The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutNovember 3, 2008 Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, November 3,2008 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littley PART "A" INFORMATION REPORTS PAGES INFORMATION REPORT NO. 21-08 SUBJECT: City Initiated Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan 1-37 File: OPA 08-002/P Requirements for Complete Applications and Pre-Submission Consultations City of Pickering (Pickerina Official Plan Review) INFORMATION REPORT NO. 22-08 38-56 SUBJECT: Draft Plan of Condominium CP-2008-02 S.R.& R Bay Ridges Ltd. Part of Block Y Plan 16 City of Pickering PART "8" PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORTS 1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 37-08 Rinal Enterprises Inc. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1906 57-70 Cougs Investments Ltd. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1913 Ballymore Building (Pickering) Corp. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1915 Dare-Dale Developments Limited Plan of Subdivision 40M-1916 Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, November 3,2008 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littley Rondev Homes Ltd. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1920 Rondev Homes Ltd.lACPA Corporation Ltd./Bianchi; Vincenzo, Lisa, Gabriale and Liliana/Digirolamo, Filomena and Anna Plan of Subdivision 40M-1923 Woodsmere Properties Limited Plan of Subdivision 40M-1943 Marshall Homes (Altona) Limited/D'Oliveira, Anthony and Allison Helbling, Gertrude Plan of Subdivision 40M-1958 Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 37-08 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding the Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision 40M-1906, 40M-1913, 40M-1915, 40M-1916, 40M-1920, 40M-1923, 40M-1943 and 40M-1958 be received; 2. That the highway being Monica Cook Place within Plan 40M-1915 be assumed for public use; 3. That the highway being Holbrook Court within Plan 40M-1916 be assumed for public use; 4. That the highway being Granby Court within Plans 40M-1920 and 40M-1923 be assumed for public use; 5. That the highways being Stroud's Lane and Treetop Way within Plan 40M- 1943 be assumed for public use; 6. That the highways being Fawndale Road, Stover Crescent, Littleford Street and Stonehampton Court within Plan 40M-1958 be assumed for public use; 7. That the services required by the Subdivision Agreements relating to Plans 40M-1906, 40M-1913, 40M-1915, 40M-1916, 40M-1920, 40M-1923, 40M- 1943 and 40M-1958, which are constructed, installed or located on lands dedicated to, or owned by the City, or on lands lying immediately adjacent Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, November 3,2008 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littley thereto, including lands that are subject to easements transferred to the City, be accepted and assumed for maintenance, save and except from Blocks 10 and 11, Plan 40M-1906; Blocks 28 and 29, Plan 40M-1915; Blocks 23, 24 and 25, Plan 40M-1920; Blocks 42,43,44 and 45, Plan 40M-1923; Block 16, Plan 40M-1943 and Blocks 35, 36, 37 and 38, Plan 40M-1958; 8. That the Subdivision Agreements and any amendments thereto relating to Plans 40M-1906, 40M-1913, 40M-1915, 40M-1916, 40M-1920, 40M-1923, 40M-1943 and 40M-1958, save and except from Blocks 30, 32, 33 and 34, Plan 40M-1923 and Block 16, Plan 40M-1943, be released and removed from title; 9. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate Block 26, Plan 40M-1920 as public highway; and 10. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate Blocks 17 and 18, Plan 40M-1943 as public highways. 2. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 43-08 Zoning By-law Amendment - A 11/08 Grant Morris Associates Ltd. 1789,1795,1801 & 1805 Pine Grove Avenue 1790, 1792, 1794, 1804, 1806, 1808 & 1810 Woodview Avenue (Part of Road Allowance Between Lots 34 & 35, Concession 1 Parts 2,3,5 - 9,11 -13,15,17,18,20,22,24,26 - 30,32,33 & 35, 40R-25121) City of Pickerina 71-90 RECOMMENDATION 1. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/08 submitted by Grant Morris Associates Ltd. to amend the existing zoning on the rear of the subject properties to permit reduced side yard widths, reduced building height and an increased lot coverage on lands situated on Part of Road Allowance Between Lots 34 & 35, Concession 1, Parts 2, 3, 5 - 9, 11 - 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26 - 30,32,33 & 35, 40R-25121 be approved. Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, November 3,2008 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littley 2. That City Council endorse the creation of more than 3 lots to proceed by Land Division for the properties at 1795 Pine Grove Avenue and 1804, 1806 & 1808 Woodview Avenue; and 3. Further, that the amending zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/08 as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 43-08 be forwarded to City Council for enactment. 3. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 42-08 91-126 Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Growing Durham - Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report, prepared by Urban Strategies Inc. et ai, dated September 23, 2008 - Phase 5 RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 42-08 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report, dated September 23, 2008, presenting the draft recommendations for Phase 5 of the Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study, be received; 2. That the comments contained in Report PD 42-08 on the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report for the Region of Durham Growth Plan Implementation Study be endorsed, and further that the Region of Durham and its consultants be requested to make the following changes: a) Expand the extent of land identified for future living area around Kinsale, extending both to the west and to the east to Lake Ridge Road, so as to create a threshold of growth for a complete neighbourhood; b) Revise the policy restricting major office development from employment areas, such that it permits major office development at selected freeway interchanges, thereby taking advantage of transit and increasing employment densities; c) Reconsider the timing of the lands in the centre of northeast Pickering identified for future employment in the post-2031 period, so as to maximize the logical and orderly extension of services and infrastructure; and d) Implement the timing changes recommended by Regional Planning Committee on October 14, 2008, to bring lands for future living area at Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, November 3,2008 7:30 pm Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littley the north limit of northeast Pickering from post-2031 to pre-2031, and to change the lands in northeast Pickering adjacent to Lake Ridge Road from pre-2031 to post-2031; and 3. Further, that a copy of Report PD 42-08 and Pickering Council's resolution on the matter be forwarded to the Region of Durham, Urban Strategies Inc. et ai, other Durham Area Municipalities, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. (II) OTHER BUSINESS (III) ADJOURNMENT CLuJ o~ ,1 i INFORMATION REPORT NO. 21-08 FOR OPEN HOUSE ON October 21, 2008 AND PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF November 3, 2008 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 SUBJECT: City Initiated Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan File: OPA 08-002/P Requirements for Complete Applications and Pre-Submission Consultations City of Pickering (Pickering Official Plan Review) 1.0 BACKGROUND · The Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006 (Bill 51) introduced a number of changes to the Planning Act including a number of additional planning and development control tools for municipalities. · One objective of the current Pickering Official Plan Review is to introduce new policies to use the additional planning and development control tools for municipalities made available by Bill 51. Complete Applications: · Among the new powers provided by Bill 51 is the ability of a municipality to require studies to be submitted at the time that applications are submitted and to refuse consideration of applications if these studies are not submitted: in other words, if applications are not 'complete'. This complete application provision applies to official plan amendments, zoning by-law amendments, consents, plans of subdivision and plans of condominium. However, since the Region of Durham is responsible for consents, policies for consents will not be proposed by the City. · To avail itself of these powers, the City must include in its Official Plan the requirements for 'complete' applications. These provisions should document the information that the City will need to review an application. Information Report No. 21-08 Page 2 ) c. Although not specifically enabled by the Planning Act (Bill 51), other municipalities have extended provisions for complete applications in their official plans to include site plan applications. Pre-submission Consultations: · The Act also provides a municipality the ability to require applicants to consult with it prior to submitting applications for official plan amendments, zoning by-law amendments, site plan approval, consents, plans of subdivision and plans of condominium. · In order to require such pre-consultation, a municipality must pass a by-law to do so. The Act does not require a municipality to include such provisions in its Official Plan, nor does the Act prevent such provisions. Official Plan Review: · The Official Plan Review draft workplan sets out a three-year study process to amend the Pickering Official Plan through a series of seven amendments. The first amendment listed in that workplan will implement Bill 51 and the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS, 2005). · Staff now proposes to take earlier advantage of those Bill 51 powers for complete applications and mandatory pre-submission consultations by proceeding with an amendment for this purpose first. The amendment to implement the remainder of the new powers introduced by Bill 51 and requirements of the PPS, 2005 will be forwarded using the Council approved consultation process for the rest of the Official Plan Review once Council has approved the revised workplan and consultation program. · Staff is currently reconsidering aspects of the consultation and visioning aspects of the Official Plan Review program, prior to forwarding a revised workplan for Council approval. · Since this amendment is part of the Official Plan Review, the Planning Act requires that an Open House be held in addition to the requirement for a Public Meeting. It also requires that notification of these consultation meetings include the proposed amendment to the official plan. · Accordingly, an Open House is scheduled to be held October 21, 2008, commencing at 7:30 pm, a Public Meeting is scheduled for November 3, 2008, commencing at 7:30 pm, and a copy of the proposed draft Official Plan Amendment has been included in the notices mailed to everyone who requested to be advised of Official Plan Review meetings. Information Report No. 21-08 Page 3 2.0 OFFICIAL PLANS AND ZONING BY-LAW ,) 2.1 Durham Reaional Official Plan · Although the Region of Durham adopted Amendment #114 (ROPA #114) as a major part of its recent Official Plan Review, the Regional Official Plan does not provide policy directives for lower-tier municipalities to implement 'complete application' requirements in their Official Plan, or require 'pre-submission consultations'. . · The Region has recently adopted its own official plan amendment and by-law to require planning applications submitted to the Region (i.e.: Regional official plan amendments, consents, etc.) to be complete and to require mandatory pre-submission consultations before applications for Regional approval are submitted. 2.2 Pickerina Official Plan · Although the current City of Pickering Official Plan provides criteria for specific stl)dies required to be provided durinq the consideration of different types of planning applications, it does not specify that such studies must be submitted at the time that the applications are submitted to the City. It also does not currently require a pre-submission consultation for planning applications. . · Chapter 15 of the current Pickering Official Plan lists various studies that are required and, in many cases, the specific study requirements. · In some cases these study requirements need to be revised to conform with the Greenbelt Plan or ROPA #114. For instance, ROPA #114 applies stricter permissions regarding uses in Prime Agricultural Areas. These restrictions affect issues that should be addressed in required studies that support applications in Agricultural Areas in the City of Pickering. 2.3 Pickerina Zonina By-laws · The subject Amendment will not have any implications for the Zoning By-law. 2.4 Other Pickerina Bv-Iaws · The City adopted By-law No. 6763/07 in May, 2007 to delegate to the Director, Planning & Development, the authority to deem applications for approval under the Planning Act as 'complete'. · A draft by-law to require applicants to consult with the municipality prior to submission of planning applications is attached to this Information Report as Attachment #3. Staff will recommend that Pickering City Council adopt such a by-law to come into effect at the same time as the proposed official plan amendment to require complete applications and mandatory pre-consultation prior to submission of planning applications. Information Report No. 21-08 {1 3.0 DISCUSSION Page 4 3.1 Advantaaes of New Policv Directions Complete Application · Requiring specific studies to be submitted as part of a development application is a tool to strengthen implementation of Provincial policies and municipal priorities. · Including such provisions in the Official Plan will offer greater certainty for the applicants. · It will also allow City staff to have adequate information and time to comprehensively assess the merits of an application. · Requiring studies to be submitted early in the process also contributes to greater transparency and accessibility to information for stakeholders, as all documents submitted to the municipality will be available to the public. · It also front-loads the planning process in that necessary information is provided up-front, leading more certainty during the process. · An application would be deemed to be complete when all required information has been submitted to the City. · The time periods in which an applicant can appeal to the OMB would not begin to run until the application is deemed complete by the municipality. · However, an applicant can bring a motion to the OMB to dispute whether a notice from the municipality that an application is not complete or whether a notice has not been received within 30 days of submission of an application is reasonable. · In addition, new provisions in the Planning Act restrict evidence before the OMB to only the information and material that was previously provided to the municipality with the application. This places the onus on applicants to ensure that municipalities have all relevant material and expert reports in support of development applications when submitted. If new information is still introduced at the OMB, the Board must refer the application back to the municipal Council to reconsider the application. Pre-submission Consultation · Requiring consultation with City staff prior to submission of a planning application will require earlier engagement with City staff and with agency staff such as Conservation Authority, the Region of Durham or other interested agencies, thus allowing staff more time to understand the possible impact of a proposed development on a range of possible public policy concerns. · It offers an opportunity for City and agency staff and other stakeholders to identify concerns and issues earlier in the process. · It also provides City staff with flexibility to scope or add to the standard list of required studies for a complete application depending on the complexity of the application and to scale the extent of required studies to the anticipated impacts of each particular application. Information Report No. 21-08 Page 5 . :) 3.2 Review of Approaches of Other Municipalities · As Attachment #1 (Table 1 - Complete Applications and Pre-Consultation Provisions of other municipalities) illustrates, there are a number of interesting similarities amongst the approaches of other municipalities to complete application requirements. · Most municipalities have chosen to include pre-submission meeting requirements in their official plans even though it is not required by the Planning Act. In many cases they have linked that requirement with the complete application requirements. · As well, many municipalities have used the pre-submission requirements to both scope the list of required studies as well as add to the list of studies. This approach has a great deal of merit, as the scale, impacts and complexity of each application varies and as such the number and type of studies will vary as well. . In terms of the studies required as part of a complete application, most municipalities list those studies in their Official Plan, while a few include them in separate schedules or appendices. . There are generally two different approaches to the list of studies themselves: one is to use a standard list of studies for all applications and rely on the scoping provisions to tailor the study requirements; and the other is to have separate lists for each type of application. Staff recommends the former approach for Pickering. . Not discussed in Table #1, but a requirement of many of the municipal official plan amendments is the requirement that applicants agree to pay for peer reviews of the applicant studies and legal support of an applicant's case at court or the OMB. This is becoming a standard practice throughout Ontario, and there is merit in clarifying the intent of the City of Pickering in this regard in the Official Plan. 3.3 The Proposed Pickering Official Plan Amendment . The proposed amendment is attached to the written notices of the Open House and Statutory Public Meeting sent to City Councillors and staff, agencies and utilities and anyone who requested notice of any Official Plan Review matters. The proposed amendment, including informational revisions and policy changes to the Pickering Official Plan is attached to Information Report No. 21-08 as Attachment #3. . The purpose, location and basis of the proposed Amendment and Informational Revision explain that changes are proposed in order to implement new powers provided by Bill 51 to require that planning applications be complete when submitted and include all required information and studies as determined at a mandatory pre-submission consultation meeting with City staff and interested agencies. This applies to applications to amend the official plan or zoning by-law and for plans of subdivision and condominium and site plan approval. This provides a standard list for all applications to be scoped at the pre-submission consultation meeting. . t J Information Report No. 21-08 Page 6 C) · Items 1 and 2 of the proposed amendment include reVISions to several informational paragraphs that precede the policy sections. Informational side notes are proposed to be amended for most of the policy sections. · Although the Planning Act does not require a municipality to include provisions to require a pre-submission consultation in the Official Plan, a number of municipalities have done so, largely to make it clear to applicants of the municipalities requirements. Including it in the Official Plan also gives the municipality the ability to scope the studies that are required under the complete application provision. This has been added as section 15.2 as shown in Attachment #2 (also see Attachment #3 for the draft by-law to require pre-submission consultations). · Item 3 requires that applicants pre-consult with City staff to establish which studies must be submitted with their planning applications and that additional studies may also be required later, during the processing of applications. · Item 4 lists the types of information that must be submitted with the application, including a completed application form, record of the pre-submission consultation meeting, all required fees, a peer review and legal fees agreement and all required studies. · Item 5 specifies that applications will be deemed complete once all required items are submitted to the satisfaction of the City. · Item 6 lists up to 30 possible types of studies that may be required to accompany applications, with the studies required for each specific application determined and scoped in the mandatory pre-submission consultation meeting with staff. · Some existing policy sections that address agricultural reports and rural servicing studies refer to applications for settlement expansions (Sections 15.6 and 15.7) that are no longer permitted by the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Other sections need to be brought into conformity with the Greenbelt Plan, Provincial policy and Regional policy in terms of their wording and scope. Items 7 and 8 of the proposed amendment address these conformity issues. · Item 7 provides the criteria/objectives for required agricultural reports; while Item 8 provides the objectives required for site suitability studies required for proposals for non-agricultural uses in rural areas. · The Greenbelt Plan provides a minimum distance for development or site alteration adjacent to key hydrologic and key natural heritage features that are located within the Natural Heritage System of the Greenbelt Plan. In such instances, a natural heritage evaluation and hydrological evaluation is required. Policy change is required to add these studies in addition to an Environmental Report. Items 9 to 13 of the proposed amendment addresses these conformity issues. · Items 9, 10 and 11 explain the criteria for environmental reports while Item 12 introduces requirements for natural heritage and hydrological evaluations for features within Natural Heritage System lands designated in the Greenbelt Plan. Item 13 provides a minor exception for farm related buildings. Information Report No. 21-08 Page 7 "" :' . Item 14 continues existing required elements to be addressed in an environmental report. . Item 15 revises technical wording for studies that would assess the impact of lands close to known waste disposal sites. · Item 16 introduces minor technical revisions to current provisions for environmental site assessments of lands suspected of being contaminated. . Items 17 and 18 revise wording to add light and safety studies to current requirements for impact studies whenever noise, vibration, dust and odour are generated or new or expanded uses are proposed within the impact areas of such nuisances. Item 19 proposes the inclusion, in an earlier section of the official plan, of light, as a matter that can impact the enjoyment of people's properties. . Finally, Item 20 clarifies that the need for retail impact studies will also be determined through the pre-submission consultation meeting with City staff. 3.4 Other Implications . The City should prepare standard terms of reference for studies not currently addressed in the Official Plan. Such terms of reference lead to products that meet the requirements of City and agency staff and address an appropriate level of technical analysis. This can lead to more responsive applications and quicker application review times. . It is also recommended that the City prepare a standard fees agreement to require that the costs of any necessary peer reviews of required studies or legal and related consulting costs for City support of an application at a court or the Ontario Municipal Board are paid by the applicant. . The peer review cost agreement may be triggered for many of the studies that may be submitted since the City does not have the expertise to review studies such as environmental, hydrogeology and some other types of studies. Outside consulting assistance may be required to review such studies. The application fees however are not sufficient to cover the costs of retaining outside consulting assistance. . Requiring an applicant to enter into a fees agreement to cover peer review costs as part of the complete application requirements provides the City with resources necessary to undertake a thorough and complete review of each and ever application. . Staff will consider whether a fee should be charged for the pre-submission consultation meetings and protocol established for scheduling and other administrative aspects of such meetings. 4.0 RESULTS OF CIRCULATION 4.1 Resident Comments None received to date; Information Report No. 21-08 Page 8 \'( 'I.... t 4.2 Aaencv Comments None received to date; 4.3 City Department Comments None received to date; 5.0 PROCEDURAL INFORMATION 5.1 Official Plan Amendment Approval Authoritv · Region of Durham approval of this City initiated amendment will be required, as this is part of an official plan review. 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 reserve the option to appeal the decision on this Amendment, 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. 6.0 OTHER INFORMATION 6.1 Attachments 1. Table 1: Complete Applications and Pre-submission Consultation approaches of other municipalities 2. Draft Informational Revision and Official Plan Amendment 3. Draft By-law to require pre-consultation k~ Steve Gaunt, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner - Policy SG:jf Attachments Copy: Director, Planning & Development (l~;f~ Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy ATTACHM!NTI~~~~"W) f1>EP()t'rr # ./) l .' C .~? '~) TABLE 1 COMPLETE APPLICATION AND PRE-SUBMISSION CONSULTATION APPROACHES OF OTHER MUNICIPALITIES Table 1- Complete Application and Pre-submission Consultation Approaches of other municipalities. Municipality ! Is pre- Are studies Can additional I Location of list ! Are there Listing of Studies j Are studies I consultation scoped in pre- studies be of studies separate lists described? required in the consultation? identified in I required (in of studies for Official Plan? pre- OP, Appendix, each consultation? other) application? Township of Brock No N/A N/A OP No . Environmental Impact Assessment Partially . Flood Plain and Erosion Hazard Study I . Hydrogeological Study I . Retail Market Study (Economic Impact Study) . Agricultural Impact Study . Noise and Vibration Analysis Study . Air Emissions Study . Soils Study . Stormwater Management Study . Archaeological Study I . Community or Urban Design Report I . Municipal Fiscal Impact Study I . Traffic Impact Study I . Other studies as determined by Township Town of Ajax Yes Yes Yes OP No . Planning Rationale Report Yes . TrafficjTransit Impact Study I (Appendix) . Parking Utilization Study . Traffic Management Plan . Heritage I mpact Statement j . Archaeologica I Assessment i . Noise/Vibration Study . Grading, Drainage and Stormwater Management Plan . Hydrogeological Report and Servicing Options Report . Functional Servicing Plan . Geotechnical Report . Slope Stability Report . Master Environmental Servicing Plan . Environmental Impact/Review Study . Phase I Environmental Assessment . Agricultural Assessment . Air Quality Study . Contamination Management Plan . Lighting/Photometric Plan . Tree Inventory and Preservation Plan . Urban Design Guidelines . Sun/Shadow Study . Master Block Plan . Cross Section Drawings/View and Vista Renderings . Park Facility Fit Plan . Rental Housing Conversion Study . Retail Impact Study . Market Impact Study . Financial Impact Study I I I ,- '---......' ~ ~ ~J: I F- dJ ),l"';' \ ('.. ~j Page 1 Table 1- Complete Application and Pre-submission Consultation Approaches of other municipalities. Municipality Is pre- Are studies Can additional location of list Are there consultation scoped in pre- studies be of studies separate lists required in the consultation? identified in required (in of studies for Official Plan? pre- OP, Appendix, each consultation? other) application? T own of Wh itby Yes r Yes No OP No listing of Studies Are studies described? Planning Rationale Report Settlement Capacity Study Social Impact Assessment Functional Servicing Report Servicing Options Report Grading and Drainage Plan Stormwater Management Plan Hydrogeology Report Well Impact Study Soils Report Geotechnical Report Noise/Vibration Study Construction Management Plan Environmental Impact Study Phase 1/11 Environmental Impact Study Natural Heritage Evaluation Hydrological Evaluation Contaminant Management Plan Natural Hazard Study Subwatershed Study Tree Inventory and Preservation Study Refuse/Recyclable Storage and Pick-up Plan Edge Management Plan Odour Study Contour Information (including Conservation Authority Regulatory lines) Mineral Aggregate Extraction Study Agricultu ra I Assessment Statement of Conformity with Minimum Distance Separation Formula Traffic Impact Study On-site traffic Management Plan Parking Study Parking Management Plan Haul Route Plan Retail Market Impact Study Retail Market Capacity Study Financial Impact Study Housing Market Study Rental Housing Study Heritage Impact Assessment Archaeological Assessment Cultural Heritage Assessment Urban Design Study Sun/Shadow Study Lighting Plan and Signage Study No ~ 1; "- &:h Ii: ofn Z -it m,~ r::".i; _ ,3:-- c=" I ~:'~'~,oO~o. o!~'Oo 00..'0 d -~ ! ."~J Page 2 Table 1- Complete Application and Pre-submission Consultation Approaches of other municipalities. Municipality Is pre- : Are studies Can additional Location of list Are there listing of Studies f Are studies consultation scoped in pre- studies be of studies separate lists described? required in the consultation? identified in required (in of studies for Official Plan? pre- OP, Appendix, each consultation? other) application? Town of Markham Yes Yes Yes OP Yes . Land Use Planning Report Yes (but they are . Market Impact Study mostly the . Urban Design Study same) . Agricultural Impact Assessment . Environmental Impact Study . Environmental Site Assessment . Servicing Study . Traffic Management Study . Archaeological Assessment . Cultural Heritage Impact Statement . Land Use Compatibility Assessment . Tree Inventory and Preservation Plan . Subwatershed Study . Noise/Vibration Study . Community Facilities and Services Needs Assessment . Development Charges Background Study . Financial Impact Study . Parking Utilization Study Town of Aurora Yes Yes Yes Schedule Yes . Planning Justification Report No (but they are . Functiona I Servici ng Report mostly the . Stormwater Management Report same) . Transportation Study . Parking Study/Analysis . Naturai Heritage Evaluation . Geotechnical Study . Hydrogeologica I Study . Tree Preservation Protection and Replacement Strategy . Landform Conservation Study . Urban Design Report . Market Analysis and Financial Impact Study . Archaeological Assessment . Heritage Evaluation . Noise Study . Soils Report . Shadow and/or Massing Study . Lighting Study Town of Oakville Yes Yes Yes ; OP No . Planning Justification Report Yes . Heritage Impact Study/Assessment . Cultural Heritage Report . Market Impact Study . Financial Impact Study . Capital Impact Assessment . Tree Inventory and Preservation Study/Arborist Report . Functional Servicing Study/Stormwater Management Report . T _,urr.,~ Impact Study/Assessment 1"...._: I ;.n:?A; ?':l """"<; o -:;:3' ~--..n Page 3 Table 1- Complete Application and Pre-submission Consultation Approaches of other municipalities. Municipality I Is pre- Are studies Can additional I location of list Are there I Listing of Studies Are studies I consultation scoped in pre- studies be I of studies separate lists described? consultation? identified in I required (in of studies for I I required in the I I Official Plan? pre- lop, Appendix, each ' consultation? other) application? I . Noise and Vibration Report . Geotechnical/Soils Report I I . Environmental Assessment I . Urban Design Brief . Environmental Implementation Report City of Burlington Yes Yes Yes OP No . Planning Justification Report No . Stormwater/Functional Drainage Report . Water & Wastewater Service Report . Tree Inventory and Preservation Study . TrafficjTransportation Impact Study . Parking Study . Hydrogeology Study . Agricultural Impact Study . Market Impact Study . Financial Impact Study . Environmental Evaluation Report . Noise and Vibration Study . Shadow Analysis Plan . Park Concept Plan . Phase 1/11 Environmental Assessment/Record of Site Condition . Sensitive Land Use Report . Landfill Impact Study . Employment/Residential Needs Analysis . Archaeological Report . Risk Study . Utility and Telecommunications Service Report I Richmond Hill Yes Yes Yes OP No I . Environmenta I/Natura I Heritage Yes I . Cultura I Heritage/Archaeological Resources i . Tra nsportation ! . Servici ng/I nfrastructu re i i . Financial/Market Impacts I . Development Impacts (Noise, Vibration, etc...) ! I . Planning Matters (Wetland policy, ORM, etc...) --L ___ ~ ~. ;~ Xi<' ~~:? ~ rn" ~tt ~t ::J f =-, :.-4! ~a Page 4 ~.._i'; ,1 ,~t AITA,.(:f",;f~.n,~::U'r"}~ ,"'.. TO ,..!l..$il ~ll1jf~~c,I'" a ff"lf":"~ . ,<I 1- /'f'i'~~ F&EPOFrr# i _ ~ ~ DRAFT AMENDMENT AND INFORMATIONAL REVISION TO TH E CITY OF PICKERING OFFICIAL PLAN ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Infor~ational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan ,J PURPOSE: The purpose of this Amendment and Informational Revision is to change policies and informational text of the Pickering Official Plan to set out the requirements for complete applications and for mandatory pre-consultation before submission of applications for Official Plan amendments, Zoning By- law amendments, plans of subdivision and plans of condominium, in accordance with Sections 22(5), 34(10.2), and 51(18) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c.P.13. The amendment also sets out requirements for complete applications and mandatory pre- consultations for site plan applications. LOCATION: This amendment applies to all lands within the City of Pickering. BASIS: On January 1, 2007, the Planning Act was amended by Bill 51, the Planning and Conservation Land Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006 to provide a number of additional planning and development control tools for municipalities. Among these is the ability of a municipality to require studies to be submitted at the time of application and to refuse consideration of an application if these studies are not submitted; in other words, if the application is not 'complete'. However, in order to avail itself of these powers, the municipality must include provisions in the Official Plan relating to the requirements of a 'complete application'. These provisions are to document the information or material that the municipality considers it may need in order to review the full range of matters relevant to an application. This complete application provision applies to Official Plan Amendments, Zoning by-law amendments, plans of subdivision and 'plans of condominium. This amendment also requires a complete application provision for site plan applications. ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan (J In addition, Bill 51 introduced provisions permitting a municipal council, by by-law, to require applicants to consult with the municipality prior to submission of a planning application. City Council has passed such a by-law, and this Amendment proposes to add a policy to the Official Plan to provide for mandatory pre- consultation for planning applications for Official Plan amendments, Zoning by-law amendments, plans of subdivision, plans of condominium and site plan approvals. UNDERLINED = NEW TEXT STRIKEOUT = DELETED TEXT UNCHANGED = RETAINED TEXT PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND INFORMA TIONAL REVISION: Chapter Fifteen - Development Review, of the Pickering Official Plan be amended by: 1'0 On page 287, by Informational Revision, amending paragraph three by adding the words "to constitute a complete application" to the end of the first sentence, deleting and replacing the remainder of the paragraph, as follows: "This Chapter outlines the various reports that are required to be submitted in conjunction 'with a development application The reports may be required to address a Yv~ariety of matters depending of the type of proposal and its location. Some types of reports that may be required include a planning analysis of the benefits. and impacts of the proposal; a retail market anal) sis; a ground'[9\rater study; a noise impact study; and a tree in v entof} and presen ation study to constitute a complete application. An application would be deemed to be complete when all required information as set out in this Chapter has been submitted to the City. A standard list of required studies is provided for all development applications. However. during the pre- submission consultation with the applicant. staff may advise of studies from the standard list that would not be required or may be scoped in extent. or may request additional information dependent on the complexity of the application." 2 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan 7 2. On Page 289, by Informational Revision, deleting paragraph one of "Supporting Reports" in its entirety and replacing it with the following: . Deleting the existing Informational paragraph: "Depending on the type, purpose and location of a de"v~elopment application, .v~arious supporting reports may be required. The policies in this section detail both general and specific requirements for the ~3sion of .v.arious supporting reports." . Adding the following new. Informational paragraph: "An application is deemed complete when all of the required items and supporting reports provided in sections 15.2 to 15.14 are submitted. The policies in this section detail specific requirements for the submission of various supporting reports. Other reports n1ay be required by other sections of tllls Plan." 3. Deleting policy section 15.2 in its entirety, including the Informational side note and replacing with new Informational side note and new policy section 15.2 as follows: . Deleting the existing Informational side note: ~ITY POLICY Impact Rp()rts " . Deleting existing section 15.2: "15.2 City Council may require the proponents of de velopmcnt, to submit for re.~:ic V..,T in conjunctian n1.th development applications, appropriate itr..,~entory, impact and mitigation reports associated \\ith one or more physical, social, ecanomic ar en ~ironmental considerations such as transportation, noise, .vibration, parking-, shado ning, ",ind, natural hazards and resources, heritage resources, market conditions, finances, recreation opportunities, senices and infrastructure. " 3 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan d · Adding the following new Informational side note: "CITY POLICY Pre-submission Consultation" · Adding the following new policy section 15.2: "15.2 City Council shall require applicants to pre- consult with the municipality prior to submitting an application for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, draft plan of subdivision, draft plan of condominium or site plan approval. The pre-submission consultation meeting will be held with the applicant, City staff and any other government agency or public authority that the City determines appropriate. At the pre-submission consultation meeting; (a) the list of required studies set out in sections 15.5A or 15.5B may be scoped depending on the nature of the application. The CityJQ consultation with applicable agencies, ma~ also prepare terms of reference for any of the required studies which would set out the required study information, analysis and recommendations; and (b) additional studies may be determined necessary for submission with the application based on the nature of the application. " 4. Deleting policy section 15.3 in its entirety, including the Informational side note, and replacing with the new Informational side note and new policy section 15.3, as follows: · Deleting existing Informational side note: "CITY POLICY DtU!(jp,litfrt AlafrCl[f'lttnt" 4 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan ) · Deleting existing policy section 15.3: "15.3 City Council may require the proponents of development to submit, and develop in accordance vlith, one or tHOle short-er-leng-tettfl management plans controlling itnpacts or pro-.;iding enhancements, sueh as tree management, storm-.",-ater management, construction management plan, edge matlagcment plan, cn....1ronmental construction matlagement plan, or a rchabilitatien-~ . Adding the following as an Informational side note: "CITY POLICY Complete Application" . Adding the following new policy section 15.3: "15.3 City Council shall not accept an application for an official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, draft plan of subdivision, draft plan of condominium, or site plan approval until the following has been submitted to the City: (a) a complete application fonn; (b) any information or materials prescribed by statute and regulation; (c) a record of pre-submission consultation; (d) the prescribed application fee(s); (e) a fees agreement with the City to cover all required peer review costs as referred to in Section 15.4 as well as legal and consulting costs incurred by the City where the City appears at the Ontario Municipal Board or in Court in support of the application: (f) all studies set out in Section 15.5 for an official plan amendment. zoning by-law amendment. draft plan of subdivision and draft plan of condominium application; and (g) all studies set out in Section 15.6 for a site plan application." 5. Renumbering policy section 15.4, in its entirety, and moving it to appear in the new policy section 15.5C, below, and deleting the Informational side note to existing policy section 15.4. Replacing policy section 15.4 with the following new policy section 15.4, including a new Informational side note, as follows: 5 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan · Deleting existing Informational side note to policy section 15.4: "CITY POLICY A~-.}upjx)rling-R.ep{jrts and P !am-!! · Add the following new Informational side note: "CITY POLICY Peer Review of Required Studies" · Adding the following new policy section 15.4: "15.4 City Council shall require all of the matters set out in Sections 15.3, 15.5A, and/or 15.5B to be completed to the satisfaction of the City prior to the City accepting the application as complete. Once an application is deemed complete, City Council a) may require a peer review by a qualified consultant of any of the studies required in sections IS.5A and 15.5B; and b) will retain the peer reviewer at the applicant's expense in accordance with a fees agreement as provided for in Section 15.3 (e) and c) will retain appropriate professionals to support the municipal decision at the Ontario Municipal Board.. or in Court." 6. Deleting policy section 15.5, in its entirety, along with its Informational side note, and replacing it with a new . Informational side note and a new policy section renumbered as policy section 15.5A. Introducing a new Informational side note and a new policy section 15.58. Renumbering existing policy section 15.4 as new policy section 15.5C, as follows: · Deleting existing Informational side note, as follows: "CITY POLICY uta! OJli.:ia/ .I)/an .f1/1hnd,7iCI~:.J " 6 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan 'I . Deleting existing section 15.5, as follows: "15.5 When considering applications to amend this Plan, in addition to other dc-..,Telopment re-..ie-.v fefJUirem en ts, Cit)' Coi:lfteil sh all co llsidet-the twerall benefit to the community of the proposal; accordingly, Council shall, (a) require all applications to be accompanied by a Planning ...A~alysis e ;aluating the proposal against the relevant goals, objecti-;es, and general purpose and intent of this Plan; and . (b) discourage amendments that arc contrary to the goals, objectives, and general purpose and intent of this Plan." . Adding the following new Informational' side note: "CITY POLICY Required Studies for an Official Plan Amendment. Zoning Bv-Iaw Amendment. [Jraft Plan ~f SubdilJision. and Drqft Plan of Condominium Approval" . Adding the following new policy section 15.5A: "15.5A City Council shall require the following materials and studies prepared by qualified experts, as scoped or expanded as a result of the pre-submission consultation required by section 15.2, to be submitted at the time of application for an official plan amendment. zoning by-law amendment. draft plan of subdivision, and draft plan of condominium approval: (i) a planning rationale report which considers the overall benefit to the community and evaluates the proposal against the relevant goals. objectives. policies and general purpose and intent of this Plan, the Regional Official Plan, the Provincial Policy Statement, the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Greenbelt Plan, where applicable; (ii) a transportation study: (iii) a shadow study: (iv) a wind study; 7 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 . Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan ') ,,::- (v) a statement of compliance with heritage conservation designation or conservation district policies; (vi) an archaeology assessment; (vii) a functional servicing study addressing municipal water and wastewater servicing. For smaller site-specific applications, a site servicing study may be required in lieu of a functional servicing study; (viii) a drainage and stormwater management study, including preliminary grading; (ix) a flood plain impact engineering stud~ as referred to in subsection 15.31(f)) ~) an agricultural report as referred to in section 15.6; (xi) a site suitability study as referred to in section 15.7; (xii) an environmental report as referred to in section 15.8; (xiii) a natural heritage evaluation as referred to in subsection 15.9; . (xiv) a hydrological evaluation as referred to in subsection 15.9: (xv) a hydrogeology and water budget study; (xvi) an impact study on potential aggregate extraction as referred to in subsection 10.8(b ); (xvii) an aggregate extraction assessment study as referred to in subsection 10.8(b) and sections 15.33 and 15.35 (xviii) an assessment of lands within 500 metres of a Known Waste Disposal Site as. referred to in section 15.12A; (xix) a Phase I environmental site assessment, and a Phase II environmental site assessment if the Phase I environmental site assessment shows potential for contamination.. as referred to in section 15.12B; (xx) a waste disposal community impact study as referred to in section 15.36; (xxi) a noise study as referred to in subsection 15.13(a); (xxii) a vibration study as referred to in subsection 15.13(c); (xxiii)a dust and/or odour study as referred to in subsection 15.13(b ); (xxiv) a lighting study as referred to in section 15.13; (xxv) a retail impact study as referred to in section 15.14; (xxvi) a sustainable development report; 8 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan ,.) (xxvii) an urban design brief which indicates how relevant development and/or urban design guidelines and related policies of this Plan are proposed to be .i.m.vletnented; (xxviii) a financial impact study;. (xxix) an architectural design study; and (xxx) a raihvay corridor safety study. " · Adding the following as a hew Inf ormational side note: "CITY POLICY Required Studies for Site Plan Approval" · Adding the new policy section 15.58, as follows: "15.5B City Council shall require the following materials and studies prepared by qualified experts, as scoped or expanded as a result of the pre-submission consultation provided for by section 15.2, to be submitted at the time of application for site plan approval: (i) a transportation study; (ii) a shadow study; _ (iii) a wind study; (iv) a statement of compliance with heritage ~onservation designation or conservation district policies; (v) an archaeology assessment~ (vi) a site servicing study addressing municipal water and wastewater servicing; (vii) a drainage and stormwater management study, including preliminary grading; (viii) a floodplain impact engineering study as referred to in subsection 15.31(f); (ix) a grading plan: (x) a landscape plan; (xi) an agricultural report as referred to in section 15.6; (xii) a site suitability study as referred to in section 15.7; (xiii) an environmental report as referred to in Section 15.8; (xiv) a report demonstrating compliance with the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan; (xv) an assessment of lands within 500 metres of a Known Waste Disposal Site as referred to in section 15.12A; 9 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan '4 (xvi) a Phase I environmental site assessment, and a Phase II environmental site assessment if the Phase I environmental site assessment shows potential for contamination as referred to in section 15.12B, and.. if warranted.. a record of site conditions; (xvii) a waste disposal community impact study as referred to in subsection 15.36; (xviii) a noise study as referred to in section 15.13(a); (xix) a vibration study as referred to in section 15.13( c); (xx) a dust and/or odour study as referred to in section 15.13(b ); (xxi) a lighting study as referred to in section 15.13(b ); (xxii) a sustainable development report; (xxiii)an urban design brief which indicates how relevant development and/ or urban design guidelines and related policies of this Plan are proposed to be implemented; (xxiv) an architectural design study; bLxv) a constnlction Inanagelnent plan; and (xxvi) a railway corrido'r safety study." · Renumbering existing policy section 15.4 as policy section 15.5C, inserting here, and amending as follows: "15.5C City Council, in considering any supporting report or management plan, shall consult with the relevant conservation authority, provincial ministry, regional department, and other relevant group or agency on the appropriateness and a pproval of the report or plan." 7. Deleting existing policy section 15.6, in its entirety, including the informational side note and replacing with the following new policy section 15.6 and new Informational side note, as follows: · Deleting existing Informational side note to section 15.6, as follows: "CITY POLICY L.J"c:;/ OJli...ia! ..D-!tilt 11;rufrd,1u,tts ni:hiti Rttra! LLilrdJ " 10 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan ~) · Deleting existing policy section 15.6 as follows: ~--In accordal1ee-wit-h-seetions 2.26 and 2.30 of-tMs Plan, City Council may permit certain uscs in the rural area and expansions to existing settlements, and may designate ne",,".T settlements, by amendment to this Plan; ";. hen considering such applications, City Council shall require all applications to be accompanied h) the follo\.\ing, in addition to any other applicable development re yiev.T requirements, including the Planniflg-Analysis required by section 15.5, (a) an .Agricultural Report demonstrating to the City's satisfactiatt that the proposed use or settlement, (i) -yvill not significantly ad"yTersely affect the amount or quality of Class 1 to 3 agricultHralland; (ii) is located and! or operated in compliance ~ith the l\finimum Distance Separation Formulae as amended fffl-m time to time;--and . (iii) cannot be accommodated on less significant agricultural lands, in a rural settlement, or in the urban area; and (b) ftft- En".nronmcntal Report meeting the requirements of section 15.9 and demonstrating to the City's satisfaction that the proposed use or settlement, (i) "Jtill not ad"yTersely affect the quality, or function of natural features and resources, including ground ~Tater; and (ii) is energy efficient and cw...it-oftftlentaUy appropriate in terms of its form, ..,vatcr usage and St: ~Tage dis~ . Adding a new Informational side note: "CITY POLICY Agricultural Areas: Supporting Information to Permit Non- Agricultural Uses" 11 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan i_ i......} . Adding a new.policy section 15.6, as follows: "15.6 .when considering applications for non- agricultural uses on lands designated Agricultural Areas, Open Space System or Oak Ridges Moraine Countryside Areas by this Plan, or for the expansion of livestock facilities, City Council shall require an Agricultural Report prepared by a qualified expert. The Agricultural Report shall demonstrate. to the City's satisfaction, that the proposed use or lot, (a) complies with the minimum distance separation policy; (b) minimizes impacts on surrounding agricultural operations and lands to the extent feasible; (c) a need for additional lands to be designated to accommodate the proposed use; (d) that the use or lot is not located on lands which comprise specialty crop areas; (e) that there are no reasonable alternatives which avoid agricultural areas; and (f) that there are no reasonable alternative locations in agricultural areas with lower priority agricultttrallands." 8. Amending policy section 15.7, Informational side note, as follows: including its . Amending Informational side note to policy section 15.7, as follows: "CITY POLICY Rural Stt:!e)'lJelft,; Areas Supporting Information for-A liJ1(j f Ha,1tk: Expan.Jion NonAgricultural Uses" 12 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & I nformational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan ./ . Amending policy section 15.7, as follows: "15.7 In accordance vdth scctions 2.32 and 14.2(h) of thfs--P-lan,---Gity--C-{}tfficil---flH\y---perm-i-t-tnfno-r expansions to the hamlets of Crccn"Noed, Kinsale and Balsam ""ithout amendment to the Plan; V\-'hen considering such applications, City Council shall require, in addition to any other applicable de",,'clopment re\.ie";.' requirements, all applications to be accompanied b) inf{)rmation demettstrating to the satisfaction of the City in consultation \-"yith other rele ,,'ant agencies, that, When considering the approval of non-: agricultural uses in the Rural Area, City Council shall require a site suitability study prepared by qualified experts. The site suitability study shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City, in consultation with other relevant agencies. that: (a) the development will have an adequate supply of potable water and soil conditions are satisfactory for the effective operation of a private \vaste sewage system on each proposed lot; and (b) there will not be any adverse impacts on the supply of water or the soil and groundwater conditions of adjacent properties." 9. Deleting the Informational side notes to existing policy sections 15.8 and 15.9 and replacing with a new Informational side note to revised policy section 15.8, as follows: . Deleting Informational side note of policy 15.8, as follows: "CITY PObIbV EItl/if'i51t/1lenta! RtpJrt" ;\Iq; bi: required" . Deleting Informational side note of policy 15.9, as follows: UCITY POLICY E,;tiffhtlltC,;:a! RcpJr/; Required" . Adding a new Informational side note for the revised policy section 15.8, as follows: "CITY POLICY 13 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official plan '1 ,. Environmental R~borts Required" 10. Renumbering policy section 15.9 as section 15.8 (a) and amending new policy section 15.8 (a) as follows: "15.8 City Council, (a) using Appendix II to this Plan as a guide, shall for major development, and may for minor development, as determined through a pre-submission consultation in Section 15.2, require the submission and approval of an Environmental Report as part of the consideration of a development application or a public infrastructure project; and," 11. Renumbering policy section 15.8 as section 15.8 (b) and amending as follows: (b) despite section, 15.9, the Guidelines in Appendix II, may, through the pre- submission consultation in Section 15.2.. require the submission and approval of an Environmental Report as part of its consideration of any other developtnent application or public infrastructure project. 12. Adding new policy section 15.9, as follows: "15.9 City Council, for development or site alteration within 120 metres of a key hydrologic feature or within 120 metres of a key natural heritage feature located within the Natural Heritage System of the Greenbelt Plan.. shall require a natural heritage evaluation and hydrological evaluation to be prepared by qualified experts. For development adjacent to a key natural heritage features located outside of the N amral Heritage System but within the Protected Countryside of the Greenbelt Plan, the policies of section 15.8 (a) , shall apply. " 13. Amending policy section 15.10 and amending its Informational side note such that the Informational side note and policy section 15.10 reads as follows: 14 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan 9 . Amending Information side note, as follows: "CITY POLICY Environmental Reports: ~Sx,-'Cpti(m Exembtion for Agricultural Uses" . Amending policy section 15.10, as follows: 15.10 Despite Section 15.8 (a), agricultural uses including the construction of farm related buildings are exempted from the requirements of sections 15.8 (b) and 15.9, except for uses adjacent to Known Waste Disposal Sites, and subject to the policies of sections 15.8 (b) and 15 .12A. " 14. Amending line 3 of the first paragraph of policy section 15.11 to remove reference to policy section 15.9, as follows: 15.11 City Council shall require that the Environmental Report submitted in accordanc.e with sections- 15.8 ftftd--t5.9 include at least the following: 15. Renumbering subsection (i) of policy 15.11 as new policy section 15.12A, amending policy section 15.12A and adding a new Informational side note, as follows: Adding as an Informational side note for section 15.12A, the following: "CITY POLICY J upporting Information for L:mds within 500 metres of a Known Waste Disposal Site" . Amending the renumbered policy section 15.12A as follows: 15.12A for a Report submitted under section 15.9 City Council shall require, for lands on or within 500 metres of a Known Was te Disposal Site, Gity Council shall require an the assessment shattld of risks from landfill gases and leachate_ to the satisfaction of the City_ that: 15 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan " J fi1(a)be ~ carried out by a qualified engineer; ~b )examine~ the potential affects of the waste disposal site on the proposed developOlent; and ~c)make~ recommendations on the construction and phasing of development to ensure the implementation of the Report's recommendations including monitoring for lands on or within 500 metres of a Known Waste Disposal Site." 16. Renumbering policy section 15.12 as section 15.128, deleting the existing Informational side note for existing policy section 15.12 and replacing with a new " side note for new policy section 15.128, as follows: · Deleting existing Informational side note for section 15.12, as follows: "CITY POLICY Enf:Je'r(}1fmCft:a! 11f~'di: an Cf}I;ta;lliHat~d-J.ite.s" . Adding as an Informational side note for section 15.128, the following: "CITY POLICY Environmental Site Assessment" . Amending renumbered policy section 15.128, as follows: "~ "15.12B On lands suspected of being contaminated (for example: sites where filling has occurred; lands used for industrial, transportation or utility purposes; certain commercial properties such as gas stations, auto repair garages and dry cleaning plants), City Council shall, 16 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan (a) require the proponents of development to complete prior to any approvals for the site an environmental audit a Phase I environmental site assessment. and a Phase II environmental site assessment if the Phase I environmental site assessment shows potential for contamination, in accordance with provincial guidelines and legislation as may be amended from time to time, to identify anyon-site contamination, and following completion of the audit assessment, should contamination be found, require the restoration of the site to a condition suitable for the intended uses, before permitting the establishment of the uses; and (b) prohibit residential uses on lands previously used for automobile repairs, for service stations, for fuel storage, or for the disposal of construction waste or debris unless. the site is first restored in accordance with provincial guidelines and legislation as may be amended from time to time. 17. Revising the Informational side note to policy section 15.13, as follows: - "CITY POLICY Noise, Vibration, IJust1 Light, Safery and Odour Studies" 18. Revising policy section 15.13 as follows: 15.13 On lands affected by noise, vibration, dust, light, safety concerns and/or odours, City Council, shall require ~ the proponent ef sensitive land uses to complete a an ft6i.se impaet appropriate study, prepared by a qualified expert. as specified in subsections a). b), and c) below to the satisfaction of the City in consultation with relevant agencies, as follows: tit DO on lands affected by noise, if----tlte proposed de velopment is for proposals for new sensitive land uses within 300 metres of a railway right-of-way or an arterial road, and for proposals for new land uses (including. but not limited to. commercial and industrial uses) that may introduce new sources of noise adjacent to sensitive land uses. City Council shall require the proponent to complete a noise study. and. 17 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan ',- .2 (i) shall require appropriate measures to mitigate any adverse effects from the noise identified by the study, and (ii) shall only permit development if attenuation rneasures satisfactory to the City are undertaken to prevent or mitigate adverse impacts, which measures may include, but not be limited to berming, fencing and the imposition of building setbacks to be undertaken as a condition of approval. (e) shall require the proponent of de l' elopmcnt to- complete an appropriate Roise, vibration, dust or odour analysis prep-ared b) a qualified consultant, to the satisfaction of the City in consultation ......"ith reley...yant agencies, ......\.yhere, noise, \dbration, dust or odour Ie l' els are anticipated to be tmaeeeptable. (b) for proposals for new sensitive land uses in proximity to sources of dust, light, and/or odours, and for proposals for new land uses that may introduce or increase existing light.. dust or odours, City Council shaD require the proponent to complete an appropriate dust:- light.. and/ or odour analysis, and (i) shall require appropriate measures to mitigate any adverse effects from the dust, light, and/or odours identified by the study, and (ii) shall only permit development if attenuation measures satisfactory to the City are undertaken to prevent or mitigate adverse impacts, which measures may include, but are not limited to: buffering or imposition of separation distances between the respective land uses to be undertaken as a condition of approval. 18 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan 5 (c) shall require the proponent of development to complete a viDration impact study, vrepared to the satisfaction of the City in consultation -......ith relevant agencies, if the pfflJWSed-develepment-is for$JWosals !hat would introduce new sensitive uses on lands within 75 metres of a railway right-of-way, and City Council shall require the proponent of development to complete (i) a vibration impact study, and shall require appropriate measures to mitigate any adverse effects from the vibration identified by the study, and (ii) a railway corridor safety study and shall require that all proposed development adjacent to railways provides appropriate safety nleasures such as setbacks, berms and security fencing to the satisfaction of the City, in consultation with the appropriate railway. 19.' Amending Information side note and policy section 10.22 (page 140) to add the effect of light as a concern, as follows: . Amending Informational side note as follows: CITY POLICY Noise, Vibration, Dust, Light and Odour . Amending policy section 10.22 as follows: "10.22 City Council recognizes that people's normal use and enjoyment of property may be affected by unacceptable levels of noise, vibration, dust, light and/or odours; accordingly, Council shall require proponents of affected developments to adequately address noise, vibration, dust, light and/ or odours, and where necessary, to incorporate into such developments, appropriate mitigation measures as may be specified in a . required analysis (see section 15.13)." 20. Revising policy section 15.14 to introduce the need for a pre-submission consultation and to separate the required issues that a retail impact study is to address into subsections i) and ii), as follows: 19 ATTACHMENT #2 TO INFORMATION REPORT # 21-08 Draft Amendment & Informational Revision to the City of Pickering Official Plan 4 15.14 Outside of the Downtown Core, City Council, in the review of development proposals for new or expanded gross leasable floor space for the retailing of goods and services, (a) shall for the development of 2,500 square metres or greater of floor space, and (b) may for the development of less than 2,500 square metres of floor space, as determined through a pre-submission consultation in Section 15.2, require a retail impact study, (i) to justify the proposed floor space for the retailing of goods and services, and (ii) to demonstrate that such additional floor space will not unduly affect the viability of any lands designated or developed fQr the retailing of goods and services. IMPLEMENTATION: The provisions set forth in the Pickering Official Plan, as amended; regarding the implementation of the Plan shall apply in regard to this Amendment. INTERPRETATION: The provisions set forth in the Pickering Official Plan I as amended; regarding the interpretation of the Plan shall apply in regard to this Amendment. 20 ; M~ ;) DRAFT BY-LAW TO REQUIRE PRE-SUBMISSION CONSUL TATION (~'\ \. ,I THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO XXX/08 Being a by-law to require consultation with the City prior to submission of applications for official plan amendments, zoning by-law amendments, site plans and plans of subdivision. WHEREAS Subsections 22(3.1),34(10.0.1),41(3.1) and 51(16.1) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990 c.P.13 authorize municipalities to pass by-laws to require land use planning applicants to consult with the municipality before submitting applications for official plan amendments, zoning by-law amendments, site plans and plans of subdivision; WHEREAS Council wishes to have applicants discuss the merits of planning applications with City staff before the applications are submitted to the City, to ensure that the appropriate studies and other requirements are completed to the satisfaction of the City, prior to final submission; AND WHEREAS Council wishes to provide City staff with an opportunity to determine and provide advice about City submission requirements, and identify to the applicant which agencies and senior levels of government will need to be consulted before an Application is deemed complete; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCil OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOllOWS: 1. Applicants shall consult with the City's Planning & Development Department prior to submitting requests to amend the City's Official Plan or zoning by-laws, and prior to submitting applications for site plans and plans of subdivision approval. 2. Planning applications submitted to the City prior to a required consultation meeting will not be accepted as Planning Act applications or processed by the City until after the consultation meeting. 3. If an applicant is proposing to, or is required to, submit more than one application for planning approval in support of a single development proposal, a single meeting with Planning & Development staff can satisfy the requirement to consult. ATTAC,i1~t~~MT'~ ;; ~O .... -.' .('..,~.~ \,) ~ .1/ :';~~~~~i1l,'r;,::wy~ I ! . - 2 - / BY-LAW read a first, second, and third time and finally passed this 2008. day of David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk , ~ ~...) CiUI tJ~ INFORMATION REPORT NO. 22-08 FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF November 3, 2008 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 SUBJECT: Draft Plan of Condominium CP-2008-02 S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. Part of Block Y Plan 16 City of Pickering 1.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION - the subject lands are located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Bayly Street and St. Martins Drive; a property location map is provided for reference (see Attachment #1 ); - the property is currently being developed for the townhouse development; - the site's topography is relatively flat; access to the townhouse development will be provided by a driveway off of St. Martins Drive and a future access from Bayly Street will be provided with the development of the mixed use portion of the project; surrounding land uses are: north - across Bayly Street is the CN rail line and Highway 401; south - townhouses and apartment building; east - open space lands being the Douglas Ravine; west - on the opposite side of St. Martins Drive are detached dwelling lots that front onto Tanzer Court. 1.1 Backaround City Council on October 3, 2006 passed By-law 6705/06, which was subsequently approved by the Ontario Municipal Board, that permits the mixed use development including the 120 townhouse dwelling unit on the subject lands which was a result of zoning amendment application (A 06/06); at the time of the rezoning application the owners of the property had indicated that applications for condominium would be forthcoming for this development; Information Report No. 22-08 Page 2 -) 2.0 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL the applicant proposes to establish tenure for 120 townhouse dwelling units on the subject lands through a common element condominium description (see Applicant's Submitted Plan, Attachment #2); freehold ownership is proposed for the future townhouse dwelling units through a common element condominium for private internal roads, parking, landscaping and services. 3.0 OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING 3.1 Durham Reaional Official Plan designates the subject lands as Living Areas; areas designated as Living Areas are intended to be predominantly used for housing purposes, and may include limited office, retail and personal service uses; in consideration of development applications in Living Areas the intent of the Plan is to achieve a compact urban form, including intensive residential, office, retail and service and mixed uses along arterial roads and in conjunction with present and potential transit facilities; Bayly Street where it abuts the subject lands is designated as a Type A Arterial Road; the applicant's proposal conforms with this designation; 3.2 Pickerina Official Plan the Pickering Official Plan designates the subject lands as Mixed Use Area - Mixed Corridors Area; permissible uses within Mixed Use Area - Mixed Corridors Area include, amongst others, a variety of residential uses including townhouses and apartment buildings, retailing of goods and services, offices and restaurants; the Pickering Official Plan establishes a density range of over 30 and up to and including 140 dwelling units per hectare for development within a Mixed Use Area - Mixed Corridors Area; the subject lands are within the Bay Ridges Neighbourhood of the Official Plan; the subject lands are within a Detailed Review Area and the Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment Guidelines have been adopted by City Council; Schedule II of the Pickering Official Plan - Transportation System designates Bayly Street where it abuts the subject site as a Type A Arterial Road; Type A Arterial Roads are the highest order arterial road and are designed to carry large volumes of traffic at moderate to high speed; Bayly Street is designated as a Transit Spine where a higher level of transit service is to be encouraged; Schedule II of the Pickering Official Plan - Transportation System designates S1. Martins Drive where it abuts the subject site as a Collector Road; Information Report No. 22-08 Page 3 , ~ Ii : I '-', '....) Collector Roads are designed to provide access to individual properties, to local roads, and to other collector and arterial roads; the applicant's proposal conforms with this land use designation and complies with the policies of the Pickering Official Plan; 3.3 Zonina By-law 3036 - the lands are zoned "SA-LW', 'MD-H6" and "SA-8" which are residential zones in Zoning By-law 2520, as amended by By-laws 6705/06 and 6786/07 that permits the development; - the applicant's proposed Plan of Condominium development complies with the requirements of the Zoning By-law. 4.0 RESULTS OF CIRCULATION 4.1 Resident Comments no resident comments received to date; 4.2 Aaency Comments the Region of Durham and the Toronto Region Conservation Authority have no objection to the application subject to certain conditions; (see Attachments #3 to #4); the following agencies or departments advised they have no objection to the application: Durham Catholic District School Board; Durham District School Board; Enbridge Gas Distribution; Veridian Connections; Canada Post; eN Rail (see Attachments #5 to #10); 4.3 Staff Comments 4.3.1 Site Plan a Site Plan Agreement has been approved and registered for the 120 townhouse dwelling units on the subject lands; details pertaining to site functioning and site design/layout for this development have been addressed through the Site Plan approval process; construction of the townhouses in ongoing in accordance with the Site Plan Agreement; 4.3.2 Common Element Condominium Description the purpose of the application is to establish whether the common element condominium description is the appropriate form of tenure for this residential development; Information Report No. 22-08 Page 4 a common element condominium refers to a residential development where each dwelling unit is individually owned (freehold ownership), and where amenities or physical features are collectively owned by the unit owners as tenants in common; it is anticipated that a future common element condominium corporation will be established to permit a community of individually owned homes and maintain joint services, amenities and physical features of the development through a common element condominium corporation; 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 for consideration by the Director, Planning & Development Department prior to a decision on the application; if you wish to reserve the option to appeal the City's decision, you must provide comments to the City before the Director, Planning & Development, issues conditions of draft approval for the proposal; if you wish to be notified of a decision regarding this proposal, 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 Director, Planning & Development in respect of the proposed plan of condominium does not make oral submission at the public meeting, or make written submissions to the Director before the proposed plan of condominium is approved or refused, the Ontario Municipal Board may dismiss the appeal. 5.1 Further Processina in accordance with City Council policy and Delegation By-law 5391/01 no further Planning & Development Reports on this application will be forwarded to Council; the Director, Planning & Development will make a decision on the application after all comments from the circulated departments, agencies and public have been received and assessed; if appropriate the Director, Planning & Development will issue proposed conditions of approval for the subject application; 6.0 OTHER INFORMATION 6.1 Appendix No. I list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City Departments that have commented on the applications at the time of writing report; Information Report No. 22-08 2. Page 5 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: 6.3 Company Principal - the owner of the subject lands is S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd.; Stephen Warsh is a principal of S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. Qrf;i7~ Lynda Tftylor, MCIPjRPP Manager, Development Review Ross Pym, MCIP, R Principal Planner - Development Review RP:jf Attachments Copy: Director, Planning & Development ,:) APPENDIX NO. I TO INFORMATION REPORT NO. 22-08 COMMENTING RESIDENTS AND LANDOWNERS (1 ) none received to date COMMENTING AGENCIES (1) Durham Planning Department (2) Toronto Region Conservation Authority (3) Durham Catholic District School Board (4) Durham District School Board (5) Enbridge Gas (6) Veridian Connections (7) Canada Post (8) CN Rail COMMENTING CITY DEPARTMENTS (1 ) none received to date <.1 AnACHMENT#...L.TO INFORMATION REPORT# ..;~LJ.. -()K v o~ \ 1 () ~ \1\ \1\ ^ ~ ~, \).~ LJJ 40\ 0\G0\J'J,lA'{ ~~ t---- S\RE:.E:.\ ~ \3/A'1\"''1 --~~& ---- ~~: r- It (J) U cP '----" z b f--- -0:- o f---,.....----.. 0::: (" 0-;:) ~ 0 r--- ~ L...I.. ?J0\ f--- 0 - ~ c ~c== ~ ;n - . , _~-5 ~:4YSH~ to P ~ P' :J ~ ~ PEACE L '.JTHERAN OU AS CHURCH 'Al!!l::~ \ ~ / SOUTH EAST SHORE P/CKERI", 0MMUNlTY CENTf, IF LAWN AND I'- 0 r I~ RA VI E B~"';''i}:;( EN/OR'S COMPLE~~ i ..... 0::: sua} ~ I PROPERTY o1,r I I I I I I STREET I ~ lUll r--L-C PQPRf r--~/ I I ~I II TATRA j I GRD ==- ST. MARTIN'S ANGLICAN I no CHURCH ~ ~~ \.- IL ________~ I r---- - - r---r--- - r--- r--- f--- r-- f--- r--- f---r--- Z ~ )> r--- ~ Lf- :::0 r---- L Or--- C o r--~ t- I L :==~ c - == ~r---.c - PATMORE;:'== t == U NE - _ < ~~ -- - 0 -r-- 0.... r-- 0:::: ~ ~~~Q(~1'~ :=~=~ ~ W r--- - -J - r---,--- ~ ~ r--- r--_ I U I II I I c-- =0 BOULEI HALLER AVENUE / J j Planning & Development Department ;)<v fv~ ~ :-\<v ~ <:) DOUGLAS FRENCHMAN ,l'f?t? BAY ~ Y; PARK - ~ ~ City of Pickering ~ PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PLAN M16 N PT BlK Y NOW RP 40R3151 PART 2 TO 5 PART 1 OWNER SR & R BAY RIDGES lTD. FILE No. CP2008-02 DATE SEPT. 7, 2008 SCALE 1 :5000 DRAWN BY JB l' CHECKED BY RP uata ~ources: c Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Nat a plan of survey. c 2005 MPAC and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not a plan of Survey. PN-3 !;'-TACHMENT# ,2 TO '\'r.':!'OMl\Y!()r-J REf\4)RT# ,,;:t-) - (/ K INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANTIS SUBMITTED CONDO PLAN SR & R BAYRIDGES. CP-2008-02 :) 0(.(.\ S\\' 6 fA. '{ '-- '{ -- ~~:.-. .--" (f) Z I- er <( ~ L_ 1 ~ I J · ... \\ ! ~~\ \\ ;~t~ \\ ~ ~~~ < m~ il ~ \\ \ ~, -- ~ ,.... · f ".,' ~ .~ ~~-- ~ /, -:.J,,_ b:~ '{ 'f' ~~ .... "'~~ PJ -.. -f",,,,,,,, ~ I !J~ Im:l29, __ ~ ,-~"M'" r f~~ PM'.. PM'Ia -i- J [ i'\Ef ,'i":3:'-('I ,'. n "'b::. -.7" ,~oaou ~ IGni "--c t a M1' _ 'l!~L~ ~ PM'''' ~ ....".. .....~' ~. PM' 2.13 ~ "l PNI"IM 'M, ") I ,,~ .....01 II I, ' ~'NI'" PM'It) V .. ,r-;- - ~ "~"'M"<6 PM"o>r~_.,~ ~ ...~ ......r..JI.....~ ~ ; I '''') I Rv 1 7'r ~ ,~...,..? '-- ~I~v ~ 'M'., 9-;- i: r PM' · I'AlIrn!I .M, I. '''' ,., I - .I'M' ...f- L l ~ r--- I ..... -PlIIrnI1 -;- !MIll- rr&UJIi "~PM' ., ... ..., 11 PM. II /' I. . ..... -'-- l ;:~'T F ~v /""""O)F '''''lIll '.....,...... L'''-;,ii 4r ':.--... ~ I~ '~......, fm:m -;-- / ! I I - r 0 1 ,~p&," ~\.+"M'n PM'. ~ ~--. ~nJ -;- i, I'm 'MT · Lu--, Im.m [P'" J "'........... ~ ....~C S!~~~r I '" ~ ~ I -( PLAN 1 'M" F i!lll::I7V~ f' I. 'A'''" r ,......fsom ,~ .M'&3 t;., .... :":'~:k~'" ~l;o I_J'M'" J: :!- I- V J 'M'. ~ :/ ~P"'''. .M'NS !./~ ,Il..'"'" ''''I2.nJ... ~ ,I ~J~' u-r ~ ~Ie '00'.. ~ mn!I i= r) ...,. C, ~~M"IO .M'::T - ~]"""'--'-?fi) I~M..,"t ~' ~~ '~ 'M'''(I.....~ :t= IrAlII:m- ~ A~ 'M'N .,-I'..,1ll 'M.n ~~ y l, ~~ ~.r/ ~ ~ "" I } 'M'1l ....,., _ I I 'Ml'. ~ I Y ....'w 'M'... Y ~ ~ ) 'M." ~~ I!m:Z1 ~Inn -""'- ~~ ~ f&7 df1ii'1 ~~ 9'" ~ ~ 2n 241 i= ~ - l 'MTl2 F rmr.co h \ 1\ \ q. l 1\ ! l ~ i 1\ ,i I~! 1\ l!j I~"l ~ :r6nD-JrJlMI- ,a~ .:;-ltI/i' ~ -,,, L; "".;'" ~~ ~~'LLJl-LJ <0 'tbTttJ cUR.:U ILU . rciJ- I \ II lJ'on riT.. ~i _. J. 'M". ~ JIClII ! ~ ! ~ i i i i i i ; i i : Jl : ~ :! : II " :; II r-lI 'i; J'/..... _:', I I r tam....... L L L L L L L i ~ ! ~ ~ i i i i i ! i ~~. . ". , ' I l..L '00' II .....,."1.. f1 I ! ! ! -I.. _ .. ! I! J ....'":'.J "" -. -. .....ru ....-r" /;/ T' if It Ii J U .-~ ~ Wi > .[( o .",. \.'" ...... ..--- ...-- ...... -'.. """-- I- Z <( (f) l c 12 .... M-16 ~ a/ PlIj IIlClCl< 21011 CURHAI.l CONOOIrIlNlu.. PlAN N" 19 ~"'M.. .....--- PlIj IIlClCl< 2704~ DURH..... CONoOlollNlUM PlAN II" 45 1_'...... ............. l' FULL SCALE COPIES OF THE APPLlCANT's SUBMITTED PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING &' DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING .t DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, INFORMATION ct SUPPORT SERVICES, AUGUST 18. 2008. 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 C:-mail: planning@ Jgion .durham .on .ca www.region.durham.on.ca A.L. Georgieff, MCIP,HPP Commissioner of Planning If Service Excellence for our Communities" ATTACHMENT#2-TO INFOOM/\JiONREPORT# S?t~ -()8 September 29, 2008 Mr. Ross Pym, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner Development Review City of Pickering . One The Esplanade Pickering ON L 1 V 6K7 Re: Post Circulation Comments to Draft Approval of Plan of Condominium File: C-P-2008-02 Applicant: S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Limited Location: Part of Lot 23, BFC (Range 3) Municipality, City of Pickering We have received the above-noted 'plan of condominium application for review. The application proposes a private condominium roadway and parking for a townhouse development. Site plan and rezoning applications have been approved by the City for ~he townhouse development and the units are currently under construction. The plan of condominium application is only for the private condominium roadway. The Region has no objection to draft approval of this plan of condominium. The following condition of approval shall be complied with prior to clearance by the Region for registration of the plan: Condition 1: The owner shall have the final plan prepared on the basis of the' approved draft plan of condominium C-P-2008-02, prepared by R. Avis Surveying Incorporated, project number 2379-0, dated July, 7, 2008, which illustrates a private condominium' roadway and parking. Please provide Dwayne Campbell, the planner responsible for this file, , with a copy of the draft approved plan and conditions of draft approval at such time as draft approval is in effect. R E eEl V E 0 Sincerely, SEP 29 2008 CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT OEPARTMENT UJ-.4J Richard Szarek, Project Planner Current Planning cc: Works Department - Pete Castellan h :\2-4 \2008\PiCkering\C-p-2008-02\COmmen* DA 100% Post Consumer onserRvaNiron for The Living City September 22, 2008 ATTACHMar:.#-:-~O ,:;2;2 - (J R INFORi\ttATION RIJ10R~ # 7 VIAE-MAIL AND MAIL RECEIVED CFN XREF CFN 38686.01 SEP 2 6 2008 XREF CFN 39234 CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Ross Pym Planning and Development Department City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L 1V 6K7 Re: Draft Plan of Condominium Application No. CP-2008-03 1215 - 1235 Bayly Street {San Francisco by the Bay, Bay Ridges Plaza} City of Pickering 5. R. & R. Bay Ridges Limited Dear Mr. Pym: Thank you for the opportunity to review the Draft Plan of Condominium application submission. We offer the following comments. Conditions of Draft Plan of Condominium Approval Further to our review of the approved Site Plan Application, we offer the following conditions of Draft Plan of Condominium Approval: 1. Owner to convey the valley land and buffer block to public ownership prior to the registration of the condominium. 2. Owner to apply for and obtain a permit under O. Reg. 166/06 for the sanitary sewer crossing of the Pine Creek south of Radom Street, west of Douglas Avenue in Douglas Park prior to the registration of the condominium. Please note that this condition may not apply if the proposed sanitary sewer is not required by the City of Pickering and/or Region of Durham. 3. Owner to prepare and implement a Ravine Stewardship Plan for the valley slopes, to TRCA satisfaction, prior to the registration of the condominium. Clearance Fee By copy of this letter, the applicant is advised that the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority has implemented a revised fee schedule for our planning application review services. Thank you for providing the initial application fee. This application is now subject to a $3,450 minor condominium clearance fee. The applicant is responsible for fee payment and should forward the clearance fee to this office as soon as possible. Please disregard if the fee has already been sent. We trust this is satisfactory. Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions. Si erely, ~ v H. Jd~R~P' ~RTPI anager, Development Planning and Regulation Planning and Development Extension 5311 cc: Steven M. Warsh, Partner, S & R Development Group Limited (bye-mail) F:\HOME\PUBLlC\OEVELOPMENT SERVICE~MRtGtGN\Pdmlt<liB~a5 - 1235 BAYLY _5.00C 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3 N 1 S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca m ;:~~ . FjSRE5 . d c- e;o <r""n~. r:UI\.!~~rr "-~ :::> TO . Ii }".."t'~""""k~~ n-~ . '" y ~.. ~~~)Q~~"j.u. .(;?".).- ( U ~.. .\;....>'~ '-(1 ,,',\ U'" l'f. 0C O\~IRICr -.<:-0 &0 ~ ~ U ~ ~ \ ~ OJ :r: . 0 a:. .h ~ & Durham Catholic District School Board Sept 4th 2008 Ross Pym, MCIP, RPP Principal Planner - Development Review Planning & Development Department City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario. L 1 V 6K7 RE: Draft Plan of Condominium CP-2008-02 S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. Part of Block Y Plan 16 City of Pickering Please note that the above noted Draft Plan of Condominium will be forwarded to the Durham Catholic District School Board's Board of Trustees on September 22nd 2008 for consideration. The Board of Trustees' official comments will be sent to your department after September 22nd 2008. Planning staff at the Durham Catholic District School Board currently have "NO OBJECTION" to the above noted plan. Please notify me if you have any questions or concerns. s~uours;f l tr ()- ~~. Jody Dale Assistant Planner, Durham Catholic District School Board Telephone: 905-576-6707 1-877-482-0722 ext. 2211 C.c. Gerry O'Neill, Manager Planning & Admissions :jd 650 RossJand Road West, Oshawa, Ontario L 1 J 7C4 Tel 905 576-6150 Toll Free 1 877 482-0722 www.dcdsb.ca Paul Pulla B. Be., B. Ed., MSe. Ed. Director of Education I Secretary I Treasurer ~~\CT SC~ Q-C:J 00 ~ ('" <( OJ J: 0 tt .b ?O S' ~wtl{lf 7f,ducatiof1/ ?;o~- f(J/l; ?;o/tUJ/l,wU)./ Facilities Services 400 Taunton Road East Whitby, Ontario L 1 R 2K6 Telephone: (905) 666-5500 1-800-265-3968 Fax: (905) 666-6439 A.nJ~~CHMENT# f~ TO 1M~OiR~\~JrnON nEPORT# .9;1 -- (', S () ) August 26, 2008 The City of Pickering Planning Dept., Pickering Civic Centre One The Esplanade Pickering, ON LIV 6K7 RECEIVED SEP 0 2 2008 CITY OF PICKERING PbANN'NQ & O~V~l.OPMI!NT OEf3AAfMmNf Attention: Mr. Ross Pym Dear Mr. Pym RE: Draft Plan of Condominium CP-2008-02 S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. Part of Block Y Plan 16 City of Pickering Staff has reviewed the infonnation on the above noted application and has the following comlnents... 1. Approxilnately 55 clen1entary pupils could be generated by the above noted application. 2. It is intended that any pupils generated by the above noted plan be accomtnodated within an existing school facility. 3. Under the mandate of the Durham District School Board, staffhas no objections. Yours truly, <: cJCUl~~ Christine Nancekivell, Senior Planner I:\PROPLAN\DA T A\PLNG\SU8'\CP200S-02. DOC I\TTACHMENT#J TO .1 5? k"5iE".~~D"\? # l'" '?;/ t.., ~ !f'{B:~'~::J'~~ ~ ' ..- :~: ENBRIDGE ENBRIDGE GAS DISTRIBUTION INC. SEPTEMBER 3, 2008 500 Consumers Road North York ON M2J 1 P8 Mailing Address P.O. Box 650 Scarborough ON M1K 5E3 ROSS PYM, MCIP, RPP PRINCIPAL PLANNER CITY OF PICKERING DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PICKERING CIVIC COMPLEX ONE THE ESPLANADE PICKERING ON L 1V 6K7 RECE'"EO St.? 0 8 1008 \c\<.EA\~$ C\T'i OF ~E\JE.LOPME PLANN\~~:A~'nJ\E.N" Dear Sirs: RE: DRAFT PLAN OF CONDOMINIUM S.R. & R. BAY RIDGES LTD. PART OF BLOCK Y PLAN 16 CITY OF PICKERING Enbridge Gas Distribution requests that the following conditions be included in the subdivision agreement: 1 . The developer is responsible for preparing a composite utility plan that allows for the safe installation of all utilities, including required separation between uti I ities. 2. Streets are to be constructed in accordance with composite utility plans previously submitted and approved by all utilities. 3. The developer shall grade all streets to final elevation prior to the installation of the gas lines and provide Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. with the necessary field survey information for the installation of the gas lines. 4. It is understood that the natural gas distribution system will be installed within the proposed road allowance. In the event that this is not possible, easements will be provided at no cost to Enbridge Gas Distribution Inc. ~,(~~<>~'.,Ci"~MENT r,lTO !j'=.' , <.~ ,;/, '") .' L' K R~~:POt~ 9 1# cxC>< ,. , '1 I Enbridge also requests that the owner / developer contact our Regional Sales Development department at their earliest convenience to discuss installation and clearance requirements for main, service and metering facilities. Yours truly, ",-- .. I.~ Tony Ciccone Manager, Network Analysis Distribution Planning (416) 758-7966 (416) 758-4374 - FAX TC: -2008 MON 01:34 PM veridian FAX NO. PI 02 ,,, ) L.. AlTACHMENT# ~" TO C ""J., , ') _ /) 0' REPORT# ><.;x; ....' Q.. .~ VERIDI.AN' CONNECTIONS DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION :REVIEW I PROJECT NAME: I ADDRESS/PLAN: I MUNICIPALITY: S.R. & R. B~.y Ridges Ltd. - D.raft Plan of COlldo11'lllliLLlTl. Part of Block 'Y'~ Phm 16 i i Pickering REF NO.: CP -2008-02 SD'BMISSION .DATE: A~lgllSt 13,. 2008 The following is ;11\ overvil::w of !:hI:: gcne1,:1l1:equireml::nts the Applic;\Ilt is Iikdy to meet in aider to obl:ain a complete clecr3~cal power supply system to tIlis site: and W:ilhil1 the site whett subdivision in t;01ne for.m is .involved. The COl111nen t~ below nrc ba~ed 011 preHrninary ,lnfo1nlal~()11 Dilly lind ate $l.lbject 1:0 revision. In all cases V eddiall's ~tandard Conditions of Sel\T1c;:e doctU'nc:nt set~ Ol.lt the ttc..luirelnents, tetlllJ and condit.iDl1~ for the provision of el~(.:tdc service. Tbh review docs 1101: constil:utc 4111 Offer to Connect. 1. Other: The legal pbn is O'L:~t:di\ted. TJle latesl: ~hould ~how a bla.nlcet eas~mellC Q?arts 128-256 no longer ,~ecded). Site is ~d.rcady b-1.111t and t;:ncr~td, Tcchnic::;1l Repre~el1tative: 'Telcphoflr::: Jotdo.n You.ng Ext. 3242 Ib- PP/df P: \dfdzzell\Dcvelopmcll( Applicarjoli Revitw\Pickenng\2008\S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. . ParI; of Block y~ Plan 16.do( r dX ~~II t.. D~ "'%~or;;);;);rOItJItJ ItJO'~~'ItJO 1tJ~.ItJ~ r ~ . ~, "'% ~rrACHMENT#.~TO f~EPORY:# bI';?' () t:/ ,5 CANADA POST ~. POST,ES CAN'ADA Derivery Planning PH (416) 2~5-5385 1860 Midra~d Ave FX (416) 755..9800 Scarborough On M1P SA1 ugust 19\ 2008 I ity of Pickering Panning & Development Department 1 The Esplanade P ckering On L 1V 6K7 Afention: Ross Pym Re: Draft Plan of Condominium C.P-200S-02 S~ R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. Part of Block Y Plan 16 ! City of Pickering I Dear Ross~ Ttank you for the opportunity to comment on the above noted plan. As a condition of draft approval, Canada Post requires that the owner/developer cdmply with the following conditions: I ' oM The owner/developer agrees to include on all offers of purchase and sale, a st~tement that advises the prospective purchaser that mail delivery will be from a dJsignated Community MaHbox. I - The owner/developer wiU be responsible for notifying the purchaser of the exact Cbmmunity Mailbox locations prior to the closing of any home sale. I - The owner/devefoper will consult with Canada Post Corporation to determine sJitable locations for the placement of Community Mailbox and to indicate these fo~ations on the appropriate servicing plans. T~e owner/developer will provide the following for each Community Mailbox site a1d include these requirements on the appropriate servicing plans: -1n appropriately sized sidewalk section (concrete pad) as per municipal standards, to place the Community Mailboxes on. .lny required walkway across the boulevard, as per municipal standards. I - htny required curb depressions for wheelchair access. ............. ~...,..... LI':::J rl . - ~he owner/developer further agrees to determine and provide a suitable tf.mporary Community Mailbox location(s), which may be utilized by Canada Post u til the curbs, sidewalks and final grading have been completed at the p rmanent Community Mailbox locations. This will enable Canada Post to p, ovidemail delivery to the new residences as soon as the homes are occupied. ATIACHMEN'f '#,,2......-. TO ?~"7. ~!f-;^. . t~"I~'.JlJ. Pl. <). /) R it'(S:S""\Ji't ~ * 0< t;7< c... Should you require further, information, please do not hesitate to contact me at t~e above mailing address or telephone number. ! I SIncerely, . I /~/~:.~J D~bbie Greenwood DFlivery Planner Canada Post I I i i ,,~ . a6""~L\ . ~~~L . I D 'Ttf"t f1~ rTli~""Jh :'~ t o'~ r '# ,.t...J:-- . ~I F~EPOR.T1t ~;< ~() X ) Pym, Ross From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: NICK.COLEMAN@cn.ca Wednesday, August 20, 2008 2:53 PM Pym, Ross CP-2008-02, SR&R Bay Ridges Ltd ' Easement in gross.pdt; Railway Noise Consultants.pdt Ross, CN has reviewed the proposed draft plan, and has no objections in principal, as the residences will be fairly removed from the railway corridor. However, there does not appear to have been a noise assessment undertaken to ensure compliance with MOE and CN criteria. As a minimum, eN will be seeking the attached environmental easement on title to units within 300 metres of the railway right-of-way. Regards, Nick Nick Coleman, B.Sc. Jnager, Community Planning & Development eN Business Development & Real Estate 1 Administration Road Concord, ON L4K 1 B9 T. 905-760-5007, F. 905-760-5010 nick.coleman@cn.ca 1 ~ITACHMENT#,~TO REPOR~r# ;I;; ~. c) R j'"\ ''"''''/ SCHEDULE"B" TRANSFER OF EASEMENT (To be attached to Form 1 - Transfer/Deed of Land) (7) Interest/Estate Transferred WHEREAS the Transferor is the owner of those lands located in the City of * and Province of Ontario, being composed of * and herein referred to as the "Easement Lands"; IN CONSIDERATION OF the sum of TWO DOLLARS ($2.00) now paid by the Transferee to the Transferor (the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged by the Transferor), the Transferor transfers to the Transferee, its successors and assigns, a permanent and perpetual easement or right and interest in the nature of a permanent and perpetual easement over, under, along and upon the whole of the Easement Lands and every part thereof for the purposes of discharging, emitting or releasing thereon or otherwise affecting the Easement Lands at any time during the day or night with noise, vibration and other sounds of every nature and kind whatsoever arising from, out of or in connection with any and all present and future railway facilities and operations upon the Dominant Tenement and including, without limitation, all such facilities and operations presently existing and all future renovations, additions, expansions and other changes to such facilities and all future expansions, extensions, increases, enlargement and other changes to such operations (herein collectively called the "Operational Emissions"). THIS Easement and all rights and obligations arising from same shall extend to, be binding upon and enure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective officers, directors, shareholders, agents, employees, servants, tenants, sub-tenants, customers, licencees and other operators, occupants and invitees and each of its or their respective heirs, executors, legal personal representatives, successors and assigns. This Easement shall be read with all changes of gender and number as required by the context in each case and the covenants and obligations of each party hereto, if more than one person, shall be joint and several. Easement in gross. Citlf c~ REPORT TO PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Report Number: PD 37-08 Date: November 3, 2008 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Rinal Enterprises Inc. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1906 Cougs Investments Ltd. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1913 Ballymore Building (Pickering) Corp. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1915 Dare-Dale Developments Limited Plan of Subdivision 40M-1916 Rondev Homes Ltd. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1920 Rondev Homes Ltd. I ACPA Corporation Ltd. I Bianchi; Vincenzo, Lisa, Gabriale and Liliana I Digirolamo, Filomena and Anna Plan of Subdivision 40M-1923 Woodsmere Properties Limited Plan of Subdivision 40M-1943 Marshall Homes (Altona) Limited I D'Oliveira, Anthony and Allison Helbling, Gertrude Plan of Subdivision 40M-1958 Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision Recommendation: 1. That Report PD 37-08 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding the Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision 40M-1906, 40M-1913, 40M-1915, 40M-1916, 40M-1920, 40M-1923, 40M-1943 and 40M-1958 be received; 2. That the highway being Monica Cook Place within Plan 40M-1915 be assumed for public use; 3. That the highway being Holbrook Court within Plan 40M-1916 be assumed for public use; 4. That the highway being Granby Court within Plans 40M-1920 and 40M-1923 be assumed for public use; Report PO 37-08 November 3, 2008 . t, Subject: Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision H 40M-1906/40M-1913/40M-1915/40M-1916 ../ 40M-1920/40M-1923/40M-1943/40M-1958 Page 2 5. That the hig~ways being Stroud's Lane and Treetop Way within Plan 40M-1943 be assumed for public use; 6. That the highways being Fawndale Road, Stover Crescent, Littleford Street and Stonehampton Court within Plan 40M-1958 be assumed for public use; 7. That the services required by the Subdivision Agreements relating to Plans 40M-1906, 40M-1913, 40M-1915, 40M-1916, 40M-1920, 40M-1923, 40M-1943 and 40M-1958, which are constructed, installed or located on lands dedicated to, or owned by the City, or on lands lying immediately adjacent thereto, including lands that are subject to easements transferred to the City, be accepted and assumed for maintenance, save and except from Blocks 10 and 11, Plan 40M-1906; Blocks 28 and 29, Plan 40M-1915; Blocks 23, 24 and 25, Plan 40M-1920; Blocks 42,43,44 and 45, Plan 40M-1923; Block 16, Plan 40M-1943 and Blocks 35, 36, 37 and 38, Plan 40M-1958; 8. That the Subdivision Agreements and any amendments thereto relating to Plans 40M-1906, 40M-1913, 40M-1915, 40M-1916, 40M-1920, 40M-1923, 40M-1943 and 40M-1958, save and except from Blocks 30, 32, 33 and 34, Plan 40M-1923 and Block 16, Plan 40M-1943, be released and removed from title; 9. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate Block 26, Plan 40M-1920 as public highway; and 10. That Council enact a By-law to dedicate Blocks 17 and 18, Plan 40M-1943 as public highways. Executive Summary: The City entered into Subdivision Agreements with the above-noted developers for the development of Plans 40M-1906, 40M-1913, 40M-1915, 40M-1916, 40M-1920, 40M-1923, 40M-1943 and 40M-1958. 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. Report PO 37-08 November 3, 2008 Subject: Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision 40M-1906/40M-1913/40M-1915/40M-1916 40M-1920/40M-1923/40M-1943/40M-1958 Page 3 ..} Background: The City entered into Subdivision Agreements with the above-noted developers for the development of Plans 40M-1906, 40M-1913, 40M-1915, 40M-1916, 40M-1920, 40M-1923, 40M-1943 and 40M-1958. 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 Blocks 10 and 11, Plan 40M-1906; Blocks 28 and 29, Plan 40M-1915; Blocks 23, 24 and 25, Plan 40M-1920; Blocks 42, 43, 44 and 45, Plan 40M-1923; Block 16, Plan 40M-1943 and Blocks 35, 36, 37 and 38, Plan 40M-1958. It should be noted that the roads fronting the lots/blocks within Plans 40M-1906 and 40M-1913 are located within an adjacent Plan of Subdivision. Accordingly, for the purposes of this report, authorization is being requested for the release and removal of the Subdivision Agreement and its amendments from title only. Further, it is also appropriate to release the developers from the provisions of their respective Agreements with the City, as follows: 1. Plan 40M-1906 Subdivision Agreement dated April 21, 1997 and registered as Instrument No. L T837788; 2. Plan 40M~1913 Subdivision Agreement dated August 5, 1997 and registered as Instrument No. L T847917; 3. Plan 40M-1915 Subdivision Agreement dated August 5, 1997 and registered as Instrument No. L T845992; 4. Plan 40M-1916 Subdivision Agreement dated April 7, 1997 and registered as Instrument No. L T847285; 5. Plan 40M-1920 Subdivision Agreement dated June 23, 1997 and registered as Instrument No. L T862135; 6. Plan 40M-1923 Subdivision Agreement dated June 23, 1997 and registered as Instrument No. L T862151 (save and except from Blocks 30, 32, 33 and 34); 7. Plan 40M-1943 Subdivision Agreement dated April 6, 1998, registered as Instrument No. L T882394 (save and except from Block 16); and 8. Plan 40M-1958 Subdivision Agreement dated February 1, 1999 and registered as Instrument No. L T893875. Report PD 37-08 November 3, 2008 Subject: Final Assumption of Plans of Subdivision 40M-1906/40M-1913/40M-1915/40M-1916 40M-1920/40M-1923/40M-1943/40M-1958 Page 4 Attachments: 1. Location Map - Plan 40M-1906 2. Location Map - Plan 40M-1913 3. Location Map - Plan 40M-1915 4. Location Map - Plan 40M-1916 5. Location Map - Plan 40M-1920 6. Location Map - Plan 40M-1923 7. Location Map - Plan 40M-1943 8. Location Map - Plan 40M-1958 9. Draft By-law to dedicate Block 26, Plan 40M-1920 as public highway 10. Draft By-law to dedicate Blocks 17 and 18, Plan 40M-1943 as public highways Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: N Director, Planning & Development t( "0~r-t Denise Bye, Supervisor Property & Development Services DB:bg Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City CouncUw. if ,"" Recommendation approved: Chief Administrative Officer Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Director, Office of Sustainability Director, Operations & Emergency Services Director, Planning & Development City Clerk ,.,'...... L)) I l 0 J ilCQI--. CKET f-EY RD \ I III T PINE GROVE PARK SANDclJa/ ffi8~ ,,?--o 0'{V - - c-- VI I I o 0- C :;:0- --l - CRi'''~ \)'0\S~5\ W~E:NT Sr>-~ V~ _ ~ = U/ S (is.~ ,\~ ,-- - UBJEC ~ I ~I >-~- SUBD/V: S -=r-- I ~ =< - y ~ rr1 i-- -r-> SANDHURST I-- '-- - Cf?('-S': Lpj'N E ~ ~ CR sci NT 3: ~ Do' III iV/71 ~i e I I I I rr ~~ ~ AVENUE z ..........~ \J I / LLl E =i---("MOSSBROoK>;::- == =~ ffiB == I--- - -~ - == e-- / SQUARE == - ~~~1il rlP ~ ~ WESTCREEK ==lill w :=) z ~ 1 II ~~ II~ ! TO ":2)'"t -- (' :~ - CRESCENT - ~ STREET - I- z_ W u- I (f) w n::: STREET u- - - III - CRESCENT ~ City of Pickering \?-. \ ,\p \?-. GO~ ..../ .......,"" ......., PINE I GROVE ~~ f---- 6 - I--- I----~/I--- ~>--- 8 o ~--~ u ~ _ o~- =r ---\~=~ > ~ -- w > o n::: C) i I I PROHILL ST. g I ~ ~ u o 0:::: ~~ Z - STREET ""'< /' 0:::: -If '-- :=) - ] co I--- ~ ,...--- ~ - f--- n::: I--- ~ o 01--->- - - - WESTCREEK PUBLIC SCHO - I - I--- Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1906 OWNER VARIOUS FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION DATE SEPT. 2, 2008 DRAWN BY JB SCALE 1 :5000 CHECKED BY RP l' Data ~our<i:es: C Teronet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not 0 plan of survey. c 2005 MPAC and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not 0 plan of Survey. PN-10 ) .f- l)V Jl =~ FINCH AVENUE /LJ FINCH ~ f--- '--- I - '--- g[]I ----- (f) fTl t-- C) C f--- <r: I-- '(_\ \) 0 '\Z z f--- Z f---- 0 I-- - f- f--- 0 I--- CO~ - f--- - I--- ./ f1! ,QUARE "--- f--- lJ#~ - \)'?-O - 0'\ II II JI I - AMBERLEA - J II I I ill I - - w > .,/ - ct: - 0- ==~ - I-- SUBJECT - - - Sf; SUBDIVISIO~ - - = - DRIFTWOOD Ct?/::/t?G'~ I--- - - f--- I-- CRT. . O;~. f-=::: ~..... e-- ~ - ~--@ f--- - l== f--- - 1-~ f-- E f--- - - r--- - E - - :;i- SAUGEEN r--- t-- '---- t::= ==/, ~ - ~~! - ~ [1 I - st ~ I II ~:5 f-- - 0 I-- :2 '-......I I-- ~/ 0 CRESCENT DEER HAVEN 0::::: I-- - w ! 0?O,y - - I I ~ ~I r w - - ~ - Z I--- >= 0('tj, - ~ >--- - - '--- <r: f-- - 7{?; - --.J I--- - - I I - f--- 5~ ~ ~ - - I--- - 0::::: - - - 0- - - - - <r: - - - -o- m '-'..J - 0... - 1---_ 0_ <( C) r--O::::: r - 1--_ :5:_ 0 w - '" '-- '" IT C) r-- ~ 0 f- - r--~ Z Z - - Z -0::::: 1 0 I--- ~ <r: w - I--- <r: 52 ~ --.J U m '--- (f) 0::::: (f) W '---- <r: w (f) SPRINGVIEW DR' - _G 0::: I--- I-- 0 I r---r- U 0::: r--- 0::::: I--~ - - W I--- f--- ?i7 - :5: f--f.-- :5: W f- a --.J Z W'---f.-- ---1 f--- - -- <( tjl--- - r;~~ LL f--- - > - 0 - - - - z (f) f--- - Z '--->- ...J - W W ~ '---f.-- ~ - W 0::: I--- 0::::: U 0.. -~ - - '--- G - (f) -----1-- - - - - ~~ WOODSMERE - - V" l--- 1//1 - - ~ (' I - - -----, / I I ~ f--- l- I ~ III II II 1 COUR CRESCENT CHARNWOOD --....... -----., ---..... 11 II I - 'T] 0 I-- - fTl WOODSMERE fTl -- -- :::D - 1--1- Z I-- -- Z 0 - - ?; City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1913 l' OWNER VARIOUS DATE SEPT. 2, 2008 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION SCALE 1 :5000 CHECKED BY DB Ii IDa a ::>ources: PN-11 c Teronet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not 0 plan of survey. c 2005 MPAC and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not a plan of Survey. - J I ~ == -r-6--F-== - PATMORE - I- -- ~ - _ _ z_ )> - I UNE _ <( ;0- - - - 0-- - '--- f--- -- '--- -:= ~== ~ ~~((<~1'~ =~ ~ ~/ I w_ - - --.J -_ ~ ----1 - '---_ I U I - ~-- - '- BOULEVARD AVENUE ~ / I ---l c;6 ~ III " I I 1/ 1\ ~ "I'-. BOULEVARD iril ~ ----f= = I ~GLOVE AVENUE tJ =~ - f---~ W f--- ~ ~ HOL Y U) (f) REDEEMER f--- ~ SHEARER SEPARA TE f--- LA E ~-CHOOL - - - DRIVE -==L - _L ~ -- -- - STREET -- - - 0-_ TST~~ I Q STREET I~~ H Planning & Development Department 3 ,_.__ .TO pri 13-:1 ,-- ,r; '. iJ... .' -: .20_-""",-" ~ ~~ ...........- ~<v ~ ~ ~<v ~ <:) ( DOUGLAS z~ /J PARK - - ~ ~; -w HALLER I I -~ z -w ~- - ~ -st1SJE'C" _ - ~SUaP/~/S/')I~ === OLD ORCHARD AVENUE --.J - - I T I g == ~= ~ I" I ~ L:='~~ ! ~= g ~NICA ho!OK -" ): 0 == - =i =J111 ) Ad"' ~IU)_~> BR~:~ ATh~lIILONA PARK I ~ ~I~I ----l 4:~ ~ I I I ~ '1 == DJllIIIJI] ~tvl~~ I ~REU- ~ - ROAD WATERP1~~T --< ~ C~ STR,!T <-- ~ ~ " 1 ~ \-1111 ~"> \ COMMERCE STREET I L8~lL ~ U--o:: 0 ~tn~- 0::'--- I- BROADVIEW z <( (f) _ <( f--- ~ =r =r= f--- ANNLAND J I BALSDON PARK ~ +~ Os ~O - ~ - - - I II -:;OMMERCE - STREET - PARK COMMERCE I I FRENCHMAN 'S ~ t? BAY STREET 0- 0- &- w- > :::::i T WHARF ? I I City of Pickering PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1915 OWNER VARIOUS FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION DATE SEPT. 2, 2008 DRAWN BY JB SCALE 1 :5000 CHECKED BY DB Data Sources: c Teronet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All ri9hts Reserved. Not 0 plan of survey. c 2005 MPAC and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not 0 plan of Survey. I .... ....) tj ~ _ - Z f------I -::::J~ - 0 o I--- ==-L f--- I--- - - l--- ~ I I ~ fT\ M -Z l' PN-3 il 1=\ \\ ~ \ \ I "\ \ , '\ "- II I I I I I W u => ~ 0:::: -.J Q. ~I-\ W (f) :> :2 W (f) -.J ~~ (') <t: 0:::: => W W I >- -"- J] Ul -----, ---...J GLENANNA ill/II. '\ o <t: o 0:::: \ '" "'- " \ '\ \~ \I~ b Rto/:) alRo CRtsc ('lvl F - -- I W U => 0:::: D- Ul ~ I I I liT =~\' I II ~ ~ GABLEHURST f{ III IM~ II III ,I~ ii. BJECT CRESCENT -=1///' ~- 25 ~, fen/VISION III ~ ~ w -= p - -:JI'" \ I '/_>-~-==~-=== 0 ~ \ I ~~'Y ~RT -?--==~=TIE~ ~1~1~ =~~~I~ 7l1111\~ ~H 1111\ ====~== I ,-----y - -~~ r--t VOYAGER AVe BONITA I- : ill 1In rBO~/TA == AVETF _ ~ wI-.J) c=] ~~==~ u I ~ f-------, ~_ S: ~ ~ "" 0:::: f--- - c--- ~ ~= =0== ~ >---) ----l {-o- 0:::: ~~== 11 (~ '-.J <=: \ ;:;; ~ v :J:::: - :{- L J--- \ :j I "'""'-- - \ -W"'--- = 0-- _ ~-== - ~==-I-== -~-==~- -_u- ==~ ~- I--- 0:::: f-- - f--- U f-- - -== - --~- --(7)- I ==-~== 1== ==~= r--~ - \ ) ~ I ~~:::::j;::: \ ~ ~ i '\ ~~ Av(), \ ~ I I: ~u( ~ I 1 ~ r:--1--=l, If".... Planning & Development Department I I~ I I - - --........----- STROUDS LANE -II~ ~II I III _ == ~~INljRDE~ CRlsc~NT ~'[ f14gR vMJ1T I Cf--- I---- I---- o <t: o O::::~ o <t: o 0:::: - -.J- ~- I_ - I- 0:::: o D- O:::: <t: LL City of Pickering PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1916 OWNER VARIOUS FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION DATE SEPT. 2, 2008 DRAWN BY JB SCALE 1 :5000 CHECKED BY DB l' IDa 0 Sources: c Teronet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not 0 plan of survey. c 2005 MPAC and :ts suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not a plan of Survey. PN-3 ::21 -) ; ~~ ~II I WESTCREEK =llli :5:.tIQ8 l-J '--0 R IVE ~ \ T ~ I--- ~ o <( o 0:::: \ \JI \..P-. \'\ ( - - - WESTCREEK ~LLEY~E PUBLIC SCHOOL PARK --r """ "\-L] 7 ~~BUTTERNUT CRT' = r STREET ""'<~ J ~ LU ( _~ 1T[[ ~ I ~~ ~ U-L 0:::: f--- -I----- 0:::: ~ ~ o"--~ o~ - \ -== ~ -..--->... - --~==VI ~- ~~ iFN[/) \\J ~= ~ ~ me llU y <( L ~~\L ((\o? LANCREST ST. ~ ~ '''' I...,.,.... ~ ~ ~ ~~1>"'O1>O I _ 11 17 u J6/~bN 1~~ ~ - GATE \ DRIVE ..-4~ '- :=r==e-- 11 I' / \.- IIIIIIIIIIITI ~~~IEW~ ~~~ - \ ~ -2- II ~~ ~ / STREET~r~= I f ]~~ r I I ----l_ SHEPPARD - WILC~ ~ ==''---)tJ ~OUR --- wf --, r - 0:::: - --- G- 'M - -II - w _ -1 -f- --~ ~WSON u ("" D r r-.I hi I I I 1":1 ~ TWYN RIVERS DRIVE == I n _ _--.J ST. MONICA'S _ SEPARA TE SCHOOL ) \ HOWELL _ i" ~w~ I ~~[OJ I I III r 0 ----lo R\C\-\ARDSON STREET 1 (3 CRESCENT ~~ II I ~ 0:::: IIII I I) ~ STRFFT ~ l ~~ 'i k~ I AVENUE I I ~~ "-\ :) ~A ~& l~ r:-- >- === I- '~1!J / \ \ - - - , II I '-- - - I~ } \0\ \~ yc '\ f---I-- _ ---- I .\ vL( ~ Planning & Development Department - City of Pickering PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1920 OWNER VARIOUS FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION DATE SEPT. 2, 2008 DRAWN BY JB ~ I' SCALE 1 :5000 CHECKED BY DB uoto ::sources: c Teronet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not a plan of survey. c 2005 MPAC and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not a plan of Survey. PN-10 ~ J c>-~ ~ S '-It. ~ ~ 1 - LN~ ~ ~ ? 1~ Co.-- \ ~ ===: ---l --! DRIVE E - - - - I IIIIIIIIITI '~ JBDI~/bN ~ TT; .' ~ / JI,:@\~ ~ r ~ I I :11 II~ ~ ) I I r) ~ TWYN RIVERS DRIVE == ==~ n - - _ _ ST. MONICA'S SEPARA TE SCHOOL ;-\ I r I ~ ~ 0::: l-~l \......./ =n 3~ WESTCREEK -oR~ ~lill = WESTCREEK 'ALLEYV/~E - PUBLIC SCHOOL - PARK _ _ _ :::=-rl _ '\-----L J I =~BUTTERNUT CRT' - STREET"""</ UJ ~r L~ ~ _~ DIn ---J I I ~~ ~ 0::: I--- - - IX _ ol---f----: 0-- ~ -== ~ -.---"'- - --~-=Y/ ~= [[lJ- \ ' GJ- '-\ =:J- r LANCREST ST. :; ~ ~01'rol'O I. ==:; I ~ GATE - I === ~ ==~- 11 I \ =:~IEWld? ==~:=f r~ -~- - (f) -I- _w_ -gs- lL... ----~ - W'LC~ ~; ~i ~OUn --- tj, 1'\'/ . - ~~~ ==- (/):=: II' '--~ r--_ r- I I r--_ ~ ~WSON u STREET I II ro ~I n I I I HOWELL == r C-) =1 ~~[[tD I ~ \S R\CI-IARDSON CRESCENT ___.-~ III STREET II I I III STRFFT - - --',.-- - - ---I,....-- City of Pickering 2:; ~~- :- \ o <t: o 0::: ~~ ~( 1/ \ \ I \ \ \ i r Pl., D I " ~- '\ k-I AVENUE -- SHEPPARD I ~~ -\ I I I I - I I /-( ~ Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1923 OWNER VARIOUS FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION DATE SEPT. 2, 2008 DRAWN BY JB SCALE 1 :5000 CHECKED BY DB 100 0 Sources: c Teronet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not a plan of survey. c 2005 MPAC and its suppliers. All riohts Reserved. Not a plan of Survey. r--- f--- - , " I f--- '-- I--- I~ \ } \c\~ \~ \c: '\ l' PN.10 .1- '2;1 - '/ / 7 / J- _L/ - ~II WOODSMERE I I I I I II I I CRESCENT U1l CHA DII -~ o 0 <( o ~~ ALTONA FOREST FUBLIC SCHOO_ PARK Si ~- -~ ST. ELIZABETH SETON SEPARATE SCHOOL ,---"-- -- - f--- _ f--- _ SUBJECT \ SUBD/~/SION \ STROUDS ____I--- r. ---'-- w \ dill =--~ I I L ==- - -- / _ _c- (. Sr!? /"1 ~ =~== t U>J-\( ~33 ~-~~==C3 "\ <( ~~:=:::t ~ / u- w ~~r ~\ ~~ 'l / 7 f~=u ~I \\ ~~ \RtJJo~1 ( // 1 f R [J \ ill ~ \ ~Ll-w ~~= r \ \ IllmmlllmB ~ F=i~-dN~ :-11 Fo1,l ::: '~\ \ ~ I \ I I II I I ==I ~ / I I w_ ~ ~- - LANE ./ '--- .,.--- f-- '--- _ i--- W > 0:::: o '-- - '-- -- -- - - -- '--- - W ..---l CL <( 2 F: - ~ 1 II II I 111 -~ t=: ~I Arni I rErENIIII~ ~ - r tl.1 1:1 D~ IVE ,r City of Pickering II III \ SHEPPARD I ill T \ '- ,-r-- 1 h-- II II I II I I I I AVENUE -rt-~ I I II 8 ~ I I I I I n Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1943 OWNER VARIOUS FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION DATE SEPT. 2, 2008 DRAWN BY JB "^' ! ' SCALE 1 :5000 CHECKED BY DB Data Sources: c Teronet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not 0 pion of survey. c 2005 MPAC ond its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not 0 plan of Survey. PN-10 WILC~ ~j F z ~[;j~UR/ O::::-I-W ~ ::>- 0:::1-- ~ ~t0~~l <( -~ - o--~ --r- ~-~ LAWSON U >-r 1/ I --- -~ ~ ~ ROUGE VALLEY PARK ) () 3'1- I - ~ ==__~l _0_ == STARVIEW CRT. _3:- w_ -~- - (f)---- _w_ -6- I...L-- STREET I II I I I (' " D __ II TWYN ~ ----. Ll ~ .-r- '\ '\ k I I I I ~ , DRIVE 1~ ;\ ~~ ~ RIVERS - - - - I--- ~ -- ---- ST. MONICA'S SEPARATE SCHOOL ~ --- dTITsw~ CIJJId~IT~~ARDSON CRESCENT ._____- I ..-1 \ o STREET d 1 ~ O'~:":J. El~'" I I r ..-,' ~ c; UB,)I ml/'JN ~ STREET -I ~EP I f--- - f -f---J- - ------1 /-( LITTLEFORD - -0::: _0 >-L f--- ~ >- W _--1 --1 ~ 0::: I---- I ----.,- ~ - ~ ----.,0 - o -Jj ----l <( - o - STOVER CRESCENT ~- I - I - I W'--- _ --1- <( 0- Z ~ <( I---- LL ELIZABETH B. PHIN PUBLIC SCHOOL \ I I w FIDDLERS ~ 0::: / 0 I - """"""'" =~ -I ~~~ ~J \ I f')- ~ I DRIVE >--- >--- - \ t=V\ ~OMLlNSON CRT. ~ [C) f--- 3 J<!' I L- tJ 0- / / '--- [L STREET <{ W \' z ~ DRIVE \~~~ d~ ~c: '\ cr ~ ---% \ n o C :::0 ---j I I- Z => o 2 w C) => o 0::: I City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION 40M-1958 OWNER VARIOUS FILE No. SUBDIVISION COMPLETION AND ASSUMPTION DATE SEPT. 2, 2008 DRAWN BY JB SCALE 1 :5000 CHECKED BY DB l' Data Sou~ceB: c Te~anet Ente~p~ises Inc. and its supplie~s. All ~i9hts Reserved. Not 0 pion of survey. c 2005 MPAC and its supplie~s. All ~i9hts Rese~ved. Not 0 pion of Su~vey. PN-5 Roadded.506 Cl .' } . ~7 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. Being a By-law to dedicate Block 26, Plan 40M-1920 as public highway. WHEREAS The Corporation of the City of Pickering is the owner of Block 26, Plan 40M-1920 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 26, Plan 40M-1920 is hereby dedicated as public highway (Granby Court). BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 17th day of November, 2008. I' J. David Ryan, May Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk Roadded. 507 tJ THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. Being a By-law to dedicate Blocks 17 and 18, Plan 40M-1943 as public highways. WHEREAS The Corporation of the City of Pickering is the owner of Blocks 17 and 18, Plan 40M-1943 and wishes to dedicate them as public highways. NOW THEREFORE, the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. Block 17, Plan 40M-1943 is hereby dedicated as public highway (Treetop Way). 2. Block 18, Plan 40M-1943 is hereby dedicated as public highway (Stroud's Lane). BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally -passed this 17th day of November, 2008. Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk Citlf 01 REPORT TO PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Report Number: PD 43-08 Date: November 3, 2008 I, , "1 f PICKERING From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment - A 11/08 Grant Morris Associates Ltd. 1789, 1795, 1801 & 1805 Pine Grove Avenue 1790,1792, 1794, 1804, 1806, 1808 & 1810 Woodview Avenue (Part of Road Allowance Between Lots 34 & 35, Concession 1 Parts 2,3,5 - 9, 11 - 13,15, 17, 18,20,22,24,26 - 30,32,33 & 35,40R-25121) City of Pickering Recommendation: 1. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/08 submitted by Grant Morris Associates Ltd. to amend the existing zoning on the rear of the subject properties to permit reduced side yard widths, reduced building height and an increased lot coverage on lands situated on Part of Road Allowance Between Lots 34 & 35, Concession 1, Parts 2,3,5 - 9,11 -13,15,17,18,20,22,24,26 - 30,32,33 & 35, 40R-25121 be approved. 2. That City Council endorse the creation of more than 3 lots to proceed by Land Division for the properties at 1795 Pine Grove Avenue and 1804, 1806 & 1808 Woodview Avenue; and 3. Further, that the amending zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/08 as set out in Appendix I to Report PO 43-08 be forwarded to City Council for enactment. Executive Summary: The applicant proposes to amend the existing zoning on the rear of the subject properties to permit reduced side yard widths & building height, and increased lot coverage (see Location Map and Applicant's Submitted Plan, Attachments #1 & 2). The application involves 11 properties owned by 7 owners, and is represented by Grant Morris Associates Ltd. The owners request that the zoning on the rear portion of the subject properties be changed to reflect development standards similar to those recently established for adjacent properties fronting Rockwood Drive. The owners may apply in the future for land severances to sever the rear of their properties to create new lots fronting onto Rockwood Drive. Rockwood Drive has recently been extended to connect the road in its entirely from Hogarth Street to Pine Grove Avenue. . Report PD 43-08 November 3, 2008 I II ,Subje~t) Zoning By-law Amendment Application (A 11/08) ~"- Page 2 This application represents orderly development and a zoning similar to that which exists in the neighbourhood. It is recommended that this application be approved and the draft by-law be forwarded to City Council for enactment. Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the proposed zoning by-law amendment. Sustainability Implications: The proposed zoning will enable future severances to create new building lots which will utilize existing services found along Rockwood Drive. Background: 1.0 Comments Received 1.1 Before the Information Meeting (see Information Report Attachment #3) The Regional Municipality of Durham - no concerns The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority - no objections Veridian Connections - no objections one comment was received from a neighbouring resident addressing concerns relating to existing on-site conditions; 1.2 At the September 2, 2008, Information Meeting none received (see Minutes, Attachment #4); 1.3 Following the Information Meeting none received; Report PD 43-08 November 3, 2008 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application (A 11/08) Page 3 ,3 2.0 Discussion: 2.1 Proposed zoning by-law will ensure new development along the undeveloped portion of Rockwood Drive will be in character with the existing neighbourhood The applicant requests that the zoning provIsions of By-law 6005/02, which applies to the lands south of the subject properties, be extended and applied to the subject properties with the exception of the front yard depth. The applicant has requested to retain a 7.5 metre front yard depth for two reasons: the lots are deep, on average ranging between 50 to 60 metres in depth, as well as existing dwellings constructed along Rockwood Drive have minimum front yard depths of 7.5 metres or greater. This has resulted in the development of its own unique character throughout the neighbourhood. Staff supports the applicant's request as it will permit development reflective of the existing character of the neighbourhood. Staff also recommends an increased lot coverage which is reflective of current subdivision standards used by the City. An Architectural Design Statement has not been submitted by the applicant; however, it will be required for all new lots created through the Land Severance application process. The Architectural Design Statement will ensure that new dwellings constructed will be in character with the existing neighbourhood. 2.2 Planning Staff support land severance applications which may have the potential to create in excess of three additional lots for specific properties subject of this Zoning Amendment Application There are two property owners which have lands capable of creating more than three additional lots (1795 Pine Grove Avenue & 1804, 1806 & 1808 Woodview Avenue). If an applicant proposes to create more than three additional lots, the City of Pickering's Official Plan requires the applicant to undertake a Draft Plan of Subdivision unless the applicant receives Council endorsement. If Council endorsement is received, the applicant is entitled to sever their property through Land Division. The Subdivision process is a process that is generally more time-consuming and is more expensive than a Land Severance process. The subject properties are connected by an internal road (Rockwood) and are situated within an infill area, therefore it is reasonable that additional lots be created by land severance. Report PD 43-08 November 3, 2008 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application (A 11/08) 4 Page 4 2.3 Existing site conditions are being monitored by City Staff Neighbouring residents expressed concerns pertaining to the existing on-site conditions of the subject properties. Their concerns included: debris, grading & seeding of surrounding properties, lighting along Rockwood Drive and the status of an existing large shed. These matters of concern are ongoing issues within the confines of the subject properties which are being monitored by City Staff, and are not matters subject . of this Zoning Amendment Application. The large shed which currently exists on the east side of Rockwood Drive (as part of 1792 Woodview Avenue) is a matter that will be addressed through the Land Severance process if a severance is proposed to separate the existing shed from the existing dwelling at 1792 Woodview Avenue. The zoning by-law for the City of Pickering does not permit accessory structures (such as sheds, gazebos, garages etc.) in a residential zone without a main dwelling. As one of the conditions of severance a stand-alone existing shed will be required to be removed from a severed lot. 2.4 By-law to be forward to Council The attached by-law schedule included as Appendix I to this report implements Staff's recommendation to approve the applicant's request. A freestanding by- law with a new schedule is proposed. It is recommended that the attached freestanding by-law and schedules be forwarded to Council for enactment should Council approve this application. 3.0 Applicant's Comments The owner is aware of and supports the recommendations of this report. APPENDIX: Appendix I: Draft Implementing Zoning By-law Attachments: 1 . Location Map 2. Applicant's Submitted Plan 3. Information Report 4. Statutory Public Information Meeting Minutes Report PD 43-08 November 3, 2008 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application (A 11/08) Page 5 :J Prepared By: Approved I Endorsed By: Neil Carroll MCIP P Director, Planning & Development AY:cs Attachments Copy: Chief Administrative Officer /r ~ 6 APPENDIX I TO REPORT PO 43-08 DRAFT BY-LAW ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICATION A 11/08 l THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area Zoning By-law 3036, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham in Part of Road Allowance between Lots 34 & 35, Concession 1, Parts 2, 3, 5 - 9,11 -13,15,17,18,20,22,24,26 - 30,32,33 & 35, 40R-25121, in the City of Pickering (A 11/08) WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to permit the development of lots for detached dwellings with minimum frontages of 15.0 metres on the subject lands, being Part of Road Allowance between Lots 34 & 35, Concession 1, Parts 2, 3, 5 - 9, 11 - 13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26 - 30, 32, 33 & 35, 40R-25121 in the City of Pickering; 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 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 "s 1-15" 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 th is 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; (c) "Dwellinq, Sinqle or Sinqle Dwellinq" shall mean a single dwelling containing one dwelling unit and uses accessory hereto; (d) "Dwellinq, Detached or Detached Dwellinq" shall mean a single dwelling 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 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 Coveraqe" shall mean the percentage of lot area covered by all buildings on the lot; (c) "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) "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; By-law No. Page 3 ) (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 a yard 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; (f) "Side Yard" shall mean a yard of a lot extending from the front yard to 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) "Flankaoe 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) "Flankaoe 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; U) "Interior Side Yard" shall mean a side yard other than a flankage side yard. By-law No. Page 4 i j 1 5. PROVISIONS (1) (a) Uses Permitted ("S1-15" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "s 1-15" 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 ("S1- 15" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "s 1-15" 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): 460 square metres (ii) LOT FRONTAGE (minimum): 15 metres (iii) FRONT YARD DEPTH (minimum): 7.5 metres (iv) INTERIOR SIDE YARD WIDTH (minimum): 1.2 metres (v) FLANKAGE SIDE YARD WIDTH (minimum): 2.7 metres (vi) REAR YARD DEPTH (minimum): 7.5 metres (vii) LOT COVERAGE (maximum): A 38 percent for all buildings and structures on a lot; B despite clause A above, where a one-storey detached dwelling with an attached private garage is constructed on a lot, the attached private garage shall be excluded from the calculation of lot coverage. (viii) BUILDING HEIGHT (maximum): 9.0 metres (ix) DWELLING UNIT REQUIREMENTS: maximum one dwelling unit per lot and minimum gross floor area residential of 100 square metres. By-law No. Page 5 '! I (x) PARKING REQUIREMENTS: A minimum one private garage per lot attached to the main building; B any vehicular entrance of which shall be located not less than 6 metres from the front lot line, and not less than 6 metres from any side lot line immediately adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a street; and, C maximum projection of the garage front entrance from the wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit shall not exceed 2.5 metres in length, whether or not such garage has a second storey, except where a covered and unenclosed porch or veranda extends a minimum of 1.8 metres from the wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit, in which case no part of any attached private garage shall extend more than 3.0 metres beyond the wall containing the main entrance to the dwelling unit. (xi) SPECIAL REGULATION: Notwithstanding .clause 5.7(b) of By-law 3036, as amended, uncovered steps and platforms exceeding 1.0 metre in height above grade may project a maximum of 2.5 metres indepth into the required rear yard of a lot provided no part thereof exceeds 6.0 metres in width. 6. BY-LAW 3036 By-law 3036, 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 matters not specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by relevant provisions of By-law 3036, as amended. Page 6 By-law No. 2 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 17th day of November, 2008. David Ryan, Mayor ..,~;,~ dl;':" .~ '" I: I"~ ~:,-',y" "';':'-' Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk PINE GROVE PARK ~ ffin~ - t--- V~ l \"ZV\Z v 1\' O~ ~\Q O~ G CRESCENT STREET STREET I I CRESCENT I NHITE PINE CRESCENT I ST UDS I g e---- :::0 t----- -j t----- ---- f-- z_ w u- (f) W 0:::: u- - - - - w :::J Z ~ J II ~ <( II~ ,s g:= II f-- WEST LANE r-II ~ TILlllUWL ~ ~ CRESCENT n 1/1 I ~,y('~E 1 III - - ~ Gf ~ri r-O I----- r-W ~r r---z =6 ===0:::: -0 W~AVENUE Ii ~)SBRLk~ === -- ffi1j ==:= ~ -- :==:= - == r---r-- :== f- e- V SQUAr<1C :==:= ~~t~1h!llllll ~~ L --- I ~iV r--- WESTCREEK __- =illJJ PINE I GROVE I I III I -~~ -~- ~- r- ~ --- -- ~8 o r-+-f- ~ u ~~~ol- - r O::::~~ - f-----' ~ \~=~ > <( w > o 0:::: () w > 6 I PROHILL SL I -- - - WESTCREEK /) PUBLIC SCHOOL o o o ~ y: u o 0:::: -- ==~1- - B c;: - ~ Sl REO ~~ ~ =--:== ~ QIJI JI-- c- o 0-- '- e--- -~~==0 r------ _ W - / =---1== ~Fh en ~ U-1JJ r LANCF ~== -- -- -----..-: I ~IID ....,-_. J tiROPERj-y ~ ,JJ1' - - - r- -- I 1 t=i~ r------ 0:::: o -- ~~ == ~~ - f- I-------- ~ -^' W I-------- 0 ~ 0 _ ~ f---- - tI1~ --- ~WILCYO/')' r----- ), ~ Z f------ tJ caul? 0:::: f------ r---- w r--:::.,...... r ~ cr: 1----- J 'n ~ '--- ~ tn t---- _Ii r-, <( -- ~ t-= o===~ II - LAWSON c5 t-- t-- ~III City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PART OF ROAD ALLlOWANCE BETWEEN LOT 34 & 35, CONCESSION 1 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PARTS 2,3,5-9,11-13,15,17,18,20,22,24,26-30,32,33 & 35, 40R-25121 I------------ ->- f------ W I------------ -1 f------ -1 c---:g; r------ '-- ~ ~ w :> o o o ~ L___ o o o W r--- 3: ~ - /U=S~U1 ~= ~~~ rJrol-= I rHswEErBRIAR~ LI1L I It~D~~; I - - ~-- r - ~-- - - r-- r- -- ~/TIIII STREET IIII C.N.R. C. I I I I I III I I I I 1"- I I \ I I DATE MAY 14, 2008 SCALE 1 :5000 l' FILE No. GRANT MORRIS ASSOCIATES LTD. A 11/08 DRAWN BY JB CHECKED BY AY OWNER Uata Sources: e Teranet Enterpri!'le!'l Inc. and it" "upplier!'l_ All rights Re"erved. Not a plan of !'Iurvey. i5 2005 MPAC and its suppliers. All rights Reserved. Not a plan of Survey, PN-10 !~ .... s.~ L{ ~~\ INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANTS SUBMITTED PLAN A 11/08 - GRANT MORRIS ASSOCIATES L TO. 1822 1823 W 1829 :::> 1818 1836 Z 1827 W 120 124 1 28 1 32 W 1814 > > 136 1828 <t: 1825 1810 a: 0 w 1823 1806 0 PROHILL STREET > 0 0 1821 1802 0 1822 a: ~ 121 125 129 133 (9 1819 1798 ~ W () 1820 :::> W 1817 1794 0 1795 Z Z a: w a.. 1815 1790 1791 1818 > <( 1811 1786 1787 1814 1809 1783 1812 ~ W 1810 > 1805 0 1808 0 1806 0 1801 ~ 1804 1802 1799 1800 1795 1796 1793 1794 1791 1792 V 1789 1790 1734 W 1735 1788 1787 > 1 . 1730 a: 1731 1786 1785 0 1 . 1726 1727 1794 1781 0 1: 1722 0 0 1723 1782 1777 S ~ 1719 1780 U 1 : 177') 1714 0 i7it:: a:: ~ THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PLANNING INFORMATION SERVICES DIVISION MAPPING AND DESIGN, MAY 14,2008. Citq 01 INFORMATION REPORT NO. 16-08 FOR PUBLIC INFORMATION MEETING OF September 2, 2008 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PUBLIC MEETING REQUIREMENTS OF THE PLANNING ACT, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P .13 SUBJECT: Zoning By-law Amendment - A 11/08 Grant Morris Associates Ltd. 1789,1795,1801 & 1805 Pine Grove Avenue 1790,1792,1794,1804,1806, 1808 & 1810 Woodview Avenue (Part of Road Allowance between Lots 34 & 35, Concession 1 Parts 2,3,5 - 9,11 -13,15,17,18,20,22,24,26 - 30,32,33 & 35,40R-25121) City of Pickering 1.0 PROPERTY LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION - the subject properties are comprised of the rear yards of lots fronting Woodview Avenue and Pine Grove Avenue (any resultant development of the rear yards will front Rockwood Drive) north of Hogarth Street, south of Prohill Street.(see Location Map, Attachment #1); - the subject properties have a combined lot area of approximately 3 hectares (see Applicant's Submitted Plan Attachment #2); - there are 11 properties involved with this application; most properties currently support one detached dwelling on an existing lot. 2.0 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL - the applicant has requested to amend the existing zoning on the rear portions of the existing lots to a similar or the same zoning requirements currently applicable to Rockwood Drive (see Attachment #4); - the applicant currently represents seven property owners (for the 11 properties) which intend to sever the rear of the subject properties creating a total of 20 lots fronting Rockwood Drive with minimum lot frontages of 15.0 metres; Information Report No. 16-08 ~~ (1 Page 2 - the applicant has filed applications for severance with the Region of Durham Land Division Committee on the properties of 1805 Pine Grove Avenue (LD 040 & 041/08) and 1792 & 1794 Woodview Avenue (LD 055 - 058/08); these applications are conditionally approved (see Applicant's Submitted Plan Attachment #2). 3.0 OFFICIAL PLAN AND ZONING 3.1 Durham Reaional Official Plan - the Regional Plan designates the subject properties Urban Areas - Living Areas, which shall be used predominantly for housing purposes; - the proposal complies with the Durham Regional Official Plan; 3.2 Pickerina Official Plan - the City of Pickering Official Plan designates the subject properties Urban Residential- Low Density Area within the Highbush Neighbourhood; - these areas are intended primarily for residential purposes having a net residential density up to and including 30 dwellings per net hectare; - the existing lots which currently front onto Pine Grove Avenue and Woodview Avenue and the proposed lots fronting Rockwood Drive will create a net residential density of approximately 10 dwellings per net hectare; - the Plan identifies Rockwood Drive as a Local Road which generally provides access to individual properties, local roads, other collector roads, whereas Pine Grove Avenue and Woodview Avenue are identified as Collector Roads which generally carry greater volumes of traffic than local roads; - the Highbush Neighbourhood policies recognizes a through road connection of Rockwood Drive from Pine Grove Avenue to Hogarth Street; - the extension of Rockwood Drive is now complete, which allows frontage through the rear of the subject properties; - the proposal complies with the Pickering Official Plan; 3.4 Zonina By-law 3036 - the subject properties are currently zoned 'R4' - Fourth Density Residential Zone, which requires a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres and a minimum lot area of 460 square metres; the applicant requests to amend the existing zoning to a zone classification reflecting either the existing zone found to the north (Zoning By-law Number 5770100) or south (Zoning By-law Number 6005/02) of the subject properties which will maintain the existing character found along Rockwood Drive (see Attachments #4 & 5); an amendment to the zoning by-law is required to allow for the future lots fronting Rockwood Drive to have the same yard setbacks, lot coverage, height requirements and garage projections permitted along Rockwood Drive. Information Report No. 16-08 Page 3 '} 4.0 RESUL IS OF CIRCULA liON (See Attachments #6, 7, 8 & 9) 4.1 Resident Comments none received to date; 4.2 Aaencv Comments The Regional Municipality of Durham no objections (see Attachment #6); The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority no objections (see Attachment #7); Veridian Connections no objections (see Attachment #8); 4.3 City Department Comments Development Control no objections (see Attachment #9); 4.4 Staff Comments in reviewing the application to date, the following matters have been identified by staff for further review and consideration: . to ensure the zoning proposed to the rear of the subject properties will conform with the existing neighbourhood through zoning requirements already established along Rockwood Drive immediately to the north and south; . the Planning & Development Department will require the applicant to provide an Architectural Design Statement for properties that will be developed along Rockwood Drive which are affected by this Zoning Amendment Application as part of any land severance application proposed on the properties; . as per Section 15.26(b) of the Pickering Official Plan, no more than three additional lots may be created through land severance; Council will have to give their consideration to allow for new additional lots in access of three to be created through the land severance process; . Planning Staff support land severance applications which may have the potential to create in access of three additional lots for the subject properties identified on Attachment #3. 5.0 PROCEDURAL INFORMA liON - written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the Planning & Development Department; oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting; Information Report No. 16-08 hd ) ~ Page 4 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 reserve the option to appeal Council's decision, 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 decision regarding this proposal, you must request such in writing to the City Clerk. 6.0 OTHER INFORMATION 6.1 Appendix No. I list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City Departments that have commented on the applications at the time of writing report; a summarY of the Zoning By-law requirements for properties along Rockwood Drive, By-law 5770/00 and By-law 6005/02 is attached (see Attachment #5); 6.2 Company Principal - the owners of the subject properties are listed below: . Ciancio, Jose & Liliana . Deschenes, Gary & Susan . Gallo, Cesare . Lodu, Donna & Thomas · Martinko, David & Janet . Oppedisano, Cosmo, Rosetta . Skidmore, Gail (1795 Pine Grove Avenue) (1792 - 1794 Woodview Avenue) (1801 Pine Grove Avenue) (1790 Woodview Avenue) (1805 Pine Grove Avenue) (1789 Pine Grove Avenue) (1804 - 1810 Woodview Avenue) - the applicant is Grant Morris c/o Grant Morris & Associates Ltd. ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Ashley Yearwood Planner I AY:jf Attachments Copy: Director, Planning & Development ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Lynda Taylor Manager, Development Review '..2 "J l-/ ,", '-j APPENDIX NO. I TO INFORMATION RE'PORT NO. 16-08 COMMENTING RESIDENTS AND LANDOWNERS (1) none received to date COMMENTING AGENCIES (1) The Regional Municipality of Durham (2) The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (3) Veridian Connections COMMENTING CITY DEPARTMENTS (1) Planning & Development Department - Development Control PI Excerpts from Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes Tuesday, September 2, 2008 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor O'Connell (I) PART 'A' - PLANNING INFORMATION MEETING 1 . Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 11/08 Grant Morris Associates Ltd. 1789,1795,1801 & 1805 Pine Grove Avenue 1790, 1792, 1794, 1804, 1806, 1808 & 1810 Woodview Avenue (Part of Road Allowance between Lots 34 & 35, Concession 1 Parts 2, 3, 5-9, 11-13, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26-30, 32, 33 & 35, 40R-25121), City of Pickerinq A public information meeting was held under the Planning Act, for the purpose of informing the public with respect to an application submitted by Grant Morris Associates Ltd. for property municipally known as 1789, 1795, 1801 & 1805 Pine Grove Avenue and 1790, 1792, 1794, 1804, 1806, 1808 & 1810 Woodview Avenue. 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. Ashley Yearwood, Planner I, gave an overview of zoning amendment application A 11/08. Grant Morris, 397 Sheppard Avenue, the. applicant appeared before the Committee in support of the application. Mr. Morris noted that he would be meeting with hydro soon to sign an agreement regarding street lighting. No members of the public in attendance at the public information meeting spoke in support or opposition to Application A 11/08. 1 Citlf iJ~ REPORT TO PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Report Number: PD 42-08 Date: November 3, 200;8 From: Neil Carroll . Director, Planning & Development Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Growing Durham Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report, prepared by Urban Strategies Inc. et ai, dated September 23, 2008 Phase 5 Recommendation: 1. That Report PD 42-08 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report, dated September 23, 2008, presenting the draft recommendations for Phase 5 of the Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study, be received; 2. That the comments contained in Report PD 42-08 on the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report for the Region of Durham Growth Plan Implementation Study be endorsed, and further that the Region of Durham and its consultants be requested to make the following changes: a) Expand the extent of land identified for future living area around Kinsale, extending both to the west and to the east to Lake Ridge Road, so as to create a threshold of growth for a complete neighbourhood; b) Revise the policy restricting major office development from employment areas, such that it permits major office development at selected freeway interchanges, thereby taking advantage of transit and increasing employment densities; c) Reconsider the timing of the lands in the centre of northeast Pickering identified for future employment in the post-2031 period, so as to maximize the logical and orderly extension of services and infrastructure; and d) Implement the timing changes recommended by Regional Planning Committee on October 14, 2008, to bring lands for future living area at the north limit of northeast Pickering from post-2031 to pre-2031, and to change the lands in northeast Pickering adjacent to Lake Ridge Road from pre-2031 to post-2031; and 3. Further, that a copy of Report PD 42-08 and Pickering Council's resolution on the matter be forwarded to the Region of Durham, Urban Strategies Inc. et ai, other Durham Area Municipalities, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Report PD 42-08 November 3, 2008 Subject: Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions J) ,- Page 2 i . Executive Summary: On September 23, 2008, the Region of Durham released for comment a report entitled Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions. The report is the preliminary recommendations from Phase 5 of Region's Growth Plan Implementation Study, entitled Growing Durham. The Study is being undertaken for the Region by Urban Strategies Inc., Watson & Associates and TSH. The Region of Durham is undertaking public and stakeholder consultation for this study. The consultants should be congratulated on completing a significant amount of work refining the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and policy directions in a short period of time. A copy of the Recommended Growth Scenario is provided as Attachment #1 to this Report to Council. The Region requests comments on the Draft Report by October 24, 2008. A Final Report is to be released on November 25, 2008. Pickering Council commented on the Phase 3 & 4 Report, Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper dated June 10, 2008. Many of Council's comments have been addressed in the latest Report (see discussion in section 3.6 of this Report to Council). Staff's review of the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report concludes with four main findings: (a) the overall density and housing mix assuniption~ to achieve the intensification and density targets are supportable; (b) the arrangement of future living area and future employment area is logical with the exception of the inadequate extent of living area around the existing Hamlet of Kinsale (see Item 1 on Appendix I to Report PO 42-08); (c) the policy direction focusing major office development (being greater than 10,000 square metres or 500 or more employees) to "centres" and "corridors" and restricting them from employment areas should be revised to permit major office development at selected freeway interchanges to take advantage of transit and to increase the number of jobs per hectare; and (d) the creation of a 'hole' within the 2031 urban area for northeast Pickering should be reexamined to take advantage of logical and orderly servicing (see Item 2 on Appendix I to Report PD 42-08). A revision to the timing of certain future living area lands in northeast Pickering recommended by Regional Planning Committee on October 14, 2008, is also of no concern to staff (see items 3 and 4 on Appendix I to Report PD 42-08). The time frame for commenting on the Study Report is extremely limited, and insufficient to accommodate Council's meeting schedule. The November 3, 2008 Planning & Development Committee is the earliest possible time frame in which to provide comment. Accordingly, the recommendations of the Planning & Development Committee will be forwarded to the consultants as well as the follow-up recommendation of Council. Report PD 42-08 November 3, 2008 Subject: Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Page 3 3 Financial Implications: No direct implications from providing comments on this phase of the Growing Durham Study. Sustainability Implications: Responsible Development, one of the five objectives in Pickering's framework for sustainability, is central to the purpose of the Growing Durham Study. The comments and recommendations contained in this Report to Council are intended to support the importance of achieving intensification in existing built up areas and meeting minimum density targets in new Greenfield areas, planning new Greenfield areas as complete communities and strengthening existing settlements, creating opportunities for major office jobs in employment areas; and extending urban areas in a logical and orderly fashion. Background: 1.0 The Growina Durham Study 1.1 Section 1, the Introduction, of the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report summarizes the Growing Durham Study to date. The introductory chapter of the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report is provided as Attachment #2 to Report to Council PD 42-08 as it gives a synopsis of the following relevant background material: the scope and objectives of the Growing Durham Study; the work completed to date on the initial growth assessment, the scenario evaluation and the preferred growth scenario; the directions of Regional Planning Committee, the Consultation Process; and the purpose and structure of the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report. A copy of the full Report is available for viewing at the Pickering Planning & Development counter, and may be downloaded from the Region of Durham's website at www.reoion.durham.on.ca . 1.2 Pickering Council commented on the Scenario Evaluation and Preferred Recommended Growth Scenario Working Paper that was released on June 13, 2008. On July 17, 2008, Council considered the recommendations of Report to Council PD 32-08 on the Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario (see text of Report PD 32-08, Attachment #3). While Council generally supported the land use structure set out in the Preferred Growth Scenario, a number of revisions were recommended to the land use structure and a number of clarifications were requested. A copy of Council's resolution on the matter is provided as Attachment #4. Report PD 42-08 November 3, 2008 Subject: Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions 44 Page 4 2.0 The Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policv Directions Report 2.1 The Draft Report presents a growth scenario for Durham Region comprising a map, related policy directions, and characteristics of development to achieve that growth. The Recommended Growth Scenario is based on a market-influenced but policy-driven approach. The map showing the location, type and timing of development must be read in the context of key policy directions, and with an understanding of the assumptions on density and housing mix for the different types and locations for growth. 2.1.1 The map showinQ the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario shows existinQ and proposed development areas and time frames for development. A copy of the map showing the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario is provided as Attachment #1 to this Report to Council. For existing urban and designated Greenfield urban areas, the map shows a number of structural elements where growth is to be accommodated. These structural elements include existing and proposed centres, mobility hubs, regional and local corridors, and waterfront villages. Employment and living areas, existing and proposed GO Station are also identified. For proposed new urban areas, the map shows the future employment and living areas, with an additional indication of whether the land is required prior to 2031 or between 2031 and 2056. The urban structure elements of future centres, and future regional and local corridors are also identified. 2.1.2 The Report provides draft policv directions for a number of key topics. The topics and selected policy directions are listed below. The full list of policy directions (except for those pertaining to the Northern Communities) is provided in Attachment #5: 1) Guiding principles and objectives; 2) Regional urban structure; 3) Intensification; 4) Designated Greenfield lands; 5) Employment; 6) Infrastructure planning, transit and servicing; 7) Environment; 8) Phasing growth; 9) Urban boundary expansion; and 10) Monitoring and ongoing review. Report PD 42-08 November 3, 2008 Subject: Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Page 5 r :) The Report also identifies some implementation tools to assist in achieving the objectives of the study. Most of the tools are not new, or were identified in the latest changes to the Planning Act. Some of tools are not yet available for use in Ontario. However, the consultant's intent in identifying them is to ensure the Regional Plan enables their use should the necessary legislation or regulations come into effect. 2.1.3 Appendix D of the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report describes the characteristics of the urban structure elements necessary to meet the intent of the policy directions. The Growing Durham Study proposes a number of "urban structure elements" to build the urban fabric. Some examples of these structural elements include urban growth centres, mobility hubs, regional corridors, waterfront villages, nodes and living areas. For each of these structural elements,. the consultants have assigned a specific set of assumptions on the mix of housing forms, the average and minimum density ranges, and examples of existing developments that represent the type of structural element. These assumptions, as well as photographs of representative developments are detailed in Appendix D to the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario Report. It is anticipated that some but not all of this detail would be incorporated in the policies for new development. 2.2 The Draft Recommended Growth Scenario is the result of the consultants review of comments, revised assumptions and analysis, and assessment of growth against the Study's objectives. Many changes were made by the consultants in moving from the Preferred Growth Scenario of June 2008 to the Recommended Scenario of September 2008. Many of the changes are interrelated. Attachment #6 to this Report to Council identifies key changes made by the consultants that are particularly relevant to Pickering. The changes include modifying assumptions for the housing demand and supply forecasts, revising the employment demand and supply forecasts, reexamining growth from both a Regional perspective (top down) and from the local perspective (bottom up), adjusting the arrangement of lands for future employment and living area, differentiating between lands required to 2031 and lands need to 2056, and checking the resulting land use structure against the principles and objectives of the Growing Durham Study. Report PD 42-08 November 3, 2008 Subject: Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions , i, ,I b Page 6 3.0 Discussion 3.1 Based on review to date, staff supports the revisions to the housing mix, densities, and assignment of growth to future corridors and centres to achieve the requirements of the Provincial Growth Plan. The Recommended Growth Scenario Report does not yet include details of all of the modeling for each municipality yet. It is anticipated that these details will appear in the Final Report. Based on the aggregate information that is available to date, the consultants appear to have reached a housing density and employment mix that will achieve the Provincial Growth Plan targets for existing built up areas and new Greenfield development. The average densities will be higher than those experienced in Pickering in recent years, and the proportion of low density housing will be less. Pickering will supply a significant amount of the medium and high density development in the Region. Higher intensities of development are consistent with a more sustainable, transit-supportive community. 3.2 The future living area around the existing Hamlet of Kinsale should be expanded to create a sufficient threshold for a complete neighbourhood. Staff generally agrees with the location of future employment lands and future living area lands in northeast Pickering, with the exception of the small extent of living area around Kinsale. For employment lands in northeast Pickering, the consultants have reflected Council's request to increase the depth of employment lands along Highway 407 in Pickering. Compared to the Preferred Growth Scenario of June 2008, Pickering has nearly twice as much future employment land identified in this area. In northeast Pickering, most but not all of the future living area lies north of the Seventh Concession Road. One area to the south is around the existing Hamlet of Kinsale. Although specific numbers are not provided, very limited amount of new living area is identified. Staff recommends a larger extent of future living area be established around Kinsale so that it may achieve a threshold for a complete neighbourhood. Staff suggests a minor expansion to the west and expansion to the east to Lake Ridge Road (see the lands identified as Item 1 on Appendix I). Strengthening an existing hamlet is also consistent with one of the Study's principles, reinforcing and building on existing regional settlement and i nfrastructu re patterns. 3.3 The policy direction focusing major office development to "centres" and "corridors" in living areas should be relaxed to allow selected locations for major office at freeway interchanges in employment areas. Staff supports the concept that a primary location for major office development (defined as offices over 10,000 square metres or having 500 or more employees) are "centres" and "corridors" in the living area. Report PD 42-08 November 3, 2008 Subject: Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Page 7 l However, policy direction restricting major development from employment areas is missing opportunities to maximize intense development around freeway interchanges, particularly where a transit system is in place. To illustrate this point, the recently completed Highway 407 (Seaton) Employment Lands Study commissioned by the Province of Ontario as part of the implementation of the Central Pickering Development Plan recommended a designation of "Office-Oriented Centres" at Highway 407 interchanges. The rationale for this designation included taking advantage of future transit stations and helping increase the jobs per hectare ratio in the employment area. It may be appropriate to establish criteria for the introduction of major office subject to conditions such as the transit being in place and other design performance criteria such as underground parking to minimize the footprint of the office in the employment lands. The consultants are requested to exempt Seaton from this proposed policy direction. 3.4 Staff recommends the consultants re-examine the 'hole' in the 2031 urban fabric for northeast Pickering that would leave significant, serviced future employment area in the post 2031 urban area. In developing the Draft Preferred Growth Scenari~, the consultants added lands for future employment area required for 2031 along Highway 407 in Whitby, in the vicinity of the 401-407 connectors. There were two reasons for this. The first was to address this area's highly accessible location. The second was to add future employment area to the future living area in north Whitby to allow the creation of complete communities. Staff has no concern with the identification of employment land along Highway 407 in the vicinity of the Whitby 401-407 connector and concurs that it is a strategic location for employment. However, based on the latest information about servicing for northeast Pickering and northwest Whitby, it appears the lands in the vicinity of the connector will be at the very end of the proposed sanitary sewer. The sewer is expected to be extended from the west to the east (that is, from Pickering to Whitby). Yet, the Draft Report identifies the lands a~ound the connector as required within the 2031 horizon. Significant upfront funding is likely to be required (by the Region, or by landowners) to extend servicing to this strategic location within. There is only a finite amount of employment land required to 2031. Therefore, the addition of land in Whitby required a decrease in future employment land elsewhere in the Region, more specifically in Pickering. As a result, future employment lands in northeast Pickering located along Highway 407 are delayed to the 2032-2056 period. Report PD 42-08 November 3, 2008 Subject: Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Page 8 I l' ) d It is staff's opinion that these lands will be serviced sooner than the lands near the connector, because servicing will be extended north in Pickering to living area lands required to 2031. This will leave a 'hole' in the 2031 urban fabric. With these lands in a different time frame, important planning and other studies such as development charges are unable to include these lands. The consultants are requested to re-examine the timing of the central block of future employment area in northeast Pickering, (see the lands identified as Item 2 on Appendix I) One option would be to reconsider the timing of lands for future employment area adjacent to the airport to the post 2031 time frame. 3.5 Staff has no objection to the changes recommended by Regional Planning Committee on October 14, 2008, to the timing of certain Future Living Area lands in Pickering. During the consultation period on the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report, a meeting of Regional Planning Committee was held. Committee passed a motion to advance the timing of the future living area at the north-central edge of northeast Pickering to the 2031 time frame, and to delay the timing of a block near Lake Ridge Road to 2032-2056 time frame. Items 3 and 4 on the map provided on Appendix I illustrate this change. Both blocks of land are at the end of their respective servicing lines and both blocks of land are within Pickering. Staff has no objection to this change. 3.6 Most but not all of Council's comments on the Preferred Growth Scenario of June 13, 2008 were included in the Draft Recommended Scenario. Pickering Council requested numerous changes to the Preferred Growth Scenario (see Council Resolution, Attachment, #4, and a copy of the Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario from June 13, 2008, Attachment #7). Some of the key changes that appear to have been addressed in the Draft Recommended Scenario are as follows: expanding the width of the employment land designation near Westney Road and Lake Ridge Road; reserving employment and living area lands needed beyond 2031; supporting watershed plans as prerequisites to secondary planning; clarifying and simplifying the characteristics of nodes, centres and transit villages; identifying policy directions to prohibit major retailing in employment areas; and identifying strong policy directions for phasing. In addition, the Region of Durham Council has supported the preparation of a fiscal impact and infrastructure study for the final growth scenario, as Pickering Council requested. Report PD 42-08 November 3, 2008 Subject: Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Page 9 9 Specific employment figures are not identified in the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report, so it is not clear what assumptions were made about the Central Pickering Development Plan's provision for 35,000 jobs in Seaton. The Recommended Growth Scenario does not expand the future centres in northeast Pickering to the Highway 407 transitway, nor did the Region hold a public meeting in Pickering, as requested by City Council. 4.0 Next Steps Comments on the Report are requested by October 24, 2008. Urban Strategies has been advised that Pickering will be submitting its comments following the Planning Committee of November 3, 2008. There is an extremely short time frame for commenting as the Final Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report will be released on November 28, 2008. Following a comment period on the Final Report, Regional Planning staff will draft an amendment to the Durham Regional Official Plan to implement the Growing Durham Study. The amendment will then be processed according to normal procedures including public meeting, Appendix: I: Extract of Figure 3B: Recommended Growth Scenario: Balanced Growth Attachments: 1. Draft -Recommended Growth Scenario, September 23, 2008 2. Introductory Chapter to Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Directions Report, Growing Durham Study, September 23, 2008 3. Text of Report to Council PD 32-08 4. Council Resolution #140/08, July 14, 2008 for Report PD 32-08 5. Summary of Key Policy Directions by Topic 6. Summary of Main Revisions to the Assumptions, Methodology or Analysis Having Reference to or Impacting Pickering 7. Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario, June 13, 2008 Report PD 42-08 November 3, 2008 Subject: Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Page 10 It' < \ \_) Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: (?~ Catherine Rose, MCIP, RP Manager, Policy Neil Carroll, PP Director, Planning & Development CR:cs Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering CitY"Councit' ,/ ,f/ i.S-- ;",',,'.,. .' #"' l.. "'-'- APPENDIX I TO REPORT TO CO UNCI L PO 42-08 1 0 1 D ~'lem 3: Regional Planning Gommitee changed to "New Living Area Required to 2031" Item 4: Regional Planning Commitee changed to "New living Area Required to 2056" Item 2: Change to IINew Employment Lands required to 2031" / /,/' / ,/ / / ,/ ,,/ ,/' / " .. J'" .....'"... ,. /i.'~:,~;" .~.:>;. :,:.~.:',;,.. ;~;;.;;-:'; j. ii.::.'~~ ,;. ;'~~ ~..,;..~.:.:~.~~~:;. .-,.<. :: -c. ""C"T d? \ ~II-II-fWNC:SSlONP. Item 1:. Expand IINew . . ~ Living Area required to ~ 2031" J-_ ~ : ... . / I . ,,\..,. , " . ~ . . <~~....... ..,........ 'J"" ..... ...,.. .j....... ...., ..... t ,~~m~?7~~r'''' ...... ,...... ~.]:, ~~: :~~~:~~'W~ iTS Y' " .... .....'... ,.. ..~ ..~":'.' f' 1 ~ JAJAX ' . ~: '. 1~ ~. i U ,/ . :".~. . ~; \ '.' - I' ! "'>-0<>" /"7""'" ~._.. __...~,.... __..;;._...~: .....i!t_._..""".~\.~ i ,,1 t.. y.,,!. ~:..' . i .... c~~~;. ; I t~A" ......-: - ~.- ---:c- '- ~- - - - -. - - - - - -. ".'u'S i ",.-;-;0" i I / / -.....-c ~..,...... Lord 4G'-..".of."" II =',";::;::s-" ~ :"';:'lntf"'r~'Ulll...!.. ~"..d Nw. !l"'~"" L:Ir.J ,...... --' 10 leN , :-:~~"'1A1\:.t fl...:c,u,-.-u N_ u........ N-\I , w~ e '\AU'vc..",,,,~sal...,~ - i:..e'ftI"C~c,..."t4M (.~ Url'=l'l ~ (ut..u,VtIb...uJ. ...~........ Od.rT,.........t ~ :~\ TI""~ c.,,1!\t" 1.......-.1' Ci T..-:."". c........f_hII..:. ~.... Gt...cI. C.........aUuI [;J . - lOll U,it......,u Iou_, o Smfw......W..... ftm'V111"'V Ci vorr I O...1g" CuHwpo Extract of Figure 3B: RECOMMENDED GROWTH SCENARIO: BALANCED GROWTH LAKE ONTARIO SHORELINE MUNICIPALITIES , TH S MAP WAS PROCUCED fJ( THE OTY OF P1O<ER1NG. PLANNING & CEVEl.OPItt:NT CE>ARTMENT. INFORMATION & 9JPPORT SERVICES. OCToa:R 21,2008 -..--..---.,,"""'--.........-.. . " ,'t,'f'" ~'",x, <;':'. ,.> ." '!:",,;": ,y; :'.~. ., ',-ie, .;', OIfN061lltf,1"" ). ,:';':"~' ,..;' ,; '" ',' ..,: ,<,' ]1 l)"-(-..:i \'~~"'~ ,.f ..............." rTI;'i:\ .' : i.",..,..,."",:",.,:;, , ,,:';, , ",,;>:.,,::,: . ..:,':. i ~;:;'i' ~ ~.., T.t.;~.:..;:7Y~ H ~ .:.::.'~.' F:":.'~r~; ?:,;,s:',... " ;:";/,,::;;. p ~ ~ f'~~;;~.~,.~::~r~~t~:;;,.:m:;:nl ,"'\,., - ~. ~ i ...._.-..-...---i4........i-...;-..""li't""~~ ..._..l.-...~..:-.._.- ....-...1.. . ;.~!'l I ~ ; I ~ '. .- i '.; " : .. . \ ~ I 1 .. u+" ... +~ .--~ i+ oclw.nrS"' . ~;~..: .,.... : /.-- I:' ~. Ii ~.;......:'..";...... ll! ( ~ ~ I.. ~. ~ ..n .' ,..'1n>:.~, I . f t~I'i,,""'" e .j "'~"; r~: ~ ~ ~~j l~ ~ i"~: \1; ~ f,,~:!J : (if t~ )i~i ~~: A """' t J I J dJd H' ~- fIlIi I I dB ifk jjjj!I I jj'JIIIfi. . _:; ,~ 80080(1)011 I j 1 II! i J J f t 1111 J J i U .i. U1 ! a j~I~I~j. i -t . ~ llil t:J I f 1 J J ! f Hid! l n -: m _ . y : .,........" .........'V .r'........... ..~............,..~---:'" '1 ..I,i, h...... j ~~~\~l \ . i: ~: r (';:)...... .. \J2" n (!J Z ~ lJ.J ~ () a.. = ~' /'iLf// ! J ." :'. '.'.' - -_._-~_.u ~._-- _-CXI~ :::is ", · ~\ I ,;; l;~ ! ,/ ~ 8 I : / : ,', / ' -..------ I U!'il \: ~ ~/("-{ .I~. C!J z 0:: :5 () !~ ....'J. 'i. >JA ::)X" .k" .i~: """:~,~.:..r;:; 7/' , -', \:j .; - - I \ ~:.' ....-.. ._. i I I I I ! i ',\.......:..... ,~ . i :.. "'~'- I~ ":.i,;!!,,:, .,' 1''''::'' '.DU jf-j'H~ ~i. I . :;;.;L~~L,;...'. ;;;;'.....)< '._ ---OII~~._..--.r. ..c" .~ ,(:",_ c:==.;) , 'V" lil .-' ~I'( ":'" \; . I . ..;.,', t~;:.;'j';:. . r: ::i: k/'~,;i,i "'.c;~;;':~;?'-:<tl'~' " ,)Jr~I;~~;f;);~.tt~~~::; 11,,;; .\... r .... :TF.~;t.'iw:~~~~~..C'., ,Ii , ;'h'0 ~~~~~. r ..;. '.(:~~i:J~;~~~:\~f~;",;: , .,. ."""";'. ..:.. ,.-, f'. ~;,~;....,::,;,i. . " ,;~~j:, L.~ ,'.. _::.;' I I ;':., ;" ";~':;. fr..') ~ ~I:;}{::c .~: 0i~~J.~:df;~~_, .~ J 1;:_'. , :.." - ~ ' k' .," ~.: ';':';',': is:~;:,'.:.I\':.!~,;, I 's..{.. ;~"; < ;, 'r.;- I" .~!' .' '. :,/:.::.:: "';:?;/.. ':i~ . .; , ~ .':.:,.;', , .......,. ...:... .' . ::: ...... ~~.. \' . \: !~'# \~ ,~ 1\. j ~~. 1\ ~'.' '., > , : . , . ~ . '1 (J 2 ATTACHMENT I I TO REPORl , PDt ~ - () ~~ -, ,"- go;,; '"'-- ~:Jf~ I .~ a: " Q 1&.1 U z 5 c( all 2~ ~i z_ tj!l:l "'z x:~ ~o~ 0 a:Lrl ,,~ fa~ Q 0 ~ z a: ., ~ ~ f5 8 ~ ~ ~:5 ~ I I N' Ll 1) In 2006 HiE:: Province of Ontario rcic~ased Fie Growth Pian for' the Greater Golden Horseshoe, In accordance 'vvith Hie policies of Fie Growth Pian, the of Durhan1 is required to pian for 960.000 peopie and 350,000 vvcrk:ng, Uv:~ LiY thc: yedr 2031. The' of Durharn ha:::; recenty undertaken conipreheriS!V'e ~:::;tuc1ie:,s as part of HH::: Officiai Pian (nOP) rCVlf>N prOCC:3s (wh:cl1 concludecJ Ofh~lai Pi;,Hi !\n)endnlE~nt 1J,4;, ()n tile Officldl PiEH"1 ReView process :3rH1 In resoonsc tel trH; Growth Pi;:H1 (frection. t.he of Durharn inl1!(:rtec.! the Durt18!rl in 200T TIllS study \lVIII prepare recornrncndcd policy responses th;::~t vyi li the Ofhci2 i PIa n into \vith the Growth Piarl policies, In panicular, the mdm objectives of Hie Durllanl study are to: ,. /\llocate the populatlon and 2:nployrrlen1 forecasts in Schecluie :3 of U"")c Growth Pi:Jn to the iJrCa n'1U(liClpalr\:iCS for penoci 203.1.. With <.~ n extended ()utloo~~ t.o 2056 to ;]ssist iongpfange :nfrastnlctufc 11 Dcvc~iop a strategy and poi:cles to ph21s(~ in and ach:cvc a 40';~: annual rate of resll::1enba! Intensification \vithin trv:; Bulitl,lp Area by 2015: · Plan for Gesignateci Greenfield areas to achieve a rnirwrwrn denSIty of 50 peopie and Jobs per hectar(;; · Plan tor a cOlrhined densit.y of 200 people and johs. per ihiocta re in Urban Gi'owth Centres; is> Assess the aciequ3cy of the supply emDiov!ilent lands to (:1ccornnlcdate the Grovvtri Pian forecasts and key principies trle OffiCial Pian; and $1 Assess the need kit iJrlJan bouncJary expanS!Yi and new urban Janet 8 II 1 \ ~..,~ " ,) The Durham StuCy (esuiL~ l(l a r-ccornrnencled Cro\<vth Scenario for Durhanl to 203.1.. and rccornrnendations to tnanage in the in a manner that conforms to the Gro\vth Plan policles, lniplementation of the GnJwtr~ Plan will have n-np!lcations on the pattenis. economic c18vs!opnlent, tr;::jnsportation and infrastructure networks, anC natura! systerns, ;\ rnaJor component of thiS stuCjy riDS the sceue of the~3e Ifr pi icatlons, hcwv' they ~)c:c~ t] urr);:Hl patH::rn that dppr'()pnatJ,: fc)r l)Y policy rccnrnmendat;ons an(j tools to ~ ill plernent Hie desl (C;'C] pattern of growUi, L2 I{ The 2007 and has DtnllcWl :n been lmderta~\en !1l five phases, as jilustrated in .1. The report of Uie hrst t\VO p1'!aS2S, tiUe{j "Phase .1. & 2: Surnrnary of Understanding cHid initial GrowU1 J\sses:;:;rncnt" "!na,ial Growth I\sse'ssrne'nt."), was re!ea:.::;ed in cHaft form in Decernber 2007, Hnd in final fonn in May ;?008, Tli;:)t tepof"t outlined a basel!;'H;:: ()f ell (rer':t tJf'()jectcd patterns in the F(c'!!i(Y) The report of third (",H"H.1 fourU"i pha~)esi titlecj "SCS!)C;lrlO E\/aluation and ReconHiK:ncied Preferred Growt1'J Scendno Paoer (the "Growth Scenano Vvod<,ing Paper") was r(;!cased jn lJl'aft fO(nl In May 2008. and in hnal fonr, With reVISions as per duccton frOlll Planning Committee, HI June 2008, An overview eaCfl of Uiese reports is pnwided !)elow, u Z - /""""\ UJ V) <( ::r: 0... z << r- V) ,"'; GJ /""""\ Z ::J N UJ V) < :t ~ ,~) Ll.'~' ~ {1 I Reconnaisance Base C=ase Scenario (Market-driven) Rehnetnents to Base Case Scenario ltegional C;ro\vth Plan ()utlook Alternative Growth Scenarios c-r; H VJ < ::c 0... u Z ........ ~ V) ~ ~ cG V z :J ~ "T 0 ~ ~ V) X < :t ~ p... L 1 u ~ ,1"""\ Z ~ ~ ~ o u ~ In ~ V) -< :c "'" ~ FIC;UREI Preferred C;ro\vth Scenario ~ rtecornlncndcd C;ro\vth Scenario 1. C:ontinuing a [)o111inant Western Anchor 2. Focusing on a C=entral Hub for Durhan1 3. Iteinforcinba Existina b C:0111111Unities Principles! Goals ()bjectives Measures High, Mediu111, Lovv F~ine tuning the preferred gro\vth scenario Irnplelnentation irnplications & strategies Policy reconllnendations 9 ,1 rhe Initial Growth .Assessrnent 2'7, 20(8) an overvie\v of the (ec()n na iSSd nee and irdtial growth assessrncnt cornponetlts of tin::: Durharn The report thecl cstah!isfl(:d 2) rnarket-.drjven Base Case Growth Scenario ("Base assessed recent and anticipated rnarhc~l conditions, as well as the population forecast in the Provincial Growth PiEHl, The Base Case was esta blished to assess whether the rnarket. d nven sccna r~o 'NOU ld rcsu 1t in the; aclj ievcrncnt of the intensification and designated Greetlfield !anc!s and whether the Regior'J has a sufficic:nt supply of It.Hld withm the current urban boundary to accornrnoda1.e the planned growth, 'rhe Inlt.ia! Growth Assessment concluded U1Dt between 2006 and 2031 on the basis of rnarket forecast the Region would not deh ievc: the C; rowth Pia n mtcnsi-rication or the Greenfield cornbined and that Futu(e Crowth Areas would be t.o accornrnodate the forecast levels of growtho 1 .:2 l\ ) The Growth Scena ria Working (June 13. provided t.he out.conlf; of the t.hird and fourtli of the Durharn in (r Uk: report: I Growth Plan Outlook rrlo(k~,j to address Growth Plan Outlook budt on the: Base' Case Scenario and reflned it to how, at a regional Durhanl Gould conforrn to the Growth 10 ~) Plan Dnd of aCC0t11rrlodating the forecasts the Growth Plan Hlree Alternative Growth Scenanos and initialloca! a!iocatlons, [)ased on a Influenced Crowth F)!an Outlook !nfluencc.:d Out 100!\"): d neJ ~ Provided an assessrnent of throe A!ternativ(~ (:)rovvth Scenarios and on this basis recornnlended a Preferred Growth Scenario, The f)ret'erred Growth Scenaric) (Scenario 3) was HUed REINFORCING EXISTING COiVl/\:1UNITfES, arKl involved the for !ancis for future growtl1 in a rnanner that reinforced the urban structure <H1(j distrihuted gr()wth across the The Scenario ba!a need futu re growth across the La ke Ontario slJoreline and rneasurcd growth in the Northern cornrnunitles. l~. f\ [j P N The Growth Sc'enrH"IO Working to Durhanl (Planning on June 3.2008. Planning Ccnnnlitt.ee directed the consult.ant to consider the follovving reflnernents to H)e influenced to nIt-: PrefE:rrecJ Scena rio: east o"f tl'lC <Jirport lands; {f An a long the of the ern ployn~lerlt IfJ ncJs 407 extension in i\Jortheast i I h \. ~ south to Higrlway 7; $ As a r(;sult of any additional terrn ernp!oyrnerlt !<Hle! need in future urban jandsl the extension of future living Area lands m North \Nhitby to Road:anci ., The identification of Mobility Hub candidcHe, Planning CornrniUee direction was incorporat'ed into a revised Growth Scenario \/Vorhing which \vas re..re!eased June 2008, Town Centre as a A consultation period was initiated the JUlIe :J3, 2008 rcrc:iease of the Pa peL t.,s of the consu !t;Jtion process, a pu b! Ie open !')ouse was held on June 25, 2008 where the alternative scenario evaluation and preferred growth scenario were ltl addition, wod\ing sessions were: hEdd with a rea rnunicipaj staff to discuss Hie finclings in the report and collect feedbacl\" At the end of the consultation aH fonnaJ subnl1sslons and cornrnent.s received at the public open house and working sessions with area rnunicipa1 staff were collected, synthesized and considered as pa rt of the ren ned and lJO! icy rccornrnendations included In thIs report A surnrnary of the subrnissions will be subrnittecl t.o Planning COrlHnrttee under separate report \V ,nr S The rnain purpose of this final of the Growi!jg Durharn is to utilize detailed analys!s to create '(1 necornrnended Growth Scenario for Durhan!. This report, the "Recornn1cncJed Gtowth Scenario and " ~:-) i-I ,~ - Policy Directions "Growth Scenario and Policy Directlorjs a Recorn rnendec1 Growth Scenario for Cornrnittee consideration, The report is structured around thc~ process of developing a Recornrnetldcd Growth Scerla rIO, The the rna nagerncnt that have beetl cons!c1erc'cJ the r1ecornrnended Groi/v'th Scenario It then descrlbes the retincrnents that were uncl(:'.rtahen to the and Hie toea! iy ! nf! uencecl !\na for the F'refcned REINFOr1CfNG EXISTiNG COt,AtVIUNfTfES SectIon 3 a ISO provides the outcorne of the ref! nod at the level a nd the LaCEd!y I nf! uenced to 2031, a nc! to 2056, Section 4 reviews the allocations arHj lJrban structure H18 G rO\rvth PIa n OfJjectives and of REINFORCING EXISTING COtvll\:1UNrr!ES and identifies final adjusttnents Recornrnendcci Growth Scenano, to finalize the Section 5 of the rc:port outlmes for Dudlarn in conforrnity with the Growth Plan and accornrnodating growth in rpore conlpact forms in tl and rnanner. Section C conc:!udes with recornmended policy directions in support of Hie f~ecornmended Growth ScenarIo, the Recornrnended Growth Scenario, inlplernentation and policy direcUons the foundation and direction for long terr)) patterns that wi!! create sustainable and corn cornrnuniUes as envisioned in DurhEHn's OfficiE11 PLan and Province1s Growth Plan. 11 eil,! iJ~ REPORT TO COUNCIL '] .I PICKERING Report Number: PD 32-08 Date: July 14, 2008 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Growing Durham Phases 3 & 4 Revised Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper, prepared by Urban Strategies Inc. et ai, dated June 13, 2008 Recommendations: 1. That Report PD 32-08 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the Revised Growth Scenario Working Paper presenting the outcomes of Phases 3 & 4 of the Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study be received; 2. That the comments contained in Report PO 32-08 on the Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario for the Region of Durham Growth Plan Implementation Study be endorsed, and that the Region of Durham be requested to: a) support the land use structure with Planning Committee directions noted, shown on Figure 13 B and provided as Attachment #2 to Report PO 32-08 with the following further refinements: · increase the depth of the future Employment Areas in Pickering along Highway 407, east of Westney Road, to a minimum 600 metres, and where appropriate, increase the depth on selected blocks up to 1,000 metres; · support the designation to future Employment Areas of the remnant parcel of "whitebelt" lands located east of the airport and north of large block Planning Committee directed be designated as future Employment Areas; and · expand to the south the Future Centres designation, currently shown at the two intersections of the Seventh Concession Road with Salem and Lakeridge Roads, to incorporate the Highway 407 transitway stations and adjacent lands, thereby allowing mixed residential, commercial and high intensity office uses, and consider designation of a future transit village on the south side of the Highway 407 transitway; Report PO 32-08 July 14, 2008 Subject: d Growing Durham - Revised Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper Page 2 b) in updating the tables and charts respecting population and employment for Pickering corresponding to the revisions to the Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario, increase the employment figures for Pickering to include the 35,000 jobs identified by the Provincial Central Pickering Development Plan for Seaton, and allocate jobs arising from the future Employment Areas, future Living Areas and intensification in South Pickering, at a ratio of no less than one job for each three new residents as is applied across the rest of the Region; c) in detailing the policies for the Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario, · establish strong phasing policies respecting the timing and process for local municipalities to bring new "whitebelt" lands into the urban area in order to address the logical and orderly phasing of growth with municipal fiscal priorities; · establish new policies prohibiting large format retailing from future Employment Areas; · establish strong phasing policies respecting future Living Areas that may be affected by incompatible noise from a possible future Pickering airport so as to prevent major residential or other noise sensitive uses from being established until a decision is made on a possible future Pickering airport; and · better clarify the different characteristics of Transit Villages, Urban Nodes, Future Centres and Waterfront Villages; d) with respect to strategic future Employment Areas addressing the need beyond the 2031, work with the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal to establish policies permitting the Region to acknowledge as part of current Regional Plan conformity amendment, the long term intended use for these lands as future Employment Area; e) support the City of Pickering in its request to the Ministry of Transportation in commenting on the Highway 407 Environmental Assessment, to relocate the proposed Highway 407 maintenance yard from the south side of the proposed interchange with Salem Road to allow maximum intensification around the Highway 407 transitway; f) obtain from Urban Strategies and forward to area municipalities the detailed information on the amount, types and locations of intensification used in the background work not contained in the Working Paper; and 3. Lastly, that a copy of Report PO 32-08 and Pickering Council's resolution on the matter be forwarded to the Region of Durham, Urban Strategies Inc. et ai, other Durham Area Municipalities, the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and the Ministry of Transportation. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report PD 32-08 July 14, 2008 Subject: Growing Durham - Revised Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper Page 3 ~) / Executive Summary: On June 13, 2008, the Region of Durham released for comment a report entitled Revised Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper, incorporating the Directions of Regional Planning Committee on June 3, 2008. The report is the outcome of Phases 3 & 4 of the Region's Growth Plan Implementation Study, entitled Growing Durham. The Study is being undertaken for the Region by Urban Strategies Inc., Watson & Associates and TSH. The Region requests comments by July 14, 2008. Phases I & 2 of the Study examined issues related to growth in each municipality, plus an analysis of how growth would occur if current trends continued. Phases 3 & 4 analyzed alternative growth scenarios for the Region and resulted in a Recommended Rreferred Growth Scenario. Phase 5 will be the refinement of the Preferred Growth Scenario, and will be the basis for the preparation and processing of an amendment to the Durham Regional Official Plan in late 2008 and early.2009. For Pickering, the Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario as revised by Planning Committee, identifies the need to designate lands beyond the current urban area (South Pickering and Seaton) to accommodate future employment and residential land needs to 2031. The Scenario is shown on Firgure 13B and is provided as Attachment #2 to this Report to Council. In essence, all lands in north-east Pickering, commonly referred to as the "whitebelt" lands in the Provincial Places to Grow Plan, are proposed for future urban uses. Also for Pickering, the Scenario includes the identification of a Mobility Hub at South Pickering's GO Station, a Waterfront Village around Frenchman's Bay, and includes intensification in Pickering's Urban Growth Centre and other corridors and centres. Staff supports the Revised Recommended Growth Scenario, subject to a number of further revisions. These revisions include the following: . increasing the depth of the future Employment Area lands adjacent to Highway 407; . updating the employment tables to reflect the 35,000 jobs set out for Seaton in the Central Pickering Development Plan while maintaining Pickering's jobs to residents ratio at no less than 1:3 elsewhere in Pickering; . expanding the Future Centres in north-east Pickering at Salem and Lake Ridge Roads to pick up intensification and mixed use opportunities associated with the Highway 407 transitway; . identifying a remnant of whitebelt lands as future Employment Areas; and . providing detailed background work on intensification. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report PD 32-08 .....'") ....~ '\ July 14, 2008 Subject: ,\ '".J Growing Durham - Revised Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper Page 4 Building on this last point, the Region is also requested to support the City in its comments on the Highway 407 Environmental Assessment to eliminate the proposed works yard on the south side of the Highway 407/Salem Road interchange. The purpose is to allow maximum intensification around the Transitway. In moving forward to Phase 5 the Region and its consultants need to establish a strong policy framework addressing the following: · phasing on the timing and process to bring new lands into the urban boundary; · phasing to reflect the uncertainty of an airport being constructed and the resulting potential for some Living Area lands to experience noise if an airport is developed; · protecting for strategic, long term Employment Areas beyond 2031; and · clarifying the distinguishing characteristics of the Urban Nodes, Waterfront Villages, Future Centres and Transit Villages. Financial Implications: No direct implications from providing comments on the Phases 3 & 4 Working Paper of the Growing Durham Study Sustainability Implications: The recommendations contained in this Report to Council respecting increasing the employment assigned to Pickering, increasing the depth of the future Employment Areas, and requiring the timely phasing of new urban areas are aimed at increasing the economic sustainability of the City. Recommendations to establish expanded Urban Centres and 1 or Transit Villages around the Highway 4071 Salem and Lake Rridge interchanges is intended to enable responsible development to occur around a transit station. 1.0 Background 1.1 The Region is implementing the Province's Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe through a Growth Plan Implementation Study entitled "Growing Durham". In August, 2007, the Region of Durham commenced a 5-Phase Growth Plan Study. The Growth Plan Implementation Study has three fundamental purposes: to provide a policy framework that meets the Growth Plan requirements; to develop a growth strategy that will guide the Region's development until 2031; and to allocate that growth to the individual local municipalities. The study is being undertaken for the Region by Urban Strategies Inc., Watson & Associates and TSH. CORP0227-07/01 revised "'-1 Report PD 32-08 i,.~ _ (.I July 14, 2008 Subject: Growing Durham - Revised Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper Page 5 'I , In February 2008, Pickering City Council commented to the Region on the Growth Plan Implementation Study Draft Phase 1 & 2 Report: Summary of Understanding and Initial Analysis (see Report PD 08-08, Attachment #1). Phase 1 & 2 of the Study examined growth issues in each municipality and analyzed growth patterns if current development trends did not change. Phase 3 & 4 of the Study examined alterative scenarios for growth within Durham, evaluated those scenarios, and recommended a preferred growth scenario. In late May and early June, 2008, the following reports were released by the consultants: · Scenario Evaluation and Consultant Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper, dated May 27, 2008; . Addendum Report, dated June 2, 2008 (issued to correct mapping errors following meeting with area municipal staff); and, . Revised Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper, dated June 13, 2008 (incorporating the directions of Regional Planning Committee on June 3, 2008). Regional Planning Committee has now invited public and agency comment by July 14, 2008 on the Preferred Growth Scenario with direction certain revisions appear in the June 13th Revised Working Paper. Refinement of the Preferred Growth Scenario is continuing in cooperation with regional and local municipal staff. Phase 5 of the Study will be the refinement of the Preferred Growth Scenario and development of a Durham policy framework to achieve the intensification targets, greenfield density targets, and related policies and provisions of the Places to Grow Plan. That work is anticipated in September, with an amendment to the Durham Regional Official Plan following in early 2009. The City is also required to bring its Official Plan into conformity with the Places to Grow Plan. The City's work requires details arising from the next Phase and the final amendment. 1.2 The Revised Growth Scenario Working Paper continues to identify a shortfall in urban land to accommodate both residential and employment uses. The Working Paper shows that the population and employment allocated to Durham Region by the Province using the intensification and density targets set out in Places to Grow, requires land beyond lands currently designated for urban uses in the Regional Plan. These lands are commonly referred to as the "whitebelt" lands in the Places to Grow Plan. . CORP0227-07/01 revised -) Report PD 32-08 July 14, 2008 Subject: .2 Growing Durham - Revised Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper Page 6 In Phases 1 & 2, the consultant's report showed that, without policy chanoes, accommodating the Growth Plan targets of 960,000 residents and 350,000 jobs for Durham by 2031 would require lands for additional low and medium-density residential units with shortfalls of 3,122 hectares of living area land and 505 hectares of employment lands. The market "base case" assumed 350/0 intensification in existing built areas (below the Growth Plan requirement of 400/0); and a greenfield density of 44 persons and jobs per hectare in greenfield urban areas (below the Growth Plan requirement of 50 people and jobs per hecta re). In Phase 3 & 4, the consultant's working paper showed that with policy chanoes to increase densities for low density housing from 25 units per net hectare to 28 uph, achieve the 400/0 intensification target within the built-up areas, and achieving 47 persons and jobs per hectare in the greenfield areas, additional urban land is required, but it is only two-thirds of that required under the base case assumptions.. 1.3 The consultants evaluated several Alternative Growth Scenarios for Durham Region, and ultimately recommended Scenario 3: Reinforcing Existing Communities. The growth scenarios proposed differing amounts OT and locations for intensification and new urban living and employment areas. The three scenarios evaluated were: 1. Continuing a Dominant Western Anchor - directing most new growth to Pickering and Whitby; 2. Focusing on a Central Hub for Durham - directing most new growth to the current central core of the Region in Whitby/Oshawa/Courtice; and, 3. Reinforcing Existing Communities - balancing the forecasted growth across the Lake Ontario shoreline municipalities with enhanced growth in northeast Pickering and a strategic reserve of employment lands along the future Highway 407 alignment. The consultants recommended Scenario 3. It proposes balanced growth across the Lake Ontario shoreline municipalities and measured growth in the Northern communities. Further, it reinforces all key drivers important to the economic prosperity of the Region. 1.4 Regional Planning Committee directed revisions be made to Scenario 3 to enhance opportunities for growth in northeast Pickering prior to accepting it as the Recommended Preferred Scenario and circulating it for consultation. CORP0227 -07 /01 revised Report PD 32-08 -") -~ '~} July 14, 2008 Subject: Growing Durham - Revised Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper Page 7 I ,) Figure 13B from the consultant's Revised Growth Scenario Working Paper is included as Attachment #2 to this Report to Council. This Figure is titled Scenario 3 - Reinforcing Existing Communities: Lands Beyond the Urban Area Boundary and Urban Structure (showing directions from June 3rd Planning Committee). Regional Planning Committee is seeking comments on this Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario by July 14, 2008. Further detailing of Scenario 3 is still continuing as further meetings occur between study consultants and regional and local municipal staff. For Pickering, the revised Preferred Growth Scenario proposes designation of another block of land east of the Pickering Airport site as future Employment Areas. It also proposes increasing the depth of the future Employment Areas along Highway 407 stretching from approximately Highway 7 to north of Highway 407 and northwards towards the Seventh Concession Road. Future Living Area designations are proposed east of Greenwood, around Kinsale and north of the Highway 407 Employment Areas,. Future Centres are proposed at the intersection of the Seventh Concession and Salem Road and the Seventh Concession Road and Lake Ridge Road. A Mobility Hub 'has been reinstated at downtown Pickering's Urban Growth Centre. Staff support these changes. The forecasts in the Revised Working Paper suggest that the revised scenario would attract 40,595 new jobs to Pickering by 2031 out of a total of 142,805 new jobs for Durham as a whole and 132,875 additional residents out of a Durham total of 411,304. However, since the consultants have not yet revised the job or residential population forecast to reflect Planning Committee directions for more employment lands in northeast Pickering, further adjustments to these numbers are anticipated. 2.0 Discussion: 2.1.1 Most of staff's earlier concerns with Scenario 3 were addressed by the directions of Planning Committee on July 3rd, although a number of further refinements are recommended. Many of staff's concerns with the May 27 Working Paper conclusions have been addressed in the recent changes made to the Preferred Scenario Three - the 'Reinforcing Existing Communities' scenario, including: . location of a mobility hub in downtown Pickering; . designation of more employment lands both east of the Pickering Airport lands and along Highway 407; . designation of more Living Area lands in north-east Pickering. A number of concerns remain. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report PD 32-08 ...... :) 'f July 14, 2008 Subject: 4 Growing Durham - Revised Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper Page 8 2.2 The depth of the future Employment Areas adjacent to Highway 407 should be increased to between 600 and 1000 metres. Whereas the May 27th Working Paper included 400 metre wide bands of employment lands along both sides of Highway 407 east of Westney Road in Pickering, the June 13th revision, responding to Planning Committee directions, indicated that the long-term employment land need should be reviewed in this location. In order to accommodate larger parcel sizes and better realize the locational advantages of a 400 level highway, the width of the employment bands should be widened to 600 metres generally and up to 1,000 metres in depth in selected locations. Staff support the suggestions of the study consultants made at a recent meeting with staff to extend the employment designation north to the Seventh Concession from Westney to Salem, and south. to Highway 7 for the lands between Living Area designations proposed around Kinsale and Greenwood. 2.3 The remnant piece of "whitebelt" lands east of the Pickering Airport site should be designated as future Employment Areas. The Revised Preferred Scenario proposes designating the large area of whitebelt land east of the airport lands as employment area, leaving three small remnant parcels as continued whitebelt lands. The remnant whitebelt parcels should also be designated either as Living Area or Employment Area at this time. 2.4 The two proposed Future Centres along the Seventh Concession Road should be expanded to the south to include lands adjacent to the Highway 407 Transitway and or considered for Transit Village designations. Future Centres proposed for the Seventh Concession Road at both Salem and Lake Ridge Roads have the potential to serve as transit villages with a range of transit supportive land uses and densities if expanded southwards to incorporate the transit stations proposed on the south side of Highway 407. It is recommended that the two proposed Future Centres be expanded southwards to incorporate the transitway stations and a broad range of transit supportive land uses and densities be permitted. 2.5 Characteristics of several designation, including Transit Villages, Urban Nodes, Future Centres and Waterfront Villages should be clarified In order to understand the roles in the new urban structure of Pickering and the Region of Durham of the new proposed features, clarification of proposed functions, land uses and densities should be provided. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report PD 32-08 --:> -i!-J July 14, 2008 Subject: Growing Durham - Revised Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper Page 9 r-- ~) 2.6 The jobs allocated to Pickering should assign the 35,000 jobs identified by the Central Pickering Development Plan to Seaton, while maintaining at least a 1:3 jobs per resident ratio for the rest of Pickering's growth. The consultants are requested to provide detailed background work on intensification. This information is required to enable staff to determine where and to what extent residential growth is being assigned to the Urban Growth Centre and other intensification corridors and centres. Also, staff requires information on the amount of jobs assigned related to intensification. This information is requested at the consultant's earliest convenience. Staff recognizes the tables in the Working Paper on population and employment have not been revised to reflect the changes directed by Planning Committee. These revised tables should be also be forwarded as soon as possible to staff. In revising the tables for Pickering, the Region and the consultants must address the current under-allocation of jobs in Seaton. The total allocation of 40,595 jobs to Pickering in the Recommended Preferred Scenario to 2031 appears to disregard the jobs 35,000 jobs identified for Seaton in the Provincial Central Pickering Development Plan. If the 35,000 jobs are part of the figure of 40,595 jobs, the remaining jobs to be created in the rest of Pickering to 2031 is only about 5,600 jobs. Yet our population (outside of Seaton) is expected to increase by???? The consultants have indicated that if a Federal airport is developed, 10,000 jobs will be added to the Pickering jobs allocation as a bonus but is not allocated in the scenario at this time. In revising the tables for the Revised Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario, it is recommended that 35,000 jobs for Seaton be included as a baseline, and the remaining jobs allocations for the rest of Pickering by 2031 be at a ratio of no less than 1:3 jobs per resident. This ratio is realistic in light of the City's strategic 2.7 Phasing policies should be included in the Regional Plan addressing the timing for area municipalities to bring new urban areas on stream so as to minimize the City and Regional fiscal impacts. While it is appropriate to designate lands in north-east Pickering for future Living Areas and future Employment Areas at this time, policies should be introduced to phase the timing of actual development. For Pickering, new development areas should not be to compete with the build- out of Seaton, for employment or residential uses. Similarly, intensification is a key element of achieving the City's vision of its Downtown Urban Growth Centre. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report PD 32-08 'J -~ /~ II ,~;r C I July 14, 2008 Subject: Growing Durham - Revised Scenario Evaluation and Recommended () Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper Page 10 The City and the Region should not be burdened with the costs of providing several sets of services and facilities for the new residents and employment area at the same time. In addition, new development areas immediately east of the potential future airport may be impacted by noise should an airport be constructed. Phasing policies should restrict the timing of these lands being developed for urban uses until a decision on the development and timing of the possible airport are reached. A decision has not been reached on how piped services will be provided to north-east Pickering yet. However, the Regional Master Water and Sanitary Services Plan is underway to address this matter. There are two different options for sanitary that would result in different phasing of development. Thus, phasing policies should coordinate the timing of development with the Region's servicing strategy and completion of related fiscal impact and financing studies. Municipal fiscal impact and financing studies will also be required. Accordingly, it is recommended that policies be introduced in the official plan amendment to appropriately phase the future growth of Durham Region to ensure o'rderly and efficient provision of municipal services. 2.8 The Durham Regional Official Plan, and the Places to Grow Plan should prohibit large format retailing in strategic employment areas. The current policy for Employment Areas in the Durham Regional Official Plan permits, by amendment, the introduction of "retail warehousing". This type of development is now widely known as the large format retailing, or power centres. Large format retailing is usually a low intensity use that primarily serves the residential areas (Living Areas). Yet, when located in Employment Areas, there is usually infrequent transit service and little or no ability for walk-to customers. Large format retailing (or retail warehouses) should be expressly prohibited in the future Employment Areas along Highway 407 and other strategic and locations such as the freeway links, through both amendments to the Durham Regional Official Plan, and addition of new provisions in the Places to Grow Plan. City staff is making similar comments in responding to the recently released Provincial Discussion Paper on Planning for Employment. The Central Pickering Development Plan contains a policy prohibiting large format retailing in the lands designated Employment Areas. 3.0 Other Information CORP0227-07/01 revised Report PD 32-08 "....... -~ i-/.:.) July 14, 2008 Subject: Growing Durham - Revised Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper Page 11 7 I 3.1 The Region of Durham is considering a financial impact study of the Preferred Growth Scenario. Area municipal staff had recommended that the Growing Durham Study add a component that analyses the financial impact of the alternative growth scenarios. This information was to provide input to the scenario evaluation process. However, Regional staff opted to recommend a subsequent financial impact study of the Preferred Growth Scenario. Regional staff have indicated that a financial impact study could be completed in approximately 18 months at significant cost with consultants conducting the study. The fiscal impact of the Preferred Scenario will not be available when final decisions are reached on a growth strategy or on the official plan amendment. Further, no data will be provided on the financial impacts of the growth strate~~ on local municipalities. Regional Tri-Committee, at its meeting held June 10 , 2008, requested that Regional staff report back with a more detailed outline of a financial impact study including a work program, the timing and costs. 3.2 The Study is moving into Phase 5: refinement of Durham's Preferred Growth Scenario and development of the related policy framework. Following receipt of comments from area municipalities, other stakeholders and the public including the comments made at the June 25th public meeting, the consultants will continue to refine the Preferred Growth Scenario and develop the policy framework. Area municipalities can request meetings if required with the consultants. In addition, a meeting with area municipalities is scheduled for late July or early August to provide an additional opportunity for input from area municipal staff into the development of the Phase 5 work. Attachments: 1. Text from Report Number PD 08-08 2. Figure 138 - Scenario 3 - Reinforcing Existing Communities, from Growing Durham - Revised Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper, as revised June 3, 2008 by Planning Committee; prepared by Urban Strategies Inc. et ai, dated June 13, 2008.. Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: CORP0227-07/01 revised Report PD 32-08 July 14, 2008 Subject: Growing Durham - Revised Scenario Evaluation and Recommended ?) Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper Page 12 ',) ORIGINAL SIGNED BY ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Steve Gaunt, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Neil Carroll, MCIP, RPP Director, P & D ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy SG:?? Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Director, Corporate Services & Treasures Director, Office of Sustainability Director, Operations & Emergency Services Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Thomas J. Quinn, RDMR, CMM III Chief Administrative Officer CORP0227-07/01 revised '~ T'r+~ "~"r-;-.'.- -.'(~.'.""j' A. ,.',','J I _. IS. t. ~., L ''-~ ./ CORPORATE SERVrCES DEPARTMENT CLERKS DIVISION DIRECTIVE MEMORANDUM July 24, 2008 To: Neil Carroll Directorl Planning & Development From: Debi A. Wilcox City Clerk Subject Direction as per Minutes of the Meeting of City Council held on July 14, 2008 Director, Planning & Development, Report PO 32-08 Region of Durham's Growth Plan Imprementation Study: Growing Durham - Phases 3 & 4 - Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper, prepared by Urban Strategies Inc. et aI, dated June 13, 2008, as revised to show Regional Planning Directions COUNCIL DECISION RESOLUTION # 140/08 1. That Report PO 32-08 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the Growth Scenario Working Paper, dated June 13, 2008, presenting the outcomes of Phases 3 & 4 of the Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study be received; 2. That the comments contained in Report PO 32-08 on the Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario for the Region of Durham Growth Pfan Implementation Study be endorsed, and that the Region of Durham be requested to: a) support the land use structure with Planning Committee directions noted, shown on Figure 13 B and provided as Attachment #2 to Report PO 32-08 with the following further refinements: · Increase the depth of the future Employment Areas in Pickering along Highway 407, east of Westney Road, to 1,000 metres south of Highway 407 between the Greenwood and Kinsale areas and in the vicinity of Lakeridge Road and the connector to Highway 401; · support the designation to future Employment Areas of the remnant parcel of liwhitebelt" lands located east of the future potential airport site; and ,. , · expand to the south the Future Centres designations I currently shown at the two intersections of the Seventh Concession Road with Salem and Lakeridge Roads, to incorporate the Highway 407 Subject: Directive Memorandum Report PO 32-08 Page 2 July 24, 2008 transitway stations and adjacent lands, thereby allowing mixed residential, commercial and high intensity office uses, and consider designation of a future transit village on the south side of the Highway 407 transitway; b) in updating the population and employment tables for Pickering to reflect Planning Committee's revisions to the Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario, increase the employment figures for Pickering to include the 35,000 jobs identified by the Provincial Central Pickering Development Plan for Seaton, and allocate jobs arising from the future Employment Areas, future Living Areas and intensification in South Pickeringl at a ratio of no less than one job for each three new residents as is applied across the rest of the Region, as further clarified in Section 2.6 to Report PO 32-08; c) in detailing the policies for the Recommended Preferred Growth Scenariol · establish strong phasing policies respecting the timing and process for local municipalities to bring new "whitebelt" lands into the urban area in order to address the logical and orderly provision of infrastructure and phasing of growth with municipal fiscal priorities; · establish new policies prohibiting large format retailing within future Employment Areas; · establish strong phasing policies respecting future Living Areas that may be, affected by incompatible noise from a possible future Pickering airport so as to prevent residential or other noise sensitive uses from being established until resolution of the appropriate noise protection standard and a decision on the development and timing of the possible airport are reached; and · better clarify the different characteristics of Transit Villages} Urban Nodes} Future Centres and Waterfront VI'fIages}' d) with respect to strategic future Employment Areas needed beyond 20311 work with the Ministry of Public Infrastructure Renewal to establish policies permitting the Region to acknowledge as part of current Regional Plan conformity amendment, the long term intended use for these lands as future Employment Areas; e) support the City of Pickering in its request to the Ministry of Transportation in commenting on the Highway 407 Environmental Assessment, to relocate the proposed Highway 407 maintenance yard from the south side of the proposed interchange with Salem Road to allow maximum intensification around the Highway 407 transitway; f) obtain from Urban Strategies Inc. and forward to area municipalities the detailed information on the amount, types and locations of intensification projected for the existing urban areas used in the background work not contained in the Working Paper; Subject: Directive Memorandum Page 3 'I Report PO 32-08 July 241 2008 g) Support the production of a financial impact study of the Preferred Gro\Nth scenario; h) Support the updating of the watershed plans with the Toronto Region Conservation Area as appropriate; and i) That the City of Pickering request the Regional Municipality of Durham to hold a public open house in Pickering prior to the next phase of the study. 3. Further, that a copy of Report PO 32-08 and Pickering Council's resolutjon on the matter be forwarded to the Region of Durham, Urban Strategies Inc., other Durham Area Municipalities, the Ministry of Energy & Infrastructure, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and the Ministry of Transportation. Please take any action deemed necessary. .---"-... I -"'\} fT\ l ',: i\ r.L j' \'..':./ J ..~ \{. (,\;, _/ Debi Wilcox fir Copy: Chief Administrative Officer ) .<... Summary of Key Policy Directions by Topic (from Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Directions Report Growing Durham Study) The topics and main policy directions identified for consideration are listed below: (1) Guiding principles and objectives: The five principles and objectives are: maximize Durham's competitive advantage; strengthen mobility within and beyond the Region; encourage healthy and sustainable communities; reinforce and build on existing regional settlement and infrastructure patterns; protect and enhance the Region's existing legacies; and live in harmony with the environment; (2) Regional urban structure: Regional and local official plans should generally reflect the proposed urban structure; establish density and housing unit mix targets to achieved desired densities; establish site plan control by-laws for the purpose of achieving complete communities; provide for compact forms of development to evolve over time; (3) Intensification: Regional policies to allow for direct access onto regional corridors in order to facilitate medium and higher density development which fronts onto these roads; local plans to designate areas appropriate for intensification, to encourage intensification, and to demonstrate how the municipality will meet the minimum intensification target established in the Growing Durham Study; include design and site plan policies; stable residential neighbourhoods are not considered appropriate for major residential; (4) Designated Greenfield lands: Designate Greenfield lands with an urban structure that supports complete communities; establish minimum densities, heights and tailored density ranges to meet the intent of both regional and local urban structure elements; establish targets that will contribute to the Greenfield density target of 50 jobs and persons per hectare; include policy and community design direction that promotes development which accommodates growth in a positive urban form; require a minimum 300/0 of new residential areas within living areas but outside centres and corridors to be other than detached dwellings; Regional policies to provide direct access on to Regional corridors specifically for medium and high density development; (5) Employment: Bring employment lands to meet 2031 regional employment land needs into the new urban boundary; monitor and review employment land needs every five years; protect strategically located employment lands sufficient to meet the long term regional employment land need to 2056; do not allow the 2056 employment land supply to be used for other purposes ahead of 2031 unless a corresponding decrease in the 2031 living area is made; provide for a range of employment uses, including employment lands, employment corridors, prestige employment and offices under 10,000 square metres or 500 employees; , ,) (5) Employment (con't); DecIsions of Regional Council to refuse conversion of employment lands shall not be subject to appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board; major retail or any retail greater than 300 square metres and that is not ancillary to the employment is not permitted on employment lands; provision and servicing of employment lands should provide for a range of market choice, with a minimum five-year supply of. serviced and developable land at all times at the local level; development applications for large sites should be required to submit phasing plans to show compliance with density targets will be achieved over time; (6) Infrastructure planning, transit and servicing: Phase development in an orderly and sequential pattern linked to regional and local transportation and infrastructure capital investment plans; identify infrastructure priority areas in the built up area to support intensification; review recommended growth scenario against Regional water and wastewater master plan; Region to explore innovative and sustainable infrastructure technologies; Transit infrastructure to be incorporated in infrastructure capital planning with a Transit First Priority; explore feasibility of new GO Transit service; integrate new Transit stations and corridors into Durham Transit Master Plan; create a 25 and 50 year capital planning strategy; (7) Environment: Require watershed planning in advance of secondary plans and plans of subdivision; protect natural heritage features in accordance with the Provincial Policy Statement; encourage sustainable design practices; (8) Phasing growth: Undertake five-year growth management reviews; require secondary plans for any development on lands greater than 20 hectares in size; require master plans for redevelopment of smaller parcels of land that need to be considered comprehensively; consider use of holding provisions; develop growth infrastructure capital plans in accordance with long servicing plans, growth management reviews and phasing; (9) Urban boundary expansion: Include in the 2031 urban boundary land that is needed to provide for the forecasted growth of both residential and jobs that responsibly utilizes land and structures urban growth to create complete and healthy communities; protect long term employment land needs; area municipalities to provide for a 10 year local housing and employment needs through logical and sequential development patterns within each phase; urban boundary expansions beyond 2031 will require a comprehensive Regional review process, except for the use of long term employment land for a Provincially or Regionally significant employer; 400/0 Region-wide intensification target in existing urban area to be met; size of urban boundary expansions to be consistent with creating complete new communities at the secondary plan level; (10) Monitoring and ongoing review: Monitor development patterns across the Region related to annual intensification targets, Greenfield densities and urban growth centre densities; Regions and area municipalities to undertake five-year growth management reviews; Region and area municipalities to work collaboratively to overcome challenges, and find and advocate for creative solutions for achieving objectives of the Growing Durham Study. 4 l Li i Summary of Main Revisions1 to the Assumptions, Methodology or Analysis Having Reference to or Impacting Pickering C Between the Scenario Evaluation and Recommended Preferred Growth Scenario Working Paper and the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report, Growing Durham Study) Staff has identified the following main revisions for Pickering: (1) Increasing the amount of high density in the housing demand forecast to meet the Greenfield density target of 50 jobs and persons per hectare; (2) Refining the housing supply needs, recognizing the specific provisions of the Seaton lands (to be planned for up to 70,000 persons); (3) Detailing the targets for the Urban Growth Centres as 100 jobs per hectare and 100 persons per hectare to achieve the required 200 jobs and persons per hectare; (4) Detailing the housing mixing Urban Growth Centres as 200/0 medium density units and 800/0 high density units; (5) Increasing the employment forecast for Durham Region to 375,000 (from the 350,000 allocated by the Provincial Growth Plan), to recognize Durham Region's objective of providing jobs and population at a ratio of one to two; (6) Assuming a Pickering Airport would generate a total of 10,000 jobs, both direct (on-site) and indirect (spin-off jobs, located off the Federal lands); 4,500 indirect jobs are included within the 375,000 employment forecast; the 5,500 direct jobs would be in addition to the 375,000 jobs forecast; (7) Increasing the employment land density from 26 jobs per gross hectare to 27 jobs per gross hectare (for comparison, the employment area at Whites Road/Granite Boulevard achieves a density of about 23 jobs per gross hectare); (8) Assuming 580/0 of Durham's employment growth will be on employment lands (the remaining 420/0 occurs primarily within the living areas, such as office, retail, personal services, and institutional); (9) Increasing the width of the employment band along Highway 407 extension northeast Pickering: south to Highway 7, and north to the Seventh Concession Road on the western side of northeast Pickering; (10) Identifying a Mobility Hub in Pickering consistent with the Metrolinx draft Report; (11) Meeting the minimum 400/0 intensification target for the Region commencing in 2015 and each year thereafter; individual municipalities have different intensification rates: Pickering's is a minimum 380/0 since Pickering has a high proportion of the new development outside the build-up area; (12) Adding future centres and corridors to the new urban areas and assigning a more intense development mix than surrounding living area; (13) Distinguishing the land for future living area required prior to 2031 and post 2031, and similarly distinguishing the lands for employment area required pre and post 2031; 1-- :] (14) Re-allocating 5,000 units of the low density residential demand for the 2031 time frame from Pickering, Ajax and Whitby to Oshawa as it has a supply of existing designated urban land; Pickering and Whitby would have required new urban to be designated; the effect of the re-allocation for Pickering is that some future living area would now be identified in the post-2031 time frame; and (15) Identifying additional future employment land along the Highway 407 corridor in the vicinity of the Highway 401-407 connector in northwest Whitby, for the 2031 time frame; the rationale was because of the area's strategic location with respect to future accessibility; and complement the future living area identified for Whitby; the effect of this identification for Pickering is that some of the future employment area is in the post 2031 time frame. C :0 CD )> Z rJ) -{ ::0 )> -{ m G> m (f) Z o c.n en SCENARIO 3 - REINFORCING EXISTING C()MMUNITIES LAND BEY()ND URBAN AREA BOUNDARY AND URBAN STRUCTURE NOTE: DnliCTION FROl'.'l Pl!\NNING CO~IMITTEE ON JUNE 3.2008 IS INDICATED IN RED BOXES. THE CONSULT.'\NTTEA:-'IIS REVIEWING THE LONG TERM FUTUIU Ef\'lPLOY~lENT LAND NEED AND HvlPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE LIVING AIZEA LAND NEED. I I J --1. I INCLUDE AS LONG TERM [' REVIEW lONG-TERM I INCLUDE AS FUTURE J REVIEW LONG-TERM' : EMPlOYMENT lAND EMPlOYMENT LAND NEED l LMNG AREA lAND EMPLOYMENT lAND NEED I, ALONG 407 CORRIDOR ALONG .0407 CORRIDOR I_ I .",.p" ""~_0.r,__- ,--'-'~'-":;:::-',-',~" ~~_:;; i.1 //~' ~tKlm"dRiNG /.&:: ~~? ~-:f// '----'--.' ~\, I / _~ ~~M I ~ ~. ~. - --.--.-.-. ( / )' .'" .-. I~/ \ i ../ 0 ............ ~ l' (~! V;. ,. ./ ,;;J.,. J):'i "IEN"''''-....~~'',...L. "-wd I ,,", ,/ "/ ~'\1 li ;' r ,'( ~..& ~I I .....~ , ~~; !~~~ ,/ r ........ . ,;:JL6 I~: ,". .- V' __; ....' @l' I HIGHWI\Y 7 r~, I"'"'"' >>. , . :~if .,":' :~. I -'~i :l_~7" ' ." '7 l;~ j ~ ~ '.? 1~'" " ~~ \. .i . ~~ :- '~:'I-~~.-f~!/ . i3. ... l!~~' ~-r. ,',.w :; m I . ....,,'l., I 'A: · F1FTHCO~'cEssJON D ____ _ ..Q.___--~ I}I:'- [~""'.:';;J f~~ I "I ~.~: ..;""----7-+ 0- - . - ~ " . ~._: r,~:'~'~: h,':~ 1:f.ifi1- ~ t" ; ~ ~ !~ ~"f, r .. , , . ~ "'I~' '-:A,.. . .~.-r -~1f lel:x- , - -' -- --,- - I I : ~ ':"00 t;: . il~'j tN'i'~" --. --r--... 1/ ~\ ,G " 1 !. " ,'~,(~:nwl-' R"O(: l- ,:", ." ~~ t ~ r'A '~ ".' [j~~ ;~..., ~ ~~i ,j::';'; ~UNTO.v~T~ : j ~ ,~.!ll: ~ fi1 ' -f-:, ,':-,\,t.\: .iJ'!: , l.I ~ A !l! ! : ~ .. ",}.,'" " ".. ~- ~ \ ^ .. ~ ~ ~ I I . .'\ //:~ ; ~~ ~ j~ ~~ -- - ~ < i I / . .'. 'r;::.ii) ::-1. :If" 1;,:' ~ ~'.~, ~1';,;~ x r,.=; ~.~. . ~ i----"""~Nr..'_ .. i':,. :;:i:,': ,.' ., ~'- U' ., , ~ ' .' lIJ!IlII~.... ~:T7 R ~ ""'t'.l "},,;: . ~10 I:,. _~ . ~ ,,- ,. 1 Ll ;', > ; ,~:: ; ;,:.. "... ". ,;;'1.:;:.::, 'oJ '. ". ,i" "'<.;,' T.t.,....i:'~:"!,;'" :"";'::-: ."'~.t, ..\!., 'S~~'i';"fjf" " "..I=r~ "_.;.'~ x...;,,:.i/;;/~;:''!'. '''.:':~,:~,; ....{\;>;:;:C) ",', ~';'if'~1':' '"' 1\ ~ r ~,:"'. 'k~ REFLECT PICKERING AS A """'G',;: ~._ MOBILITY HUB CANDIDATE ........~: ~, C~R I LAKE ONTARIO LEGEND ;fij~~ E:2J - ~ ~ built up area gr\~onfleld urban area boundary rUWrc LMng Arco future E.mployment Ares rOSiomH contre urban growth contre rj '-..' l/fOOt) node .C>i/stJl1p'/pl~)Ilt)Od Emergmg growth nodes: transit village: ex/sUng/future emc(llln~ W8(onront '1ll1ago UOIT/DUrhi;lm College mObility 'lull future centre Osrllngfon/Pfckerlng generation facilities ..~l "'7 I I I I I j ~ e/e o .,~ iil ~. o . -JJh NG I~N FIGURE 13B N01E:THE ILLUSTRATED t\RE.'\ IS BASED ON FUTURE GROWTH LANDS IDENTlFIEDTHROUGHTHE LOCALLY INFLUENCED OtJ'TLOOK FOR RESlDENTIALAND EMPLOYMENT USES AND FUTURE CENTRES. THE ILLUSTR,ATED AREA ALSO REFLECTS STRATEGICALLY LOCATED EMPLOYMENT LANDSAND LANDS RESERVED TO PROVIDE CONTIGUOUS RESIDENTlAL DEVELOPMENTS. DUE TOTHE SCALE OF [\.1APPING.THE TOTAL FUTURE GROWTH AREAS ILLUSTRATED FOR EACH SCENARIO INCLUDE ALL NATURAL HERIT.'\GE AND HYDROLOGIC FEATURES. HIGHWAY -W7 RIGHT OF WAY .~ND MAJOR HYDRO CORRIDORS, ONCE THESE FE:\TURES1\RE REMOVED.THE REMAINING LAND AREAS APPROXIMATELY REPRESENT THE GROWTH PLAN GROSS LAND NEED FOR LAKE ONTARIO SHORELINE MUNICIPALITIES FOR THE SCEN,'\RIo. :t1 j:, m-f 6~ :00 -4::I: .,$: .,,~ c ...... I f'" 1 I :) ).... ...... o N 0\