhausted, it is
necessary to establish a new purchase order with Y+W. To continue this work the
City's purchasing policy requires that three formal written quotations be solicited for
consulting services of this magnitude. However, staff are extremely pleased with the
work of Y+W and wish to secure their services for this continuing project. The firm is
highly qualified and extremely well respected in the building and development industry.
The firm is also very well-aligned with the City's sustainable development goals and
objectives and has an excellent understanding of our downtown area. It is
recommended that Council authorize the continued use of Y+W for the remainder of
2008, up to the approved 2008 budget allotment of $70,000. In 2008 Y+W merged with
the 181 Group. The firm is now known as Young + Wright / 181 Group Architects.
The Downtown Program is a joint program of the Planning & Development Department
and the City's Office of Sustainability.
Report PD 29-08
July 7, 2008
Subject: Young + Wright / 181 Group - Downtown Pickering Program
Page 3
)
Prepared By:
Approved/Endorsed By:
L---
Neil Carr --
Director, Planning & Development
~---
/j /'7/l,
Thomas E. Melymu
Director, Office of Sust
RT:TM
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration
of Pickering City Council
'/
Cit'l 0#
REPORT TO
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE
.1 '1 A
I ! (~
Report Number: PO 30-08
Date: July 7, 2008
From:
Neil Carroll
Director, Planning & Development
Subject:
Request from Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited for Exemption to Section 10 (b) of
Fill & Topsoil Disturbance By-law 6060/02
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood
Recommendation:
1. That the request of Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited for exemption from Section 10 (b)
of Fill & Topsoil Disturbance By-law 6060/02 to allow pre-grading of its lands in the
Duffin Heights Neighbourhood be approved; and
2. Further, that the appropriate City officials be authorized to take the necessary
actions to give effect thereto.
Executive Summary: Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited owns land in the Duffin
Heights Neighbourhood, which is subject of a Draft Plan of Subdivision Application and
Zoning By-law Amendment Application. Mattamy wishes to proceed at the end of July 2008
with topsoil removal and earthworks for cut and fill to pre-grade, and rough grading for a
stormwater management pond. However, City of Pickering Fill & Topsoil Disturbance By-law
6060/02 Section 10 (b) prohibits the Director, Planning & Development from issuing a permit
unless the land use to which the proposed work pertains is permitted by applicable by-laws
passed under the Planning Act.
As the current 'A'- Agricultural zoning of the lands does not permit the development to
which the proposed grading work pertains, Mattamy requires Council approval of an
exemption from Section 10 (b) of the Fill & Topsoil By-law in order to proceed with the
proposed grading work to accommodate future development.
Financial Implications: There are no financial implications to this request.
Sustainability Implications: This report does not contain any sustainability
implications.
Report PO 30-08
July 7, 2008
Subject: Exemption to Fill & Topsoil Disturbance
By-law 6060/02 Section 10 (b)
Page 2
~'1 5
Background: In a letter dated June 11, 2008 (see Attachment #2 - copy of
letter), Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited has requested an exemption to Fill & Topsoil
Disturbance By-law 6060/02 in order to commence pre-grading site works activity on its
lands in the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood at the end of July 2008. These works
include topsoil removal and earthworks for cut and fill to pre-grade, and rough grading
for a stormwater management pond. The works are required prior to installation of
underground servicing which Mattamy anticipates will commence in late 2008/early
2009 following Council's consideration of their draft plan/zoning amendment
applications. Mattamy wishes to proceed with pre-grading work as earthworks,
especially topsoil removal, cannot be completed when the ground is frozen.
However, the lands subject of Mattamy's request are currently zoned lA' - Agricultural which
does not permit the land use to which the proposed grading work pertains. Fill & Topsoil
Disturbance By-law 6060/02 Section 10 (b) prohibits the Director, Planning & Development
from issuing a permit unless the land use to which the proposed work pertains is permitted by
the applicable by-laws passed under the Planning Act. Mattamy has submitted a draft plan of
subdivision application (S-P-2008-01) and zoning by-law amendment application (A 1/08) on
its lands, but these applications will not be considered by Council until late 2008 (see
Attachment #1 - Location Map). Consequently, in order for a permit to be issued at this time,
Council's approval of an exemption to the By-law must first be secured.
The Planning & Development Department has no objection to Mattamy's exemption
request. The lands are currently designated for urban development and the
environmental development limits have already been established in consultation with
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority, Ministry of Natural Resources and other
approval authorities (these lands were part of the Seaton land exchange). The
exemption will only apply to the timing of grading activity. All other requirements of the
Fill & Topsoil Disturbance By-law and permit process will apply. Further, the proposed
earthworks are limited to pre-grading of the site and will not pre-determine the
subdivision design which has yet to be considered by Council.
Attachments:
1 . Location Map
2. Copy of letter requesting exemption from Fill & Topsoil Disturbance By-law
Report PO 30-08
July 7, 2008
Subject: Exemption to Fill & Topsoil Disturbance
11 f, By-law 6060102 Section 1 0 (b)
Page 3
Prepared By:
Approved/Endorsed By:
~/
2~~~_
Robert Starr
Supervisor, Development Control
Neil Carro, =- CIP,RPP
Director, Planning & Development
NC:kb
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration
of Pickering City Council
/.
/,
t }
P1ACHMENT-I I TO
RE?ORT I PO ~O.. 08
'7
c..P""
~
~
'-'
z
j
>=
fNDU CUL rURAL C
DERSAN
STREET
i
City of Pickering Planning & Development Department
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION CON 3, N PT LOT 17,18 40R-2114, PART 1 TO 5
SCALE 1 :5000
CHECKED BY DB
l'
FILE No.
MATTAMY HOMES INC.
SUBDIVISION APPLICATION
DATE JUNE 19, 2008 DRAWN BY JB
OWNER
o 0 ources:
Tor-anol Enterprises Inc. and ita supplier:s. All rights Reserved. Not 0 pion of survey.
2005 MPAC and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not 0 plan of Survey.
PN-15
-I '; g
ArrACHMENT'_.~ IU
REfiORTI PD~ -os
VIA EMAIL
JUN 11 2008
June I I, 2008
'}
iRE.cEBVEDI
1\ 1 ~ 1 ^.,,,,,,,, I.
: , : '. '. i; .. I .') ~
, ' , ~ I ,-,.. I
, Cl~; ~F PIC~ERING I
1 PLAj'.JN1NG Af,jD ". ~
_ f~~"~: ("P~.ilt:~,JT DEP/~RT~1E',IT -:1
t_~::-.;.~~-:,~~""",-".""""",,,,u,,,",.~.,,,,,,,>rn""~~'"
Dear Ms Wilcox:
RE: Fill and Topsoil Disturbance Bylaw 6060/02
Mattamy (Brock Road) Limited, Duffin Heights
We are writing to City to request an exemption to the current Fill and Topsoil Disturbance
Bylaw 6060/02 and allow our application for site alteration as submitted in October 2007 to be
approved which would allow Mattamy to start site works at the end of July.
Our development schedule will require approximately 3.5 months for topsoil stripping and cut
& fill moving to pre-grade the land for servicing and complete the rough grades for the pond.
Our Consultant is preparing their detail engineering design for submission with the anticipation
that the City and Region will be able to review and approve the plans and allow us to start
servicing approximately 100 units in October.
Over that past year we have frequently pre-consulted with Planning and Engineering staff to
review our draft plan prior to our December 2007 application. Since then we have regularly
met with staff to discuss and resolve outstanding planning and engineering matters.
The Duffm Heights Landowner Group (DHLG) revised the Environmental Servicing Plan
(ESP) and submitted it to the City and TRCA May 15th. A coordination meeting was held on
June 6th that confirmed the ESP was approved "In Principle" by the TRCA.
We anticipate the approval ofthe Group's Local OPA will occur this fall and Mattamy's Draft
Plan and Zoning by-law wiJI happen at the same time.
We understand that a staff report will need to be approved at Council to support our request, as
such we respectfully request your report be presented at the earliest possible Council meeting
for consideration.
We thank you in advance for your cooperation with these matters.
Please contact me if you require any additional information.
Yours truly,
MAITAMY (BROCK ROAD) LIMITED
-L
T (90,) 477-2048 F (905) 477-2337
140 RENFREW DRIVE. SUITE 206. MARKHAM, ONTARIO L3R 653
REPORT TO
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Report Number: OES 22-08
Date: July 7,2008
q
From:
Everett Buntsma
Director, Operations & Emergency Services
Subject:
Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Dump Truck
Q-32-2008
File: A-1440
Recommendation:
1. That Report OES 22-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services
regarding the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck be received; and
2. That Quotation No. Q-32-2008, as submitted by Scarborough Truck Center Inc.
for the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck with Snow Plow and Wing,
and Electronic Salt Metering, in the amount of $158,809.00 (PST, GST and
license extra) be accepted; and
3. The total gross purchase cost of $179,454.17 and a net purchase cost of
$171,513.72 as outlined in Report OES 22-08 of the Director, Operations &
Emergency Services, be approved; and
4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance
the purchase through the issuance of debt; and
(a) that debt financing through the Regional Municipality of Durham in the
amount of $171,000.00 for a period not exceeding five (5) years, at a rate to
be determined, be approved and the balance of approximately $513.72 plus
financing costs be financed from current funds; and
(b) that financing and repayment charges in the amount of approximately
$39,500 be included in the annual current budget for the City of Pickering
commencing in 2009 and continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid; and
(c) that the Director, Corporate Services and Treasurer has certified that this
loan and the repayment thereof falls within the City's debt and financial
obligations approved annual repayment limit for debt and other financial
obligations for 2008 as established by the Province for municipalities in,
Ontario; and
Report OES 22-08
July 7, 2008
Subject: Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Dump Truck
Page 2
, ,
~ 'i II
I / '.)
(d) that the Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary in order to
effect the foregoing; and
(e) staff at the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto
Executive Summary: The City of Pickering currently utilizes a fleet comprised of
nine (9) 4-ton dump trucks and three (3) 5-ton dump trucks to perform a wide range of
road maintenance activities including winter control. A replacement for the oldest 4-ton
truck was approved in the 2008 Capital Budget. Three vendors were invited to bid, of
which all responded.
Upon review, the vehicle that meets the City's requirements and specifications is being
recommended. The vehicle proposed by the two low bidders do not, in staff's opinion
meet the overriding requirement for engine torque. This was also the situation in 2006
when the City purchased its last new 4-ton truck.
Financial Implications:
1. Approved Source of Funds
2008 Roads Capital Budqet
Item
Proiect Code
Source of
Funds
Debt - 5 years
Available
Required
4-Ton
Dump Truck
With Plow
& Wing
5320.0801.6158
$190,000.00 $171,513.72
Estimated Project Costing Summary 4-Ton Dump Truck
$158,809.00
Q-32-2008
Subtotal
GST
PST
Total Gross Purchase Cost
158,809.00
7,940.45
12,704.72
179,454.17 I
I
GST Rebate
Total Net Purchase Cost $171,513.72
The Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has reviewed the budgetary implications
and the financing of the expenditure contained in this report and concurs.
CORP0227-07/01 revised
Report OES 22-08
July 7, 2008
Subject: Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Dump Truck
Page 3
J 1
. i
Sustainability Implications: The engine powering this truck meets the
Environmental Protection Agency's Tier II emission standard. This will significantly
reduce the amount of harmful emissions created by the operation of the vehicle as well
as provide increased fuel economy. This purchase conforms to the environmental and
economic lens of sustainability.
Background: The purchase of a 4-Ton Dump Truck with Plow and Wing was
identified and approved by Council in the 2008 Capital Budget. Utilizing existing
specifications from past purchases, Supply & Services invited (3) three vendors to
participate in the bidding process, of which all (3) three have responded.
When the City called for Quotations for the purchase of a 4-Ton tuck in 2006 (see
Report OES 25-06 attached), the low bidder, Freightliner Mid Ontario did not provide
the required torque specified in the quotation document. At that time Council supported
the decision not to accept their bid. The vehicle purchased did meet the required
torque specification and performed well during the extremely heavy 2007-08 winter
control season.
After a complete review of all bids submitted it has been determined that the bid
submitted by Harper Freightliner does not meet the required torque specification.
Although the bid submitted by Donway Ford Sales indicated that they were able to meet
the requirement, staff have been informed by the bidder that the manufacturer will not
supply the engine quoted in this class of truck, therefore they also cannot meet the
specification.
Based upon these facts as well as a careful examination of all quotations received by
Supply & Services, the Municipal Property and Engineering Division recommends the
acceptance of the bid submitted by Scarborough Truck Inc, in the amount of
$158,809.00 (PST, GST and License extra) and that the total net purchase cost of
$171,513.72 be approved. This report has been prepared in conjunction with the
Manager, Supply & Services who concurs with the foregoing.
Attachments:
1. Memo from Supply & SeNices
2. Report OES 25-06
3. By-law to Confirm the Authorization of the Issuance of Debentures in the amount
of $171 ,000 for the Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Dump Truck
CORP0227-07/01 revised
Report OES 22-08
Subject: Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Dump Truck
July 7, 2008
Page 4
1 ~)?
Prepared By:
I~~
/'~L
Supervisor, Fleet Operations
Vera Felgemac er
C.PP., CPPO, CPPB, C.P.M., CMM III
Manager, Supply & Services
GS:cr
Attachments:
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration
of Pickering City Council
APproved~:_~dorse~ty:
/'/ if
~./' ... . .....,(/
(-,/// //\
. ...../-, / /
tsma
perations & Emergency
~..
.s:::.........-.... ..~
Gillis Paterson
Director
Corporate Services & Treasurer
CORP0227-07/01 revised
'f
Gi~
I
c
,,:~
CiiLJ c~
,
" .-} '~'.
'. f.
t /_...
To:
Richard Holborn,
Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering
MEMO
RECElVElJ
May 26, 2008
MAY 2 6 2008
CITY OF PICKERING
MUNICIPAL PROPERTY & ENGINEERING
From: Bob Kuzma
Senior Purchasing Analyst
Copy: Subject: Q-32-2008 Supply & Delivery
of 4 Ton Dump Truck
Quotations have been received for the above project. Three (3) companies were invited to
participate of which three (3) responded. Quotations shall be irrevocable for 60 days after the
official closing date and time.
Copies of the quotations are attached for your review along with the summary of costs. Each line
item provides a space for the vendor to indicate a "Yes, No, Specify" to provide the City with
information and details to subjectively review each line item and the sum total of all specifications.
Specifications item #4 (b) states: A mark in the "no" space shall mean a deviation from the
specification and must be further detailed in the SPECIFY space. Deviations will be evaluated
and acceptance of these deviations IS within the discretion of the City of Pickering. .
Due to the fact that delivery date of these vehicles is not certain, it is not possible to state an exact
cost for licensing, therefore prices will be stated as license fee extra. The quotation submitted by
Harper Freightliner in the total amount of $172,588.29 (license fee extra) is the low quotation,
subject to further evaluation of the vehicles conformance to specification.
Please advise with your recommendation any reason the low bid from Harper Freightliner is not
acceptable.
SUMMARY
After
Vendor Amount G.S.T. P.S.T. Lie. Total Calculation
Fee Check
Harper $152,733.00 $ 7,636.65 $12,218.64 Extra $172,588.29 $172,588.29
Freightliner
Donway Ford $155,357.00 $ 7,767.85 $12,428.56 Extra $175,553.41 $175,553.41
Sales
Scarborough $158,809.00 ~7,940.45 ~12,704.72 Extra $179,454.17 $179,454.17
Truck Center
This award is subject to Council approval.
'1 'i 4.
I ,/ .
Include in your report to Council:
I
"-c b
1. the appropriate account number(s) to which this work is to be charged and the
budget amount(s) assigned thereto
2. Treasurer's confirmation of funding
3. related departmental approvals
4. any reason(s) why the low bid of Harper Freightliner is not acceptable, and
5. related comments specific to the project
Bidders will be advised of the outcome. Please do not disclose pricing to enquiring bidders.
Subject to Council approval, an approved "on-line" requisition will also be required to proceed.
If you require further information or assistance during the evaluation phase of this quotation
call, contact me at extension 2131 .
May 26,2008
Q-32-2008 Supply & Delivery of 4 Ton Dump
Truck
Page 2
.-
~
~"',... '
i ::.c ,) REPORT TO
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
u72
,.t ;-J I
! ,/ ~)
Report Number: OES 25-06
Date: June 12, 2006
From:
Everett Buntsma
Director, Operations & Emergency Services
Subject:
Supply and Delivery of 4-Ton Truck
- Q-20-2006
- File: A-2130
Recommendation:
1. That Report OES 25-06 regarding the supply and delivery of a 4 Ton Dump Truck
be received and that:
2. Quotation No. Q-20-2006 submitted by Scarborough Truck Centre Inc. for the
supply and delivery of a 4 Ton Dump Truck with snow plow and wing, and
- electronic salt metering in the amount of $157,624.00(GST, PST and license extra)
be accepted;
3. The total gross purchase cost $180,432.36 and a net purchase cost of
$170,974.92 be approved;
4. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the
purchase through the issuance of debt: and
a) That debt financing through the Region of Durham in the amount of
$170,000.00 for a period not exceeding five (5) years, at a rate to be
determined, be approved and the balance of approximately $975 plus
financing costs be financed from current funds; and
-
b) That financing and repayment charges in the amount of approximately
$39,000 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering
commencing in 2007 and continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid; and
c) That the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has certified that this loan
and the repayment thereof falls within the City's debt and financial
obligations approved annual repayment limit for debt and other financial
obligations for 2006 as established by the Province for municipalities in
Ontario; and
d) That the Treasurer be authorized to take any actions necessary in order to
effect the foregoing: and
1,7 'i
- ..
Report OES 25-06
~..',
~ -c ')
)-f) REPORT#tL:> . Date: June 12, 2006
-
Subject: Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Truck
". ,") h Q-20-2006
I '
.~- '-~
Page 2
5. Staff at the City of Pickering be given the authority to give effect thereto.
Executive Summary: The City of Pickering has a fleet of 4 ton and 5 ton dump
trucks that are used year round for road maintenance activities including sanding.
salting and snow plowing. A replacement for the oldest 4 ton truck in the fleet was
approved in the 2006 Capital budget. Six vendors were invited to submit bids and two
bids were received. Upon review, the vehicle that meets the City's requirements is
being recommended. The vehicle proposed by the low bidder does not, in staff's
opinion, meet the overriding requirement for engine torque.
Given new emission requirements that will increase the cost of these trucks in January
2007, orders being placed at this time are significant resulting in extended delivery
times and actual uncertainty of availability. Therefore, the sooner Council approval is
received and the order is placed, the better chance the City has at receiving acceptance
and delivery. Scarborough truck has advised that delivery would be in December 2006.
The vehicle from Freightliner would be available in March 2007.
-
Financial Implications:
1.
Approved Source gf Funds
Total Approved Funds
Amount
$175.000.00
$175.000.00
2006 Capital Budget
Debt (5 years)
New Chart of Accounts
5320.0602.6158
2.
Estimated Project Costing Summary
Sub Tolal
GST (6%)
PST
License
Total Gross Purchase Cost
$157.624.00
$157,624.00
$9,457.44
$12,609.92
$741.00
$180,432.36
($9.457.44)
$170,974.92
Q-20 -2006
4 Ton Dump Truck
-
GST Rebate
Total Net Purchase Cost
Report DES 25-06
c ~<. c ;)
ri~-':"'Date: June 12, 2006
074
,,-1
-
Subject: Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Truck
Q-20-2006
'. ') '7
Page 3 'i :/ I
3.
Project Cost under (over) Approved Funds
$4025.08
The Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has reviewed the budgetary implications
and the financing of the expenditures contained in this report and concurs.
Background: The purchase of a 4-Ton Dump Truck with snow plow and wing
and electronic salt metering was approved by Council in the 2006 Capital Budget.
Through market research and analysis of emerging technology in winter control, Fleet
Operations compiled specifications for this piece of equipment. Supply & Services
invited six (6) vendors to participate in the bidding process of which two (2) have
submitted quotations.
--
The Supervisor, Fleet Operations advises that the low bid submitted by Freightliner Mid
Ontario does not provide the required engine torque specified in the document. A
torque of 1050 pound-foot at approximately 1500 RPM is required to operate the
vehicle efficiently and safely with the added load of the snow plow, wing, hydraulic
systems and salt metering device. The bid submitted by Scarborough Truck Centre
provides the torque of 1050 pound-foot at 1200 RPM whereas the bid from Freightliner
Mid Ontario only provides 950 pound-foot at 1500 RPM. This difference of 100 pound-
foot (or 10%) can be significant for vehicle performance, especially when considering
the topography and terrain of Pickering. A review of other municipalities in Durham
indicate others {Clarington and Whitby} are purchasing trucks with high torque engines
manufactured by International or Stirling.
The bid from Freightliner Mid Ontario indicates the engine supplied is a wet sleeve
engine, however, upon further research it can be stated that the MBE 900 engine is not
a true wet sleeve engine. It is a cast iron block with induction hardened cylinder bores.
The block cannot be replaced as a wet sleeve can, therefore, overhauls are more
complicated and not as cost effective.
The City's fleet of 4 ton and 5 ton dump trucks consists of four International trucks,
model year 1997-2000, five Freightliner trucks; model year 2001-2003 and three
International trucks; model year 2005-2006. The International truck has proven to be
reliable and several have been in service beyond the desirable seven-year life cycle.
The City's heavy equipment operators that operate the latest model International trucks
advise that the in-cab comfort and overall ride of the latest model International trucks
- are superior. This is important during winter control events that can typically run for 13
hours when salting and plowing is required.
Should the order be accepted, Scarborough Truck Centre advises that delivery would
be in December 2006. A call to Freightliner Mid Ontario indicated delivery would be in
March 2007.
u.,~
Report OES 25-06
L-/ ~J
. ",: L':>
-Date: June 12, 2006
i--)
-
Subject: Supply & Delivery of 4-Ton Truck
1 ) R Q-20-2006
Page 4
Upon careful examination of all quotations received by Supply & Services the Municipal
Property & Engineering Division recommends acceptance of the bid from Scarborough
Truck Centre Inc. in the amount of $157,624.00 (GST, PST and License extra) and that
the total net purchase cost of $170.974.92 be approved. This report has been prepared
in conjunction with the Manager Supply & Services who concurs with the foregoing.
Attachments:
1. Supply & Services Memorandum
Prepared By:
.' ~~?C~h
Grant Smith
Superv'sor, Fleet Operations
-
Everett untsma
Director
Operations & Emergency Services
~~-"-~
'-Gruis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
Vera A. Felgemacher
Manager, Supply & Services
RH:GS
Attachments
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
.-
consideration of
-
"?'
"
"
,l,
THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING
i () 9
BY-LAW NO.
Being a by-law to confirm the authorization of
the issuance of debentures in the amount of
$171,000 for the supply and delivery of a 4-
Ton Dump Truck in the City of Pickering
WHEREAS Section 11 of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a lower-
tier municipality may pass by-laws respecting matters within the spheres of jurisdiction
described in that Section; and,
WHEREAS Subsection 401 (1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a
municipality may incur a debt for municipal purposes, whether by borrowing money or in
any other way; and,
WHEREAS Subsection 401 (3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a
lower-tier municipality in a regional municipality does not have the power to issue
debentures; and,
WHEREAS The Regional Municipality of Durham has the sole authority to issue
debentures for the purposes of its lower-tier municipalities including The Corporation of
the City of Pickering (the "City"); and,
WHEREAS the Council of the City approved Report OES 22-08 at its meeting of July
14, 2008 pursuant to Resolution /08 and awarded Quotation Q-32-2008 for the
supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck at that meeting; and,
WHEREAS the Council of the City is proceeding with the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton
Dump Truck in the City of Pickering; and,
WHEREAS before the Council of the City authorized the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton
Dump Truck, the Council of the City had the Treasurer update the City's Annual
Repayment Limit, the Treasurer calculated the estimated annual amount payable in
respect of such project and determined that such annual amount would not cause the
City to exceed the updated Limit and, therefore, Ontario Municipal Board approval was
not required prior to City Council's authorization as per Section 401 of the Municipal Act,
2001, as amended, and the regulations made thereunder.
CORP0223-07/01
-)
:1...
BY-LAW NO
130
.J.,
Page 2
NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF
PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. That the estimated costs of the supply and delivery of a 4-Ton Dump Truck in the
amount of $171,513.72 be financed as follows:
a) That the sum of $171,000 be financed by the issue of debentures by The
Regional Municipality of Durham over a period not to exceed five (5) years;
b) That the balance of $513.72 be funded from the 2008 Current Budget;
2. That the funds to repay the principal and interest of the debentures be provided for
in the annual Current Budget for the City commencing in 2009 and continuing
thereafter until the loan is repaid.
By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 14th day of July, 2008.
David Ryan, Mayor
Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk
REPORT TO
EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Report Number: CS 34-08
Date: July 7,2008
'1 ;:; 1
From:
Gillis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
Subject:
Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act - Adjustment to Taxes
Recommendation:
1. That Report CS 34-08 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be
received;
2. That the write-offs of taxes as provided under Section 357/358 of the Municipal
Act, 2001 be approved; and,
3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the
necessary action to give effect hereto.
Executive Summary:
Not Applicable
Financial Implications: If approved, the write-off of taxes as contained in this report
represents a gross cost of $115,161.85 with a net cost to the City of approximately
$33,093.07 the balance being charged back to the Region of Durham and the School
Boards. Pickering's share of the costs will be charged to the 2008 Current Budget
allocation under General Government - Provision for Uncollectable Taxes.
Sustainability Implications:
implications.
This report does not contain any sustainability
Background: The Municipal Act provides the Treasurer with various tax tools
regarding the administration and collection of property taxes. Under the provisions of
Section 357 of the Municipal Act, reduction of taxes due to fire, demolition, exemption,
assessment change or error is allowed for the current year only. Section 358 of the
Municipal Act, allows for the reduction of taxes due to assessment error and this
section can be applied to property taxes for the two preceding years.
Change in realty tax class can translate into lower property taxes if the property went
from industrial to commercial tax class or commercial to residential tax class.
Demolitions, and other physical changes to a property, such as removing or filling in a
Report CS 34-08
Date: July 7, 2008
Subject: Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act - Adjustment to Taxes
Page 2
1 l f)
; ,j (-
sWimming pool, or damage caused by fire result in a reduction In assessment and
taxes.
Municipal Property Assessment Corporation has conducted a review of those lands
adjoining the 407 roadway. They have reviewed records and have determined that
those land listed on Attachment 1 should be considered as 407 property and is
therefore exempt from property taxation as per subsection 3.8.1 of the Assessment Act.
Four properties reflects "no change" or reduction in their property taxes. These
changes are shown as having zeros in the corresponding columns. Municipal Property
Assessment Corporation or MPAC staff have investigated the assessment reduction
request. After completing their investigation, they have reached the conclusion that the
property does not warrant a reduction in assessment and corresponding adjustment in
property taxes. If the property owner does not agree with MPAC's recommendation,
they have the right to appeal to the Assessment Review Board under section 357(7) of
the Municipal Act, 2001.
Attachments:
1. Section 357/358 Adjustment to Taxes
Prepared By:
Approved I Endorsed By:
~. '.... ~~~:~,.;:'O'._:::-2 _
--~---~~-~ .....
~._~--"~-' '
Gillis A. Paterson
Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer
GAP:tp
Copy: Chief Administrative Officer
Recommended for the consideration of
Pickering City Council
/
/ q
~./"
CITY OF PICKERING
SECTION 357/358 ADJUSTMENTS TO TAXES
JULY 2008
APP # NAME REASON FOR ADJUSTMENT YEAR ROLL NUMBER CITY REGION EDUCATION TOTAL
75/06 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2004 030.003.32700 $128.23 $251.39 $48.42 $428.04
76/06 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.32700 $134.69 $262.76 $48.40 $445.85
21/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.009.15300 $202.15 $394.35 $162.80 $759.30
22/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.009.15300 $201.10 $426.62 $161.04 $788.76
23/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.28800 $176.42 $344.16 $142.08 $662.66
24/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.003.28800 $178.02 $377 .67 $142.56 $698.25
25/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.28000 $260.95 $509.07 $0.00 $770.02
26/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.003.28000 $230.77 $489.57 $184.80 $905.14
27/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.26800 $220.52 $430.32 $177.60 $828.44
28/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.003.26800 $227.47 $482.58 $182.16 $892.21
29/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.27100 $301.38 $587.94 $242.72 $1,132.04
30/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.003.27100 $296.70 $629.45 $237.40 $1,163.55
37/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.28600 $34.30 $66.91 $29.60 $130.81
38/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.003.28600 $32.86 $69.72 $30.36 $132.94
39/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.27400 $35.16 $68.58 $30.34 $134.08
40/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.003.27400 $34.29 $72.75 $31.68 $138.72
41/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.25900 $14.70 $28.68 $0.00 $43.38
42/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.003.25900 $16.48 $34.97 $0.00 $51.45
43/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.29500 $205.82 $401.52 $165.76 $773.10
44/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.003.29500 $210.99 $447.61 $168.96 $827.56
45/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.29800 $29.16 $56.87 $25.16 $111.19
46/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.003.29800 $27.15 $57.59 $25.08 $109.82
47/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.31300 $301.38 $587.94 $242.72 $1,132.04
48/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.003.31300 $309.89 $657.42 $248.16 $1,215.47
49/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.32000 $231.55 $451.71 $0.00 $683.26
50/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.003.32000 $237.36 $503.56 $0.00 $740.92
51/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.32300 $301.38 $587.94 $0.00 $889.32
52/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.003.32300 $296.70 $629.45 $0.00 $926.15
53/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.34000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
54/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.003.34000 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
55/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.35400 $474.13 $924.93 $381.84 $1,780.90
56/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.003.35400 $481.31 $1,021.10 $385.44 $1,887.85
57/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.004.11700 $205.82 $401.52 $165.76 $773.10
58/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.004.11700 $197.80 $419.63 $158.40 $775.83
59/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.009.13900 $133.77 $260.95 $115.44 $510.16
60/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.009.13900 $127.88 $271.29 $118.14 $517 .31
61/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.009.14400 $154.37 $301.14 $124.32 $579.83
62/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.009.14400 $159.89 $339.20 $128.04 $627.13
63/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.009.14600 $231.55 $451.71 $186.48 $869.74
64/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.009.14600 $234.06 $496.56 $187.44 $918.06
65/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.009.15200 $29.16 $56.87 $25.16 $111.19
66/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.009.15200 $27.86 $59.11 $25.74 $112.71
67/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.009.15400 $62.48 $121.89 $50.32 $234.69
68/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.009.15400 $65.93 $139.88 $52.80 $258.61
69/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.003.35500 $580.71 $1,132.86 $0.00 $1,713.57
70/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.003.35500 $679.11 $1,440.73 $0.00 $2,119.84
71/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2005 030.004.11600 $790.21 $1,541.55 $636.40 $2,968.16
72/07 Ontario Realty Corporation Gross or Manifest Clerical Error-407 properties 2006 030.004.11600 $916.47 $1,944.29 $733.92 $3,594.68
~
~
:I:
3:
m
:;;
'-~
f
-1
o
:;:AJ
m
"U
()
;;.::I
-1
:ft
~
L/\
I..V
-c:..
\
.-/~'.,.J r
~--,,, ~
)
CITY OF PICKERING
SECTION 357/358 ADJUSTMENTS TO TAXES ..---.";"
JULY 2008 ':....t..J
-;::.
APP# NAME REASON FOR ADJUSTMENT YEAR ROLL NUMBER CITY REGION EDUCATION TOTAL
98/07 Ministry of Transportation Became exempt 2005 010.030.05200 $1,301.10 $2,538.18 $0.00 $3,839.28
99/07 Ministry of Transportation Became exempt 2006 010.030.05200 $1,167.02 $2,475.82 $0.00 $3,642.84
100/07 Ministry of Transportation Became exempt 2007 010.030.05200 $1,270.52 $2,583.21 $0.00 $3,853.73
110/07 Ministry of Transportation Became exempt 2005 010.040.08100 $819.62 $1,598.91 $0.00 $2,418.53
111/07 Ministry of Transportation Became exempt 2006 010.040.08100 $735.16 $1,559.63 $0.00 $2,294.79
112/07 Ministry of Transportation Became exempt 2007 010.040.08100 $800.36 $1,627.28 $0.00 $2,427.64
113/07 Ministry of Transportation Became exempt 2005 010.039.15100 $547.64 $1,068.33 $0.00 $1,615.97
114/07 Ministry of Transportation Became exempt 2006 010.039.15100 $491.20 $1,042.08 $0.00 $1,533.28
115/07 Ministry of Transportation Became exempt 2007 010.039.15100 $534.77 $1,087.28 $0.00 $1,622.05
126/07 Donald / Elizabeth Evans Size of property incorrect 2008 010.021.08314 $26.55 $53.98 $18.48 $99.01
130/07 Larry Giles / Elizabeth McGown Garage incorrectly assessed as 3-car 2008 030.020.01700 $34.18 $69.40 $23.76 $127.34
06/08 2143345 Ontario Inc Building Demolished 2008 030.008.07100 $463.30 $940.74 $322.08 $1.726.12
10/08 556170 Ontario Limited Gross or Manifest Clerical Error 2007 020.022.07706 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
11/08 556170 Ontario Limited Gross or Manifest Clerical Error 2008 020.022.07706 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00
17/08 City of Pickering Became exempt 2008 010.021.06568 $37.98 $77.11 $26.40 $141.49
18/08 City of Pickering Became exempt 2008 020.016.06806 $37.98 $77.11 $26.40 $141.49
19/08 Ontario Realty Corporation Building Demolished 2008 030.011.16900 $408.73 $829.93 $698.78 $1,937.45
20/08 Ontario Realty Corporation Building Demolished 2008 030.003.25800 $523.97 $1,063.94 $487.74 $2,075.66
21/08 Ontario Realty Corporation Building Demolished 2008 030.003.29400 $542.63 $1,101.80 $659.08 $2,303.51
22/08 Ontario Realty Corporation Building Demolished 2008 030.004.33700 $391.41 $794.76 $587.49 $1,773.66
23/08 City of Pickering Became exempt 2006 030.002.33410 $32.97 $69.94 $26.40 $129.31
24/08 City of Pickering Became exempt 2007 030.002.33410 $35.89 $72.97 $26.40 $135.26
25/08 City of Pickering Became exempt 2008 030.002.33410 $37.98 $77.11 $26.40 $141.49
26/08 City of Pickering Became exempt 2006 030.002.33412 $32.97 $69.94 $26.40 $129.31
27/08 City of Pickering Became exempt 2007 030.002.33412 $35.89 $72.97 $26.40 $135.26
28/08 City of Pickering Became exempt 2008 030.002.33412 $37.98 $77.11 $26.40 $141.49
32/08 Conservation Authority Changed to taxable based on ownership 2007 030.020.26000 $1,338.71 $2,721.86 $587.15 $4,647.72
33/08 Conservation Authority Changed to taxable based on ownership 2007 030.020.25500 $606.55 $1,233.23 $446.16 $2,285.94
34/08 Conservation Authority Changed to taxable based on ownership 2008 030.020.25500 $641.79 $1,303.16 $446.16 $2,391.11
35/08 Conservation Authority Changed to taxable based on ownership 2007 030.020.26010 $854.19 $1,736.74 $628.32 $3,219.25
36/08 Conservation Authority Changed to taxable based on ownership 2008 030.020.26010 $903.82 $1,835.22 $628.32 $3,367.36
37/08 Conservation Authority Changed to taxable based on ownership 2007 030.020.26100 $3,872.57 $7,873.69 $2,848.56 $14,594.82
38/08 Conservation Authority Changed to taxable based on ownership 2008 030.020.26100 $4,097.56 $8,320.15 -$15.84 $12,401.87
$33,093.07 $67,287.89 $14,796.72 $115,161.85