Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMarch 23, 2009 Council Meeting PI ~KERI Agenda Monday, March 23, 2009 Council Chambers 7:30 pm 1) INVOCATION Mayor Ryan will call the meeting to order and lead Council in the saying of the Invocation. II) DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST III) ADOPTION OF MINUTES PAGE In Camera Council Minutes, February 17, 2009 Under Separate Cover Council Minutes, February 17, 2009 1-16 Planning & Development Committee Minutes, 17-21 March 2, 2009 Executive Committee Minutes, March 9, 2009 22-26 IV) PRESENTATIONS V) DELEGATIONS 27-28 29-95 VI) CORRESPONDENCE VII) COMMITTEE REPORTS 96-103 a) Report EC 2009-03 of the Executive Committee VIII) REPORTS - NEW AND UNFINISHED BUSINESS 104-215 IX) MOTIONS AND NOTICE OF MOTIONS 216-217 X) BY-LAWS 218-220 XI) OTHER BUSINESS XII) CONFIRMATION BY-LAW Accessible For information related to accessibility requirements please contact P ~ ~ ~ ~ p ~ ~ Linda Roberts PICKERNG Phone: 905.420.4660 extension 2928 TTY: 905.420.1739 Email: Iroberts(@citvofpickerina.com FOR INFORMATION ONLY • Minutes of the Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations & Equity, February 5, 2009 & March 5, 2009 • Minutes of the Committee of Adjustment, February 11, 2009 • Minutes of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee, February 24, 2009 • Minutes of the Accessibility Advisory Committee, February 25, 2009 cibl oo Council Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 17, 2009 PICX 7:30 PM Council Chambers 01 PRESENT: Mayor David Ryan COUNCILLORS: D. Dickerson R. Johnson B. Littley B. McLean J. O'Connell D. Pickles ALSO PRESENT: T. Melymuk - (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer N. Carroll - Director, Planning & Development A. Allison - City Solicitor S. Reynolds - Division Head, Culture & Recreation D. Wilcox - City Clerk D. Shields - Deputy Clerk (1) INVOCATION Mayor Ryan called the meeting to order and led Council in the saying of the Invocation. (II) DISCLOSURE OF INTEREST No disclosures of interest were noted. (III) ADOPTION OF MINUTES Resolution # 32/09 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor McLean 1 Call o0 Council Meeting Minutes PICKEMG Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:30 PM 0 Council Chambers In Camera Council Minutes, January 19, 2009 Council Meeting Minutes, January 19, 2009 Special Council Minutes, February 2, 2009 In Camera Council Minutes, February 2, 2009 Special Planning & Development Committee Minutes, February 2, 2009 Planning & Development Committee Minutes, February 2, 2009 Executive Committee Minutes, February 9, 2009 CARRIED (IV) DELEGATIONS 1. David Middleton Durham Environmental Advisory Committee Re: Information on Environmental Awards Run by the Durham Environmental Advisory Committee [Refer to CORR. 15-091 David Middleton of the Durham Environmental Advisory Committee (DEAC) appeared before Council to explain the Durham Environmental Awards process. Mr. Middleton stated that the awards were created to highlight the positive examples of what we can do as individuals for the environment. He also explained the different types of awards and requested on behalf of DEAC that the City of Pickering complete nominations forms for citizens they feel might be deserving of the awards. Mr. Middleton noted that nominations must be submitted by March 2"d, 2009. 2. Chaitanya Kalevar Just One World Re: Nuclear Issues Chaitanya Kalevar appeared before Council and stated that he still feels that Council has not answered his questions regarding nuclear issues. He reiterated that he does agree with Council's position on supporting the refurbishment of the Pickering nuclear site and also noted that we need to change the way we do things. Mr. Kalevar noted his concerns regarding house insurance and the limited criteria and coverage available for nuclear accidents. 3. Professor Robert MacDermid Political Science, York University Re: Reforms to the Ontario Municipal Elections Act [Refer to CORR. 12-091 2 Cali 00 Council Meeting Minutes PICKERsUNG Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 03 Professor Robert MacDermid appeared before Council requested their support of the Town of Ajax motion regarding election reforms with respect to campaign contributions with the aid of a powerpoint presentation. Professor MacDermid stated that he had completed studies on municipal election campaign contributions. He noted that he felt Corporation and Trade Unions should not be allowed to contribute to a municipal candidates campaign. He stated that by banning Corporations and Trade Unions from contributing would eliminate the perception of unfair influence. Professor MacDermid stated that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing should take a look at the Municipal Elections Act and review campaign financing. (V) CORRESPONDENCE 1. CORR. 12-09 BLAIR LABELLE MANAGER, LEGISLATIVE SERVICES/DEPUTY CLERK TOWN OF AJAX 65 Harwood Ave. South Ajax, ON L1 S 21-19 Resolution #33/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Pickles That CORR. 12-09 from Blair Labelle, Manager of Legislative Services/Deputy Clerk, Town of Ajax, requesting Council's endorsement of a resolution passed by Ajax Town Council on February 9, 2009 concerning prohibiting corporate and trade union contributions to municipal election campaigns and that Ajax be notified of this decision be received for information. CARRIED ON A RECORDED VOTE YES NO Councillor Dickerson Councillor Johnson Councillor McLean Councillor Littley Councillor Pickles Councillor O'Connell Mayor Ryan 3 Citli oq Council Meeting Minutes PICKEIUNG Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:30 PM 04 Council Chambers 2. CORR. 13-09 BLAIR LABELLE MANAGER, LEGISLATIVE SERVICES/DEPUTY CLERK TOWN OF AJAX 65 Harwood Ave. South Amax, ON L1 S 2H9 Resolution #34/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Johnson That CORR. 13-09 from Blair Labelle, Manager, Legislative Services/Deputy Clerk, Town of Ajax with respect to a resolution passed by Ajax Town Council on January 12, 2009, regarding the Friends of Ajax-Pickering Hospital East LHIN's Clinical Services Plan, be received for information. CARRIED 3. CORR. 14-09 SHELLY VAN EMPEL LEGISLATIVE ADMINISTRATOR TOWN OF MILTON 150 Mary Street Milton. ON L9T 6Z5 Resolution # 35/09 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That CORR. 14-09 from Shelly van Empel, Legislative Administrator, Town of Milton, with respect to a resolution passed on January 26, 2009 regarding the implementation of the $100m hospital growth funding commitment ensuring that growth funding is targeted to high growth hospitals and social services, the Health Based Allocation Model and to develop a health care and social services growth plan for Ontario high growth communities to complement Places to Grow, be endorsed. CARRIED 4 Ct, a~► Council Meeting Minutes gill .~.1_ Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 0~ 4. CORR. 15-09 DURHAM ENVIRONMENTAL ACHIEVEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE (DEAC) ENVIRONMENTAL ACHIEVEMENT AWARDS 605 Rossland Road East Whitby. ON L1 N 6A3 Resolution # 36/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That CORR. 15-09 from the Durham Environmental Achievement Advisory Committee with respect to submitting nominations for the 2009 DEAC Environmental Achievement Awards, be received for information. CARRIED 5. CORR. 16-09 BLAIR LABELLE MANAGER OF LEGISLATIVE SERVICES/DEPUTY CLERK TOWN OF AJAX 65 Harwood Ave. South Aiax, ON L1 S 21-19 Resolution # 37/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor McLean That CORR. 16-09 from Blair Labelle, Manager, Legislative Services, Deputy Clerk, advising that at a meeting of the Ajax General Government Committee held on January 22, 2009, a resolution with respect to bottled water and the feasibility of establishing a bottle free area was passed, be received for information. CARRIED 6. CORR. 17-09 HEATHER BROOKS DIRECTOR, WATERSHED PLANNING & NATURAL HERITAGE CENTRAL LAKE ONTARIO CONSERVATION 5 Ctrs, Council Meeting Minutes PICKE Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:30 PM 06 Council Chambers 100 Whiting Avenue Oshawa, ON L1 H 3T3 Resolution # 38/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Littley That CORR. 17-09 from Heather Brooks, Watershed Planning & Natural Heritage, Central Lake Ontario Conservation, advising that at a meeting held January 20, 2009, a resolution was passed with respect to staff reports regarding Wildlife Monitoring Program (Long Term), Aquatic Monitoring Program (2009-2013) and the Aquatic Monitoring Program 2006 and 2007 Annual Reports, be received for information. CARRIED 7. CORR. 18-09 P.M. MADILL, REGIONAL CLERK REGION OF DURHAM 605 Rossland Road East Whitby. ON L1 N 6A3 Resolution # 39/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Littley That CORR. 18-09 from P.M. Madill, Regional Clerk, Region of Durham, advising that at a meeting of Regional Council held January 28, 2009, a recommendation was passed regarding encouraging municipalities to seek advice from the Durham Agricultural Advisory Committee in matters and areas of consideration that may affect the viability and future of the farming industry in Durham Region, be received for information. CARRIED 8. CORR. 19-09 REGIONAL COUNCILLOR BILL MCLEAN Pickering Civic Complex One the Esplanade Pickering. ON L1 V 6K7 6 Citli eq Council Meeting Minutes lal I PICKEMG Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers ~q 7 Resolution # 40/09 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That CORR. 19-09 from Regional Councillor Bill McLean, expressing his concerns in relation to the Do Not Call List, be endorsed. CARRIED 9. CORR. 20-09 DAVE STELL, COMMUNICATIONS SPECIALIST AJAX-PICKERING BOARD OF TRADE 144 Old Kingston Road 2"d Floor, Suite 10 Aiax, ON L 1 T 2Z9 Resolution # 41/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Littley That CORR. 20-09 from Dave Stell, Communications Specialist, Ajax-Pickering Board of Trade, forwarding a copy of a letter of support which was sent to the Canadian Chamber of Commerce in relation to American Protectionism currently being considered by the U.S. government, be received for information. CARRIED 10. CORR. 21-09 CHAITANYA KALEVAR JUST1 WORLD Resolution # 42/09 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Littley That CORR. 21-09 from Chaitanya Kalevar, Just 1 World, with respect to the election contribution profile of Pickering Councillors, be received for information. CARRIED 7 Citt, 00 Council Meeting Minutes all PICKEMG Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:30 PM 08 Council Chambers 11. CORR. 22-09 JAYME HARPER PFLAG CANADA Resolution # 43/09 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Pickles That CORR. 22-09 from Jayme Harper, PFLAG Canada, be received and that the City of Pickering proclaim May 17, 2009 as International Day Against Homophobia. CARRIED 12. CORR. 23-09 KIRSTEN SCHMIDT-CHAMBERLAIN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR DURHAM HOSPICE 209 Dundas St. East Lower Level Units 1 & 2 Whitby, ON L1 N 7H8 Resolution # 44/09 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Pickles That CORR. 23-09 from Kirsten Schmidt-Chamberlain, Executive Director, Durham Hospice, be received and that the City of Pickering proclaim May 3 - 9, 2009 as Hospice Palliative Care Week. CARRIED 13. CORR. 24-09 SHEILA CARSON, CHAIR TEACHERS OF ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE ASSOCIATION OF ONTARIO 27 Carlton Street, Suite 405 Toronto, ON M513 1 L2 Resolution # 45/09 8 Cali 00 Council Meeting Minutes All PICKERNG Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 09 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Pickles That CORR. 24-09 from Sheila Carson, Chair, Teachers of English as a Second Language Association of Ontario, be received and that the City of Pickering proclaim December 6-12, 2009 English as a Second Language Week. CARRIED 14. CORR. 25-09 FRANK MACPHEE, PRESIDENT Durham Region Home Builders' Association King Street Postal Outlet P.O. Box 26064, 206 King Street East Oshawa, ON L1 H 1 CO Resolution # 46/09 Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Pickles That CORR. 25-09 from Frank MacPhee, President, Durham Region Home Builders' Association, be received and that the City of Pickering proclaim April, 2009 as "New Homes Month". CARRIED VI) COMMITTEE REPORTS a) REPORT PD 2009-03 OF THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE 1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 09-09 Grand Oak Homes (Eastern Division) Ltd. Plan of Subdivision 40M-1488 Final Assumption of Plan of Subdivision COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report PD 09-09 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding the Final Assumption of Plan of Subdivision 40M-1488 be received; 9 City 0? Council Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 2. That the highways being Alpine Lane, Wildwood Crescent (formerly Forsyth Lane), Hollyhedge Drive and Major Oaks Road within Plan 40M-1488 be assumed for public use; 3. That the services required by the Subdivision Agreement relating to Plan 40M-1488, 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; and 4. That the Subdivision Agreement and any amendments thereto relating to Plan 40M-1488 be released and removed from title. 2. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 10-09 Comments on the final report Size and Location of Urban Growth Centres in the Greater Golden Horseshoe, prepared by the Ontario Growth Secretariat, Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure November 2008 COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report PD 10-09 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the report Size and Location of Urban Growth Centres in the Greater Golden Horseshoe, prepared by the Ontario Growth Secretariat, Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure November 2008, be received; and 2. Further, that as part of the conformity exercise for the Provincial Growth Plan through the Pickering Official Plan Review, the Planning & Development Department take appropriate follow up action to: a) delineate the precise Urban Growth Centre (UGC) boundary, and b) establish land use designations and corresponding policies to define the specific types and densities of uses in the UGC which support and encourage development envisioned by the Growth Plan. 3. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 11-09 Final Rouge River Watershed Plan Comments on Rouge River Watershed Plan: Towards a Healthy and Sustainable Future and Implementation Guide, prepared by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority COUNCIL DECISION 10 Council Meeting Minutes all r. Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 1. That Report PD 11-09 of the Director, Planning & Development regarding the Final Rouge River Watershed Plan, be received; 2. That the Final Rouge River Watershed Plan: Towards a Healthy and Sustainable Future and Implementation Guide, be received; and 3. Further, that City staff be authorized to work with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) to implement the recommendations of the Rouge River Watershed Plan, appropriate to the City of Pickering. Resolution # 47/09 Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor McLean That the Report of the Planning and Development Committee PD 2009-03, dated February 2, 2009, be adopted. CARRIED b) REPORT EC 2009-02 OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 1. (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer, Report CAO 02-09 Sustainable Pickering -2008 Update and 2009 Work Program COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Council receive Report CAO 02-09 of the (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer providing an update on the 2008 Sustainable Pickering initiative and 2009 work program ; 2. That Council authorize staff and the Sustainable Pickering Advisory Committee to continue to work on the City's Sustainable Pickering initiative with the continued assistance in 2009 of Durham Sustain Ability as outlined in this Report; and 3. That Council agree to the City's participation in "Earth Hour" on March 28, 2009 and authorize staff and the Sustainable Pickering Advisory Committee to take the appropriate actions to engage residents, business and institutions to also participate in this event. 11 City oe Council Meeting Minutes PICKEFING Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 2. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 01-09 City Policy ADM 060 -Records Management Policy COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report CS 01-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That Policy ADM 060 Records Management Policy, be approved; and 3. That the appropriate officials be given the authority to give effect thereto. 3. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 02-09 Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act - Adjustment to Taxes COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report CS 02-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the write-offs of taxes as provided under Section 357/358 of the Municipal Act, 2001 be approved; and, 3. That the appropriate officials of the City of Pickering be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect thereto. 4. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 08-09 Telus Mobility Lease Renewal Sideline 24, Between Highway 7 and Highway 407 COUNCIL DECISION 1. That Report OES 08-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services be received; and 2. That the Mayor and the Clerk be authorized to execute a lease renewal agreement with TM Mobile Inc. ("Telus") substantially on the terms set out in this Report. 12 stir Council Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers r; I; t 5. Proclamation - Black History Month COUNCIL DECISION That the month of February be proclaimed Black History Month in the City of Pickering and that the Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations & Equity be so advised. Resolution # 48109 Moved by Councillor Dickerson Seconded by Councillor Littley That the Report of the Executive Committee EC 2009-02, dated February 9, 2009, be adopted, CARRIED (VII) BY-LAWS 6934/09 Being a by-law to dedicate Block 12, Plan 40M-1502, Pickering as public highway (Fawndale Road). (By-law attached) 6935/09 Being a by-law to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for the purpose of enforcing parking restrictions on private property. (By-law attached) THIRD READING: Councillor Dickerson, seconded by Councillor Johnson moved that By-law Numbers 6934/09 and 6935/09, be adopted, and the said by-laws be now read a third time and passed and that the Mayor and Clerk sign the same and the seal of the Corporation be affixed thereto. CARRIED (VIII) OTHER BUSINESS Resolution # 49/09 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor McLean 13 Ciu< 00 Council Meeting Minutes PICKERM Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers That the rules of procedure be suspended in order to introduce a motion with respect to ensuring fair and appropriate municipal election financing. CARRIED ON A 2/3 MAJORITY VOTE ENSURING FAIR AND APPROPRIATE MUNICIPAL ELECTION FINANCING Resolution # 50/09 Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Littley WHEREAS the Government of Ontario regulates municipal election finances through the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 for municipalities in Ontario; and WHEREAS a number of persons have suggested that municipal election finances should be reviewed with a view to tighten rules and procedures regarding campaign donations and expenditures and provide greater transparency; and WHEREAS the rules for municipalities should be consistent to all municipalities across Ontario NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the City of Pickering requests the Province of Ontario to undertake a review of the Municipal Elections Act, 1996 to ensure the rules regarding election financing and expenses are appropriate and transparent; AND FURTHER that input is sought from all Ontario municipalities and the public; AND FURTHER that this resolution be forwarded to the Premier of Ontario, Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing and the MPPs of Pickering, and the Association of Municipalities of Ontario. CARRIED ON A RECORDED VOTE YES NO Councillor Dickerson Councillor Johnson Councillor Littley Councillor McLean Councillor O'Connell Councillor Pickles Mayor Ryan 14 cap 01 Council Meeting Minutes PICKEIUNG Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:30 PM Council Chambers 15 (IX) CONFIDENTIAL MATTERS In accordance with Procedural By-law 6746/07 and the provisions of the Municipal Act, an In Camera meeting of Council was held prior to the regularly scheduled meeting. Resolution # 51/09 Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That Council go In Camera in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Act for the purpose of dealing with personal matters about an identifiable individual, including municipal or local board employees. CARRIED a) Appointments to Boards and Committees Refer to the In Camera minutes for further information. [City Clerk has custody and control of the In Camera minutes.] Moved by Councillor McLean Seconded by Councillor Dickerson That the following appointments be confirmed thereto for a term to expire on November 30, 2010: i) Accessibility Advisory Committee Terence Arvisais Alton Atkinson Sharon Farrell Jacques Tardif ii) Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee Terence Arvisais Susan Gardner Joanne Glasser Kelly McLean 15 Cirq Council Meeting Minutes Tuesday, February 17, 2009 7:30 PM 1 6 Council Chambers iii) Pickering Museum Village Advisory Committee Alan Espenlaub CARRIED (X) CONFIRMATION BY-LAW By-law Number #6936/09 Councillor Johnson, seconded by Councillor McLean, moved for leave to introduce a By-law of the City of Pickering to confirm those proceedings of the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering at its Regular Meeting of February 17, 2009. CARRIED (XI) ADJOURNMENT Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor McLean That the meeting be adjourned at 10:00 pm. CARRIED DATED this 17th day of February, 2009 MAYOR DAVID RYAN DEBI A. WILCOX CITY CLERK 16 Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, March 2, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littley PRESENT: Mayor Ryan COUNCILLORS: D. Dickerson R.Johnson B. Littley B. McLean D. Pickles ABSENT: J. O'Connell ALSO PRESENT: T. Melymuk - (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer N. Carroll - Director, Planning & Development D. Wilcox -City Clerk L. Taylor - Manager, Development Review R. Pym - Principal Planner, Development Review L. Roberts -Committee Coordinator (1) PART `A' - INFORMATION REPORTS City of Pickering Official Plan Amendment, OPA-08/003/P Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 19/08 S.R & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. And S.R. & R. Bay Ridges (Plaza II) Ltd. Part 1 Plan of Part of Block Y, Registered Plan No. M-16 Plan 40R-3151, And Plan M 16 Part of Block Y, RP WR-414 Part 1 to 3 City of Pickering A public information meeting was held under the Planning Act, for the purpose of informing the public with respect to the above noted application. Lynda Taylor, Manager, Development Review gave an outline of the requirements and notification process for a Public Meeting under the Planning Act. She informed the public that anyone not wishing to speak tonight could also put their comments in writing to the Planning Department. She also made note of the sign in sheets out front for anyone wishing to be informed of future meetings. 1 Ciai Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes PICURUNG Monday, March 2, 2009 ^I 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littley Ross Pym, Principal Planner, Development Review, provided an overview of the property location, explaining the process, applicant's proposal and the City's Official Plan policies pertaining to this site, as outlined in Information Report No. 04-09, through the use of a powerpoint presentation. He confirmed that the Bay Ridges Redevelopment Guidelines had been approved. He indicated they had received two comments prior to the meeting as well as two written comments received today. The Conservation Authorities have no objection to the development. He noted this application is exempt from Regional approval. He also explained the need for the Official Plan Amendment and rezoning. Moiz Behar, a representative for the applicant, appeared before the Committee in support of the application. Mr. Behar provided background information through the use of a PowerPoint presentation. He stated that the subject site functions poorly and needs revitalization. He noted the plaza was a 5 minute walk, and the proximity to the GO station was a major advantage. He stated this development is consistent with the direction of the Official Plan and the landscape ideas and sustainability features are in keeping with the City of Pickering's Sustainable Development Guidelines. He further noted that this also complies with Pickering's Sustainable Neighbourhood Plan and transportation reviews were completed with no negative impacts. He indicated the benefits would revitalize the commercial area, and noted the existing tenants are welcome to relocate to the new development. He outlined the increased tax benefits and increase in building permits. Moved by Councillor Pickles Seconded by Councillor Johnson That the rules of procedure be suspended in order to extend the 10 minute time limit for speaking on the matter. CARRIED Mr. Behar proceeded to outline the balance of his powerpoint presentation. A question and answer period ensued. Written correspondence was received from Dan Shire, 22-1235 Radom Street, Pickering, in opposition to the subject proposed 25 storey building. Members of the Committee were provided with a copy of the correspondence in this regard. Written correspondence was received from Mike Danishchewsky, 1113 Tanzer Court, Pickering, in opposition to the subject proposed 25 storey building. 2 Crry Planning & Development - Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, March 2, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littley ct Members of the Committee were provided with a copy of the correspondence in this regard. Doris Hopper-Riede, 204-1210 Radom Street, appeared before the Committee in opposition to the subject application. She noted her concerns with traffic at the intersection of Liverpool and Bayly, stating that accidents occur far too frequently and this is the 8t" most dangerous intersection in Pickering. She suggested the City contact the Region to provide a traffic report on this dangerous intersection and further noted Radom Street is not equipped to handle the increased traffic. Her second concern was with parkland. She noted the regulations with respect to parkland conveyance and questioned whether monies owing to the City had been settled. She stated there needs to be more park space as opposed to cash in lieu of parkland. In summary, she stated that the City should not approve a third tower at this time. Hazel Daubeny, 807-210 Radom Street, appeared before the Committee in opposition to the subject application. She stated she has been a resident of the area since 1964 and hopes the Committee takes a logical approach to this application. She stated she concurred with the previous delegates concerns and questioned why the Committee would even consider another tower when the other two had not been started yet. She noted high-rises in Toronto are not selling and developers are walking away, therefore questioned why the City would take this risk at this time. She agreed with a park, stating this would be an asset to the whole community. She also noted the need for a grocery store south of the 401 and stated that the decision should be deferred until the economy improves. John Blandford, 108-1210 Radom Street, appeared before the Committee, stating his concerns with respect to waste collection in all forms, retail as well as residential. He noted space would not be adequate for garbage trucks and emergency vehicles already had difficulty manoeuvring . He questioned whether there were any provisions for recycling, and if curbside pickup was not available, would there be any other arrangements for this. He also stated his concern for the safety of children in the area, insufficient parking, impacts on the Douglas Ravine and questioned who would be responsible for cleanup and vermin control of this area. Jocelyn Hammond, 1703-1210 Radom Street, appeared before the Committee. She stated she is a 20 year resident of the area and noted the townhouses along Bayly and Liverpool were a nice improvement to the Pickering waterfront. She requested that the application for the third tower be deferred, stating that this would be an overpopulated corner. She noted room to grow on the other side of the GO station, which would be better for congestion, and was closer to the 401. 3 Crry Planning & Development = Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, March 2, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers 2 Chair: Councillor Littley She questioned the environmental impact on Douglas Park as well as the ecological repercussions as being built on the cusp of the ravine would mean garbage will land in the ravine. She suggested this application be deferred until after the two towers had been built and at that point any traffic issues arising would be seen and it would allow the City time to solicit the Federal and Provincial governments for additional funds for infrastructure. She read a letter from tenants in the Bayshore Towers noting the threat to the creek and the fact that wildlife would be disappearing, further advising that they also suggested deferral of this application. Paul Crawford, 867 Antonio Street, appeared before the Committee, requesting that consideration be given to the creation of jobs first. He suggested a citizens advisory committee be put in place for the purpose of cross table discussions. He would like to see Places to Grow legislation incorporated into this development, but noted this had yet to be adopted. He noted we should produce more jobs, not more people, and this should be done over a long period of time. He also stated his willingness to sit on a Committee if formed. Marie John, 1646 McBrady Crescent, appeared before the Committee stating she is a first time homebuyer and that Bayshore Towers interested her. In researching the area she noted that the townhouses are not fully built yet, but already there are traffic issues. She questioned where the visitors parking is, and noted how insufficient it was. She noted her interest in moving into Bayshore Towers, but if this application was approved, she would reconsider her decision to move there. She does not approve of this development and suggested it be delayed. James Graham, 849 Douglas Avenue, appeared before the Committee, noting the key issues he felt needed to be addressed. He noted his concerns with traffic in the areas of Radom Street, St. Martins Drive, Liverpool and Bayly, particularly during peak GO train times, pedestrian safety, and transporation issues with children getting to school. He further noted concerns with snow removal, emergency planning, and greenspace. He also questioned where cars would go in the case of underground parking repairs being required. In summary, Mr. Graham noted that if the application were approved, it should be done in stages, with commercial first. Steve Laforest, Pickering Naturalists, 1133 Ritson Road North, Oshawa, appeared before the Committee, noting his concerns with planning issues, encroachments, increased littering, disruption of habitat, and the high density along Douglas ravine. He commented that it was unfortunate that a greater setback was not required, stating it would have a major impact on the ravine, and that it was incompatible with Sustainable Pickering principals. He stated there 4 Cal Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes PICKE1UNG Monday, March 2, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Littley ` 21 would be a loss of greenspace as well as increased runoff. He noted this contravenes the guidelines and puts features such as flora and fawna at risk. He was concerned with birds colliding into the buildings. If this application is approved, there should be provisions in place to reduce the risk of death to birds, which should also be applied to the other two buildings as well, including a procedure in place in which to monitor the building perimeter. Tim Dobson, 1505 Sturgeon Court, appeared before the Committee. He stated he had been a resident of Bay Ridges in 2007 and that his concerns related to the traffic issues. He questioned why the third tower had not been considered in the original submission to Council and whether the parkland payment had been resolved. Frank Dempsey, 1152 Tanzer Court, appeared before the Committee, expressing concerns with population density. He informed the Committee that through his observations of the area, the population density is too high, and there was not enough space for people to walk their dogs. Kit Cross, 1507-1210 Radom Street, appeared before the Committee with respect to the Douglas ravine and the problem with greenspace. She noted there would be a loss of animals in the ravine with the increase in population. She indicated the nature aspect was what made her choose this location as a nice place to live and stated she would consider moving should this application be approved. Susan Passmore, 1235 Radom Street, appeared before the Committee in opposition to the third tower, noting the traffic issues. She also stated she had realized a decrease in her home value. Sharon Wilken, 877 Chapleau, appeared before the Committee, outlining her concerns with exhaust emissions as a result of traffic congestion. A question and answer period ensued. Lynda Taylor, Manager, Development Review stated that staff were aware of the issues and this would be part of their review process which would be addressed through a future report. (II) ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 10:10 pm. 5 cis Executive Committee PICXEMG Meeting Minutes Monday, March 9, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers 22 Chair: Councillor McLean PRESENT: Mayor Ryan COUNCILLORS: R. Johnson B. McLean J. O'Connell D. Pickles ABSENT: D. Dickerson B. Littley ALSO PRESENT: T. Melymuk - (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer E. Buntsma - Director, Operations & Emergency Services N. Carroll - Director, Planning & Development G. Paterson - Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer D. Wilcox - City Clerk L. Harker - Coordinator, Records and Elections (1) DELEGATIONS 1. Jim Simpson, Chair Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee Re: 2008 Annual Report and 2009 Work Plan Jim Simpson, Chair, Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee appeared before the Committee to present the 2009 Heritage Workplan with the aid of a PowerPoint presentation. Mr. Simpson gave an overview of who the Committee is and their plans for 2009. He noted workplan items are broken down into three categories - communication, designation and infrastructure. Mr. Simpson and the Heritage Advisory Committee appreciates the continued support of the City, in particular of Debi Wilcox and Linda Roberts from the Clerks Division. 1 i Executive Committee =0 3 = Meeting Minutes Monday, March 9, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean 23 2. Brenda Jamieson Transportation/Environmental Planner AECOM Re: 407 East Environmental Assessment and Preliminary Design Study Brenda Jamieson, a representative of AECOM, appeared before the Committee to provide a PowerPoint presentation on the 407 East Environmental Assessment and an update on their progress. She noted that the EA Report is to be filed in July 2009 and the City of Pickering would have an opportunity to provide formal comments prior to this date. 3. Harry Froussios Zelinka Priamo Representative for Pickering Brock Centre Inc. Re: Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 05-09 Application for Minor Variance to Sign By-law 2493/87, as amended -Pickering Brock Centre -1755-1805 Pickering Parkway Harry Froussois, representative for Pickering Brock Centre Inc., appeared before the Committee in opposition to recommendation #3 of Report CS 05-09. Mr. Froussios provided an overview of the application and spoke specifically about the recommendation to deny the pylon signs, Al and B1. Mr. Froussios stated that he would like the City to approve the sign variance application, as this would increase marketing opportunities for his client. (II) MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION 1. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 12-09 First Nations Trail Project - Western Gateway Detailed discussion ensued on this matter. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor O'Connell Seconded by Councillor Pickles 1. That Report OES 12-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the First Nations Trail Project - Western Gateway be received; 2 Executive Committee =g 1' - Meeting Minutes Monday, March 9, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers 24 Chair: Councillor McLean 2. That Council acknowledge that staff will be proceeding with the tendering of the Western Gateway project prior to 2009 budget approval; 3. That, notwithstanding the provisions of the City's Purchasing Policy, Council approve the appointment of Johnson Sustronk & Weinstein to provide consultant services for the Western Gateway project at an estimated cost of $30,000; 4. That Council provide approval to modify the 1977 agreement with the City of Toronto, to relieve them from the responsibility to maintain the eastern approaches to the Rouge River pedestrian bridge; 5. The Council provide approval to enter into an agreement with the Canadian National Railway Company, for the reconstruction of the pedestrian crossing under the CN Rail lines; and 6. That a copy of this report be forwarded to the TRCA for their information. CARRIED 2. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 05-09 Application for Minor Variance to Sign By-law 2493/87, as amended - Pickering Brock Centre - 1755 - 1805 Pickering Parkway Detailed discussion ensued on this matter. RECOMMENDATION Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Councillor Pickles 1. That Report CS 05-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the application for minor variance to Sign By-law 2439/07, as amended, submitted by Bayfield Realty Advisors on behalf of Pickering Brock Centre, for property municipally known as 1755-1805 Pickering Parkway, be approved as follows; 3 i Citq °o 92 Executive Committee MICKE Meeting Minutes Monday, March 9, 2009 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor McLean 2 5 a) The request to permit an increased height for the proposed pylon sign '132', Highway 401 frontage; b) The proposed roof top signage for Unit A16; 3. That the application for minor variance to Sign By-law 2439/07, as amended, submitted by Bayfield Realty Advisors on behalf of Pickering Brock Centre, for property municipally known as 1755-1805 Pickering Parkway, be approved as follows; c) The request to permit an increased height for pylon sign `131', Brock Road frontage; d) The request to permit an increased height for pylon sign 'Al', Pickering Parkway frontage; and 4. That the appropriate officials be given the authority to give effect thereto. CARRIED AS AMENDED (SEE FOLLOWING MOTIONS) Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That the main motion be divided in order to deal with Item #3 separately. CARRIED The main motion, save and except Item #3 was then CARRIED. Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Mayor Ryan That Item #3 of the main motion be divided in order to deal with parts c) and d) separately. CARRIED 4 cis Executive Committee " Meeting Minutes Monday, March 9, 2009 Z 7:30 pm - Council Chambers ~ Chair: Councillor McLean Moved by Councillor Johnson Seconded by Mayor Ryan That Item 3 c) of the main motion be approved. CARRIED Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor O'Connell That Item 3 d) of the main motion be referred back to staff for a report. CARRIED 3. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 03-09 Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information RECOMMENDATION Moved by Mayor Ryan Seconded by Councillor Pickles That Report CS 03-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information be received for information. CARRIED (III) ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 8:50 pm. 5 CLtq O~ I;I 2 7 - - I I PICKER G March 23, 2009 "PLEASE NOTE: ORDER OF DELEGATIONS SUBJECT TO CHANGE DELEGATIONS 1. Pat McNeil Ontario Power Generation Re: OPG's New Nuclear at Darlington Project 2. Bonnie Harkness, CEO Gayle Clow, Volunteer United Way of Ajax, Pickering and Uxbridge Re: Recruitment of Volunteers 3. Harry Froussios Senior Planner Zelinka Priamo Ltd. Re: Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 05-09 Application for Minor Variance to Sign By-law 2493/87, as amended - Pickering Brock Centre - 1755 - 1805 Pickering Parkway Application for Minor 4. Robert Munshaw Patrick Dovigi Direct Line Environmental Corp. Re: Amendment to Certificate of Approval Processing and Transfer Station for Liquid and Soil Industrial Waste (Delegate to appear in the event Council has questions related to CORR. No. 27-09) 5. Patricia Korol Re: 555 Mountain Ash Drive - Fence Exemption [Refer to CORR. No. 32-091 6. Ian Cumming Wayne Gibson Re: Traffic Calminq on Fairport Road 7. Charlotte Sheardown Re: Traffic Calming on Fairport Road 8. Peter Rodrigues Re: Report PD 13-09 Durham Region Growth Plan 28 9. Maria Das Re: Nuclear Issues 10. Sheila Caporali Re: Nuclear Issues 11. Linda Harvey Re: Nuclear Issues 12. Ashwin Baskaran Re: Nuclear Issues 13. Chai Kalevar Re: Nuclear Issues PICKERD March 23, 2009 CORRESPONDENCE Pages 1. CORR. 26-09 Motion for Direction ANGIE HACHE, CITY CLERK 33-34 CITY OF GREATER SUDBURY P O Box 500 Stn A 200 Brady Street Sudbury, ON P3A 5P3 Letter received from Angie Hache, City Clerk, City of Greater Sudbury, requesting Council's endorsement of a resolution passed by the City of Greater Sudbury on February 11, 2009 concerning the regulation and provision of resources to monitor retirement homes. 2. CORR. 27-09 Motion to Support DIRECTOR, PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT (refer to Page 6 of memo) CITY OF PICKERING 35-46 Correspondence received from the Director, Planning & Development dated March 18, 2009 with respect to an Application to Amend Ministry of the Environment Certificate of Approval #A680301, from Direct Line Environmental Services inc. for property municipally known as 1048, 1060/1070 Toy Avenue. Staff are responding in order to meet a March 27, 2009 comment date of the Ministry. 3. CORR. 28-09 Motion to Confirm ROGER HANMER, REGIONAL DIRECTOR Previous Position MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION 47-58 Central Region 2nd Floor, Bldg. D 1201 Wilson Ave., Downsview, ON M3M 1J8 Correspondence received from the Ministry of Transportation in response to Report OES 46-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services with respect to West Duffins Creek Bridge. The Ministry is requesting in writing that the City agrees to a new proposal of $200,000 for the cost of the share of the sidewalk based on the estimate provided by MTO to the City in March 2008. 4. CORR. 29-09 Refer to Planning & TERRI D. DANIELS Development Committee ROGERS WIRELESS PARTNERSHIP Director of Planning 8200 Dixie Road & Development Brampton, ON L6T OC1 to Report 59-62 30 Correspondence received from Terri D. Daniels, Rogers Wireless Partnership with respect to a proposal by Rogers Communications Inc. to install wireless communications on City owned property municipally known as Lots 34 and 35, Concession 5. 5. CORR. 30-09 Receive for Information ULLI S. WATKISS, CITY CLERK 63-68 CITY OF TORONTO City Hall, 12th Floor West 100 Queen Street West Toronto, ON M5H 2N2 Letter received from Ullis S. Watkiss, City Clerk, City of Toronto, with respect to a resolution passed on January 27 and 28, 2009 regarding the development of regulations which will ensure that comprehensive and effective energy efficiency measures are in place and to take immediate steps to improve protection for tenants from negative impacts of sub-metering. 6. CORR. 31-09 Receive for Information RESIDENTS CORRESPONDENCE 69-72 RE: PROPOSED INCINERATOR (Copy of attachments available in the office of the City Clerkl Correspondence received, from Whitby residents Chris White and Rebecca Harrison expressing concerns with respect to the proposed incinerator site in Clarington and the location and times of the meetings. 7. CORR. 32-09 Receive for Information TOM LAWSON 73 R.R. 2 Port Hope, ON L1A 3V6 Correspondence received from Tom Lawson expressing concerns with respect to the Pickering B refurbishment. 8. CORR. 33-09 Receive for Information PATRICIA KOROL 74-80 545 Mountain Ash Drive Pickering, ON L1W 3Z8 Correspondence received from Patricia Korol with respect to an exemption to Fence By-law No. 425/76 for 555 Mountain Ash Drive, Pickering. 9. CORR. 34-09 Motion to Endorse KIMBERLEY KITTERINGHAM 81-88 TOWN CLERK TOWN OF MARKHAM 101 Town Centre Boulevard Markham ON UR 9W3 J Letter received from Kimberley Kitteringham, Town Clerk, Town of Markham with respect to a resolution passed on February 10, 2009 seeking Council's support regarding the establishment of federal tax incentives for heritage properties. 10. CORR. 35-09 Motion to Declare LYNDA SHEPHERD 89 THE CANADIAN HEARING SOCIETY 13-575 Thornton Road North Oshawa, ON L1J 81-5 Letter received from Lynda Shepherd, The Canadian Hearing Society requesting the City of Pickering proclaim May, 2009 as Hearing Awareness Month. 11. CORR. 36-09 Motion to Declare SARA LAWSON 90-91 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR PARKINSON SOCIETY CANADA CENTRAL & NORTHERN ONTARIO 4211 Yonge Street, Suite 321 Toronto, ON M2P 2A9 Letter received from Sara Lawson, Community Development Coordinator, Parkinson Society Canada Central & Northern Ontario requesting the City of Pickering proclaim April, 2009 as Parkinson's Disease Awareness Month. 12. CORR. 37-09 Motion to Declare ELAINE GORAJ 92-93 FUNDRAISING & PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT CHILD FIND ONTARIO 440A Britannia Road East Mississauga, ON L4Z 1X9 Letter received from Elaine Goraj, Fundraising & Program Development, Child Find Ontario, requesting the City of Pickering proclaim May 25, 2009 as Green Ribbon of Hope Campaign and National Missing Children's Day. 13. CORR. 38-09 Motion to Declare MARISA CARPINO 94 SUPERVISOR, CULTURE & RECREATION CITY OF PICKERING Correspondence received from Marisa Carpino, Supervisor, Culture & Recreation, City of Pickering, requesting the City of Pickering proclaim March 21, 2009 as International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. -32 14. CORR. 39-09 Motion to Declare MARISA CARPINO 95 SUPERVISOR, CULTURE & RECREATION CITY OF PICKERING Correspondence received from Marisa Carpino, Supervisor, Culture & Recreation, City of Pickering, requesting the City of Pickering proclaim May, 2009 as Asian Heritage Month: City of Greater Sudbury Ville du Grand Sudbury u ulc. er ! Grand i0s at 33 February 26, 2009 All Ontario Municipalities Re: Regulation and Provision of Resources to Monitor Retirement Homes PO BOX 500 STN A 200 BRADY STREET The following resolution #2009-65 was passed by Council of the City of SUDBURY ON P3A 5P3 Greater Sudbury on February 11, 2009: CP500 SUCC A 200, RUE BRADY WHEREAS in 2001 the Mayor and Council's Roundtable on Seniors' SUDBURY ON P3A 5P3 Issues recognized the need to regulate rest and retirement homes; AND WHEREAS a working group of the Mayor and Council's 705-671-2489 Roundtable on Seniors' Issues was established in September 2001 www.greatersudbury.ca and since that time the working group has gathered information and www.grandsudbury.ca feedback from municipal officials and received input from privately owned retirement homes, advisory groups, residents and families; AND WHEREAS the 2006 Ontario budget stated "the Government will continue to improve efficiency and accountability by engaging in formal consultations in 2006/2007, through the Ontario's Seniors' Secretariat, with the goal of establishing a new regulatory framework for strengthening standards of care in Ontario's retirement homes"; AND WHEREAS the Assistant Deputy Minister, Mr. Geoff Quirt, met with the Mayor and Council's Roundtable on Seniors' Issues in 2006; AND WHEREAS the findings of the consultation which were distributed in April 2007 recommended the need to regulate retirement homes; AND WHEREAS to date it appears that the Provincial Government has made no progress in implementing legislation to address this need; A W HEREAS there have been recent incidents that have resulted in residents of retirement homes being placed in life threatening si uatiors such as a recent fire in Orillia that resulted in the unfortunate nd hospitalization of many residents T EREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of the City of er Sudbury lobby all Ontario municipalities to have the Ontario dal government take immediate action and pass the legislation FILE th t wild regulate and provide resources to monitor all retirement o es nd provide a safe home environment to those seniors who are ~r10, N erable; 2 1-k - 3 4 -2- AND THAT this resolution be forwarded to The Honourable Rick Bartolucci, M.P.P., Minister of Community Safety and Correctional Services. Yours truly W . /.C14 /fb Angie Hache City Clerk cc: Councillor Ted Callaghan, Co-Chair, Mayor and Council's Advisory Panel on Seniors' Issues Anadel Hastie, Co-Chair, Mayor and Council's Advisory Panel on Seniors' Issues G. Forget-Rose, Community Development Co-ordinator WSCLA/MER This material is provided under contract as a paid service by the originating organization and does not necessarily reflect the view or positions of the Usociation of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO), its subsidiary companies, officers, directors or agents. 'CL~ D~ PI ~KERI MEMO To: Debi Wilcox March 18, 2009 City Clerk From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Everett Buntsma Director, Operations & Emergency Services Copy: (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer. Chief Administrative Officer Subject: Application to Amend Ministry of the Environment Certificate of Approval # A680301 MOE Reference Number 3332-7NXKQ3 f`+~ccrch Direct Line Environmental Services Inc. - 1048,1060/1070 Toy Avenue ` °L= (Part of Lot 18, Concession 1) r City of Pickering vr~ .o File: A-2412-004 +c:, p~,(oof 4he m=nno) The City is in receipt of a request for comments from the Ministry of the Environment (MOE), respecting an application from Direct Line Environmental Corp., seeking an amendment to their Provincial Certificate of Approval (C of A) for their Waste Disposal Site at 1048 and 1060/1070 Toy Avenue. The Ministry has requested comments by March 27, 2009. The application is to amend the C of A to permit an ex-situ biological treatment station for non-hazardous hydrocarbon impacted soils at 1060/1070 Toy Avenue, with a daily receiving limit of up to 1300 tonnes and a maximum on site storage and treatment capacity of 40,000 tonnes at any one time. The application also requests to incorporate the southerly adjacent 0.85 ha property and building at 1048 Toy Avenue into the C of A, to accommodate additional storage of drums, used automobile filters (filter crushing), empty plastic containers and pails (recycling), solvents, glycol and parts washers currently listed on the current Certificate, as well as additional truck parking (see site location map Attachment #1). City Staff do not have the technical expertise necessary to provide a comprehensive review on the detailed supporting documentation. Our comments are based on the information provided, a meeting held with the applicant, and discussions with the Reviewer from the Ministry.of Environment. Council may wish to consider whether the services of an environmental consultant are required to review this application request. ~_However, such action would impact the City's ability to meet the comment deadline set by the Province. The applicant wishes to commence soil treatment activities on the site as soon as possible. The application has been reviewed by the Planning & Development Department and the Municipal Property & Engineering Division. The proposed land use complies with the City's Official Plan and Zoning By-law. It is recommended that the Ministry establish a condition in the C of A that prohibits the commencement of the proposed new uses until such time as the owner has received approval from the City for revised site plans for both sites. The applicant also requests that soil be accepted for treatment at this facility from anywhere in Ontario and United States. This geographic area is considered broader than necessary for this operation. Direct Line advises that the majority of its clients are located within the GTA and Peterborough area, due to the significant costs involved in truck transportation. The applicants current C of A is restricted to the Province of Ontario and appears to be working well. Staff recommend that the Ministry be requested to limit the service area for the soils treatment element of the C of A to the Province of Ontario. This restriction will allow the establishment of a local treatment facility for soil remediation, reducing the distance trucks must travel to reach a suitable facility and reducing emissions and fuel consumption. The application is supported subject to several conditions related to site operations and site plan approval. The applicant has met with staff and is aware of these recommended City requirements. These conditions include: • That the owner receive revised site plan approval from the City prior to commencing the additional activities sought through the C of A amendment application. • That any outdoor soils storage activity be limited to the northern property (1070 Toy Avenue) and be restricted to a maximum height of 6.0 metres. • That the facility only receive soil for treatment from the Province of Ontario. Current Site Operations 1060110 70 Toy Avenue Direct Line Environmental Corp. (Direct Line), which is owned by Green For Life (GFL) is a liquid waste management facility that has been in business for more than 40 years. They have operated from the 1060/1070 Toy Avenue site for approximately 10 years (see Attachment #2). Through the company's current C of A they collect and process liquid waste materials from throughout the Province of Ontario. Direct Line accepts used oil filters that are crushed in order to extract oil waste and shredded, and treats/recycles grease trap waste, liquid industrial waste, plastic oil containers, spill clean-up materials, and catch basin materials. March 18, 2009 Page 2 Direct Line Environmental Services Inc. Direct Line is also capable of handling other waste materials on-site such as the treatment/recycling/disposal of waste water, non hazardous and hazardous sludge, _ laundry, acid and alkaline wastes, used anti-freeze and paint sludge. The site is permitted, under the existing C of A, to handle a maximum of 2,312,500 litres of liquid industrial waste at any one time, and the business is permitted to operate from 6:00 am to 11:00 pm Monday to Friday, and 6:00 am to 6:00 pm on Saturdays. The C of A also permits the site to receive emergency shipments of waste from spill clean- ups on a 24 hour, 7-day per week basis. An average of 25 trucks per day enter the site. The current C of A amendment application does not propose to increase the volume of liquids permitted to be stored or processed on-site. 1048 Toy Avenue GFL purchased 1048 Toy Avenue in September 2008. The site currently supports two buildings. The building fronting Toy Avenue is a multi-tenant industrial building, while the building that fronts Quartz Street operates as a separation and resource recovery facility for construction wastes (see Attachment #3). Since February 1993, two of the eight units in the multi-tenant building have operated as a waste transfer facility for commercial waste under a C of A from the Ministry of the Environment. This C of A was issued to PGR Septic Systems in 1993, but is now operated by Direct Line Environmental Service Inc. Proposed Site Operations 1060 & 1070 Toy Avenue Direct Line proposes to treat non-hazardous hydrocarbon impacted soils over a three acre area of its site (ex-situ) using a biological treatment process. They propose a daily receiving limit of up to 1,300 tonnes and a maximum on-site storage and treatment capacity of 40,000 tonnes at any one time. Soil would be trucked to the site from various locations and deposited at a soil storage and screening area of approximately 11,200 square metres (140 metres x 80 metres) at the north portion of the property (see Attachments #4 & #5). The application requests that soils be permitted to be received from Ontario and United States, however the applicant advises that the majority of shipments will be from the GTA and Peterborough area. Up to an additional 20 trucks per day (triaxle and tandem) are anticipated to deliver soil to the site. The storage area would have capacity to contain up to 15,000 tonnes of soil. Soil from the storage area would be screened, inoculated with microbes (containing non-pathogenic bacteria and bacteria nutrients that are neither genetically altered nor enhanced), placed into a series of 10 cells (each 20 metres x 20 metres x 2 metres high), and tarped. After a 30 to 60 day treatment period, the soil would be trucked from the site, often returning to its place of origin (see Attachment #6). An example of the type of soil proposed to be treated at this site is soil from a gas station that has experienced a leak in a storage tank and is required to undergo site remediation. March 18, 2009 Page 3 Direct Line Environmental Services Inc. 38 -If no capacity is available in the cells, soil will be stored in piles in the soil storage and screening area. The height of soil storage will not exceed 6 metres. The storage and screening area is to be established on a concrete base. Surface water and leachate from the treatment cells will be directed toward specific catch basins and treated by existing licensed facilities operated by Direct Line. All on-site surface water will be controlled and remain within the area containing the proposed concrete base Any additional runoff will be contained on site. The surface will be graded to prevent surface water external to the site from entering the property. The applicant proposes to construct two additional buildings on the site at a later date: a 96 square metre (12 metres x 8 metres) Environmental Control Building to accommodate microbe solutions, a maximum of 4 regenerative blowers, emergency spill equipment, a maintenance shop and parts inventory; and a 9 square metre Auxiliary Building to accommodate a maximum of 2 regenerative blowers to aerate the treatment cells on-site (see Attachment 5). The applicant will use the existing buildings on 1070 Toy Avenue to accommodate the items mentioned above until new buildings are constructed, if required. 1048 Toy Avenue As part of the amendment application, the applicant has requested that abutting property to the south (approximately 0.85 hectares (2.1 acres) of land at 1048 Toy Avenue) be incorporated into the existing C of A. This site currently supports a 1,460 square metre building and is proposed to be used for the additional storage of drums, used automobile filters (filter crushing), empty plastic containers and pails (recycling), solvents, glycol and parts washers, which is currently occurring on 1070 Toy Avenue, and additional on-site truck parking. It is our understanding that the additional parking requested on 1048 Toy Avenue will be utilized on an occasional basis only. Toy Avenue Reconstruction/Urbanization Project The City of Pickering and the Regional Municipality of Durham plan to coordinate efforts necessary to reconstruct Toy Avenue to full urban standards in 2009, from Bayly Street to the northern terminus of the street, adjacent to 1060/1,070 Toy Avenue. The City will be responsible for providing storm sewers and road reconstruction, and the Region of Durham will be responsible for replacement of the existing water main and signalization of the Toy/Bayly intersection. Recognizing the existing turning radius problem on the north end of Toy Avenue, a 16m curbed cul-de-sac could be constructed by the City in conjunction with the proposed widening/urbanizing works for Toy Avenue. This may require some property acquisition from neighbouring properties; however a 16.Om radius will better serve all sizes of vehicles including truck traffic and emergency vehicles. March 18, 2009 Page 4 Direct Line Environmental Services Inc. The City is presently in discussion with Direct Line to acquire a portion of its lands in order to complete a proper turning circle in conjunction with the proposed road work. 39 This will be further evolved through the site plan approval process. The reconstruction project is anticipated to commence in 2009, pending budget approval. Official Plan & Zoning The properties are located in the Brock Industrial Area within an area designated "General Employment Area" by the Pickering Official Plan. The proposed use is permitted under this designation. The property at 1060/1070 Toy Avenue is zoned "MC-6" - Associated Industrial under Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 2234/86, and By-law 6902/08. This zoning permits manufacturing or industrial uses, as well as warehouse and distribution depots, light manufacturing plants for the processing of goods and materials, controlled outdoor storage and truck parking subject to specified areas on-site. The proposed use complies with the existing zoning for the subject property. 1048 Toy Avenue is zoned "MC-16" - Associated Industrial under Zoning By-law 2511, as amended by By-law 5949/02. This zoning permits manufacturing or industrial uses, as well as warehouse and distribution depots, light manufacturing plants for the processing of goods and materials, and outdoor storage in any yard except the front yard so long as the area used for outdoor storage purposes does not exceed 30 percent of the area of the lot. The owner intends to use the existing building for the indoor storage of waste materials and on-site truck parking. The proposed operation at 1048 Toy Avenue complies with the existing zoning for the subject property. Site Plan Revisions Required Currently, both sites (1060/1070 Toy Avenue and 1048 Toy Avenue) are subject to approved site plans. The site at 1060/1070 Toy Avenue will require revisions to the approved site plan to address site operation and function and the site plan for 1048 Toy Avenue may require amendments. Matters for review include: • location and grading of outdoor soil storage area and treatment cells • stormwater management • site grading • driveway access control • inbound/outbound traffic movement • internal traffic circulation, including location of truck parking, queuing, loading/unloading details • truck turning paths (along with truck turning radius, truck length and width) dedication of lands required for introduction of a turning circle at the north end of Toy Avenue • height limitation for soil storage to 6.0 metres March 18, 2009 Page 5 Direct Line Environmental Services Inc. 4 0 -Summary The application is supported subject to several conditions related to site operations and site plan approval. These conditions include: • That the owner receive revised site plan approval from the City prior to commencing the additional activities sought through the C of A amendment application. • That any outdoor soils storage activity be limited to the northern property (1070 Toy Avenue) and be restricted to a maximum height of 6.0 metres. • That the facility only receive soil for treatment from the Province of Ontario. LT: jf JiDocumentsTlanninglT Memo to CAO - Direct Line doc2.doc March 18, 2009 Page 6 Direct Line Environmental Services Inc. Attachment 41 PICKtRING PARKWAY f II L 1 1 1 1 1 nog 1 N~~NW P~ Q 0 Q 1070 ~ O Z > S 1060 Q L~ m 1048 SUBJ CT LAN ET QUARTZ ST. P Y U O C M } O Ln w O U1 City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PART OF LOT 18, CONCESSION 1 OWNER GREEN FOR LIFE(GFL)/DIRECT LINE ENVIRONMENTAL DATE MAR.12 2009 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. N/A SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY AY N pTa ro etrcEntarpr;aea Inc. pnd ;t. auppl;- Ail right. R.'*'" d Not a plon of aurvay. PN-4 2005 MPAC Pntl its sup Pliers. All rights Rese rvatl. Not .plan o! Survey. 42 a M A Y . p. A 1 L F FC ri, Wt G K R r•~ bu„p~C ri~'E r yN'~ r w CC F 22 2 (2-1 1 S P U R L I X E Sfcacc ar: E+er7 y,_,,,,,~ b, . 'F.~W 1 lctiP,na..Y Y~ n' FY ]p' F piLRc \ - ' F'1,.Cititn 311 iPViu(., Ree[iu,n+6~ SITE AREA 6y Cw,i L 0. '4r3 4.~ 1060 TCY AVE 0.94 ho (9,41227tii) \I 1070 TOY AVE 1.07 ho (10,650.8dm') FORMER CNR PROPERV 2.26 ha (22679.EOm') 4.27 ho (4271211 m') y 6 a pn'pY F nape a FkOlbuo. Ouie.niuL , S1aL~ a'o~ tw~k MAn;, i t i l e LO Cd TION I ' /DWCr L" 81'nRCN9ENTN. ( 1070 -OY 7+y V f.~ ~ o ~'cFa6.u Lis- GL LLI MAW M2 1.05 f hfIO PLt-Ii R~cy P~lV1`~ . R S4L G H C,g WASHE Lf TLT I 4Y9 tat I R7rmro•F _ _u~y_ I ¢ i 1080 TOY AVE j 9,412 m2 (0.9 1 I I I i KEY PLAN 000 000 000 000, k i , i' p n• pr a, F , nS.6. i j j I +~..n1, I ~ S6'T'~ FLAN s.a 4 3,1 sr.~- "i I C a i g .t 6~ Q 1 1 F~ I ~ ~ 1 f ~ ~ © 4' LIIL~` ii. 7 I __-___'.A _ _ ~S'~© i) ~ __-7~°:=~__~ 77ttYYr•IiI~II•~ Ili lilt lily li il~jyl~ t \ ~:f'. ~:^i 7 .n .-mow-- - •-~1 i t 111#1 1140 » fit ; w t t~ f ~~.~4vvE•rw III ;II III it S i of t u ; 2 I i = t all i ' ; i . ` 1 'Za 6 t~ ®q rt1 I' ly S Z' = Q'' 1 ° a/ E~ i 3 b' u n Illy 'il j t IN E♦ a 111 ~1~E rE ~ ® •q '1 " LL.. I l i I ~ . (zl a W, V.1 iE -Ile a: a IS = a a .71 -I ; .ter JI - 3rw3nr .AOL s I 4~ F z w L O ' (X31dWOO ANV713M X33273 u Y J SN13311A213M073H1301HVd) ? u v ANV713M133211SA7AV8 dm< W7WW 0 CL w 7 O 1°w OLL J < z~m I Q o ~ gm° y > F ^ 11.r o w am q O Q 3.w. ua3aoae w£v4'91 a o uz- O w z z- 0 oat ' Z Z ?~i W W ~w° W 2GZP~ 2~..' W Y 0 revs Y W F- ' J F v; OFK-~Q oc12 E n s' LL W J ~Pi 5~i Ko< cL I ~:R~ Q K c~ a - LL '3AV A010901 Ol to 31nom S5399V)49081 W q r Rv do >z Q y : ; i / E l 3•JV801S h N3d0 W LLJ 3mv ~ er r ONI)48Vd )40081 03SOd08d ~ Z J a~W4 e S W ~ • ~ 1079NNa I W W m r LL >y S fi a H 3 Z p a waW i ~a~ Wa to I W o n ~u f II xyZ z m 01 2 Q W W >N 2 Q I \ 3w3i 9NUsL r" X 1 Z W O a / 2 1'< W a S a u <11 1=, Z W \ a-Jm2q 's► - .''~i i xp =?u7 twi?•w mw WI i ~~rro.. m.i 3AVA0V- a I=J o W 4 uZ ~LL -a. o I w 0w ~ LLw O iEZlzw 1 1 a FV WF r-m I VI V J 1- - y ` ,e a <K Z'F-~ Op-Ioo =O lr~ V WO K 0: W I 1 W W zOF0 KO O 1~ I I I J LL V F O W f W Z W H W' ~ i e F« E I <<W OW ~~<W ii 1 I GCOwYO 3f1Af ow E~'.~i ~ rmgux <OW°W n1-JZ'_ ~on~Hf Wn `it ol. R <ia° y j t- pOUZ Oz ••u0 4 C 1i ^:e °x Fi°o I I I 60 0 00 2 u*iUV OXmo .~'mA'o o° oos V WmJf Wo• << oR°°m °«de_ W 1 mg 7 a a000x p vo°~ ZOCi 'emu 3NNyH~ 6F-vcF-__ rr~Rt- o~ N W 1 1 200 u, r SWO $ gi° ,om • = u « z' .2 w~JO WW nD~om c 3uy Q o _ _ ° E° i _ 5 3- u a u;; w C K ; 15 toW> 6w< q?Q OC FV g: w$L oEms c° nm _ m° C SF a^ _ m° ° G o G m° m - ° o W W G rn j o C- R C e C~ L 30 3 U 10 ° - = Hor'O dC: m°m «3 Sm aq° com °°«@ Er x. Ow: 0_ du•-lo o ct ~o asc oo° mm a. me f~ r3€e~o °m E mm3rn go:m zo c QT_°«~cu m` =te nnnow o_m n'< ! °°ct~° °o4E o~F°cO~ E •e mE - u~ o c° m _ j_-Ea and « E c co E - ° oe- a.,gni So 3° w Em o~c - - ~m c°$ of°n~w9 o-°e So ' m nom -O tlf-- H, $o ° kr°S°RammE m moo -o« 3m nau -°°`°O~°~a o° °W L) Q ° moc° ` ° °W euo ou`Fm~ oc cE J a,°6 Ebwm°_mo Eon porn mm~°~=~ vA- N m4 ornQ(1a>rn ° °rn W m O m ° s3 ~o° Nm o ° ` W 7 u E- vtt=noo _aur - c U Q 6 Q ~y° vQOmmn a«- L~~° _ v<m W N 7 o cm Em°x r Z S g a °NO 3 mu1 pD - =3 tc E °D = mm W 0 Z E... m o~aL a nmi ca vLr n°m° v ° 07 ;°O-yD mho -moo ~c Q V d c oac 5m n W ao°E O u°= nt U d U °_o o c~L m S° ._'°au °m O w z rim ¢io£"~a` mo JN_ / ~n m5 m__n° N 0 ` o w d a M N Site Plan Layout `attar -wie 4. January 2009 45 ~8m x 12m Cell #1 Cell #2 Cell #3 ECB 20m x 20m Cell #4 Cell #5 Soil Storage 8 140m Screening Area 80m x 40m Cell #6 Cell #7 3m x 3m AB Cell #10 Cell #9 Cell #8 80m LEGEND I Travel Areas i ECB Environmental Control Building AB Auxiliary Building i 4 6 Process Flow Diagram CLEAN SOIL OUT SCALE SOIL STORAGE IMPACTED SOIL IN METAL RECYCLER IZE =INJECTION (RocksSM tal) SCREENING - - - - - 1 METAL i FAIL < 2" SIZE W TREATMENT CELL W - Wash with water and/or / microbes until sheen or discolouration is removed. OA/ . QC ROCKS PASS i CLEAN SOIL STORAGE TABLE 1 TABLE 2 F TABLE 3 Ministry of Ministere des Transportation Transports r`0 N 1 Office of the Regional Director Bureau du directeur regional l r1 47 Central Region Region du Centre • / 12 Floor, Bldg. D 2e etage, edifice D Ontario 1201 Wilson Avenue 1201 avenue Wilson Downsview, ON M3M 1J8 Downsview ON M3M1J8 Tel (416) 235-5400 Tel: (416) 235-5400 F Fax (416) 235-5266 Telec: (416) 235-5266 -0 February 9, 2009 CITY OF PICKERING Debi A. Wilcox CMO, CMM III City Clerk City of Pickering E~[l° Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Dear Ms. Wilcox: This is in response to your letter of December 17, 2008 to Jim Bradley, Minister of Transportation ~Of'y regarding the sidewalk construction on the West Duffins Creek Bridge, which is the subject of Report ~t~tr OE^ S 46-08. 1 have been asked to respond on the ministry's behalf. The Ministry's policy in this regard is that a municipality is responsible for the cost of new sidewalk on a structure and the additional cost associated with constructing the bridge to accommodate it. This approach has been consistently applied over the past several years. In February 2008, MTO provided the City with an estimate of $200,000 as the City's share for the sidewalk, based on conventional bridge construction values at that time. In May 2008, prior to commencing the detail design, a 'Draft' Legal Agreement for cost sharing between MTO and the City for the sidewalk portion of the project was sent to Darrell Selsky of the City of Pickering. There was no concern raised at that time to the principle of cost sharing or the cost estimate, and hence, MTO proceeded with the design, in good faith. In August 2008, City staff advised MTO that the City disagreed with the MTO's formula for calculating the cost of the sidewalk. By this time the bridge contract was being advertised. MTO has based the cost of the sidewalk portion on a percentage of the total cost of the bridge. This estimate was based upon a full 1.8m sidewalk along the length of the bridge. The total cost of the sidewalk based on this formula is $433,000. The construction of the bridge is scheduled to begin in April 2009 and it would be difficult and costly to delete the sidewalk from the current design. To allow us to move forward, we propose that the City's share of the sidewalk be reduced to $200,000, based on the estimate provided by MTO to the City in March 2008. Please indicate in writing that the City agrees to this proposal that is in keeping witFi'tle°oridinal terms of this arrangemen . VV3-WIII then issue a new Legal Agreement for the City's execution. If we. are unable-to reach an agreement, we will delete the sidewalk from the contract. -r J . Q~~NiJ Yvtd ~ m L k My apologies for the delay in this response. I look forward to your reply so that the projecib.n_.ay without delay. • At t ; sv r SinCorely, + Roger anmer, MBA, P.Eng „ Ufa - Re to Director P'~ --22oa 48 REPORT TO COUNCIL PIC Report Number: OES 46-08 146 Date: December 15, 2008 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Operations & Emergency Services Subject: Sidewalk Installation - West Duffins Creek Bridge Highway #7, Green River - File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report OES 46-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services be received; 2. That the City of Pickering request that the Ministry of Transportation provide a platform area and a 1.8 metre wide sidewalk on the north side on the proposed reconstructed West Duffins Creek Bridge structure at no cost to the City; 3. That the City of Pickering enter into an agreement with the Ministry of Transportation, Ontario for the maintenance of a new 1.8 metre wide sidewalk on the north side of the West Duffins Creek Bridge structure; and 4. Further, that a copy of Report OES 46-08 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services be forwarded to the Ministry of Transportation for their information. Executive Summary: In 2008 the Ministry of Transportation, Ontario (MTO) advised the City that they were in the process of preparing the detail design for the West Duffins Creek Bridge replacement located on Highway # 7 near the Hamlet of Green River. City staff viewed this as an opportunity to have a sidewalk constructed on the new structure as one of standard width currently doesn't exist on the old structure. The Ministry of Transportation, Ontario has since completed detail design and tendered this project. The project has been awarded to Dufferin Construction who plans to start work in the Spring of 2009. Financial Implications: If the recommendations contained in this report are acceptable to MTO, the City will not be required to budget funds in the 2009 Capital Budget. Staff are currently negotiating an acceptable agreement with MTO staff. 4 9 Report OES 46-08 December 15, 2008 ' Subject: Sidewalk Installation - West Duffins Creek Bridge 147 Highway #7, Green River Page 2 Sustainability Implications: The construction of a new bridge structure on Highway # 7 will improve the roadway geometrics and vehicular flows in this area. It will also provide for the necessary concrete sidewalk of standard width for the safe and efficient passage for pedestrians in the area. Background: In 2008 the Ministry of Transportation, Ontario contacted the City of Pickering indicating that they were in the process of preparing the detail design for the West Duffins Creek Bridge replacement on Highway #7 in Green River. City staff indicated a desire for a sidewalk to be installed on the new bridge structure. Sidewalks should be ultimately provided on both sides of Highway #7 and the bridge to accommodate existing and future pedestrian movement. As the MTO design indicates future widening on both sides of the structure to accommodate four lanes, it is appropriate to install the sidewalk on one side only at this time. The north side was chosen as there currently exists a 0.6m wide raised concrete curbed area on the north side. The City therefore, requested that the Ministry of Transportation consider a 1.8 metre wide sidewalk in their detail design. The Ministry over the last few months has provided the City with a draft agreement and cost estimate for our review which covers the detail design and sidewalk installation costs. Staff have reviewed the agreement but are unable to recommend it's acceptance to Council. Staff are of the opinion that the Ministry of Transportation, Ontario should be providing a platform area on the new structure to accommodate sidewalks at their cost. However in the agreement provided by the Ministry, they are proposing a cost sharing arrangement whereby the City incurs costs for the sidewalk as a percentage of the total project cost. If Council would agree to the proposed cost sharing agreement by the Ministry, the City would incur costs in the amount of $434,000. City staff do not agree that the local municipality should be burdened with any costs related to the provision of sidewalks over the bridge structure The province should have a responsibility to ensure that pedestrian access is accommodated over its infrastructure. Provincial policy statements promote accessibility, reduced reliance on motorized travel, and increased pedestrian and cycling movement/activity and their construction practices should be consistent with these policy statements. Since there exists a 0.6 metre wide raised curbed area (non-standard sidewalk), the MTO should incur the cost to bring this to a proper, current standard. It is staffs recommendation that the City not accept the cost-sharing suggested in the proposed draft agreement and advise the Ministry. The City requests the Ministry to provide a platform area on the new structure to accommodate a sidewalk on the north side and that the Ministry provide pedestrian access in compliance with the Ontarians' with Disabilities Act 2001 and other provincial policy. CORP0227-07/01 revised Report-()ES 46-08 December 15, 2008 Subject: Sidewalk Installation - West Duffins Creek Bridge Highway #7, Green River Page 3 The Ministry has recently awarded this contract to Dufferin Construction who plan to start work in the Spring of 2009. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Ministry of Transportation, Ontario Agreement rsed Prepared By: A4Bsma arrell Selsky ESupervisor, Directo r, Engineering al Works Operations & Emergency Services ichard W. Hol rn, P. Eng. Division Head Municipal Property & Engineering /DS Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City sou cil J. Quin DMR MM III Zief J Administra ve Officer r CORP0227-07/01 revised Caq 4 TO REPORT C)l MUNICIPAL PROPERTY & ENGINEERING Attachment for Report OES-46-08 WEST DUFFINS CREEK BRIDGE (GREEN RIVER) rw z D ~ n Y = GREEN m W W W RIVER Y u 0 O } U. HIGHWAY 7 O SUBJ CT AR Z N W O O HIGHWAY 407 S LOCATION MAP PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION INCLUDES: Complete construction of West Duffins Creek Bridge which includes; • Installation of a new sidewalk installed on the new bridge structure ,=TTACHMENT# 'TOREPORT#bILS 44-01 52 1 0l THIS AGREEMENT made in triplicate this day of 2008 BETWEEN: HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN in right of the Province of Ontario, represented by the Minister of Transportation for the Province of Ontario, Hereinafter referred to as the "Ministry", OF THE FIRST PART: -and - THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING, Hereinafter referred to as the "City", OF THE SECOND PART. WHEREAS: (1) The Ministry proposes to replace the West Duffins Creek Bridge located on King's Highway Number 7 within the limits of Ministry work project W.P. 280- 91-00 in the City of Pickering, Regional Municipality of Durham; (2) The City has requested the Ministry design and construct a sidewalk on the north side of the West Duffins Creek Bridge structure, as shown on Schedule "A" attached hereto; (3) The Ministry has agreed to design and construct the sidewalk for the City, at the City's cost and expense, as part of the Ministry's construction contract and upon the terms and conditions of this Agreement. NOW THEREFORE THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSES that in consideration of the premises and the covenants herein contained the Parties hereto for themselves and their respective successors and assigns hereby mutually agree as follows: 1. In this Agreement, "Regional Director "means the Regional Director of the Central Region of the Ministry of Transportation or his nominee; and, 1 ATTACHMENT#- sOREPORT#~~G"D~ 1 2_01 "Work" means all the work to construct a sidewalk on the West Duffins Creek bridge structure, as shown on Schedule "A" and includes all work of or incidental to the design and construction of the sidewalk. 2. The Ministry shall, at the City's cost and expense, design and prepare the contract drawings and documents for construction of the Work upon the terms and conditions in this Agreement. I The City has approved the design of the City's Work as detailed in the contract drawings and documents prepared by the Ministry. 4. The Ministry shall construct the Work, when the West Duffins Creek bridge structure on King's Highway Number 7 is replaced under the Ministry's work project W.P. 280-91-00. 5. The Ministry shall: a) tender and award the contract for construction of the Work; b) provide field engineering during construction of the Work; c) supervise and direct the contract to the extent necessary to ensure the Work is constructed as detailed in contract drawings and documents approved by the Regional Director and to Ministry standards and specifications; and, d) determine all matters relating to the Work, construction of the Work, and other matter of or incidental to the Work as required by this Agreement. 6. If in the opinion of the Ministry the unit bid prices or total bid tendered for both the Ministry's and the City's Work under W.P. 280-91-00 is excessive, the Ministry reserves the right to cancel the award of the contract for construction of the Work mentioned in this Agreement and to re-tender the whole or any portion of the contract, and in the event the Ministry cancels the award of the contract for the Work, this Agreement is terminated. 7. The Ministry shall provide the City 4th a copy of the unit contract prices for the _54 4", RE PORT it Ministry's and the City's Work immediately following award of the Ministry's contract. 8. The Ministry shall give the City at least two (2) weeks written notice before construction of the Work is commenced. 9. From time to time the Ministry shall invoice the City for amounts the City is required to pay the Ministry by reason of this Agreement, and the City shall pay to the Ministry the amount or amounts of the invoices within sixty (60) days of receipt. 10. When the Ministry is satisfied that the City's Work has been constructed in compliance with this Agreement, the Ministry shall notify the City and the City shall have the Work inspected, and if the City finds the Work has been completed to the satisfaction of the City and in accordance with the contract drawings and documents, the City shall give the Ministry a written notice that the Work has been completed. 11. The Ministry shall report completion of construction under this Agreement to the City and while the Ministry will take normal precautions and construct according to the normal practice of the Ministry of Transportation, no warranties are expressed or implied by this Agreement. 12. The estimated cost to design and construct the Work for the City under this Agreement is the sum of Four Hundred Thousand ($433,681.00) Dollars, including surcharges, as shown in Schedule B attached hereto, but this is an estimate only and payment shall be made on the basis of the actual cost of the construction completed by the Ministry for the City under this Agreement. 13. The City shall pay to the Ministry the Ministry's actual cost and expense to design and construct the Work, actual costs to be determined by: a) application of the unit contract and material prices to the as-constructed quantities; b) the actual cost and expense of any force account work related thereto; and, 3 r,{w- MEN-'s ti. z ,KEPORI'44 OCS 146-69 c) the following surcharges: 1. five (5) percent for design of the work; 11. ten (10) percent for field supervision, quality assurance inspection and testing, contract administration; and, III. seven (7) percent for administrative overheads of the actual cost and expense otherwise payable to the Ministry under this Agreement. 14. The liability of the City to pay actual cost and surcharges is limited as fdlows: a) to pay one hundred (100) percent of any increased expense incurred by the Ministry to delete work herein at the request of the City; b) to pay one hundred (100) percent of increased expenses incurred by the Ministry to complete additional work which is requested by the City and not included in the final estimated cost; c) to pay one hundred (100) percent of increases in the cost of the Work attributed to delays for which the Ministry is not responsible; d) to pay one hundred (100) percent if increases in the cost of the Work attributable to unforeseen obstacles or other problems encountered during construction by the Ministry or the Ministry's contractor; and, e) the expenses and costs mentioned in this paragraph shall include surcharges determined as provided in this Agreement. 15. Upon completion of the Work, the City hereby agrees to assume ownership of the Work constructed under this Agreement. Thereupon, the City acknowledges that pursuant to section 33(1) of the Public Transportation and Highway Improvement Act, the Work is a sidewalk or municipal undertaking or work and that the City is liable for want of repair of the same. 4 5-6 REPORT;7-Qgp~ig- 16. The City shall be responsible for all safety and liability issues associated with the use of the sidewalk by the public and shall indemnify and save harmless the Ministry from and against any claim, action, cause of action or liability for loss, damage, accident or injury in any manner arising due to, out of, from or in connection with the City's responsibility for the sidewalk. 17. The City warrants that it has taken all necessary steps, done all acts, passed all by- laws and obtained all approvals within its power legally required to give it the authority to enter into this Agreement. THIS AGREEMENT shall enure to the benefit of and be binding upon the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Minister of Transportation for the Province of Ontario on behalf of the Party of the First Part has hereunto set his hand and the Party of the Second Part has hereunder affixed its Corporate Seal under the hands of its proper officers duly authorized in that behalf. SIGNED AND SEALED this day of , 2008. I I MINISTER OF TRANSPORTATION (ONTARIO) SIGNED AND SEALED this day of 2008. j i I THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING Per: Mayor David Ryan Per: Clerk, Debie Wilcox 5 `ACH1ENTtt!Z.. i"OREPORT# 6ES~F6-Of~ ro! Z 57 Schedule "A" to an Agreement between the Ministry and The Corporation of the City of Pickering r,(;~ ? IY + t giil a 'tt to }[F } f}ON ~ 3s ! i' 11 !fit iv!~}t! , E'+I,e i,-} '.'i:~=1 ' Jill; t , i f ~ ii Y Yfe , z p~ 3 a II = ~~1 11 i°i~ }F 1 rF"y eP. > F ~~j7 Y=j1~y+D .C !1=~ : I i ! ~ ~ ! ! y r i. ~i 1 ` 1 i i Y~lS .!lFSl;r t7 z >r 0 ! } ~ 1 ~M i G ! 6 !is',1 (!'+=Y F 1~~ ~~il r~ i ~ o E ( i 1 !!r !i_M , = EE . r'si 14 i• !.=AY - ~ qq ( q y p =36' (a Ii e! rsi nl i5t>kltl3t Ill t ii, LaiC+[?~Y3 : ftu ~d+ 11 flit,, E_ f LL Oili c .SC ~ Q fill I is ~ 5a i i I . , ~ o! is t el I i i.,. Wf t~ 4+ I j. f 1444 6 AT"`. CHMENT#.-...._2 TOREPORT#~ 6-4`6 581 _ ?Ql_ 7- Schedule "B" to an Agreement between the Ministry and The Corporation of the City of Pickering Preliminary Estimated Cost Breakdown Total Estimated Ministry City of Pickering Cost Category Cost % Cost Estimated % Cost Estimated $ Share Cost Share Cost Construction Works Highway 7 - West Duffins Creek Bridge Replacement; West Duffins Creek Bridge -New structure 2,235,728. Roadworks for bridge approaches 575,871. Temporary Traffic Signals (Electrical) 43,808. Utility Relocation (Hydro/Bell)- 50% of labour and labour 17,544. saving device costs Sub Total 2,872,951. Engineering -including Design and Construction Liaison (5% 143,647. of sub Total Contract Administration, Inspection and Material 287,295. Testin 10% of sub total Administrative overheads 201,106. (7% of sub Total) GST See Note 2 Estimated Total Project Cost 3,504,999 88% $3,071,318 12"/" $433,681.1 NOTES: 1. The above table reflects estimated costs for the Work. All payments shall be based on the actual costs incurred. 2. GST has been excluded from all Ministry costs. 3. Bridge Deck area - 34mx14.5m =493m2 Sidewalk area - 34mx1.8m = 61 m2 Sidewalk area as a per cent age of total deck area= (61/493) x 100 = 12% Sidewalk - Estimated cost =12% of Total estimated Cost 7 ROGERS" Rogers Wireless Partnership 5.9 8200 Dixie Road Brampton, Ontario L6T OC1 March 13, 2009 City of Pickering Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Attention: Debi Wilcox - Clerk Re: Proposed Rogers Communications Inc. Installation - Road Allowance Between Lots 34 and 35, Concession 5 Dear Ms. Wilcox: I would like to outline in this letter a proposal by Rogers Communications to install a wireless communications site on City owned land. It would be greatly appreciated if you would kindly ensure that this request is circulated to the appropriate City officials in order that Rogers can receive a formal response from the City. I have also enclosed a copy of our proposed site plan and photo simulations showing the proposed installation. Purpose of Rogs ers Proposed Telecommunication Installation Rogers is proposing to build and expand the necessary infrastructure to satisfy the enormous and growing demand for high quality, reliable wireless service. The vicinity of Highway 407 and the York Durham Line is known to be an area of poor wireless coverage for Rogers' network. In order to improve Rogers' wireless service to the aforementioned vicinity, a new antenna site is required. )LjD. Rogers' Site Requirements - -M L • C!1 c k A monopole structure measuring 40 metres in height is required, for Rogers to meet its wireless coverage objectives. Radio equipment is proposed to'.-lie"h6Us-e-d n a s e measuring approximately 3 metres x 4.9 metres at the base of the -towex-tee shelter are located in a fenced compound measuring approximt1 1.LLmetres x 18 .r -a metres. A AL L-i :so K; ~cvvtrv; i s 1) _FILE: MA ~ tf z LJI~EC'U_ 1_~G WIRELESS CABLE TV • INTERNET • HAME PHONE • RETAIL PUBLISHING BROADCASTING OROGERS' 60 Site Selection Process The selection of a wireless telecommunications site works similar to fitting a piece into a puzzle. In this case, the puzzle is a complex radio network, situated in a rural setting. Client demand, radio frequency, engineering principles, local topography and land use opportunities work in concert with one another to direct the location of our sites. To achieve a reliable wireless network, Rogers tries to provide a seamless signal to alleviate gaps in coverage and capacity. It is gaps in coverage that are responsible for dropped calls and unavailable service to clients. Once an area is identified as potentially meeting all of the above criteria, the surrounding neighbourhood is reviewed for existing structures that Rogers can utilize for the placement of its equipment and antennas. Generally, this includes multi-storey buildings and towers owned by other wireless carriers that can support our antennas. Within the search area identified as meeting the criteria for Rogers' network, there are no existing structures which could be utilized. In the course of attempting to secure a site for Rogers, it was found that the City of Pickering has an unutilized road allowance that is located within Rogers' search parameters. This is the Road Allowance between Lots 34 and 35, Concession 5 (east of York Durham Line and north of Whitevale Road.) Rogers has approached City staff with a proposal to lease a portion of this unused road allowance for our communication site for ten years with two renewals periods of five years each. Rogers was informed by City of Pickering staff that the Hamlet of Whitevale (located over I kilometre to the East of the proposed site location) is a Heritage District. Meetings were held with staff from the Planning & Development, Municipal Property & Engineering and, Legal Services departments in attendance in order to discuss the proposal. It was impressed upon Rogers that this is a sensitive area. Rogers has therefore made efforts to mitigate the visual impact of the proposed site while, still providing improvement to the local wireless service. Ideally, the best location for the site would have been close to Whitevale Rd., thereby limiting the costs associated with constructing road access and the installation of electrical supply. Given the input and advice from City staff during the meetings which were held, the location of the site has been pushed 600 metres north of Whitevale Rd. to reduce the impact on the Hamlet of Whitevale and surrounding areas. A study was undertaken and photo simulations were prepared that illustrate the tower, at this location, will not be visible from within the Hamlet of Whitevale. The Photo Simulation package forms part of this letter. RO E RS 61 Land Use Consultation Process Wireless facilities are exclusively regulated by the Federal Government and as a result are not required to obtain municipal permits of any kind. It is my understanding that the City of Pickering is in the process of developing policies and protocols respecting the installation of cell tower facilities in accordance with Industry Canada's recommendation. In the absence of such policy the Land Use Consultation Process defaults to Industry Canada's Spectrum Management and Telecommunications CPC (Client Procedures Circular) 2-0-03 Issue 4, http://vvww.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/smt-gst.nsf/eng/sfO8777.html a copy of which has been provided as part of this proposal letter package. Within this Industry Canada document, the process for public consultation and notification is outlined. It is noted that proponents must provide a notification package to the local public within a radius of three times the tower height, measured from the tower base or the outside perimeter of the supporting structure. In the case of Rogers proposed installation, this would preclude notice beyond the two adjoining property owners. By copying the Whitevale and District Residents Association in this proposal letter, Rogers is extending the notification significantly beyond the mandated radius. Conclusion This proposal gives way to a positive opportunity for the City of Pickering. Rogers' proposed installation will provide industry leading 3.5G wireless voice and data service to the area surrounding York Durham Line and Highway 407 including the Hamlet of Whitevale. In addition, the City of Pickering will receive revenue for the leased land which is otherwise not being utilized. Rogers has agreed to move the tower location significantly north of Whitevale Rd. thereby, limiting the impact that the site would have on the Whitevale Heritage District. Photo simulations have been prepared that demonstrate the effectiveness of the selected location. Rogers believes that the location will have minimal impact on the neighbourhood while providing improved service to the surrounding area due to the elevation, interactions with the existing wireless network, and line-of-site requirements. ROCS ERSM 6 _L _ Rogers looks forward to working with the City of Pickering to ensure that its real estate and land use processes are respected. Rogers looks forward to receiving the City's comments in the very near future. Yours truly, ROGERS COMMUNICATIONS INC. Terri D. Daniels New Site Development Network Implementation Tel (647) 747-4909 Cell (416) 567-3467 Fax (647) 747-4600 tcrri.daniels!urci.rogers.corn cc. Whitevale & District Residents Association Ulli S. Watkiss DITOROMO City Clerk cokp 30 - C Secretariat Tel: 416.392.7032 City Clerk's Office Fax: 416.392.2980 6 3 I ! + Council Secretariat Support email: mtoft@toranto.ca City Hall, 12" Floor, West 100 Queen Street West web: www.taronto.ca Toronto, Ontario M5H 21\12 In reply please quote: IE' ft.69-CD21.4 CITY OF PICKERING February 2, 2009 MUNICIPALITIES IN ONTARIO WITH A POPULATION OF OVER 30,000: Subject: Community Development and Recreation Committee Item 21.4 Installation of Sub-meters in Residential Rental Units and Its Impact on Tenant Affordability Units (Ward: All) City Council on January 27 and 28, 2009, adopted this Item without amendment, and in so doing, has forwarded the following recommendations to all municipalities in Ontario with a population of over 30,000: 1. City Council request the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to move quickly to enact sections 137 and 138 of the Residential Tenancies Act, and develop regulations which will ensure that comprehensive and effective energy efficiency measures are in place prior to hydro being removed from the rent, and that rent reductions be calculated in a fair and transparent manner. 2. Until such time as sections 137 and 138 are enacted, City Council request the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to immediately take steps to improve protection for tenants from negative impacts of sub-metering, including: a. implementing interim information and communication programming to support tenants in understanding and enforcing their rights under section 125 of the Residential Tenancies Act; . b. legislative amendments to section 125 to ensure fair practices mi the transfer of hydro costs from landlords to tenants, including requirements for informed consent; and T C. regulatory amendments to section 125 to ensure a fair and transparent determination of rent reductions. : 3 ' 2 64 3. City Council request the Minister of Energy and Infrastructure to review the provincial regulatory and incentive environment as it applies to sub-metering in multi-residential rental properties, and to move quickly to put in place measures to ensure fair practices and protect tenants, including licensing of sub-meter providers operating in rental residential buildings. 4. City Council request the Chair of the Cabinet Committee on Poverty Reduction to support enhanced funding to programs that help low-income tenants to pay hydro costs when they cannot afford the cost of this vital service, and to take other actions towards reducing energy poverty. 5. City Council delegate authority to the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, to allocate up to $25,000 from. the Tenant Defence Grant Fund to support tenant dispute applications, in partnership with one or more Toronto community legal clinics, on issues related to the removal of hydro as a service included in the rent, and to report to the Tenant Defence Sub-committee on the results of any cases funded under this recommendation. 6. City Council send a copy of this report to the Ontario Energy Board, the Ontario Power Authority, Ontario's Chief Energy Conservation Officer, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Landlord and Tenant Board, and Toronto Hydro to advise of Council's concerns about tenant protection and fair rent reductions where hydro is removed as a service included in the rent. 7. City Council request the Province of Ontario to put a hold on the installation of "smart meters" in residential rental units until such time as the appropriate legislative amendments and/or regulations have been brought into force. for City Clerk M. Toft/csb Attachment DITORONTOCity Council Decision 65 Community Development and Recreation Committee Item 21.4 (Considered by City Council on January 27 and 28, 2009) CD21.4 Adopted Ward: All Installation of Sub-meters in Residential Rental Units and Its Impact on Tenant Affordability Units City Council Decision City Council on January 27 and 28, 2009, adopted the following: 1. City Council request the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to move quickly to enact sections 137 and 138 of the Residential Tenancies Act, and develop regulations which will ensure that comprehensive and effective energy efficiency measures are in place prior to hydro being removed from the rent, and that rent reductions be calculated in.a fair and transparent manner. 2. Until such time as sections 137 and 138 are enacted, City Council request the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to immediately take steps to improve protection for tenants from negative impacts of sub-metering, including: a. implementing interim information and communication programming to support tenants in understanding and enforcing their rights under section 125 of the Residential Tenancies Act; b. legislative amendments to section 125 to ensure fair practices in the transfer of hydro costs from landlords to tenants, including requirements for informed consent; and c. regulatory amendments to section 125 to ensure a fair and transparent determination of rent reductions. 3. City Council request the Minister of Energy and Infrastructure to review the provincial regulatory and incentive environment as it applies to sub-metering in multi-residential rental properties, and to move quickly to put in place measures to ensure fair practices and protect tenants, including licensing of sub-meter providers operating in rental residential buildings. 2 6 Community Development and Recreation Committee - Item 21.4 Considered by City Council on January 27 and 28, 2009 4. City Council request the Chair of the Cabinet Committee on Poverty Reduction to support enhanced funding to programs that help low-income tenants to pay hydro costs when they cannot afford the cost of this vital service, and to take other actions towards reducing energy poverty. 5. City Council delegate authority to the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, to allocate up to $25,000 from the Tenant Defence Grant Fund to support tenant dispute applications, in partnership with one or more Toronto community legal clinics, on issues related to the removal of hydro as a service included in the rent, and to report to the Tenant Defence Sub-committee on the results of any cases funded under this recommendation. 6. City Council send a copy of this report to the Ontario Energy Board, the Ontario Power Authority, Ontario's Chief Energy Conservation Officer, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Landlord and Tenant Board, and Toronto Hydro to advise of Council's concerns about tenant protection and fair rent reductions where hydro is removed as a service included in the rent. 7. City Council request the Province of Ontario to put a hold on the installation of "smart meters" in residential rental units until such time as the appropriate legislative amendments and/or regulations have been brought into force. 8. City Council forward these recommendations to all municipalities in Ontario with a population of over 30,000. Committee Recommendations The Community Development and Recreation Committee recommends that: 1. City Council request the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to move quickly to enact sections 137 and 138 of the Residential Tenancies Act, and develop regulations which will ensure that comprehensive and effective energy efficiency measures are in place prior to hydro being removed from the rent, and that rent reductions be calculated in a fair and transparent manner. 2. Until such time as sections 137 and 138 are enacted, City Council request the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing to immediately take steps to improve protection for tenants from negative impacts of sub-metering, including: a. implementing interim information and communication programming to support tenants in understanding and enforcing their rights under section 125 of the Residential Tenancies Act; b. legislative amendments to section 125 to ensure fair practices in the transfer of hydro costs from landlords to tenants, including requirements for informed consent; and 3 f 1 ! ► Community Development and Recreation Committee - Item 21.4 Considered by City Council on January 27 and 28, 2009 67 C. regulatory amendments to section 125 to ensure a fair and transparent determination of rent reductions. 3. City Council request the Minister of Energy and Infrastructure to review the provincial regulatory and incentive environment as it applies to sub-metering in multi-residential rental properties, and to move quickly to put in place measures to ensure fair practices and protect tenants, including licensing of sub-meter providers operating in rental residential buildings. 4. City Council request the Chair of the Cabinet Committee on Poverty Reduction to support enhanced funding to programs that help low-income tenants to pay hydro costs when they cannot afford the cost of this vital service, and to take other actions towards reducing energy poverty. 5. City Council delegate authority to the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, to allocate up to $25,000 from the Tenant Defence Grant Fund to support tenant dispute applications, in partnership with one or more Toronto community legal clinics, on issues related to the removal of hydro as a service included in the rent, and to report to the Tenant Defence Sub-committee on the results of any cases funded under this recommendation. 6. City Council send a copy of this report to the Ontario Energy Board, the Ontario Power Authority, Ontario's Chief Energy Conservation Officer, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Landlord and Tenant Board, and Toronto Hydro to advise of Council's concerns about tenant protection and fair rent reductions where hydro is removed as a service included in the rent. 7. City Council request the Province of Ontario to put a hold on the installation of "smart meters" in residential rental units until such time as the appropriate legislative amendments and/or regulations have been brought into force. 8. City Council forward these recommendations to all municipalities in Ontario with a population of over 30,000. Origin (December 9, 2008) Letter from the Tenant Defence Sub-Committee Summary The Tenant Defence Sub-Committee on December 9, 2008, considered a further report (December 3, 2008) from the General Manager, Shelter, Support and Housing Administration, providing information about feedback from a consultation with stakeholders on the recommendations made by the Sub-Committee in response to the first report, including landlord groups, tenant groups, housing committees, other City divisions, and provincial ministries and agencies dealing with energy conservation. 4 Community Development and Recreation Committee Item 21.4 68 Considered by City Council on January 27 and 28, 2009 Background Information (Committee) cd21.4-Letter from Tenant Defence Sub-Committee (http://www.toronto..a/leadocsVmmis/2002/cd/bar karoundfile 18100 r) f) cd21.4-Installation of Sub-meters in Residential Rental Units and Its Impact on Tenant Affordability-Staff Report dated December 3, 2008 (http://www.toronto..a/leadocsVmmis/2009/r (far /harkaroundfile 18101 ndf) cd21.4-Installation of Smart Meters in Residential Units and Its Impact on Tenant Affordability-Staff Report dated June 12, 2008 http:#www.toronto.a/iggdocsVmmis/2009/cd/b r kgroundfile 18102 odf) cd21.4-Information Sheet for Tenants Prepared by ACTO-Appendix A to Staff Report dated June 12, 2008 (http:/Iwww.toronto. a leadoca(mmisV2009/rd/bgr /backaroundfile 18103 pdf) cd21.4-Letter from Shelter, Support and Housing Administration Division htt: www.torsntg rya leacloc.../mmis/2009/cd/bgr /hackgrgundfilP 1$104 odf) Communications (Committee) (January 12, 2009) presentation from Mike Chopowick, Manager of Policy, Federation of Rental-housing Providers of Ontario, (CD. Main. CD21.4. 1) Speakers (Committee) Brad Butt, President, Greater Toronto Apartment Association Mike Chopowick, Manager of Policy, Federation of Rental-housing Providers of Ontario (Submission Filed) Vince Brescia, President and C.E.O., Federation of Rental-housing Providers of Ontario Dan McIntyre, Project Co-ordinator, Federation of Metro Tenants Associations Mary Todorow, Advocacy Centre for Tenants Ontario Councillor Frances Nunziata, Ward 1 l; York South-Weston Councillor Michael Walker, Ward 22, St. Paul's E4 Roberts, Linda From: Rebecca Harrison [rebecca_y_harrison@yahoo.ca] h § ; Sent: i March 9, 2009 11:10 PM To: infogdurhamyorkwaste.ca; gavin.battarino@ontario.ca; clerks@region.durham.on.ca; clerks@clarington.net; clerks@oshawa.ca; clerks@whitby.ca; martin.derond@townofajax.com; Roberts, Linda; brock@townshipofbrock.ca; mail@scugog.ca; dleroux@town.uxbridge.on.ca; mario.ferri@vaughan.ca; ctrim@clarington.net; dwheeler@georgina.ca; jheath@markham.ca; glandon@markham.ca; npidwerbecki@oshawa.ca; scott.crawford@townofajax.com; Johnson, Rick, Councillor; emmg@whitby.ca; info@ombudsman.on.ca; jgerretsen.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org; jwatson.mpp@liberal.ola.org; councillor mihevc@toronto.ca Cc: roger. anderson@region.durham.on.ca; jabernethy@clarington.net; mnovak@clarington.net; Littley, Bonnie, Councillor; McLean, Bill, Councillor; Ryan, David, Mayor; acullen@oshawa.ca; jgray@oshawa.ca; jhenry@oshawa.ca; jkolodzie@oshawa.ca; rlutczyk@oshawa.ca; jneal@oshawa.ca; bnicholson@oshawa.ca; steve.parish@townofajax.com; colleen.jordan@townofajax.com; patperkins@sympatico.ca; mdonaldmitchell@hotmail.com; council@whitby.ca; jmcmillen@township.scugog.on.ca; mayorpearce@township.scugog.on.ca; hherrema@town.uxbridge.on.ca; rshepherd@town.uxbridge.on.ca; jgrant@townshipofbrock.ca; oconnor. larry@sympatico.ca; drummj@whitby.ca; Mitchelld@whitby.ca; perkinsp@whitby.ca; PPessian@durhamregion.com; marissa.kata@rogers.com; AFurlong@sff-oshawa.com; kstrachan@oshawaexpress.ca; Judi.Longfield@LPCO.CA; newsroom@kx96.fm; city@thestar.ca; melodee.smart@durham.ca Subject: Clarington garbage incinerator Please receive as official correspondence and add to next meeting agenda. Please forward to all counsellors. I am a resident of Whitby and have very serious concerns about the proposed incinerator, its' health effects, financial implications, and the direction of our region's waste strategy if the incinerator is approved. (1) The April JWMG meeting is scheduled to be held in York Region even though matters around the incinerator affect primarily Durham residents and taxpayers. Please ask that all incinerator meetings should be held in Durham as Durham residents should have reasonable access to these meetings. (2) There has been delays on the part of the Durham Region in publishing the various incinerator related documentation on their website. Please ask that the project team posts all documentation on the website (www.durhamyorkwaste.ca), on the correct pages, within 24 hours of documents being released to the public. (3) The incinerator must be fed a minimum of 140,000 tonnes (according to documentation from Durham _ , Region) of garbage per year (even if we divert an increasing amount of waste from the landfill through recycling programs). And the contract allows for an expansion of up to 400,000 tonnes per year, which if + approved we would be a huge importer of garbage. Please keep in mind that 25-30% of that tCtaJ°tOM~ge r- m still need to be landfilled and an additional 5% on average will need to be landfilled in an appxQ tax~~ facility. With the projected diversion Durham Region is suppose to be facilitating and the increase in capacity T we will soon find ourselves landfilling more than the residual waste we create. It sounds as though this is more or less a plan to make Durham the new Michigan. (4) As a person who has suffered from epilepsy since I was a child I rely heavily on transit as my o independent mode of transportation. As is the expressed intention of the region, 100%:vf the•Gas Tax from the Federal government will be funding the incinerator. This will leave nothing to contribute o the growth of the already inadequate Durham Region Transit System let alone a sustainable waste diversion strateg'.1:.. t1 1 C=t~, cwt tG~ lF° • Y, _F Ir`~_ r~~-~ ;cam- 70 F5} The "health specialist's" recommendation not to preform ambient air or biomonitoring has truly shocked me. I don't think I have to explain why. I hope that I have provided adequate references for all my points. If, however you would like further information on any of the points I trust that rather than picking my email apart in a public forum, as was the unfortunate case with the email of one of my fellow rate payers at the last SLC meeting, you will contact me directly. I greatly admire all those who answer the call of duty in the field of public servitude. I would like to take this opportunity to remind each of you that you are servants to the public. You are charged to serve the best interests of that public at all times.l would hope that you remember this throughout the process and make your decisions accordingly, because should the worst come to pass and the incinerator unleash a host of negative effects on this region and its citizens you and your administration will be remembered as the bringers of this smoking giant. I urge you to refer to the Precautionary Principal and look for another solution. No one including myself will suggest it will be easy to find a suitable solution however that is the job that you were given. There is no room for compromises when it comes to the health and well being of our children and unborn. Rebecca Harrison Looking for the perfect gift? Give the gift of F!ickr! 2 'tl} 71 Roberts; Linda r From: Chris White [chris@disensors.com] Sent: March 9, 2009 6:53 PM s' To: melodee.smart@durham.ca; info@durhamyorkwaste.ca; gavin.battarino@ontario.ca; clerks@region.durham.on.ca; clerks@clarington.net; clerks@oshawa.ca; clerks@whitby.ca; martin.derond@townofajax.com; Roberts, Linda; brock@townshipofbrock.ca; mail@scugog.ca; dleroux@town.uxbridge.on.ca; jgerretsen.mpp.co@liberal.ola.org Cc: mario.ferri@vaughan.ca; ctrim@clarington.net; dwheeler@georgina.ca; jheath @markham.ca; glandon@markham.ca; npidwerbecki@oshawa.ca; scott.crawford@townofajax.com; Johnson, Rick, Councillor; emmg@whitby.ca; jwatson.mpp@liberal.ola.org; info@ombudsman.on.ca; roger. anderson@region.durham.on.ca; jabernethy@clarington.net; ctrim@clarington.net; mnova k@clarington.net; Johnson, Rick, Councillor; Littley, Bonnie, Councillor; McLean, Bill, Councillor; Ryan, David, Mayor; acullen@oshawa.ca; jgray@oshawa.ca; jhenry@oshawa.ca; jkolodzie@oshawa.ca; rlutczyk@oshawa.ca; jneal@oshawa.ca; bnicholson@oshawa.ca; npidwerbecki@oshawa.ca; scott.crawford@townofajax.com; steve.parish@townofajax.com; colleen.jordan@townofajax.com; patperkins@sympatico.ca; mdonaldmitchell@hotmail.com; council@whitby.ca; jmcmillen@township.scugog.on.ca; mayorpearce@township.scugog.on.ca; hherrema@town.uxbridge.on.ca; rshepherd@town.uxbridge.on.ca; jgrant@townshipofbrock.ca; oconnor.larry@sympatico.ca; drummj@whitby.ca; Mitchelld@whitby.ca; perkinsp@whitby.ca; PPessian@durhamregion.com; marissa.kata@rogers.com; AFurlong@sff-oshawa.com; kstrachan@oshawaexpress.ca; Judi.Longfield@LPCO.CA; newsroom@kx96.fm; city@thestar.ca; afoster@clarington.net; rhooper@clarington.net; wwoo@clarington.net; grobinson@clarington. net Subject: Proposed incinerator in Clarington Attachments: Correspondence March 10, 2009.pdf Please receive as official correspondence and distribute a copy to all Councillors and to add to the next meeting agenda (1) The April JWMG meeting is scheduled to be held in York Region even though matters around the incinerator affect primarily Durham residents and taxpayers (such as myself and my wife). Please ask that all incinerator meetings should be held in Durham as Durham residents should have reasonable access to these meetings. (2) Public meetings need to be held on this issue in the evenings or on weekends so that taxpayers such as myself who have full time jobs may attend. The JWMG meetings are held during the day (such as the meeting tomorrow, starting at 1PM) I noticed that the agenda for tomorrow's meeting includes approx I letters and cards from residents who oppose the incinerator! [See attached] (3) There has been delays on the part of Durham Region in publishing the *ious- neinerater-related documentation on their website. Please ask that the project team posts all documentation on-the website (www.durhamyorkwaste.ca), on the correct pages, within 24 hours; of documents being released to the public. . ~~.ltcyc . I~ C (4) The incinerator is in direct contrast to the direction that the province isr~ov.:towards with their environmental policy "Towards a Zero Waste Future", so it does not makeN.-towards whatsoever. 7 Ministry of Environment web site: http://www.ene.gov.on.ca/envision/land/wda/wda-zeroWastePaper.pdf Why does the Joint Waste Management Group refuse to listen to the residents of Durham region and ignore the current direction/policy of the provincial government? We do not want to breathe or ingest our garbage which has been tranformed into tiny invisible toxic particles by an incinerator. Also we do not want our property taxes to go towards this horrible project!! (5) I attended the Site Liaison Committee meeting last week and the following was recommended: human biomonitoring NOT recommended ambient air quality monitoring NOT recommended water monitoring of Lake Ontario (located 350 meters from planned site) NOT recommended The councillors and committee members should be thinking primarily about the health and safety of the residents of this region. Also, they should be thinking about their jobs because we are watching who is voting on this project. Chris White 905-999-5479 Home owner/taxpayer in Whitby 2 7 3 r From: Tom Lawson [mailto:t Lawson@sympatico.ca] Sent: February 12, 2009 4:11 PM To: Roberts, Linda Subject: pickeringB refurbishment I wish to make a presentation at your meeting the third Monday in March to address the issue of the refurbishment of Pickering B reactor. I spoke at the recent hearing before the CNSC in Pickering. Having lived in the shadow of the nuclear industry all my adult life, I am deeply troubled by the prospect of your community welcoming such a refurbishment. I cannot doubt that your real reasons are purely economic and tragically shortsighted. My own community, having, for 60 years, been dominated, defaced, and contaminated by this industry, has been essentially "bought" by lavish handouts, giving it basic control of our Town Council, our Chamber of Commerce, and our local Press, enabling them stigmatize concerned informed citizens, and to minimize concern about a steady series of polluting accidents. Port Hope drags its feet economically precisely because of the presence of the industry we are told to believe is essential to our survival. Countless healthy industries have consistently turned their backs on us because of its presence. I believe this town and yours will experience genuine progressive wellbeing only when the nuclear industry departs. We are in the midst of a worldwide market collapse precisely because of shortsighted, narrowminded worship of Economic Growth and selfserving Individual Rights. The result has been widespread corruption at all levels, and a widening gap between the rich and the poor. . I wish to present evidence that the nuclear industry cannot meet even our basic longterm energy needs, and that, by continuing to support it, we divert desperately needed funding from the alternative, renewable energy sources capable of meeting our energy needs at a fraction of the cost. By supporting the nuclear option, you subject your own community, and the whole Toronto area, to unprecedented and potentially catastrophic dangers.. Finally, the inability of the nuclear industry to survive without massive taxpayer support, has long since been proven. Please try to embrace the wider perspective, and change your minds on' - I iscia issue. Tom Lawson RR2, Port Hope LIA 3V6 905-885 5396 a 1 y PLE 74 FcTT fLa ry 1 19 009 C. cad p.2 3 Lim the 1 ]-)ave _R - v§;n Pad Ward 1 Co cIIIor jennifer O'Connell, CE,-- Ad= stredrve, G oer l-l#umas Quim , Councillors: D Dick, erso , ~~ttJoErisom, B Mc19--ma, B ltt,ey an D Pickdes. A:-ll members c~t the Pro -m-f-tiT L ~ 4.anis ds Corn #ee: Ke RY* antes er, lumd e uft-ney, Greg Fernandes, Fie, ~ F-~ g, Marcia O'Connor clce- One ! e Esplanade Ontai~io, Canada L 1 Y 6K7 From: -Residents of MomiLai Asli Dirive Pickering. Re: €enc :'fig bylaw,%ariance at piope- r 555 Zvio'm? .Ln Ash °?ollcei€kigs Ve, the i-Ideg signed have valid conce 's ab.3vadne 3ropow'd #'eighr o a been, a~irjr Ted ~ 6 d s ?o v °ov" S"arr. ~d f a a~T rt- ~ ~it Trg d n MI, La e ~r a rke i i ? te. It . s E-a.ndUke he c-their E'rn . e; lall r.p,,,cs Wt es g vE3' d-.Le j~ 4 r+ e!r }i yot° v~~` rS iff ~.;-'t sl D { TShf-: - of e^3r5 f n x. P ns-~ th_',j been in-fc ? e'+ JI-La - i-z c T er f ~ E i- 5 ~ h f r ~ Ash _ 'L J~ K- ✓G, s > J~~ r LAC e€F ware a-ad u..reG. C;.F'i~t r„c! ~ua 4, `c',)y 425/76. i` A,.. pS°?F.?Jii ry' C'C e-,r f'..Etss'T `r.b;. tjG trF,(t ru4- $ . ~f _ r r+j., ..~4 u~,n.._w .F.G-a'_ i 155{~f ai li-T adFGYd -a around the mrne_ ix.._'- _g dE_ t.JU~.c.°:~ 6&SI_I D__ G'!).;iQ vtE ve8, has many cll ld,ren i v npar cn l" . Loms of 9 -_vve of us or, the - G.4.t J:d.,+ of she vyieea.° 'sTtTEdchL 1' __m---C-t. _ n p y = t e 0 s - gf z cr T4 F f`€ y - °t G iC - ~4's 9rt € , Zlt r> R^^y C 75 (C) Loss of Venue. As those of us situated across the street from this fence will face the structure and feel it will detract from our nei2bbourhoncl ambience and appearance. (D) BY-LAW NUMBER 5943/02: Nuisance - means a condition or use of property which causes or is likely to cause: i) a health, accident, fire or similar hazard; or ii) an appearance or use that is out of keeping with or detracts from the appearance or enjoyment of neighbouring properties. We ask our elected officials to please reconsider the front fence variance at 555 Mountain Ash Drive. The fence height limit set out in Section 4(a), By- law 425/76, as amended by the erection, growth or maintenance of a fence more than 42 inches in height within 25 feet of any street lot line should be enforced, in our opinion. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. PRPff N SIGN ADDRESS Tele: t :a 't r if i f :'Qr; Av. .lL/~ eri~~; ;y. '.a`~ c. sa; i.: '~'`r•, _ ~ ~ ~a~` ` i -tit q ~iJl L'° i L vim- 1 ~'_j 6 'ice ^ ✓it;`, t ,fl n ! N / A` 1 77 lu; i ~...IC t ','4PJi.1 March 18, 2009 Patricia Korol 545 Mountain Ash Drive Pickering, ON L1W 3Z8 - and - A. Moretti 547 Mountain Ash Drive Pickering, ON L1W 3Z8 Subject: Request to appear as a Delegation Exemption to Fence By-law-- 555 Mountain Ash Drive - File: A-1400 This letter will confirm your request for delegation status at the March 23, 2009 meeting of Council. The meeting commences at 7:30 pm, however, I cannot confirm when your delegation will be heard. In response to your letter submitted on behalf of residents from Mountain Ash Drive, please be advised of the fallowing: 1. The Fence By-law (425176) was passed under the authority of the old Municipal Act, not the Planning Act. The authority for a lower-tier municipality to regulate fences is currently found in paragraph 7 of subsection 11(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001. 2. The City has always had the authority to delegate certain types of decisions to members of staff. The rules regarding delegations are currently found in sections 23.1 through 23.5 of the Municipal Act, 2001. 3. Under the Fence By-law, no person has the right to appeal the exemption other than the owner of 555 Mountain Ash Drive. The owner is provided a formal right to appeal under the by-law. Request to appear as a Delegation March 18, 2009 Page 2 As requested, a copy of your correspondence dated March 9, 2009 will be listed in the Council agenda under Council Correspondence. Please note that the personal information contained in your correspondence is collected under the authority of the Municipal Act, 2001. Any personal information you choose to disclose in your correspondence will be used to receive your views on the issue and this information will become part of the public record. It is our policy to publish the correspondent's name on the internet as part of the Council agenda. You may request, in writing to theCity Clerk, the removal of your personal contact information from the correspondence posted on the internee. Should you require further information, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Yours truly Debi A. Wilcox, CMO, CMIVI III City Clerk DAW:ks Copy: City Councillor -Ward 1 Chief Administrative Officer {Acting} Chief Administrative Officer City Solicitor 79 March 09, 2009 To: the attention of L. Roberts, Committee Coordinator The Corporation of the City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario, Canada L 1 V 6K7 From: Residents of Mountain Ash Drive Pickering. Re: Please add this to the March 23, 2009 council agenda and delegation status, request for reconsideration of Fence Height Exemption By-law #425/76 property 555 Mountain Ash Drive, Pickering, Ont. Dear Ms. L. Roberts, A delegation status is requested to present a request to council for their consideration with regard to allow an appeal to Fence Height Exemption By- law #425/76 at 555 Mountain Ash Drive, Pickering. As per the letter from Mountain Ash Drive, Pickering residents dated February 11, 2009, we, the undersigned of said letter have valid concerns about the proposed height of a front property fence at 555 Mountain Ash Drive and request that council allow an appeal of this fence exemption. All of the property owners (less only three resident homes) directly impacted by the possibility of a height exemption on Mountain Ash have already sent a letter to you outlining their concerns. This property is a unique corner lot as it already has a substantially fenced backyard approximating in size and equal to the other properties, which are not corner lots. It is unlike the other corner properties located on Mountain Ash Drive with regard to this and in our opinion requires council's consideration of the resident's effected. Our concerns are: (A) The residents of Mountain Ash Drive have not been consulted nor have they been informed that the owners of the property located at 555 Mountain Ash Drive were seeking and granted an exemption of the fence height by- law as stated in Section 4(a), By-law 425/76 and consideration of: (B) BY-LAW NUMBER 5943/02: Nuisance - means a condition or use of property which causes or is likely to cause: i) a health, accident, fire or similar hazard; or ii) an appearance or use that is out of keeping with or detracts from the appearance or enjoyment of neighbouring properties. Our delegation will state that a fence exemption will detract from the appearance of neighbouring properties. We ask our elected officials to please reconsider the front fence exemption at 555 Mountain Ash Drive. The fence height limit set out in Section 4(a), By-law 425/76, as amended by the erection, growth or maintenance of a fence more than 42 inches in height within 25 feet of any street lot line should be enforced, in our opinion. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Mr. A. Moretti, spokesperson for Mountain Ash residents concerned. CORD 34f IARKHAM CIN IVES February 18, 2009 CLERKS TO ALL MUNICIPALITIES IN THE GREATER TORONTO AREA RE: FEDERAL TAX INCENTIVES FOR HERITAGE PROPERTIES LANDMARKS NOT LANDFILL CAMPAIGN - HERITAGE CANADA (7.3,16.11)-- This will confirm that at a meeting held on February 10, 2009, Town of Markham Council adopted the.following resolution: "1) Whereas according to the Heritage Canada Foundation, Canada has lost more than 20% of its pre-1920 heritage buildings to demolition over the past 30 years; and, 2) Whereas the Heritage Canada Foundation has stated that urgent action is needed to stop the demolition of Canadian landmarks, to restore and re-use them, and to acknowledge their value as a reminder of our origins and cultures; and, 3) Whereas heritage buildings are also a valuable economic development resource which supports re-urbanization initiatives and tourism, stimulates adjacent development, increases property values, all while providing environmental benefits by way of reducing landfill, preserving natural resources and promoting sustainability; and, 4) Whereas there are currently no federal financial incentives to encourage private sector investment in the rehabilitation of heritage properties; and, ' m --V M ;Heritage Markham, Council's heritage advisory committee, has req eaed that the Town of Markham pass a resolution requesting the Federal go ernrrent to introduce financial incentives which would encourage private sec or investment in the rehabilitation of historic properties; and, ,.gym FI1.1?rTr0Q-1= 4 mccr yl 2 ~f . r~ C The Corporation of the Town of Markham Clerk's Department f i p r~ ~C & of-";cl 10'1 Town Centre Boulevard, Markham, ON L3R 9W3 • tel. 905.475.4744 • fax. 905.479.7771 • www.markham.ca -2- • 8 2 6) Be it resolved that the Corporation of the Town of Markham endorse resolutions by the Heritage Canada Foundation and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities that request the Federal Ministers of Finance and the Environment to establish tax incentives which would encourage private sector investment in the rehabilitation of heritage properties; and, 7) That this motion be forwarded to. local Members of Parliament and Greater Toronto Area (GTA) municipalities for their support; and, 8) That the Association of Municipalities of Ontario be requested to support the work of the Heritage Canada Foundation and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities regarding the need for federal tax incentives by endorsing a resolution at its Annual Convention; and further, 9) That Staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution." (Item 2 of Report No. 7) If you have any questions, please contact Regan Hutcheson, Manager, Heritage Planning at 905-477-7000 ext. 2080. Yours sincerely, Kimberley Kitteringham Town Clerk mbp:kk gAclerks\clerks exec\marylou\council\feb. 10, 2009\item 2 rep 7 - federal tax incentives - heritage properties.doc C1%ARKHAM 8 3 Agenda Items' 10 Report to: Development Services Committee Report Date: February 3, 2009 SUBJECT: Federal Tax Incentives for Heritage Properties Landmarks Not Landfill Campaign - Heritage Canada PREPARED BY: Regan Hutcheson, Manager-Heritage Planning, ext. 2080 RECOMMENDATION: Whereas according to the Heritage Canada Foundation, Canada has lost more than 20% of its pre-1920 heritage buildings to demolition over the past 30 years; Whereas the Heritage Canada Foundation has stated that urgent action is needed to stop the demolition of Canadian landmarks, to restore and re-use them, and to acknowledge their value as a reminder of our origins and cultures; Whereas heritage buildings are also a valuable economic development resource which supports re-urbanization initiatives and tourism, stimulates adjacent development, increases property values, all while providing environmental benefits by way of reducing landfill, preserving natural resources and promoting sustainability; Whereas there are currently no federal financial incentives to encourage private sector investment in the rehabilitation of heritage properties; and Whereas Heritage Markham, Council's heritage advisory committee, has requested that the Town of Markham pass a resolution requesting the Federal government to introduce financial incentives which would encourage private sector investment in the rehabilitation of historic properties; Be it resolved that the Corporation of the Town of Markham endorse resolutions by the Heritage Canada Foundation and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities that request the Federal Ministers of Finance and the Environment to establish tax incentives which would encourage private sector investment in the rehabilitation of heritage properties; That this motion be forwarded to local Members of Parliament and Greater Toronto Area (GTA) municipalities for their support; That the Association of Municipalities of Ontario be requested to support the work of the Heritage Canada Foundation and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities regarding the need for federal tax incentives by endorsing a resolution at its Annual Convention; That Staff be authorized and directed to do all things necessary to give effect to this resolution. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Not applicable 31 Report to: Development Services Committee Report Date: February 3, 2009 `t page 2 PURPOSE: To obtain a resolution requesting the Federal government to introduce financial incentives to encourage private sector investment in the rehabilitation of properties of heritage value. BACKGROUND: Heritage Canada has asked for Markham's support The Heritage Canada Foundation contacted Heritage Section staff in December 2008 as a Prince of Wales Prize municipality, and asked for Markham's support to encourage the Federal government to introduce financial incentives to encourage private sector investment in the rehabilitation of historic properties. Rehabilitation of heritage properties has many positive effects Canada's communities contain heritage properties that define our local and national identity and give shape and texture to our urban and rural neighbourhoods. The rehabilitation of heritage buildings stimulates the economy, revitalizes communities, and creates jobs. It also supports sustainability by consuming less than half the energy of new construction and reusing existing municipal infrastructure. There are currently no federal financial incentives Many provinces and municipalities are doing their part to protect and rehabilitate Canada's heritage buildings. However, they are missing an important partner - the Government of Canada. The federal tax system is a significant instrument shaping the direction of the Canadian economy and private investment decisions. But, unlike measures to support cultural and environmental heritage, there are currently no federal measures to encourage the rehabilitation of Canada's heritage buildings. The United States has federal financial incentives Other countries have federal incentives for rehabilitation of heritage properties that have been extremely effective. Among G-8 countries, Canada alone lacks a national system of funding policies and programs to preserve its heritage properties. In 1976, the United States established the Federal Historic Preservation Tax Incentives Program which provides a 20 percent federal tax credit for rehabilitation of heritage buildings and a 10 percent tax credit for the rehabilitation of non-heritage, non-residential buildings built before 1936. Results are visible in every region of the United States: • Over 32,000 properties rehabilitated by the private sector • Over $36 billion in private investment in historic buildings leveraged ( with a 5 to 1 ratio of private investment to federal tax credits) • An average of 45 new jobs created by each project (Source: Heritage Canada) • Over 350,000 housing units created, 60,000 of them low and moderate income housing 3 6~ • Reduced landfill ~r Report to: Development Services Committee Report Date: February 3, 2009 85 Page 3 • , Increased property values and enhanced state and local tax revenues Many Canadian municipalities have already demonstrated their support As part of Heritage Canada's Landmarks Not Landfill campaign, the Foundation has been encouraging municipalities to pass resolutions calling on the federal government to establish tax incentives for the rehabilitation of heritage buildings. A growing number of Canadian municipalities large and small have passed such resolutions, including Victoria, Winnipeg, Kitchener, Region of Waterloo, Toronto, Regional Municipality of Niagara, Welland, Thorold, Township of Wainfleet, Niagara-on-the-Lake, Port Colborne, Charlottetown, and St. John's. Federation of Canadian Municipalities (FCM) has also supported this initiative In September 2008, the National Board of Directors of the FCM endorsed the City of Thorold's resolution on tax incentives for heritage rehabilitation (see Appendix `A').. This resolution has been forwarded to the federal finance minister. OPTIONS/ DISCUSSION: Markham should take a leadership role and support this initiative Markham is acknowledged as a leader in heritage conservation initiatives and programs, and was the first recipient in 2000 of Heritage Canada's Prince of Wales Prize. Markham received the award for outstanding stewardship of its built heritage and exemplary commitment to the preservation of the built heritage within its boundaries. At the local level, Markham has introduced a number of municipal financial incentives such as: ➢ Heritage Loan Program ➢ Heritage Property Tax Reduction Program Y Commercial Fagade Improvement Grant Program (Heritage Districts) ➢ Commercial Signage Replacement Grant Program (Heritage Districts) However, a municipality can only do so much in providing financial incentives for heritage resource rehabilitation. As a leader in heritage conservation, it would be appropriate to call upon the Government of Canada to establish financial tax incentives for the rehabilitation of heritage buildings which would encourage private sector investment in our historic landmarks. Heritage Markham has supported this initiative. The motion should also be forwarded to local Members of Parliament and area municipalities in an attempt to secure their support for this initiative. It would also be beneficial if the Association of Municipalities of Ontario (AMO) would support the work of the Heritage Canada Foundation and the Federation of Canadian Municipalities regarding the need for federal tax incentives by endorsing a resolution at its Annual Convention. FINANCIAL TEMPLATE Not applicable. 33 Report to: Development Services Committee Report Date: February 3, 2009 86 Page 4 ALIGNMENT WITH STRATEGIC PRIORITIES: The support of this resolution aligns with our strategic priorities associated with appropriate growth management including the preservation and re-use of heritage resources, as well as our objective of protecting and preserving our environment. DEPARTMENTS CONSULTED AND AFFECTED: Heritage Section staff has consulted with Heritage Markham and the committee fully supported the proposed resolution at its meeting of January 14, 2009. RECOMMENDED BY: Bi u Karumanchery, M.C.I.P., R. P. J aird, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Senior Development Manager Commissioner of Development Services i ATTACHMENTS: Appendix `A' Letter and resolution from Federation of Canadian Municipalities Q:\Development\Heritage\SUBJECT\Heritage Canada\DSC report on tax incentive resolution Feb 2009.doc 34 "POMIX A i` FCM Federation of Canadian Municipalitin September 23, 2008 Wintion canadicnne den munidpalit6 The Honourable James Michael Flaherty, P.C., M.P. 24, me Clarence Street Minister of Finance Ottawa, Ontario . CANADA KIN 5P3 L Esplanade Laurier, 140 OrConnor Street Ottawa, Ontario Tel./TA.: 613-241-5221 K1A OG5 r Fa,JTekc.: 613-241-7440 wwwrcn,.ca Dear Minister: I am writing to inform you of the attached resolution, S0008.3.07 - Federal Pry d pt Financial Tax Incentives for. Heritage Places, was recently adopted by FCM's Maire Jean Perrault National Board of Directors. Sherbrooke. Quebec The resolution calls on the Government of Canada to establish financial tax rtstvite-rrt,ident Premier viceprfsident incentives. for the rehabilitation of heritage buildings which would encourage i Mayor Basil Stetvazt private sector investment in the rehabilitation of historic landmarks. Sumrncrside, Prince Edward Island As you may know, every Canadian province and territory has protective Second Vice-president legislation for heritage buildings and a range of grants and other incentives to Derta2mevice-president encourage their rehabilitation. Similarly, the vast majority of Canada's urban Director Ham Cunningh- municipalities offer financial incentives for heritage buildings. But they are missing Regional District of Cenral an important partner - the Government of Canada. Amon G-8 countries, Canada Kootenay, British Columbia g alone lacks a national system of funding policies and programs to preserve its nwvi-President heritage properties. Troisibne vicrpr&ident Councillor Be" Vrhattovie Kitthcnc4 Ontario Incentives for the rehabilitation of heritage buildings can have many spin j - off benefits: stimulate investment in Canadian projects, infrastructure and r.at P-ident communities; create new employment in the building trades and professions; p`6ideri"°"'°` enhance cultural tourism - a huge generator of revenue from other countries; and Cnunin c°rdan bn Stetwi keep historic buildings out of landfill sites. Winnipeg. Mani t° Chief F=cadve 018ra We look forward to hearing from you on this issue. Chef de I. direction Brock triton Ottawa, Ontario Yours sincerely, i Jean Perrault President of FCM Mayor of Sherbrooke JPlsi:sd Enclosure c: The Honourable John Baird, Minister of the Environment c: The Honourable Lawrence Cannon, Minister of Transport, Infrastructure and Communities sir" 1901 Dcp,ris 1`X)1 35 ' i ' I R i I February 12, 2008 SOC08.3.07 FEDERAL FINANCIAL TAX INCENTIVES FOR HERITAGE PLACES i i WHEREAS according to the Heritage Canada Foundation, Canada has lost more than 20% of its pre-1920 heritage buildings to demolition over the past 30 years; WHEREAS the Heritage Canada Foundation has stated that urgent action is needed to stop the demolition of Canadian landmarks, to restore and re-use them, and to acknowledge their value as a reminder of our origins and cultures; WHEREAS heritage structures are also a valuable economic development resource, supporting re-urbanization initiatives and tourism as well as providing environmental benefits by way of reducing landfill, preserving natural resources and promoting sustainability; WHEREAS there are currently no financial incentives to encourage private sector investment in the rehabilitation of historic properties; and WHEREAS Heritage Thorold LACAC has requested the City of Thorold pass a resolution requesting the Federal government to introduce financial incentives which would encourage private sector investment in the rehabilitation of historic properties; j BE IT RESOLVED that the Federation of Canadian Municipalities request that the j Federal Ministers of Finance and Canadian Heritage establish financial tax incentives for the rehabilitation of heritage buildings which would encourage private sector investment in'the rehabilitation of historic landmarks. { i i City of Thorold, Ontario SEPTEMBER 2008 BOARD DECISION: Category "Au; RESOLUTION ADOPTED i ! i I ! 3f THE CANADIAN HEARING SOCIETY 89 LA SOCIETE CANADIENNE DE LOUIE cop-P-35--o9 Services to deaf, deafened and hard of hearing people. Services aux sourds, devent~ s urds et malentendants. February 24, 2009 r INN Debi A. Wilcox City Clerk, City of Pickering f-ERK` DIVISION. One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L IV 6K7 Dear Ms Wilcox: May is national "Hearing Awareness Month". This is an occasion to promote public understanding and awareness of the needs of culturally Deaf, oral deaf, deafened and hard of hearing Canadians, and to emphasize the importance of protecting our hearing. The aging of our population and the increase in noise pollution have made hearing loss the fastest growing disability in North America. Often referred to as the "invisible disability", almost one in four Ontarians experience some degree of hearing loss, with the greatest incidence occurring among the elderly. For deaf, deafened and hard of hearing people, the key to enjoying an independent life is keeping the lines of communication open. The barriers to communication can be lifted through the use of technology, sign language interpreting services, closed captioning, assistive devices such as TTYs (teletypewriter phones) and wider use and knowledge of American Sign Language. At this time every year, national, provincial and regional organizations work to dispel the myths and stereotypes of individuals with hearing loss, and promote programs and services designed to ensure equal access for all culturally Deaf, oral deaf, deafened and hard of hearing Canadians. The Canadian Hearing Society, serving the Durham region, would like to ask that the month of May be proclaimed as "Hearing Awareness Month" in the City of Pickering. We appreciate the fact that we are one of many organizations requesting recognition, and do hope you will be able to accommodate our request by way of an official proclamation and/or letter from your office which - we can display in our reception area during our Open House in May. We thank you in advance for your time and consideration of this request, and look forward to your reply. Sincerely, Lynda Shepherd The Canadian Hearing Society, #13-575 Thornton Road N., Oshawa, ON,_, L1J 8L5 PETERBOROUGH/DURHAM REGIONAL OFFIC r Serving Peterborough, Durham, City of Kawartha Lakes, Northumberland an Haliburton - United Way Member Agency Charitable Registration No. 10684 6926 RR0001 W W W.C11S.Ca (Peterborough Office) Parkinson Society Canada Central & Northern Ontario 4211 Yonge Street, Suite 321 Toronto, ON M2P 2A9 ' Ph: (416) 227-1200 Societe Parkinson Canada du Centre et du Nord de I Ontario Toll Free: (800) 565-3000 www.parkinson.ca A Regional Partner of Parkinson Society Canada Charitable registration number 10809 1786~R0001 9 C, CoPP- 3 ~ -d February 25, 2009 Mayor David Ryan City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering ON L1V 6K7 Dear Mayor Ryan: Parkinson Society Canada (PSC) is a national, not-for-profit, volunteer based charity with more than 200 chapters and support groups working nationwide, As the voice of Canadians living with Parkinson's disease, the purpose of PSC is to ease the burden and find a cure through research, advocacy, education, and support services. As a regional partner, Parkinson Society Central and Northern Ontario provides information, support services, specialized programs, and funding to the nation-wide research program. It is estimated that nearly 100,000 Canadians have Parkinson's - men and women from all ethnic backgrounds. Although the average age of onset is 60, it also affects people as young as 30 and 40. Currently there is no cure for Parkinson's. April is Parkinson's Disease Awareness Month. In an effort to raise awareness and gain support, we are contacting all communities with a Parkinson's chapter or support group to ask that April be proclaimed as Parkinson's Disease Awareness Month. We would like to request that Mayor Ryan and members of council proclaim April 2009 as Parkinson's Disease Awareness Month in the City of Pickering. For your convenience, I have enclosed a sample proclamation, as well as a Fact Sheet about Parkinson's disease and Parkinson Society Central and Northern Ontario. We appreciate your support in bringing awareness of Parkinson's Disease to the City of Pickering community. If you have any questions, you may contact me at 416-227-3377 or at sara.lawson(a,parkinson.ca. Sincerely, a Sara Lawson Community Development Coordinator - Torontoo ate` IV' 1: rl G LEGAL i (~i'r~1 c l 1 i ~.i 1c:a I s 1 HU l:^kN ta_.S li cu "r c/ ? A__ a rwGR cost &au1Vl Parkinson Society Canada Central & Northern Ontario 4211 Yonge Street, Suite 321 Toronto, ON M2P 2A9 Ph: (416) 227-1200 Societe Parkinson Canada du Centre et du Nord de I Ontario Toll Free: (800) 565-3000 www.parkinson.ca A Regional Partner of Parkinson Society Canada Charitable registration number 10809 1786 RR0001 91 FACT SHEET What is Parkinson's? Parkinson's is a neurodegenerative disease. Movement is normally controlled by dopamine, a chemical that carries signals between the nerves in the brain. When cells that normally produce dopamine die, the symptoms of Parkinson's appear. Who gets Parkinson's? Parkinson's affects approximately 100,000 Canadians, and 6.3 million people worldwide - men and women from all ethnic backgrounds. Although the average age of onset is 60, it also affects people as young as 30 and 40 (called Young- Onset Parkinson's). How is Parkinson's diagnosed? A diagnosis of Parkinson's takes time. There are no x-rays or tests to confirm Parkinson's - diagnosis is made after a thorough assessment by a neurologist (a specialist trained in Parkinson's). What are the symptoms of Parkinson's? The most common symptoms are: tremor, slowness and stiffness, balance problems and/or rigidity of the muscles. Other symptoms of Parkinson's include: fatigue, soft speech, writing problems, stooped posture, constipation, sleep disturbances, and depression. Is there a cure for Parkinson's? Currently there is no cure. But there are many promising research projects underway to find and understand the causes of Parkinson's disease and to help develop better treatments. How is Parkinson's treated? Parkinson's is treated with medication, which can reduce symptoms, but may cause side effects. Physical and occupational therapy and exercise are also helpful. As the disease advances, medications need to be adjusted. A small percentage of people with Parkinson's may benefit from brain surgery. 92- CA4Wi O N T A R 1 O "7984-2009 proudly keeping children safe for 29 years" - - •i ICLE4K _ e March, 2009 _ "i M',EEG LEGAL I _._C HUMAN! RES 1~ CUST CAPE t MGRCUST&ADM ~a Your Worship, This May marks two very special milestones for Child Find Ontario. It is our 25th Anniversary and also the 18th Annual Green Ribbon of Hope TM Campaign. Once again we ask for your support, and that of your council members, to assist us in bringing this message to families in your community. The concept of the Green Ribbon of Hope was developed by the students of Holy Cross Secondary School in St. Catharines as a result of the abduction and subsequent murder of 15-year-old Kristen French on April 16, 1992. The Green Ribbon is now a symbol of recognition for the many children who go missing every year. The colour green embodies a sign of hope for those children who have gone missing. Last year the RCMP National Missing Children Services reported that over 21,000 children went missing in Ontario alone. Our education and prevention programs are vital in helping families cope with the many obstacles that were not an issue 25 years ago. Cyber bullying and on-line predators present a real threat to our youth. Teenage runaways remain on the rise. In honour of all searching parents we ask that your leadership play a key role in promoting the safe return of all missing children. I have enclosed sample proclamations for the Green Ribbon of Hope Campaign and National Missing Children's Day on the 25th of May. I would be very pleased if you could help us raise awareness by proclaiming either a day or a month in your constituency. We are happy to provide Green Ribbons free of charge and would encourage you to order as many as you need so that you might wear them on the 25th of May or any other time during the month. Fliers are also available to post in your workplace and can be ordered by completing the attached form and faxing or e-mailing it back to our office. For further information on Child Find Ontario or the Green Ribbon of Hope Campaign please email me at elainea-childfindontario.ca or visit our website at www.ontario.childfind.ca or contact us at 1-866- KID-TIPS (543-8477). w n..:.. With my thanks, Elaine Goraj Fundraising & Program Development Provincial Head Office 440A Britannia Rd. E. Mississauga, Ontario Canada L4Z 1X9 Tel: 905-712-3463 Fax: 905-712-3462 Toll Free: 1-800-KID-TIPS (543-8477) National Toll Free: 1-800-387-7962 • E-mail: mail(achildfindontario.ca • www.ontario.childfind.ca 93 0 N T A R 1 O "1984-2009 proudly keeping children safe for 25 years" May. 2009 18th Annual Green Ribbon of HopeTM Campaign Order Form Quantity Quantity Package Request Ordered Shipped Bags of 100 Pre-cut & pinned Green Ribbon -No Charge Rolls of 100 Green Ribbon Stickers -No Charge (Available in French and English) Collection Boxes -No Charge (Complete with tray to hold Stickers or Ribbons) Green Ribbon Posters - 13" x 22" -No Charge Available in French and English) Green Ribbon Fliers - 8'h" x.11" -No Charge (Available in French and English) Green Ribbon "Spirit of Hope" Wrist Band * $2.00 each YES, We would like to raise funds to help reduce the incidence of missing children PLEASE PRINT CLEARLY CITY/MUNICIPALITY/TOWNSHIP: CONTACT PERSON/TJTLE: SHIPPING ADDRESS: POSTAL CODE: ( ) PHONE # ( FAX # EMAIL ADDRESS: To receive your order before May, please reply by fax before April 1St Please fax this sheet to 905-712-3462 or email me at iohn@childfindontaric.ca. If you have any questions please feel free to contact us at 905-712-FIND (3463) or 1-800-543-8417 Child Find Ontario, 440A Britannia Bd. E., Mississauga, ON, UZ 1X9 94 PICKERING MEMO C-0 33=07 To: Debi Wilcox February 10, 2009 City Clerk From: Marisa Carpino Supervisor, Culture & Recreation Copy: Chair, Pickering Advisory Committee on Race- Relations & Equity Chief Administrative Officer (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Director, Operations & Emergency Services Department Division Head, Culture & Recreation Members of the Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations & Equity Subject: Proclaim March 21 St A-2100-005-09 On behalf of the Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations & Equity, please accept this memorandum as a formal request that the City of Pickering proclaim March 21, 2009 as the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination. Since 1966, March 21 St has been recognized by the United Nations as the International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination in response to the killing of 70 peaceful demonstrators in Sharpeville, South Africa in 1960. David Pickles, Chair, Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations & Equity and committee members would like to commemorate March 21St by way of proclamation so that our community can continue to be aware of the harmful effects of racism and discrimination and of the leadership of the municipal government to foster equality, respect and diversity. The Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations & Equity will also host the Race Relations Forum on March 25, 2009 in Council Chambers in order to commemorate March 21St. This forum will showcase the winning entries of the student contest entitled "In Your Words & Expressions". This annual contest focuses on issues of diversity, race relations and equity and is presented by the Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations & Equity in partnership with the Durham District School Board and the Durham Catholic District School Board. The Forum will also include guest speaker Dr. Alvin Curling. The Honourable Alvin Curling has been the former Member of Provincial Parliament, Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of Ontario and Canadian Ambassador to the Dominican Republic. The winning entries of the contest will be on the city's website and displayed in the lobby of the Civic Complex for the entire month of March 2009. :mc 9 5 PICKERING MEMO To: Debi Wilcox March 12, 2009 City Clerk From: Marisa Carpino Supervisor, Culture & Recreation Copy: Chair, Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations & Equity Chief Administrative Officer (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Director, Operations & Emergency Services Department Division Head, Culture & Recreation Members of the Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations & Equity Subject: Proclaim Asian Heritage Month A-1400-005-09 On behalf of the Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations & Equity, please accept this memorandum as a formal request that the City of Pickering proclaim the month of May as Asian Heritage Month. In December 2001, The Honourable Vivienne Poy introduced a motion in the Senate of Canada to designate May as Asian Heritage Month. The Government of Canada officially recognized Mayas Asian Heritage Month in May, 2002. The resolution at the Senate of Canada appropriately explains its significance: "Be it resolved that May be recognized as Asian Heritage Month, given the important contributions of Asian Canadians to the settlement, growth and development of Canada, the diversity of the Asian Community, and its present significance to this country." The City of Pickering is among the most diverse in the Durham Region and the Asian Community are significant part of our cultural mosaic. The Asian Community represent 17% of the total population in Pickering and 56% of the visible minority population in Pickering'. Clearly, the Asian Community is strong and vibrant within the City of Pickering. And the Pickering Advisory Committee on Race Relations & Equity wish to recognize their contributions to Pickering's past, present and future through this proclamation. The Pickering Public Library has a display of materials and resources in their lobby during the month of May to commemorate Asian Heritage Month. Furthermore, the Pickering Public Library Children's Department will welcome guest author Arlene Chan at 9:30 am on May 20, 2009 who will conduct a presentation for local school children for Asian Heritage month. Arlene Chan has published several non-fiction children's books about different festivals. She will be focusing on the Dragon Boat Festival. We encourage our community to get involved and participate during Asian Heritage Month. 'Source: Statistics Canada, 2006 Ccty o0 9 6 March 23, 2009 PICKERI COMMITTEE REPORTS a) REPORT EC 2009-03 OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Executive Pages Buff 1. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 12-09 1-6 First Nations Trail Project - Western Gateway RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 12-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding the First Nations Trail Project - Western Gateway be received; 2. That Council acknowledge that staff will be proceeding with the tendering of the Western Gateway project prior to 2009 budget approval; 3. That, notwithstanding the provisions of the City's Purchasing Policy, Council approve the appointment of Johnson Sustronk & Weinstein to provide consultant services for the Western Gateway project at an estimated cost of $30,000; 4. That Council provide approval to modify the 1977 agreement with the City of Toronto, to relieve them from the responsibility to maintain the eastern approaches to the Rouge River pedestrian bridge; 5. The Council provide approval to enter into an agreement with the Canadian National Railway Company, for the reconstruction of the pedestrian crossing under the CN Rail lines; and 6. That a copy of this report be forwarded to the TRCA for their information. 2. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 05-09 7-17 Application for Minor Variance to Sign By-law 2493/87, as amended - Pickering Brock Centre - 1755 - 1805 Pickering Parkwav At the March 9, 2009 meeting of the Executive Committee, recommendation 3 d) of Report CS 05-09 was referred back to staff. In order to consider recommendation 3 d) as part of this agenda this item should be pulled and a motion introduced to suspend the rules in order to consider the matter. Please see attached memorandum from the City Clerk and correspondence from Zelinka Priamo Ltd. 97 RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report CS 05-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer be received; 2. That the application for minor variance to Sign By-law 2439/07, as amended, submitted by Bayfield Realty Advisors on behalf of Pickering Brock Centre, for property municipally known as 1755-1805 Pickering Parkway, be approved as follows; a) The request to permit an increased height for the proposed pylon sign '132', Highway 401 frontage; b) The proposed roof top signage for Unit A16; 3. That the application for minor variance to Sign By-law 2439/07, as amended, submitted by Bayfield Realty Advisors on behalf of Pickering Brock Centre, for property municipally known as 1755-1805 Pickering Parkway, be approved as follows; c) The request to permit an increased height for pylon sign '131', Brock Road frontage; and 4. That the appropriate officials be given the authority to give effect thereto. 3. Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer, Report CS 03-09 18-21 Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information RECOMMENDATION That Report CS 03-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer regarding Formal Quotations - Quarterly Report for Information be received for information. 9 8 „ PICKERING MEMO To: Mayor and March 19, 2009 Members of Council From: Debi A. Wilcox City Clerk Copy: Chief Administrative Officer (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Directors Subject: Staff Response further to March 9, 2009 Executive Committee Report CS 05-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer The Executive Committee considered the sign variances submitted by Pickering Brock Centre at its meeting of March 9, 2009 and Committee recommended approval of the height variance (10.6 metres) for the two pylon signs B1 and B2 (Brock Road and Highway 401 respectively), and the roof sign for Unit A16. However, the variance request for pylon sign Al dealing with both sign height (10.6 metres) and video display was referred to staff by the Committee. Staff was requested to review the proposal with specific reference to the impact of the video display and sign height on the adjacent residential neighbourhood, traffic safety and economic development. On March 10, 2009 the applicant's agent (Mr. Harry Froussios) advised the City that Pickering Brock Centre Inc. had abandoned the video board/electronic message centre for Pylon sign Al. By letter dated March 10, 2009 (copy attached) they have formally revised their variance application to replace the video sign with the same sign as proposed for locations B1 and B2 (sign Al has been replaced with sign B3 - revised site sketch attached). Consequently, sign B3 now only requires a variance in height (10.6 metres) being the same height as the other two proposed pylon signs (131 and 132) recommended for approval by the Executive Committee on March 9th. It is the owner's intent to implement the new signage as one comprehensive initiative in the near future, and they do not wish to delay installation due to concerns raised about the appropriateness of a video board at this location. The current pylon sign at the Pickering Parkway frontage of this site provides a height of 7.5 metres (being the maximum height permitted by the current sign by-law) and is located east of the vehicular entrance to the Pickering Parkway. The replacement pylon sign (133) is proposed at a height of 10.6 metres and is to be located west of the vehicular entrance, further away from the residential community. The replacement sign will have significantly higher visual prominence than the current sign, which we understand to be one of the objectives of the owner. For reference, the height of facade of the recently renovated Fairweathers outlet at this Centre is 9 metres. Staff's general review indicates that the proposed sign will be visible from residences on Larksmere Court that back on to Pickering Parkway and Wal-Mart, but is only in the direct line of view of three properties. The sign will also be in the direct line of view from the residence at the northeast 99 corner of Pickering Parkway and Beechlawn Drive, but this location is significantly distant to the east. The proposed 3.1 metre increase in height will increase the visibility of the sign from these and other residences, and the dominance of the sign as a structure on the site. This is evident from the Wal-Mart signage that exists on the adjacent property at a height of approximately 12 metres. However, the greater height should not impact the residential neighbourhood to any significant degree. The intensity of the internal lighting for the sign will also directly impact its visibility from the residential community. Considering the owner's revision for the sign variance application to delete reference to the video board/electronic message for Pylon sign Al, the information provided by staff in this memorandum addressing Committee's concerns, and the applicant's desire to proceed expeditiously with site signage, this matter (Item 3d) can be brought forward for consideration at Council on March 23, 2009. Therefore, the following recommendation is hereby supported by staff: 3 d) The request to permit an increased height for pylon sign `63% Pickering Parkway frontage is approved;. Debi A. Wilcox DW/Ir March 19, 2009 Page 2 Report CS 05-09 of the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Alp Alk ZELINKA PRIAMO LTD A Pi-oFesszonaL Pcah" Praet;ae 100 March 10, 2009 Ms. Debi A. Wilcox City Clerk City of Pickering Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Dear Ms. Wilcox: Re: Application for Minor Variance to Sign By-law 2439/07 Pickering Brock Centre 1755-1805 Pickering Parkway City File: L-2340 Our File: BRA/PCK/06-01 Further to our presentation at last evening's Executive Committee meeting, we are pleased to provide the following information regarding the above-noted application: It is our understanding that the following actions were taken by the Committee last night with respect to the application: 1. Adopt staff recommendation items 1, 2 and 4 as per Report CS 05-09; 2. Deny staff recommendation item 3c) and approve pylon sign `131' as proposed by the applicant; and 3. Defer staff recommendation item 3d) to allow Planning staff the opportunity to review impacts of video display and increased sign height on neighbouring residential uses. With respect to recommendation item 3d) we would like to advise that our client is no longer pursuing a video display on the proposed pylon sign. However, a pylon sign of ` 10.6 metres in height is still proposed at the same location as originally proposed along Pickering Parkway (see attached site plan). The proposed pylon sign (`133') will have the same design as pylon signs `B 1' and `132' (see attached sign details), which was approved by the Committee for the proposed pylon signs located along the Highway 401 and Brock Road frontages. 318 Wellington Road London, Ontario N6C 4P4 Tel: 519-474-7137 Fax: 519-474-2284 Email: zp@zpplan.com Website: zpplan.com Ms. Debi A. Wilcox March 10, 2009 City Clerk City of Pickering 101 We have already discussed the pylon sign revisions with Mr. Neil Carroll, Director of Planning & Development, and it is our understanding that planning staff will undertake a review of the impacts of the proposed height of the pylon sign on neighbouring residential uses and report on their findings in advance of the March 23rd Council meeting. As such, we would greatly appreciate your assistance in advancing our revised pylon sign proposal for Council's consideration at it's meeting on March 23r . This will assure that all of the proposed signage for the site will be dealt with at the same time in order to allow our client to proceed with construction of the signs as soon as possible. Also, please use this correspondence as our formal request to appear as a delegation for the March 23rd Council Meeting to discuss and provide information to Council regarding the proposed pylon sign revisions. We thank you for your assistance and co-operation regarding this matter. If we can be of any assistance, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Yours very truly, ZELINKA PRIAMO LTD. Harry Froussios, BA, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Attachments cc: Vish Brijbassi - Bayfield Realty Advisors Neil Carroll - Director, Planning & Development Zelinka Priamo Ltd. Page 2 i p 102 E,. / 1 _ 0 v T t TM i { = ,C S 10 off S 4aM n; t f i 10 _ va r I luL:~ ~ cm _ l 2E m = s - o u L~ -2 611 _ - ~ i i i I t ' M.+a.+e[ ~I I I ~ i~ 4 ~ ~ ~ y 4 M _ I mot m m city o~ 104 March 23, 2009 NEW AND UNFINISHED PAGES 1. Director, Planning & Development Report PD 13-09 107-140 Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study - Proposed Amendment to the Regional Official Plan RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 13-09 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the Region of Durham's Proposed Amendment to the Durham Regional Official Plan to incorporate recommendations of the Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study, and to incorporate Food Security Principles be received; 2. That the comments contained in Report PD 13-09 on the Proposed Amendment to the Regional Official Plan to implement the Region of Durham Growth Plan Implementation Study be endorsed, and that Council request the Region to incorporate the following changes: a) the land use structure as shown on Exhibit 4 to the proposed Amendment and provided as Appendix I to Report PD 13-09 be revised as follows: i) replace the Regional Centre designation with a new Urban Growth Centre designation for downtown Pickering; ii) designate a Future Regional Centre designation, at Salem Road and the Seventh Concession Road in northeast Pickering; iii) delete the Regional Corridor overlay along Taunton Road and delete the Living Area designation on lands located between Taunton Road and the C.P. Rail line within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood; and iv) add the Regional Corridor overlay along Brock Road between the Highway 401 interchange and Bayly Street; b) the transit priority network as shown on Exhibit 8 to the proposed Amendment and provided as Appendix II to Report PD 13-09 be revised as follows: (i) replace the future commuter station symbol with a transportation hub symbol for the GO Train Station in Seaton; and c) the detailed comments and revisions to the policies of the proposed Amendment provided as Appendix III to Report PD 13-09 be incorporated into the final Amendment to the Regional Official Plan; 3. That Council support the Region's commitment to undertake the Infrastructure and Fiscal Analysis to address infrastructure, transit and servicing costs relating to new urban areas identified on Exhibit 4 to the 10 SRegion's proposed Amendment and provided as Attachment #3 to Report PD 13-09; 4. That Council request the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure to extend the required Growth Plan Conformity submission deadline by one year, from June 16, 2009 to June 16, 2010 for the City of Pickering; and 5. Further, that a copy of Report PD 13-09 and Pickering Council's resolution on the matter be forwarded to the Region of Durham, other Durham Area Municipalities, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and the Ministry of Transportation. 2. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 14-09 141-190 S.R. & R. Bay Ridges Ltd. Addendum to Report Number PD 47-08 -Parkland Conveyance RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 14-09 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Council confirm the requirement that S.R.& R. Bay Ridges Ltd. ("SR&R") pay the sum of $533,250 in lieu of the conveyance of parkland in relation to the redevelopment of the lands in the former Bay Ridges Plaza; 3. That payment of the total parkland amount of $533,250 be phased to coincide with the issuance of above-ground building permits for each of the three phases of the site's redevelopment - the first being the construction of 110 townhouses, the second being the construction of Building/Tower A (236 units), and the third being the construction of Building/Tower B (141 units) and the remaining 10 townhouses; and 4. Further, that $81,976.87 of the $200,000 already paid on account of parkland be returned to SR&R in order to be consistent with a phased payment approach. 3. Director, Operations & Emergency Services, Report OES 14-09 191-215 Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project -Tender No. T-17-2008 -Request for Additional Funding RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report OES 14-09 of the Director, Operations & Emergency Services regarding additional funding for the Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project be received; 2. That additional expenditures in the total amount of $150,000 (GST excluded) be approved; 3. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to 106 finance the additional required expenditures from funds received under the "Investing in Ontario Act, 2008"; and 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take any actions necessary to give effect thereto. REPORT TO ' COUNCIL 1 VCKWE R I Report Number: PD 13-09 i ~1 O Date: March 23, 2009 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study - Proposed Amendment to the Regional Official Plan Recommendations: 1. That Report PD 13-09 of the Director, Planning & Development, regarding the Region of Durham's Proposed Amendment to the Durham Regional Official Plan to incorporate recommendations of the Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study, and to incorporate Food Security Principles be received; 2. That the comments contained in Report PD 13-09 on the Proposed Amendment to the Regional Official Plan to implement the Region of Durham Growth Plan Implementation Study be endorsed, and that Council request the Region to incorporate the following changes: (a) the land use structure as shown on Exhibit 4 to the proposed Amendment and provided as Appendix I to Report PD 13-09 be revised as follows: (i) replace the Regional Centre designation with a new Urban Growth. Centre designation for downtown Pickering; (ii) designate a Future Regional Centre designation, at Salem Road and the Seventh Concession Road in northeast Pickering; (iii) delete the Regional Corridor overlay along Taunton Road and delete the Living Area designation on lands located between Taunton Road and the C.P. Rail line within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood; and (iv) add the Regional Corridor overlay along Brock Road between the Highway 401 interchange and Bayly Street; (b) the transit priority network as shown on Exhibit 8 to the proposed Amendment and provided as Appendix II to Report PD 13-09 be revised as follows: (i) replace the future commuter station symbol with a transportation hub symbol for the GO Train Station in Seaton; and (c) the detailed comments and revisions to the policies of the proposed Amendment provided as Appendix III to Report PD 13-09 be incorporated into the final Amendment to the Regional Official Plan; Report PD 13-09 March 23, 2009 108 Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Proposed Amendment Page 2 3. That Council support the Region's commitment to undertake the Infrastructure and Fiscal Analysis to address infrastructure, transit and servicing costs relating to new urban areas identified on Exhibit 4 to the Region's proposed Amendment and provided as Attachment #3 to Report PD 13-09; 4. That Council request the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure to extend the required Growth Plan Conformity submission deadline by one year, from June 16, 2009 to June 16, 2010 for the City of Pickering; and 5. Further, that a copy of Report PD 13-09 and Pickering Council's resolution on the matter be forwarded to the Region of Durham, other Durham Area Municipalities, the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, and the Ministry of Transportation. Executive Summary: In February 2009, the Region of Durham released the Proposed Amendment to the Regional Official Plan, to incorporate changes resulting from the second part of the Region's Official Plan review. The amendment responds to "Directions" presented in the Growing Durham, Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions, Final Report, dated November 18, 2008. For lands within Pickering, the Amendment proposes to designate at the Regional level, future urban lands beyond the current urban area (South Pickering and Seaton) to 2031 and identifies potential future growth areas to accommodate future employment and residential growth beyond 2031. The additional urban lands are shown on Exhibits 4 and 10 and are provided as Attachments #3 and #4 to this Report to Council. In essence, all lands in northeast Pickering, commonly referred to as the "whitebelt" lands in the Provincial Growth Plan, are proposed for future urban uses. Also for Pickering, the Amendment includes the identification of a Transportation Hub at South Pickering's GO Station and intensification policies for Pickering's Urban Growth Centre and Regional Corridors. A strong policy framework is proposed to address phasing of urban area expansions and the protection of strategic Employment Areas beyond 2031. Staff supports the proposed Amendment subject to a number of changes for Pickering. Key changes include replacing the Regional Centre designation with a new Urban Growth Centre designation for Pickering downtown, adding a future Regional Centre at Salem Road and the Seventh Concession Road in northeast Pickering, deleting the Regional Corridor overlay along Taunton Road within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood and adding a Transportation Hub at the future GO Station in Seaton. Financial Implications: No direct implications. Report PD 13-09 March 23, 2009 Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: 09 Proposed Amendment Page 3 Sustainability Implications: The proposed Regional Amendment supports the City's economic, environmental and social objectives by providing Pickering with future urban areas to accommodate population and employment growth and protect strategic employment areas for investment opportunities. The proposed phasing policies ensure that higher residential densities are being achieved prior to approving sequential secondary plans. Also, to support new urban area expansions, the completion of watershed plans in sensitive areas such as the Carruther's Creek watershed are required as part of the secondary plan process. This proposed policy will adequately protect Carruther's Creek and other watersheds in Durham Region. The proposed policies also require an overall minimum 40% intensification target for the built-up area across Durham Region and allocate a level of intensification expected to be achieved in local municipalities (see Attachment #6 - Intensification Allocations). Lastly, staff applauds the Region in adding wording and definitions that promote the creation of healthy and complete sustainable communities. 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 initiated a Growth Plan Implementation Study to bring the Durham Regional Official Plan into conformity with the Provincial Growth Plan for the Golden Horseshoe. The overall Study was completed in five phases. The Study objectives were: • allocate the Growth Plan population and employment forecast to Durham's local municipalities to the year 2031 with an extended outlook to 2056; • accommodate a 40% rate of residential intensification within the built-up areas of the Region by 2015 and each year thereafter; • achieve a minimum density of 50 people and jobs per hectare in designated Greenfield areas; • plan for a combined 200 people and jobs per hectare in designated Urban Growth Centres; • assess the supply of employment lands to accommodate the Growth Pan forecast; and • assess the need for settlement boundary expansions and new designated Greenfield Areas. The consulting firms of Urban Strategies Inc., Watson & Associates and Totten Sims Hubicki were retained by the Region to prepare the Study. Report PD 13-09 March 23, 2009 11« Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Proposed Amendment Page 4 1.2 Staff has been participating in Durham's Growth Plan Study process by attending meetings, open houses and preparing reports for Council's consideration. Staff has been participating in Durham's Growth Plan Study and providing regular updates to Council as input to the Region's Study. In addition to a memorandum to the Chief Administrative Officer in December 2008, this is the fourth Report from the Director, Planning and Development prepared for Council's consideration. The last report, PD 42-08, provided staff comments on Durham's Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Report dated September 23, 2008. The Directions Report represented the last phase of the Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study. On November 17, 2008 Council endorsed PD 42-08 and requested the Region to make the following changes: 1. 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; 2. 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; 3. 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; 4. 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 5. include policies to support updating watershed plans. On November 25, 2008, Regional Planning Committee endorsed the Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Final Report, incorporating Council's recommended changes in items 1, 3 and 4 above. The Directions Report also contained policies on watershed planning addressing item 5, and item 2 was not addressed. Regional Planning Committee also requested staff to consider permitting mixed uses (including residential) in proximity to transit centres. R,-- D 13-09 March 23, 2009 Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: 1 Proposed Amendment Page 5 On the basis of the Final Report and Committee's resolutions, Planning Committee authorized Regional staff to prepare a Regional Official Plan amendment to implement the Directions Report. 1.3 In February 2009, the Region of Durham released the proposed Amendment to the Regional Official Plan incorporating the results from the Region's Growth Plan review. On January 26, 2009, Regional staff held a meeting with local municipal staff in order to discuss the content of the proposed Amendment and to solicit comments. Although the proposed Amendment was not provided to staff for review, a broader discussion on the proposed official plan policies took place. On February 24, 2009, Durham provided Pickering a copy of the "Early Release of the Public Meeting Report" and the proposed Amendment to the Durham Regional Official Plan. A copy of the Region's Report and proposed amendment including attachments is available at www.region.durham.on.ca. 1.4 The Region is convening a series of Public Open Houses and meetings pertaining to the Proposed Amendment. In keeping with the November 25, 2008 direction of Regional Planning Committee to hold a series of public open houses on the proposed Amendment, a public open house was held in Pickering on March 3, 2009. Copies of the displays presented at the meeting have been provided to Council for information. The statutory public open house has been scheduled for March 23, 2009 at Durham Regional Headquarters. Regional Planning Committee will hold the statutory public meeting on March 24, 2009. The consultation period will conclude on March 31, 2009. 1.5 As part of the Growth Plan Implementation Amendment, the Region is proposing to add new policies supporting food security. In February 2009, Report 2009-P-17 was received from the Region proposing to add new policies supporting food security in the proposed Amendment. The new policies include: • a new Direction to support food security for all residents; • recognizing the need for equal access to locally grown food; protecting prime agricultural areas as a significant element of the Region's economy and secure source of food; and 0 adding a new 'food security' definition. Report PD 13-09 March 23, 2009 ' 112 Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Proposed Amendment Page 6 2.0 Discussion: 2.1 Most of staff's earlier concerns with the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Final Report were addressed in the Proposed Amendment, although a number of further refinements are recommended. Many of the revisions requested in Report PD 42-08 on the Draft Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Final Report have been incorporated in the proposed Amendment as follows: • the future Employment Areas extended north to the Seventh Concession Road and south to Highway 7; • an area south-east of the Pickering airport site designated as future Employment Areas within the 2031 planning horizon; • a transportation hub identified at the GO Station in downtown Pickering; • large format retailing (or retail warehouses) prohibited in all Employment Areas except were currently permitted in local Official Plans; • phasing policies added to ensure that residential densities are being achieved prior to approving sequential secondary plans; and • the number of jobs increased to 76,720 at 2031 for Pickering including the 35,000 jobs identified by the Central Pickering Development Plan for Seaton. 2.2 Although population forecasts in the near term are optimistic for Pickering, accelerated growth in the longer term should achieve the 2031 growth forecasts. An excerpt from the Population, Household and Employment Table in the proposed Amendment is shown below for Pickering (also see Attachment #1 - Population, Households and Employment). POPULATION, HOUSEHOLDS AND EMPLOYMENT Municipality Year 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 Pickering Urban Population: 105,850 136,850 173,605 199,960 221,340 Rural Population: 4,230 4,260 4,280 4,305 4,330 Total Population: 110,075 141,105 177,890 204,265 225,670 Households: 34,860 45,030 58,245 68,110 77,125 Employment: 41,000 54,770 67,910 73,590 76,720 The population forecast indicates that Pickering's population will grow from 110,075 in 2011 to 141,105 in 2016, increasing again to 177,890 in 2021. The current population for Pickering is 92,800. The Region is forecasting substantial population growth from 2009 to 2021. ~jp5' Dq 13-09 March 23, 2009 Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Proposed Amendment Page 7 The number of building permits for new residential units issued in Pickering in recent years has been modest with 166 units in 2006, 280 units in 2007, and 245 units in 2008, or 691 units over the past three years. However, it should be recognized that residential growth has been limited due to the scarcity of developable lands in south Pickering and the unavailability of provincially-owned lands until recently with the approval of the Central Pickering Development Plan in 2006. The Region's population and employment forecasts for Pickering in the near term (2016) are considered overly optimistic. However, increased residential development activity in Seaton after 2016, Pickering's strategically located employment lands and specific economic drivers including the proposed Highway 407 extension, the growing Energy Cluster in Durham and the University of Ontario Institute Technology/Durham College should accelerate residential and employment growth in the longer term to achieve the 2031 forecasts. The Region has also identified the future proposed Pickering Airport as a key economic driver. Also, in recognition of these key drivers, the Region is forecasting an additional 9,090 jobs in Pickering out of 25,000 additional jobs across Durham on employment lands by 2031 (see Attachment #2- Additional Forecasted Employment Growth). 2.3 The proposed Amendment designates Future Urban Areas to address the urban land needs required to accommodate Pickering's forecasted growth to 2031. Previously, staff commented that Pickering's 20-year growth targets cannot be accommodated within its current urban area boundary and identified an urban land shortfall in less than 20 years. In recognition of Pickering's shortfall, the Region is proposing designating lands within the "whitebelt" in northeast Pickering for urban development (see Attachment #3 - Exhibit 4 to the proposed Amendment) for a combined urban area expansion of 1,234 hectares as shown in the table below. Future Urban Lands required by 2031 (gross ha) Potential Future Growth Areas* 2031-2056 (gross ha) Living Proposed Employment Combined Living Employment Combined Area Nodes & Areas Area Areas Corridors Pickering 630 167 437 1,234 147 304 451 * Title changed to reflect proposed Amendment wording Source: Growing Durham - Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Final Report, dated November 18, 2008, p.48. Report PD 13-09 March 23, 2009 Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: 114 Proposed Amendment Page 8 With this proposed Amendment, Pickering will have sufficient lands designated for urban uses up to the Region's planning horizon of 2031. It should be noted that these new development areas would not be brought on-stream until the substantial build-out of employment and residential lands in Seaton, and the City has satisfied the Region's criteria for urban area expansions. Staff agrees with the proposed regional policy requiring local official plan amendments for urban area boundary expansions to be part of a comprehensive municipal official plan review. However, the Region also proposes a related policy that requires detailed neighbourhood plans for expansion areas to be prepared as part of that same comprehensive municipal official plan review. This early timing requirement for detailed neighbourhood plans will unnecessarily complicate and burden the municipal official plan review process. Rather, staff recommends that the Region permit local municipalities to designate new urban areas as 'Urban Study Areas' as part of their comprehensive official plan review. Detailed neighbourhood planning would be undertaken subsequently, with all necessary background studies including securing approval of a watershed plan and addressing all regional and local policy requirements for the expansion area. A municipally initiated official plan amendment would then be required to approve the detailed neighbourhood plan. This approach still includes all checks and balances to ensure proper growth, but does not unnecessarily tie detailed neighbourhood planning with the higher level comprehensive official plan review process. This approach is similar to the planning exercise currently being followed for the Seaton Community. At this time, the fiscal impact of providing Regional infrastructure to the new urban areas is not known. However, the Regional Council has committed funding for the preparation of an Infrastructure and Fiscal Analysis Study to address infrastructure, transit and servicing costs once final decisions relating to the proposed Amendment have been made. 2.4 The proposed Amendment identifies Potential Future Growth Areas to address the urban land needs beyond 2031 to accommodate Pickering's future population and employment growth. The proposed Amendment identifies Potential Future Growth Areas of both Living Area and long term strategic Employment Areas forecasted to 2056 (see Attachment #4 - Exhibit 10 of the proposed Amendment). As shown in the table on the previous page, this area comprises 451 hectares. The Potential Future Growth Areas abut the 2031 urban boundary and support longer term growth in particular economic investment relating to the strategically located Employment Areas. These lands beyond the 2031 urban boundary are not intended for development prior to 2031 and should remain in agricultural use. Reood RD 13-09 March 23, 2009 1 1 5 Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Proposed Amendment Page 9 The longer horizon for the development of lands in northeast Pickering provides sufficient time to address longer term regional infrastructure needs such as roads, transit, water and sewers (wastewater) on lands required for future population and economic investment. A decision has not yet been reached on how piped services will be provided to northeast Pickering. 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 the completion of related fiscal impact and financing studies. 2.5 A new Urban Growth Centre designation should replace the Regional Centre designation located in downtown Pickering to support the objectives of the Growth Plan and the Final Regional Transportation Plan (Metrolinx). The proposed Amendment downplays the importance of Pickering's Urban Growth Centre as a significant centre in the Greater Golden Horseshoe for transit, infrastructure and employment investments as identified by the Province. It should be noted that Downtown Pickering and Downtown Oshawa are the only UGC's identified in Durham Region and are further recognized as Anchor Mobility Hubs in the Regional Transportation Plan (Metrolinx). These centres are hubs for accommodating significant intensification, including the highest gross densities in the Region at 200 residents and jobs per hectare (80 residents and jobs per acre). Staff recommends that Council request the Region to replace the Regional Centre designation with a new Urban Growth Centre designation as shown on Appendix 1 and that new Urban Growth Centre policies be added as provided in Appendix III to reflect the higher profile and role served by downtown Pickering. 2.6 A longer term horizon to realize higher densities for Regional Corridors and in Greenfield Living Areas is required. A floor space index (FSI) target of 2.5 for non-residential uses and a minimum average density of 170 residential units per net hectare is proposed for Regional Corridors in the Lake Ontario Shoreline Urban Areas. Brock Road, Bayly Street, Whites Road and Kingston Road are identified as Regional Corridors (see Attachment 3 - Regional Structure). While the objective of achieving this density for residential and non-residential uses over time is supported, its implementation will be challenging as this density is significantly higher than most developments in downtown Pickering, except the Tridel apartments (Picore office complex is about 0.7 FSI). It is unclear as to whether these density requirements are to be phased over the longer term (2031) or implemented soon after Provincial approval. Report PD 13-09 March 23, 2009 It 116 Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Proposed Amendment Page 10 To achieve the density required for Regional Corridors, developments would generally require underground or decked parking at the outset. Other challenges include the need for significant investment in community infrastructure and transit to support increased densities in our downtown and major corridors, requiring major financial assistance from the Province and Region. Also, within Regional Corridors, it may necessary to reduce densities at certain locations that abut lower density neighbourhoods, thereby driving density requirements in other locations in the Corridor significantly higher. Proposed policies for Greenfield Living Areas require a minimum average density of 50 residential units per net hectare. This requirement exceeds the Growth Plan minimum density target of not less than 50 residents and jobs combined per hectare. Also, the proposed density target represents the median of the City's medium density range (over 30 and up to and including 80 units per net hectare). In applying this requirement to the greenfield lands outside of the Mixed Corridor lands, the Region's target would appear to exclude most grade related housing forms such as single detached dwellings, semis, and townhouses and impose higher intensity, multi unit housing forms. A true mix of housing forms and densities for new neighbourhoods including low density appears to be difficult under the Region's proposed policies. Staff have contacted Regional staff to meet and discuss the density and housing form targets for Regional Corridors and Greenfield Living Areas, implementation of the targets and their relationship to Pickering's urban design objectives for corridors. 2.7 A new Regional Centre designation should be identified at Salem Road and the Seventh Concession Road in northeast Pickering to accommodate future growth at higher densities. The Region's Recommended Growth Scenario and Policy Directions Final Report identified a Regional Centre at Salem Road and the Seventh Concession Road. However, the proposed Amendment does not include a Regional Centre designation at this location. A centrally located Regional Centre at this location would provide an opportunity to accommodate higher residential densities and mixed uses in this sector of the City and in close proximity to Pickering's strategic Highway 407 employment lands. Regional Centres are planned as the main concentration of urban activities providing a fully integrated array of retail, residential, and major office uses and are a focal point to the surrounding area within which they are located. Staff recommends that Council request the Region to add the Regional Centre designation as shown on Appendix I, to reflect its central location in northeast Pickering to accommodate future growth and development at higher intensities. Relpol r D 13-09 March 23, 2009 Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Proposed Amendment Page 11 2.8 The Regional Corridor overlay and Living Area designation located between Taunton Road and the C.P. Rail line in Duffin Heights should be deleted to support the Final Recommendations of the Duffin Heights Environmental Servicing Plan and Pickering's proposed Amendment for Duffin Heights. The proposed Amendment shows a Regional Corridor overlay on Taunton Road between the municipal boundary of Ajax/Pickering and the C.P. Rail line. The area of land along this portion of Taunton Road is designated as Living Area. The Pickering Official Plan designates this area of land located between Taunton Road and the C.P. Rail line in Duffin Heights as Prestige Employment. Council endorsed the Final Recommendations of the Duffin Heights Environmental Servicing Plan that confirmed the area as part of the larger Duffins Creek Natural Heritage System supporting wildlife connectivity between Seaton and Duffin Heights/A9 Ajax Community Plan. The City's proposed Amendment for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood designates the area as a Natural Areas consistent with the environmental analysis conducted for the Environmental Servicing Plan. Staff recommends that Council request the Region to delete the Regional Corridor overlay on that portion of Taunton Road in Duffin Heights in conjunction with replacing the Living Area to Major Open Space Areas as shown on Appendix I, to reflect Council's endorsement of the Environmental Servicing Plan. 2.9 A transportation hub symbol should replace the commuter station symbol located at the future GO Station in the Seaton community to support the community objectives of the Central Pickering Development Plan (for Seaton) and the Regional Transportation Plan (Metrolinx). The proposed Transit Priority Network Schedule shows a commuter station symbol at the future GO Transit Station in the Seaton community (see Attachment #5). Both the Central Pickering Development Plan and Regional Transportation Plan (Metrolinx) identify a mobility hub of major activities including mixed-use and higher density development at the future GO Transit Station in Seaton. Staff recommends that Council request the Region to replace the Commuter Station symbol located at the future GO Station with a Transportation Hub symbol as shown on Appendix II to reflect the community objectives of both the Central Pickering Development Plan (for Seaton) and the Regional Transportation Plan. Report PD 13-09 March 23, 2009 118 Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Proposed Amendment Page 12 2.10 A number of refinements are recommended to provide clarity to policies and to add or revise policies to support the City's comments provided in this Report. Many of the issues previously raised by staff on the draft Directions Report have been addressed in the proposed Amendment. Staffs comments on the policies of the proposed Amendment are provided for Council's review and endorsement (see Appendix III). A technical revision of adding the Regional Corridor overlay along Brock Road between the Highway 401 interchange and Bayly Street is also recommended. 2.11 The proposed food security policies promoting access to quality food for residents and protecting agricultural land as a secure source of food is supported. The addition of the food security policies to the final Growth Plan Amendment to specifically recognize food security for all residents and to provide convenient access to healthy and locally grown food is supported. Staff continues to support the role of the GTA Agricultural Action Committee and other agricultural organizations to help build a healthy local food-based economy and to assist the farming community in making available fresh locally grown produce and other healthy foods at farmer's markets, community gardens and grocery stores. It should be noted that Pickering has a significant agricultural land base with approximately 47% of the City's land area within the Greenbelt Plan. 3.0 Next Steps 3.1 Following the Statutory Public Meeting, it is expected that Regional Planning staff will prepare a revised version of the proposed Amendment for Planning Committee consideration on May 19, 2009 with Regional Council adoption anticipated on June 3, 2009. Following receipt of comments from area municipalities, other stakeholders and the public including the comments made at the March 24, 2009 public meeting, Regional Planning staff will refine the proposed Amendment for Planning Committee consideration on May 19, 2009 with Regional Council adoption on June 3, 2009. The amendment will be forwarded to the Province for approval. 3.2 Due to the timing of the Region's approval of the proposed Amendment, an extension to the Provincial Growth Plan's June 16, 2009 deadline for official plan conformity is required. The City is also required to bring its Official Plan into conformity with the Provincial Growth Plan by June 16, 2009. Rjp?r~PD 13-09 March 23, 2009 Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: Proposed Amendment Page 13 As part of the City's Official Plan review process, staff intends to implement the approved Regional Official Plan Amendment. Pickering will not be in a position to bring its Official Plan into conformity by the deadline date. Therefore, Council must request the Minister of Energy and Infrastructure to extend the conformity submission deadline to June 16, 2010. APPENDICES: I Revised Exhibit 4 to proposed Regional Amendment, Schedule 'A' - Map 'A4', Regional Structure II Revised Exhibit 8 to proposed Regional Amendment, Schedule 'C' - Map 'C3', Transit Priority Network III Excerpt of Proposed Regional Official Plan Amendment Policies with Pickering Staff Comments ATTACHMENTS: 1. Population, Households and Employment from proposed Regional Amendment 2. Additional Forecasted Employment Growth included in Regional Amendment 3. Exhibit 4 to proposed Regional Amendment, Schedule 'A' - Map 'A4', Regional Structure 4. Exhibit 10 to proposed Regional Amendment, Schedule 'F' - Specific Policy Areas D, Potential Future Growth Areas 5. Exhibit 8 to proposed Regional Amendment, Schedule 'C' - Map 'C3', Transit Priority Network 6. Exhibit 11 to proposed Regional Amendment, Schedule 'E'- Table 'E9', Intensification Targets Report PD 13-09 March 23, 2009 Subject: Region of Durham's Growth Plan Implementation Study: 17 01 Proposed Amendment Page 14 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: ~~t'A Grant McGregor, MCIP, PP Neil Carroll, P Principal Planner - Policy Director, Planning & Development Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy GM:jf Copy: (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Chief Administrative Officer Director, Corporate Services & Treasures Director, Operations & Emergency Services Division Head, Municipal Property & Engineering Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council (14eA ko~ 0 Thomas J. Qui n, RDMR, CMM III Chief Administrative Officer t 1 21 APPENDIX I TO REPORT PD 13-09 REVISED EXHIBIT 4 TO PROPOSED REGIONAL AMENDMENT SCHEDULE `A' - MAP `A4', REGIONAL STRUCTURE O O ' N M r N 0 ~ a 0 CL a~ 0 x as CL Q Q w m ■ Ix w 1.W .qua ~ _ m UJ Gf5 7a~ 9r & iiI ° ku I~ LU i R r JE Y G aJU LL W~~J'j•LL:= 2 6 ',~Y• jj ~LL 111 ` ~y i~ Wi•1~r J d LLI~R z ° 7 W i' r ; mn i. s ti 2 V V'' .5 w a Y 1 1 ~i Y I 1 Iil F J ~ti S - w ] W `d r` u: Y °7 a ± W M 'K LL1 0 w U W a r! .r = L LL~ u iP w w"-f v v x^ w 11 „i ?1 d O 7 ff,} w m' 3 :!i - w s7 -~rfi N. :.r, y u Lj- U- WU- /p''44 ~ ° N IC tit rc~, it mini S -Y ~ iAii a }w a M1 '1 q w ~LL W V ~ 1 ~ :L J ~s!C <LLLy r IL 4 ~u•1 ~ riU f 7. z: U: V ~ir y it 1iii Ly H H ~ , s - AYE,...-,.- - Oaa. r, • r x ~r fi Lu- rFi ,r" ~ ~ t. ,y .v t,..,~, 1~► to r g l 1 a U r i 1 1 f ti ~ °U5 eg i m m U Y ~ rn ~ K ar wwi I rt APPENDIX 11 TO 12 3 REPORT PD 13-09 REVISED EXHIBIT 8 TO PROPOSED REGIONAL AMENDMENT SCHEDULE `C' - MAP `C3', TRANSIT PRIORITY NETWORK Q! O ~ N 0 ~ IL r- 0 CL as 0 x as a CL Q ° n Lu O d _ F- G u 6 V W zz aZ € `z 5 EL Q (WW9 3 - = y - gz U~ - - c,o=1 = h o on jF zs on JIM W Z WZ IJ I i i j I ! ,I 1 I I a -71 ICI -..~-~L ~ I I i ~ •~`,ll 4 I ----7------ I TL I APPENDIX III TO REPORT PD 13-09 125 EXCERPTS OF PROPOSED REGIONAL OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT POLICIES 126 Appendix III to Report 13-09 EXCERPTS OF MAJOR POLICIES FROM PROPOSED GROWING DURHAM REGIONAL OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT New Item Section Details of Policy Amendment Pickering Staff Comments No. 1. 1.1.1 a) Delete the word "target" and replace with "and Agree. employment forecasts". Delete the phrase "2021 is 970,000" and replace with "2031 are 960,000 and 350,000 respectively, consistent with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe". 2. 1.2.1 e) Add the phrase "healthy and complete sustainable Agree with adding the words communities within" after "to create". "sustainable communities". 3. 1. 3.1 e) Add the phrase "healthy and" before "complete". Agree. Add the word "sustainable" after "complete". 4. 1. 3.1 g) Add the phrase "and support active transportation" Agree. at end of the sub-section. 9. 3.2.2 Add the phrase "healthy and " before "complete". Agree. Add the word "sustainable" before "communities". 10. 3.3.5 Delete policy in its entirety and replace with the Agree. following: "The Region shall monitor progress in achieving the employment forecasts included in Policies 7.3.3 and 7.3.4, and the target ratio of jobs to population of 50% (1 job for every 2 persons)." 15. 3.3.10 Add a new policy to read as follows: Agree. These key economic drivers "This Plan recognizes the importance of key have the potential to facilitate and economic drivers that will influence the future attract desired investment for growth and development of the Region, including Durham and Pickering. UOIT/Durham College, Highways 401 and 407, Clarington Energy Park, the Darlington nuclear facility and future airport in Pickering." 18. 5.2.1 Add the following sentence at the end of the policy: Agree. These types of facilities are more appropriately located along "Cultural and health facilities shall generally be Regional Corridors or in Regional discouraged from locating in the Employment Centres. Areas designation, subject to Policy 8C.2.2." 19. 5.2.2 Add the following sentence to the end of the policy: Agree. "Community facilities that are deemed to be sensitive uses shall generally be discouraged from locating in the Employment Areas designation, subject to Policy 8C.2.2." 127 New Item Section Details of Policy Amendment Pickering Staff Comments No. 24. 5.3.12 b) Add the words "Urban Growth Centres," after Agree. "provision of services to". 36. 7.3.4 Add a new policy to read as follows: Agree with allocating 9,090 jobs of the additional forecasted "The population and employment forecasts outlined employment of 25,000 jobs to in Policy 7.3.3 are consistent with Schedule 3 of Pickering in recognition of the City's the Provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Golden strategically located employment Horseshoe. However, this Plan recognizes the lands. potential for the Region to accommodate up to an additional 25,000 jobs by 2031 in accordance with the following:" Add the "ADDITIONAL FORECASTED EMPLOYMENT" Table included at the end of Table A. 37. 7.3.5 Add a new policy to read as follows: Agree with the target ration of 1 job "Notwithstanding the employment forecasts in for every 2 persons. Policies 7.3.3 and 7.3.4, the Region continues to support a target ratio of jobs to population of 50% (1 job for every 2 persons) in accordance with Policy 3.2.2.". 39. 7.3.6 Delete the Policy in its entirety and replace with a Agree. new policy to read as follows: "The land base required to accommodate the population and employment forecasts outlined in Policies 7.3.3 and 7.3.4, for the Lake Ontario shoreline municipalities, capitalizes on the economic potential of the Highway 407 transportation corridor.". 40. 7.3.7 In the first sentence: Agree. • delete the word "The" at the beginning and replace with "This Plan recognizes that growth in the"; and • delete the word "in" after "Urban Areas" and replace with "of'. Delete the second sentence in its entirety. In the third sentence: • delete the phrase "additional population and/or employment land equivalents may be allocated and", and replace with "the boundaries of"; • delete the word "Area" after "the Urban" and replace with "Areas may be"; • delete the phrase "of this Plan or an area municipal official plan"; • add references to Policies "73.3, 7.3.4, 7.3.12" after "5.3.20"; and 12 New Item Section Details of Policy Amendment Pickering Staff Comments No. • delete reference to Policy "7.3.11" and replace with 7.3.13". Add the following sentence at the end of the policy: "Any remaining population and employment forecast allocation will be held in reserve for the respective municipality, and shall not be reallocated." 45. 7.3.10 Add a new policy to read as follows: Agree. However, the Region should be supporting intensification in local "Urban Areas shall be planned to achieve the municipalities by investing following growth management objectives: significantly in infrastructure, transit and active transportation. a) by 2015, and each year thereafter, accommodate a minimum 40% of all residential development through intensification within built-up areas, in accordance with Schedule E - Table 'E9'; b) develop greenfield areas in the Lake Ontario Shoreline municipalities at a minimum gross density of 50 persons and jobs combined per hectare; and c) accommodate a minimum 50% of all forecast employment in designated Employment Areas." 47. After "Future", add the word "Regional" in the Agree. heading "Future Urban Area Boundary Expansions". 48. 7.3.12 Add the phrase "on Schedule 'A' - Regional Agree. Structure" after "Urban Area boundaries". Delete the punctuation and phrase Upon consideration of an amendment to permit additional growth beyond the limits of the Urban Areas, Regional Council shall have", and replace with "having". 51. 7.3.12 g) Add a new sub-section to read as follows: Agree with policy to restrict the conversion of Employment Area "the ability to provide for a minimum 10-year lands to accommodate unmet housing and employment land needs, with logical population. and sequential development patterns. Where an area municipality has a fixed Urban Area Boundary, this policy shall not be construed to provide justification for Employment Area designation conversions to accommodate unmet residential unit demand on an area municipal basis;" 1?9 New Item Section Details of Policy Amendment Pickering Staff Comments No. 62. 7.3.13 e) Add a new sub-section to read as follows: Agree in principle with the secondary or neighbourhood "a secondary plan is prepared, based on the planning process. However, the following: policy should be flexible to consider the neighbourhood planning process i) an approved watershed plan; outside a comprehensive municipal official plan review process. ii) the area is sufficiently large to create a new community, or to round out an It is recommended that the policy be existing community; revised as follows: "e) A secondary plan may be iii) the area is contiguous to an existing prepared either as part of a Urban Area; comprehensive review of the area municipal official plan or as iv) sequential development; part of a municipal official plan amendment process provided v) the area is serviceable by full the urban expansion area has municipal water and sanitary been designated as a Urban sewerage systems; Study Area as part of the comprehensive review, based vi) environmental impact studies, in on the following:" accordance with Policy 2.3.42; vii) the growth management objectives of Policy 7.3.10; and viii) prescribed unit mixes and minimum and/or combined densities;" 7.3.13 f) Add a new sub-section to read as follows: Agree with the policy to require minimum medium and high density "secondary plan areas shall be developed to 75% units to be built prior to approving of their planned dwelling unit capacity, with a development in adjacent greenfield minimum of 25% of the medium and high density neighbourhoods. units, prior to the approval of development in adjacent secondary plan areas;" 66. 7.3.13 Add the following paragraph to the end of the Agree. However, the policy is not policy: clear and should be rewritten. "This policy will not serve to restrict the expansion of an area municipal urban area boundary, where the area municipal comprehensive review demonstrates that the municipality is moving significantly toward achieving the growth management objectives of Policy 7.3.10." 130 New Item Section Details of Policy Amendment Pickering Staff Comments No. 74. 8A.2.2 a) Delete the phrase "community, office, service and Disagree. The proposed policy shopping, recreational and residential uses" and does not implement the Growth Plan replace with "commercial, major retail, residential, policies for Urban Growth Centres. recreational, cultural, government and major office uses". It is recommended that Policy 8A.2.2 a) become b) and a new a) be provided as follows: "Centres shall be classified in hierarchy of functions as follows: a) Urban Growth Centres shall be planned to: i) serve as the dominant concentration for local, regional and provincial investment in institutional and region-wide public services as well as commercial, recreational, cultural, residential and entertainment uses; ii) accommodate and support major transit infrastructure; iii) serve as the highest density of major employment uses in the Region; and iv) accommodate a significant share of regional population and employment growth; b) Regional Centres shall be planned and developed in accordance with Policy 8A.1.2 as the main concentrations of urban activities within area municipalities, providing a fully integrated array of commercial, major retail, residential, recreational, cultural, government and major office uses. Generally, Regional Centres shall function as places of symbolic and physical interest for the residents, and shall provide identity to the area municipalities within which they are located." 131 New Item Section Details of Policy Amendment Pickering Staff Comments No. 91. 8A.2.3 Add a new policy to read as follows: Agree. However, it is not clear to what a)ii) is referring to - 80% of all "Centres shall be planned to accommodate the planned units to be of high density following: form; or 80% of all residential areas to be designated high density; or a) Urban Growth Centres (downtown Oshawa 80% of all urban growth centre lands and downtown Pickering): must be high density residential. i) density of 200 persons and jobs A similar clarification is required in combined per gross hectare; other subsections in section 8A.2.3 ii) minimum 80% high density residential; where similar policy phrasing is and used. iii) Minimum floor space index of 3.0 for non-residential uses; b) Regional Centres (Lake Ontario Shoreline Urban Areas): i) minimum average density of 170 residential units per net hectare; ii) minimum 80% high density residential; and iii) minimum floor space index of 2.5 for non-residential uses; c) Regional Centres (Beaverton, Cannington, Sunderland, Uxbridge, Port Perry and Orono); i) minimum average density of 30 residential units per net hectare; and ii) maximum 50% low density residential; d) Local Urban Centres (Lake Ontario Shoreline Urban Areas): i) minimum average density of 65 residential units per net hectare; ii) minimum 10% high density residential; iii) minimum floor space index of 2.0 for non-residential uses; and e) Local Community and Neighbourhood Centres: as determined in area municipal official plans." 132 New Item Section Details of Policy Amendment Pickering Staff Comments No. 101. 8A.2.12 Add a new policy to read as follows: Agree in principle. However, Regional Corridor density and "Corridors that are associated with Living Areas, in housing form targets are unlikely to accordance with Section 86, be planned to be achieved in the near term and accommodate the following: should be phased over the longer term (2031). Further clarification a) Regional Corridors: required. i) minimum average density of 140 residential units per net hectare; ii) minimum 60% high density residential; iii) minimum floor space index of 2.5 for non-residential uses; and iv) ultimate build-out, to demonstrate that higher density targets would not be precluded; b) Local Corridors: i) minimum average density of 65 residential units per net hectare; ii) minimum 10% high density residential; and iii) minimum floor space index of 2.0 for non-residential uses. 102. 8A.2.13 Add a new policy to read as follows: Agree. "Regional Corridors that are associated with Employment Areas, in accordance with Section 8C, shall be planned to accommodate a minimum average density of 40 employees per net hectare. Employment Area uses with the greatest potential for high employee densities are encouraged to locate along Regional Corridors." 111. 86.2.3 Add a new policy to read as follows: Agree in principle. However, Greenfield Living Areas target would "Greenfield Living Areas, not subject to the higher exclude most grade related housing density provisions of Section 8A for Centres and forms such as single detached Corridors shall be planned to accommodate the dwellings, semis, and townhouses following: and impose higher intensity, multi a) Lake Ontario Shoreline Urban Areas: unit housing forms. Further clarification required. i) minimum average density of 50 residential units per net hectare; and ii) maximum 70% low density residential; b) Other Urban Areas: i) minimum average density of 20 residential units per net hectare; and ii) maximum 75% low density residential." 133 New Item Section Details of Policy Amendment Pickering Staff Comments No. 122. 8C.2.2 Add a new policy to read as follows: Agree. "Residential uses shall not be permitted in Employment Areas. Other sensitive uses may be permitted as an exception, subject to applicable policies in area municipal official plans." 137. 8C.2.14 Add a new policy to read as follows: Agree "Limited personal service and retail uses, serving the immediate Employment Area may be permitted as a minor component, provided that such uses do not exceed 10% of the aggregate gross floor area. In any case, a single use shall not exceed 500 mz, subject to the inclusion of appropriate provisions in the area municipal official plan and/or zoning by- law." 140. 8C.2.16 Delete the policy in its entirety and replace with.. Agree with prohibiting major retail "Major retail uses shall not be permitted in uses within Employment Areas as Employment Areas, except where currently these use are more appropriately designated as a permitted use in an area municipal located within Regional Centres. It is official plan. " unclear as why supermarkets and department stores are excluded in the definition of major retail use. These uses should not permitted in the Employment Areas. 143. 8C.2.17 Delete the policy in its entirety and replace with: Agree with Employment Area land "The conversion of Employment Areas lands shall conversions being part of a only be considered through a municipal municipal comprehensive review. comprehensive review pursuant to the provisions of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. In the case of a downtown area or a regeneration area, re-designations shall be considered through a comprehensive review pursuant to the provisions of the Provincial Policy Statement." 144. 8C.2.18 Add a new policy to read as follows: Agree. "Decisions of Regional Council to refuse applications, or non- decisions of Regional Council on applications, for the conversion of Employment Areas, shall not be subject to appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board, pursuant to the Plannin Act." 173. 11.3.18 Add the following sentence to the end of the policy: Agree in principle. However, there "For the purposes of this Policy, development is minimal policy support for adjacent to a Transportation Hub or Commuter transportation hubs. Recommend Station shall be within a 500 metre radius of the that the transportation policies be station." enhanced once the Regional Transportation Plan is approved. 134 New Item Section Details of Policy Amendment Pickering Staff Comments No. 190. 14.10.2 Add a new policy to read as follows: Agree with the Regional monitoring. "The Region, in consultation with the area municipalities will monitor the following key growth management objectives on a regular basis: a) employment forecasts coincident with the release of relevant Census of Canada information, and updates to the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe; b) the achievement of the minimum intensification rates for each area municipality, as detailed in Schedule E - Table'E9' and the overall Regional target of 40% intensification overall within the built-up area, including the following key growth areas: i) Regional and Local Centres; ii) Regional and Local Corridors; and iii) Waterfront Places; C) the achievement of the overall 50 people and jobs combined per gross hectare in greenfield areas; and d) the achievement of the increasing densities in the Urban Growth Centres of Oshawa and Pickering, in relation to the combined density of 200 people and jobs per gross hectare. ATTACHMENT#~-TO REPORT# PD i 3 ® 9 135 POPULATION, HOUSEHOLDS AND EMPLOYMENT FOR THE LAKE ONTARIO SHORELINE MUNICIPALITIES Municipality Year 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 Aiax Urban Population: 110,525 125,475 131,465 135,000 136,795 Rural Population: 825 835 850 860 875 Total Population: 111,350 126,310 132,310 135,860 137,670 Households: 34,500 40,100 42,895 44,620 45,845 Employment: 34,800 40,660 46,280 48,560 49,290 Clarington Urban Population: 72,700 81,660 92,630 111,910 124,685 Rural Population: 15,275 15,380 15,465 15,565 15,655 Total Population: 87,980 97,040 108,095 127,475 140,340 Households: 30,230 34,030 39,175 46,590 52,125 Employment: 22,580 26,890 32,130 36,080 38,410 Oshawa Urban Population: 152,560 164,345 173,640 183,395 195,935 Rural Population: 1,020 1,035 1,045 1,055 1,065 Total Population: 153,580 165,380 174,685 184,450 197,000 Households: 59,105 64,540 70,420 75,660 82,595 Employment: 68,270 75,290 84,660 86,940 90,800 Pickering Urban Population: 105,850 136,850 173,605 199,960 221,340 Rural Population: 4,230 4,260 4,280 4,305 4,330 Total Population: 110,075 141,105 177,890 204,265 225,670 Households: 34,860 45,030 58,245 68,110 77,125 Employment: 41,000 54,770 67,910 73,590 76,720 Whitby Urban Population: 122,930 138,545 154,815 177,045 190,760 Rural Population: 2,055 2,070 2,080 2,090 2,100 Total Population: 124,985 140,615 156,895 179,140 192,860 Households: 41,700 47,745 55,235 64,565 71,645 Employment: 40,840 47,800 56,740 65,260 71,300 DURHAM Urban Population: 592,715 676,855 757,065 840,770 905,375 Rural Population: 51,265 52,170 52,920 53,800 54,605 Total Population: 643,980 729,025 809,985 894,570 960,000 Households: 220,635 253,300 289,515 324,955 356,645 Employment: 225,530 265,100 308,980 332,900 350,000 Notes: 1. Totals may not add precisely due to rounding. 2. The population and employment forecasts for Pickering include an allocation of 70,000 people and 35,000 jobs for Seaton, in accordance with the Central Pickering Development Plan. 3. Durham Urban, Rural and Total Population includes Brock, Scu o and Uxbrd e ATTACHMENT#-L_-TO 136 REPORT# PD Q 5 ADDITIONAL FORECASTED EMPLOYMENT Municipality Year 2011 2016 2021 2026 2031 Ajax - - - - Brock - - - 300 550 Clarington - - - 1,490 2,680 Oshawa - - - 4,280 6,100 Pickering - - 990 4,380 9,090 Scugog - - - 300 540 Uxbridge - - - 280 500 Whitby - - - 3,100 5,800 DURHAM - - 990 141130 25,000 Note: Totals may not add precisely due to rounding. ATTACHMENT#TO REPORT# PO 02 137. d w t-a Zw i U O CL 6 pa IN z Z U ' s w~3o Za _ pu;~ O~u _ O N~ ¢ ~ I U_ w 'a y°2 ¢rcj• '6 .156, 556 IS ow s Q J Q O n w~ rcw w m~ I 4 w Z J J Q 111 w rc w° rc ma O J U O 7 N LLI J $f aw m p... w~ f tt vii o p ° ~a' L u1~ d i > w$ € 90 z a: l 2 0 ~ rn a u~$ o ~ c'wy j E a O O O uw N $°d .o o Rp: F_M Q 10 w 0 y rc ° $6 i i w ¢ ou az ? z w z~ v ~f W V y °d~a i y a W a°a J~ `3 o°m aka $ a p op j y o$ J I U" W LL = LL 0 m - a O W _ ® W N w0Z I ' N a y'_J tl 0 I _ a a a~8 I ' I • ~ ae w`senazs d+. ~ 6 9 8 ~ifuryY"rr-~~-'h T M1 T~LT, a E y 1- Ilk II `x'AILS I 'YfiTT:+Ff[r~~~ ` T ' ~ / I I I i T I = wsauwa Yowcauwewu ATTACHMENT#-±-TO ; , . w REPORT# PO 43 38 Q I- _ w w W J m f J~ FQ p0 w Qp as Q~ p pz OZ ~O o w z~ Qw wQ a_j~ O~ QzIx od LLO~ Wa. I H Q O W O O LL Z ca u W U W 2 2 - X tLL L Ci I►((~\ U a. 0 w0z (nrna ~I - i I a II I ° Y W J N . n o 1 pB 1 ~ $4 I w Y@ 6j I ni 6 i~ Z~ f6 ATTACHMENT 5 9EPORT# PD v i EXHIBIT 8 TO REGIONAL 139 OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. OFFICIAL PLAN OF THE REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY ~z--- OF DURHAM SCHEDULE 'C' - MAP 'CY TRANSIT PRIORITY NETWORK i I 4 / LEGEND I EXISTING FUTURE COMMUTER RAIL ~T N FREEWAY TRANSIT TRANSIT SPINE TRANSR SPINE (FUTURE CONNECTION TO EAST OUR- FREEWAY LINK) O TRANSPORTATION NUB O O COMMUTER STATION O URBAN AREA L A SPECIFIC POLICY AREA I I I I I I I i ~ 1 I =T I I I 1' I I I I I I I I I Repl ..ft SOre I Tn.nsn sgne I Dnignellon Replaw'FNUre I Trensn Splnn' I onslynn I ~ I L ' I 1 I I 1 I I II I 1 Y~I ~~I I 1 I 1 I I ~ A I 1 I I I I I I ~1c I I ~ jIF '71F - I I LAKE ONTARIO ATTACHMENT -L-TO REPORT# PD " 140 EXHIBIT 11 to REGIONAL OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. Schedule E - Table 'E9' Intensification Allocations, 2015 - 2031 TOTAL UNIT UNITS % OF MUNICIPAL % OF REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY GROWTH ALLOCATED TO TOTAL TOTAL INTENSIFICATION Ajax 7,987 4,343 54% 9% Brock 1,321 306 23% 1 % Clarington 19,616 6,181 32% 13% Oshawa 20,229 7,934 39% 17% Pickering 36,163 14,354 40% 31% Scugog 1,908 576 30% 1 % Uxbridge 2,870 1,042 36% 2% Whitby 26,316 11,963 45% 26% DURHAM 116,411 46,699 40% 100% Cary REPORT TO COUNCIL I KERI Report Number: PD 14-09 Date: March 23,+2069' 141 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: S.R.& R. Bay Ridges Ltd. Addendum to Report Number PD 47-08 - Parkland Conveyance - File: S 2/07 Recommendations: 1. That Report PD 14-09 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Council confirm the requirement that S.R.& R. Bay Ridges Ltd. ("SR&R") pay the sum of $533,250 in lieu of the conveyance of parkland in relation to the redevelopment of the lands in the former Bay Ridges Plaza; 3. That payment of the total parkland amount of $533,250 be phased to coincide with the issuance of above-ground building permits for each of the three phases of the site's redevelopment - the first being the construction of 110 townhouses, the second being the construction of Building/Tower A (236 units), and the third being the construction of Building/Tower B (141 units) and the remaining 10 townhouses; and 4. Further, that $81,976.87 of the $200,000 already paid on account of parkland be returned to SR&R in order to be consistent with a phased payment approach. Executive Summary: This report is an addendum to two earlier reports (PD 36-08 and PD 47-08) that set out the positions of both SR&R and staff in relation to parkland payments. Staff continue to support the recommendations contained in the earlier reports that SR&R pay the sum of $533,250 in lieu of the conveyance of parkland, but can support phasing the payment to coincide with the commencement of above-ground construction on each phase of the site's redevelopment. Financial Implications: If Council adopts the recommendation contained in this second addendum report, the City will collect a total of $533,250 as payment in lieu of parkland conveyance for the redevelopment of the property. If Council accepts the most recent SR&R offer, the City will only collect a total of $397,895. Report PD 14-09 March 23, 2009 Subject; S.R.& R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 2 142 Sustainability Implications: Other than the financial implications set out above, there are no sustainability implications. Background: Report PD 36-08 was considered by the Planning & Development Committee on October 6, 2008 and referred back to staff for further discussion with SR&R, with direction to report to Council on October 20, 2008. At the October 20, 2008 Council meeting, Report PD 36-08 was referred to the November 17, 2008 meeting of Council at the request of SR&R. Report PD 47-08 was then prepared by staff to identify and provide staff responses to some of the issues raised subsequent to the preparation of Report PD 36-08. At the November 17, 2008 meeting, Council again referred the matter back to staff for further discussion with SR&R. This second addendum report provides staff responses to SR&R's most recent offer which has the following three components: 1. The payment in lieu of parkland conveyance should be reduced by the amount that SR&R has agreed to pay for improvements to the buffer area, which SR&R estimates to be $46,000. 2. The payment in lieu of parkland conveyance should be reduced by an amount equal to the market value of the walkway portion of the buffer, which SR&R calculates to be $89,355. 3. The net total payment in lieu of parkland conveyance ($397,895) should be pro-rated based on a per unit amount of $800.59 ($397,895 . 497 units) and phased as follows: Phase 1: 110 townhouse units $88,064.90 deemed paid with the balance of the $200,000 already paid ($111,935.10) returned to SR&R. Phase 2: Building "A" (236 units) $94,469.62 (50% of $188,939.24) paid upon the issuance of the first building permit for this phase with the balance ($94,469.62) paid prior to the earlier of the following two events: (a) condominium registration for Building "A"; or (b) eighteen (18) months following the issuance of the first building permit for this phase. Report PD 14-09 March 23, 2009 Subject: S.R.& R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page .3 143 Phase 3: Building "B" (141 units) and the10 remaining townhouse units $60,444.55 (50% of $120,889.10) paid upon the issuance of the first building permit for this phase with the balance ($60,444.55) paid prior to the earlier of the following two events: (a) condominium registration for Building "B"; or (b) eighteen (18) months following the issuance of the first building permit for this phase. Staff's response to each of the components of this offer is as follows: 1. Buffer Improvements This request is not new. Staffs position on a parkland credit for buffer improvements remains as set out in the previous staff reports. Staffs position on the issue was set out in Report PD 36-08 as follows: Site Plan Improvements SR&R Position 4. 'Bay Ridges has agreed to make certain improvements to the Buffer Lands conveyed to the City at a cost of $46, 000, 00. " Staff Response SR&R has agreed to make certain improvements to the buffer lands as a condition of site plan approval. Staff cannot determine if the cost estimate of $46, 000 is accurate without more detailed information from SR&R. Site improvements are a standard requirement for any major development in the City of Pickering. They can be on private property and/or on public property (i.e. boulevard planting; pedestrian connections to existing sidewalks). As a condition of the City's approval of the site plan for this redevelopment and with the approval of TRCA, SR&R was required to construct a walkway within a section of the Douglas Ravine buffer area. Certain landscaping features have been incorporated into the walkway design. The costs associated with these site improvements are part of the overall site development requirements. The City does not credit the cost of improvements like these against parkland dedication requirements. In Report PD 47-08, staff provided the following additional comments: 5. Is it appropriate to reduce the parkland amount by an amount equal to SR&R's cost of constructing the walkway within the buffer area? Report PD 14-09 March 23, 2009 Subject:1 4 . R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 4 The opinion of staff on this issue was set out on page 5 of Report PD 36-08. Requiring a developer to pay for the construction of a walkway and related lighting (whether on the developable footprint or on lands conveyed from the developer into public ownership) is a standard City requirement in accordance with Section 41 of the Planning Act and staff therefore feel that no reduction should be given. The only additional clarification that needs to be made on this issue is that the cost of constructing the walkway is only a fraction of the cost of the buffer improvements that SR&R has contractually agreed to make. The estimates supplied by SR&R's own consultant (Sernas) indicated the cost of constructing the walkway would be approximately $6,000. The balance of the buffer improvements are for tree and shrub plantings and other landscaping which would have been required with or without construction of the walkway. In fact, the bulk of these plantings in the buffer lands are located south of the walkway. 2. Walkway Land Value The nature of this request is not new. Report PD 36-08 and Report PD 47-08 dealt extensively with this request. What is new is the amount of the credit SR&R is now claiming and the way in which it has been calculated. Previously, SR&R asked for a credit against the parkland payment equal to the market value of all of the buffer lands (0.199 ha or 0.494 ac). SR&R calculated this value to be approximately $672,000. SR&R's current request is for a credit equal to the market value of only the walkway portion (277 square metres) of the buffer area, which it calculates to be $89,355. This figure represents the area of the walkway expressed as a percentage of the net developable area of the site (0.7%) multiplied by the appraised market value of the entire site ($12,765,000). Staffs position in relation to a parkland credit for the walkway equal to the market value of the buffer lands has not changed. All of the reasons and professional opinions set out in Report PD 36-08 and Report PD 47-08 in relation to this issue apply whether the claim is for a credit in relation to all or any portion of the buffer lands. Even if the threshold issue of whether this land should be credited at all is set aside, staff cannot agree with SR&R's calculation of the market value of the walkway lands. SR&R's calculation assumes that the walkway lands are as valuable as the tableland upon which the residential and commercial buildings are to be constructed. The buffer lands do not have the same market value as the rest of the site because they cannot be built upon. The buffer lands have a nominal value only. 3. Phasing of Payments Staff's position in relation to the concept of phasing of the parkland payment was set out in Report PD 47-08 as follows: Report PD 14-09 March 23, 2009 Subject: S.R.& R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page,,5 145 7. Is it appropriate to phase the payment of the parkland levy to coincide with what is in essence a development with three phases - the first being the construction of 110 townhouses, the second being the construction Building/Tower A (236 units), and the third being the construction of Building/Tower B (141 units) and the remaining 10 townhouses? Staff would not have any objection to phasing the payments based on building permit issuance for each phase, provided the total parkland payment remains at $533,250. SR&R was advised of this position. SR&R was also advised that staff could support payment of the parkland payments upon the issuance of the building permits for above ground works on Building/Tower A and Building/Tower B. In other words, the issuance of a demolition permit, a shoring permit and a permit for construction of the underground parking garage would not trigger a parkland payment. Finally, SR&R was advised that, consistent with a phased approach, staff could support the return of a portion (approximately $82, 000) of the monies already paid in relation to the first phase. SR&R indicated that it could not accept these terms. 8. If it is appropriate to phase the parkland payments, should the payments be triggered by the issuance of a building permit for the phase to be constructed or by the registration of the plans of condominium? In the opinion of staff, a parkland payment-in-lieu is most appropriately triggered by the issuance of a building permit. This is consistent with subsection 8(2) of the Building Code Act which states that a chief building official must issue a building permit unless the proposed building, structure or demolition will contravene the Building Code Act, the building code or any other "applicable law", and "applicable law" is defined in the building code (section 1.4.1.3) to include payments-in-lieu of parkland conveyances required by subsection 42(6) of the Planning Act. The registration of a condominium plan establishes tenure - it does not by itself constitute development. Residents could be occupying their dwelling units for months or in some cases years prior to the registration of a condominium plan. In the opinion of staff, it would be inappropriate to delay the collection of parkland payments-in-lieu for an uncertain period of time when the new residents who will be placing demands on the City's park services have already moved into their units. SR&R's most recent offer differs in two material respects from the offers that it made prior to the preparation of Report PD 47-08. First, SR&R is offering to put an end date to the requirement to pay (18 months after the first building permit is issued), so that the payment will not be delayed indefinitely. Second, SR&R has offered to pay 50% of the parkland payment at the beginning of phases 2 and 3 of the project. Report PD 14-09 March 23, 2009 Subject: S.R.&.R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 6 1 46 In the opinion of staff, it would be inappropriate to delay the collection of any portion (i.e. 50%) of the parkland payments-in-lieu for any length of time (i.e. 18 months) when the new residents who will be placing demands on the City's park services have already moved into their units and for the other reasons set out in Report PD 47-08. There is no precedent for it in the City. However, as stated in Report PD 47-08, staff can support a phased approach to the payment of the parkland amount based on a per unit amount of $1,072.94 ($533,250 497 units). Staff can support the following phased approach: Phase 1: 110 townhouse units $118,023.40 deemed paid with the balance of the $200,000 already paid by SR&R ($81,976.60) returned to SR&R. Phase 2: Building "A" (236 units), $253,213.84 paid upon the issuance of the first above-ground building permit for this phase. Phase 3: Building "B" (141 units) and the10 remaining townhouse units $162,013.94 paid upon the issuance of the first above-ground building permit for this phase. Concluding Comments None of the information that SR&R has provided subsequent to the preparation of Report PD 47-08 has caused staff to alter any of the professional opinions set out in that report or in Report PD 36-08. In the opinion of staff, reducing the amount of the parkland payment in the manner requested by SR&R (a) is contrary to subsection 42(1) of the Planning Act; (b) is inconsistent with the City's Official Plan policies; (c) is inconsistent with City practices; and (d) would set an undesirable precedent with serious long-term City parkland program implications. Attachment: 1. Report PD 47-08 (with attachments) Report PD 14-09 March 23, 2009 Subject: S.R.& R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 7 '14 7 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Z04c~-- Ross Pym, MC RPP Neil Carroll Principal Planner - Development Review Director, Planni g & Development Gillis Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Everett sma Director, Operations & Emergency Services 14V4011640000 Andrew C. Allison City Solicitor RP:jf Copy: (Acting) Chief Administrative Officer Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Thomas J. ui , RDMR, CMM III Chief Administ ative Officer Caq 4 ATTACHMENT# TO REPORT TO I'w REPORT#PD COUNCIL PICKERING Report Number: PD 47-08 148 Date: November 17, 2008 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. Addendum to Report Number PD 36-08 - Parkland Conveyance - File: S 2/07 Recommendation: 1. That Report PD 36-08 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; and 2. Further, that Council confirm the requirement that S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. pay the sum of $533,250 in lieu of the conveyance of parkland in relation to the redevelopment of the lands. in the former Bay Ridges Plaza. Executive Summary: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. ("SR&R") disputes the amount that City staff have calculated to be payable in lieu of the conveyance of parkland. Report #PD 36-08 was considered by the Planning & Development Committee on October 6, 2008 and was referred back to staff for further discussion with the applicant, with direction to the report to Council on October 20, 2008. At the October 20, 2008 Council meeting, Report #PD 36-08 was referred to the. November 17, 2008 meeting of Council at the request of SR&R. This report is an addendum to Report #PD 36-08 that set out the positions of both SR&R and staff. Staff continue to support the recommendation contained in Report #PD 36-08 that SR&R pay the sum of $533,250 in lieu of the conveyance of parkland for this project. Financial Implications: If Council adopts the recommendation contained in this addendum report, the City will collect a total of $533,250 as payment in lieu of parkland conveyance for the redevelopment of the property. If Council accepts the offer contained in a letter from SR&R's lawyer (William Friedman) dated June 18, 2008, the City will only collect a total of $150,000. Sustainability Implications: Other than the financial implications set out above, there are no sustainability implications. ATTACHMENT. -M Report PD 47-08 REPORTS PD I'V-0 2 November 17, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 2 149 1.0 Background: At the October 6, 2008 meeting of the Planning & Development Committee, Report #PD 36-08 was referred back to staff for further discussion with the applicant, with direction to bring it back to Council on October 20, 2008. At the October 20, 2008 Council meeting, Report #PD 36-08 was referred to the November 17, 2008 meeting of Council at the request of SR&R. Prior to the October 6, 2008 Planning & Development Committee meeting, the Director, Planning & Development and the City Solicitor met with representatives of SR&R (William Friedman and Steven Warsh) on two separate occasions to discuss parkland issues. At the conclusion of the second meeting (July 7, 2008), the Director, Planning & Development and the City Solicitor advised Mr. Warsh and Mr. Friedman that staff could not accept any of SR&R's arguments in relation to parkland dedication except to the extent set out in Report #PD 36-08. On October 24, 2008, the Chief Administrative Officer, City Solicitor and the Mayor met with representatives of SR&R (David Friedman, William Friedman and Steven Warsh). At the conclusion of this meeting, the Chief Administrative Officer and the City Solicitor advised the representatives of SR&R that none of the information that had been provided by SR&R either at the October 6, 2008 meeting of Planning & Development Committee or subsequent to that meeting had persuaded staff to alter any of the professional opinions set out in Report #PD 36-08. However, subsequent to the October 24, 2008 meeting, SR&R was advised that staff could support a phased approach to the parkland payments-in-lieu., This addendum report identifies and provides staff responses to some of the issues raised since Report #PD 36-08 was prepared. 2.0 Discuss ionllssues Set out below are some of the issues that were raised during the October 6, 2008 Planning & Development Committee meeting, the October 24, 2008 meeting described above, and several telephone conversations with. representatives of SR&R subsequent to the October 6 Planning & Development Committee meeting, along with staff's response to each of them. 1. Were the buffer lands "conveyed to the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes" as per subsection 42(1) of the Planning Act? Report PD 47-08 ATTACHMENT# I L TO November 17, 2008 REPOKU PD Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page- 3 Subsection 42(1) of the Planning Act provides the authority for the City to require the conveyance of land "for park or other public recreational purposes". It reads as follows: 42(1) As a condition of development or redevelopment of land, the council of a local municipality may, by by-law applicable to the whole municipality or to any defined area or areas thereof, require that land in an amount not exceeding, in the case of land proposed for development or redevelopment for commercial or industrial purposes, 2 per cent and in all other cases 5 per cent of the land be conveyed to the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes. There are numerous memoranda, letters and reports to and from representatives of SR&R, including Watershed Management Ecology (SR&R's environmental consultants), in the records of the Planning & Development Department referencing the fact that the buffer lands are an integral component of the natural heritage system and that SR&R would be required to convey them for the purpose of protecting the ecological function of the valleylands. Prior to the letter from Mr. Friedman dated June 18, 2008, there was no documentation in these same records stating that the buffer lands were conveyed "for park or other public. recreational purposes". At no time prior to SR&R executing the development agreement (which created the obligation to convey the buffer lands without any credit for parkland contribution) did anyone from SR&R ever allege that the buffer lands were conveyed "for park or other public recreational purposes". It was never intended that the buffer lands were to be conveyed "for park or other public recreational purposes". The purpose of the conveyance of the buffer land was always to protect the natural heritage features in the valley as required by the Provincial Policy Statement, TRCA policy, and City Official Plan policy. The applicable Natural Heritage sections of the Provincial Policy Statement are set out in the Scoped Environmental Impact Statement dated May 2006 prepared for SR&R by Watershed Management Ecology. TRCA policies for defining valley, corridor boundaries are set out in its "Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program". As set out in its initial letter to the City dated September 6, 2006 (see Attachment #1 to this Addendum Report) commenting on SR&R's rezoning application, these policies require protection to the top of valley bank "plus a minimum 10 metre buffer'. This buffer requirement is set out in all of TRCA's subsequent letters to the City. Watershed Management Ecology confirmed this TRCA requirement in their Scoped Environmental Impact Statement. City Official Plan Policy 10.5 states that "City Council recognizes the importance of its stream corridors, and acknowledges the health of its valley and corridors can be affected by uses and activities anywhere in the watershed; accordingly, Council shall, c) require conveyance of the valleylands and associated vegetation, and/or buffers to the City or other public agency as a condition of development approval, where appropriate". ATTACHMENT#--L-TO Report PD 47-08 REPORT# PD I 'V -D 9 November 17, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 4 151 2. Does the fact that the TRCA permitted SR&R to install a walkway within the buffer lands mean that the purpose of the conveyance of the buffer lands was "for park or other public recreational purposes"? SR&R was required to convey lands for walkway purposes in order to comply with the site plan control provisions (section 41) of Planning Act and the Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment Development Guidelines. Subsection 41(7) of the Planning Act reads as follows: 41(7) As a condition to the approval of the plans and drawings referred to in subsection (4), a municipality may require the owner of the land to, (a) provide to the satisfaction of and at no expense to the municipality any or all of the following: 4. Walkways and walkway ramps, including the surfacing thereof, and all other means of pedestrian access. 5. Facilities for the lighting, including floodlighting, of the land or of any buildings or structures thereon. This requirement for the conveyance of land for the purpose of a walkway is separate and distinct from SR&R's obligation to convey lands for the purpose of protecting the valleylands. However, in order to maximize its developable footprint, SR&R sought permission from TRCA to locate the required walkway within the buffer lands and City staff supported the request. TRCA agreed to permit the construction of the walkway within the buffer lands, in part because walkways can enhance the protection of natural heritage features by controlling where people walk. To now characterize the buffer lands as having been conveyed for "park or other public recreational purposes" because the walkway was allowed to be located in the buffer area is a mischaracterization of the purpose of the conveyance of the buffer land and the construction of the walkway. The applicable City policies are set out in the Bay Ridges Plaza Redevelopment Development Guidelines which were approved by Council on October 3, 2006 concurrently with Council's approval of SR&R's rezoning application. The Guidelines explicitly obligate SR&R to provide "a pedestrian walkway on public lands along or near the top of bank of the ravine to provide a link to the Bayly Street sidewalk and the Pickering GO Station" (Section C3.2). The purpose of the walkway is to ensure that the development is truly transit-oriented and pedestrian friendly. The Guidelines also require lighting "to enhance [the] development's attractiveness and safety of the built environment (Section C3.8). Attachment #2 to this Addendum Report shows that all existing and future lighting is or will be located outside of the buffer lands on private property. Attachment #2 also shows that the walkway extends only as far as the tot lot within the development and that it only occupies a very small percentage (13.8%) of the buffer lands. ATTACHMENT#-!--TO Report PD 47-08 REPORT# PD1-/ November 17, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 5 - 2 The extent of the walkway was minimized to reduce impacts in the natural heritage system and to provide a pedestrian transit connection focused on serving the residents of the development. The lands covered by the walkway only constitute 0.7% of the net developable area of the site. The balance of the buffer lands (i.e. all of the land other than the walkway) cannot be used for any purpose other than as a buffer. Neither the Guidelines nor any other policy document of the City requires SR&R to. convey the buffer lands or any part of the development lands to provide a connection to a recreational trail system. In other words, the purpose of the walkway is not recreational; it is intended to provide connectivity to transit. Even if all of the buffer lands were conveyed to the City at the request of the City and for the sole purpose of creating a walkway, staff's opinion would still be that these lands are not lands conveyed "for park or other public recreational purposes". Lands are required to be conveyed to municipalities for sidewalks and walkways primarily for the purpose of ingress and egress. The City requires the construction and conveyance of sidewalks and walkways in all major developments and it would be wrong to suggest that these conveyances are "for park or other public recreational purposes Simply put, installing a walkway and related features (e.g. lighting) on a piece of land cannot mean that the land is converted for a recreational purpose. Trails, on the other hand, can serve a recreational purpose. However, as stated above, the walkway on this site does not serve such purpose. There is a distinctive difference in the use of the words "pedestrian pathway', "walkway", and "parkland" in the Planning Act. They are not synonymous. 3. Does the fact that the buffer lands were conveyed to the City and not TRCA mean that they were conveyed for purposes other than protection of the valley system? Staff do not agree with SR&R's suggestion that the buffer lands should be treated as lands that were conveyed "for park or other public recreational purposes" simply because they were conveyed to the City and not to TRCA. TRCA repeatedly requested that the buffer lands be conveyed into public ownership (see, for example, their letter to the City dated July 3, 2007). The buffer lands and the valleylands were put into City ownership in order to be consistent with adjoining valley system lands which are in City ownership. City Official Plan Policy 10.5 makes it clear that lands conveyed for the purpose of environmental protection can be held by the City or another public agency. It reads as follows: City Council recognizes the importance of its stream corridors, and acknowledges the health of its valley and corridors can be affected by uses and activities anywhere in the watershed, accordingly, Council shall, c) require conveyance of the valleylands and associated vegetation, and/or buffers to the City or other public agency as a condition of development approval, where appropriate". Report PD 47-08 ATTACHMENT1 November 17, 2008 REPORT# PD j Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 6 5 3 Official Plan Policy 15.28 reads as follows: City Council, (c) shall not accept as parkland conveyance lands required for drainage; valley and stream corridor or shoreline protection purposes; lands susceptible to flooding; steep valley slopes; hazard lands; lands required to be conveyed to a public agency other than the City of Pickering; and any other lands unsuitable for park development. Policy 15.28(c) prohibits the City from accepting any lands required for "valley and stream corridor or shoreline protection purposes" and "lands unsuitable for park development" irrespective of whether the lands are conveyed to another public agency. In the opinion of staff, because the buffer lands were conveyed for environmental protection purposes and because none of. the buffer land is capable of being programmed for:any parkland use by the City's Culture & Recreation Division, Policy 15.28 (c) prohibits the City from accepting such land for parkland conveyance. In the opinion of staff, to suggest that who owns the buffer lands is determinative of the purpose of the conveyance of such lands is inconsistent with Policies 10.5 and 15.28 (c) of the City's Official Plan. 4. What are the correct figures to be used when calculating the amount of the parkland payment? SR&R claims that it has exceeded its statutory parkland obligations because the buffer lands represent approximately 6% of the net developable area of the site. Area calculations based on the final approved site plan are set out in Attachment #3 to this Addendum Report. Staff do not qualify the buffer lands as parklands and have requested cash-in-lieu of parkland for this development. The net site area of this development is 3.174 ha. The cash-in-lieu value is calculated at 5% of the value of the land the day before the issuance of a building permit. Based -on the appraisals provided by SR&R, the parkland payment is 5% of $10,665,00, being $533,250. 5. Is it appropriate to reduce the parkland amount by an amount equal to SR&R's cost of constructing the walkway within the buffer area? The opinion of staff on this issue was set out on page 5 of Report #PD 36-08. Requiring a developer to pay for the construction of a walkway and related lighting. (whether on the developable footprint or on lands conveyed from the developer into public ownership) is a standard City requirement in accordance with Section 41 of the Planning Act (see question 2 above) and staff therefore feel that no reduction should be given. 6. Who bears the onus of proving that a developer is entitled to a credit for prior parkland conveyances? ATTACWMW# -~--TO Report PD 47-08 REPORT# PD / ~O ~ November 17, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 7 154 The issue of credits for previous parkland conveyances or payments-in-lieu was discussed at the October 6, 2008 Planning & Development Committee meeting. Notwithstanding the fact that the onus is on an applicant to establish that there has been a previous conveyance of parkland in order to be entitled to a credit, City staff diligently tried to determine if there had been any previous conveyances of payments- in-lieu relating to the Bay Ridges Plaza lands. Significant staff resources were spent searching through City and Registry Office records. Staff could not locate any documentation and SR&R has not provided any documentation to show that there was any such parkland conveyance or payment-in-lieu. 7. Is it appropriate to phase the payment of the parkland levy to coincide with what is in essence a development with three phases - the first being the construction of 110 townhouses, the second being the construction of Building/Tower A (236 units), and the third being the construction of Building/Tower B (141 units) and the remaining 10 townhouses. Staff would not have any objection to phasing the payments based on building permit issuance for each phase, provided the total parkland payment remain at $533,250. SR&R was advised of this position. SR&R was also advised that staff could support payment of the parkland payments upon the issuance of the building permits for above ground works on Building/Tower A and Building/Tower B. In other words, the issuance of a demolition permit, a shoring permit and a permit for construction of the underground parking garage would not trigger a parkland payment. Finally, SR&R was advised that, consistent with a phased approach, staff could support the return of a portion (approximately $82,000) of the monies already paid in relation to the first phase. SR&R indicated that it could not accept these terms. 8. If it is appropriate to phase the parkland payments, should the payments be triggered by the issuance of a building permit for the phase to. be constructed or by the registration of the plans of condominium? In the opinion of staff, a parkland payment-in-lieu is most appropriately triggered by the issuance of a building permit. This is consistent with subsection 8(2) of the Building Code Act which states that a chief building official must issue a building permit unless the proposed building, structure or demolition will contravene the Building Code Act, the building code or any other "applicable law", and "applicable law" is defined in the building code (section 1.4.1.3) to include payments-in-lieu of parkland conveyances required by subsection 42(6) of the Planning Act. The registration of a condominium plan establishes tenure - it does not by itself constitute development. Residents could be occupying their dwelling units for months or in some cases years prior to the registration of a condominium plan. In the opinion of staff, it would be inappropriate to delay the collection of parkland payments-in-lieu for an uncertain period of time when the new residents who will be placing demands on the ,City's park services have already moved into their units. Report PD 47-08 ATTACHMENT- November 17, 2008 REPORW PD_LLZ Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 8 155 9. Is the City's approach to parkland levies on this development consistent with the City's approach to the Tridel development at Kingston Road and Valley Farm? The original 1987 development agreement for the Tridel project required Tridel to pay a 5% of the appraised value of the property. The parkland payment-in-lieu amounted to $1,225 per unit (as compared to SR&R's $1,073 per unit). Tridel was permitted to pay the total parkland amount in phases as the project was built out, but any deferred payments were increased by 10% eachyear. In 1998, Council agreed to amend the escalation provision in the development agreement, as a result of which Tridel -paid a total of $1,598,738.48 or an average of $1,406 per unit in lieu of parkland conveyance. None of the walkways or the pedestrian rest areas in the project were counted as parkland dedication. 3.0 Concluding Comments None of the information that SR&R has provided subsequent to the preparation of Report #PD 36-08, including case law supplied by SR&R's solicitor, has caused staff to alter any of the professional opinions set out in that report. In the opinion of staff, SR&R's position on the issue of parkland conveyance (a) is contrary to subsection 42(1) of the Planning Act; (b) is inconsistent with the City's Official Plan policies; (c) is inconsistent with City practices; and (d) would set an undesirable precedent with serious long-term City parkland program implications. Attachments: 1. TRCA letter to the City dated September 6, 2006 2. Extract from SR&R's Approved Landscape Plan 3. Area Calculations 4. Report PD 36-08 Report PD 47-08 ATTACHMENT#-.._.TO WORT# PD November 17, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 9 156 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: ~T'~✓ Ross Pym, Mcip, 90 V- Th o1fi a J. u i n n Principal Planner - evelopment Review Chief Administrati Officer Approved/Endorsed By: ~d kL Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Approved/Endorsed By: Gillis Paterson Director, Corporate S rvices & Treasurer Appro r By Everett B tsm Director, Oper o & Emergency Services Approved/Endorsed By: Andrew C. Allison City Solicitor RP:ks Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Ci u 'I v~ l o as J. u' n, RD , CMM III Chief Admi ' trative Officer. ` ' TORONTO AND REG1UN"1r~ Attachment #1 to Report #PD 47-08 157 onservation ATTACHMENT# TO for The Living City REPORT# PD /L02._. September 6, 2006 CFN 37347.06 ; VIA E-MAIL AND MAIL SEP 1 2006 Ross Pym, MCIP, RPP CITY PLANNING ;Cn,ORINN Planning and Development Department DE ~ DEV EPa~Tnn NOPMENT City of Pickering Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade ------Pickering; elf--L-1Af-617- Re: Zoning By-Law Amendment Application No. A 06/06 1215,-1235 Bayly Street (Bay Ridges Plaza) City of Pickering S. R. & R. Bay Ridges Limited Dear Mr. Pym: Thank you for the opportunity to review Zoning By-Law Amendment Application No. A 0610.6 for the redevelopment of the Bay Ridges Plaza. We have reviewed the following documents: • Survey, prepared by R. G. McKibbon Limited, signed October 13, 2004; received June 23, 2006 from the. applicant; Scoped Environmental Impact Statement, prepared _by Watershed Management, Ecology, dated May 2006, received June -12, 2006; Preliminary Report - Slope Stability Assessment, prepared by"Jaques Whitford, dated August 16, 2006, received August 23, 2006 from the applicant. • Master Plan, prepared by Kirkor Architects,. dated August 1.7, 2006, received on August 30, 2006 in a meeting with the applicant. We offer the following comments: TRCA Permit Requirements The subject property is partially within a TRCA Regulated Area.. In accordance with Ontario Regulation 166/06 (Development, Interference with. Wetlands and Alterations to Shorelines and Watercourses), a permit is required from the TRCA prior to any. of the following works taking place: 1. straightening, changing, diverting or interfering in any way with the existing channel of a river, creek, stream or.watercourse, or for changing or interfering in any way with a' wetland; 2. development, if in the opinion of the authority, the control of flooding, erosion, dynamic beaches or pollution or the. conservation of land maybe affected by the development. Development is defined as: 1. the construction, reconstruction, erection or placing of a building or structure of any kind; 2. any change to a building or structure that would have the effect of altering the use or FAHOME\PUBLIC\DEVELOPMENT SERVICES\DURHAM REGION\PICKERING\1215 - 1235 BA_YLY_2.DOC 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca 1 5 8 Attachment #1 to Report #PD 47-08 ATTACHMENT# TO REPOHT# PD Ross Pym -2- September 6, 2006 potential use of the building or structure, increasing the size of the building or structure or increasing the number of dwelling units in the building or structure; 3. site grading; 4.- the temporary or permanent placing, dumping or removal of any material, originating on the site or elsewhere. The applicant should contact TRCA staff to obtain permit approval prior to the issuance of any municipal grading or building permits. TRCA Policy and Program Interests . Notwithstanding permit requirements,. the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's policies for defining valley. corridor boundaries are guided by our "Valley and Stream Corridor Management Program" (VSCMP). The VSCMP, guides our review of development proposals and permit and planning applications. The overali objectives of these policies is to prevent new development from occurring within areas that may introduce a risk to life and property associated with flooding, erosion and slope instability, or is not compatible with the protection or. rehabilitation of these areas in their natural state. For the subject.property, the VSCMP policies define the valley corridor boundary as follows- 1 . If the valleyslope is stable, a minimum of 10 metres inland from the top of the valley bank;. or 2. If the valley slope is not stable, a minimum of 10 metres from the predicted long term stable slope projected from the existing stablelstabilized toe (base) of slope, or the predicted location of the toe of.the slope as ! hifted as a result of stream erosion over a 100 year period; or 3. If there is significant vegetation, the limit of this vegetation plus ten metres. In summary, the limits of the valley corridor will be defined by the greater of the top of bank, the predicted long term stable slope line or the limit of vegetation, plus a minimum 10 metre buffer. No development is permitted within the valley corridor. Identification of Development Limits The development limits on the subject property have been identified, as follows: 1. The top of bank as staked in 2004 has been accurately illustrated as "TRCA staked top of bank - staked September 2004" on the Survey signed October 13, 2004. The top of bank is valid for a period of five years, at which time if development is not substantially underway then a new top of bank staking will be required. 2. The Preliminary Report - Slope Stability Assessment dated August 16, 2006 is appropriate and we concur with the process for identifying and locating the stable top of bank in the Assessment. As such, the stable top of bank is considered to be the same as the staked top of bank. We do note, however, that in the extreme southeast of the site, the existing drain or stormwater sewer pipe is broken and. its discharge has caused an erosion gully descending to the creek. This should be remediated as part of any future development application. F:\HOME\PUBLIC\DEVELOPMENT SERVICES\DURHAM REGIONOCKERING1121 5 - 1235 BAYLY 2.DOC Attachment #1 to Report #PD 47-08 ATTACHMENT# ~ TO -0 REPORT# PD--/ Ross Pym -3- September 6, 20061 5 9 3. The limit of vegetation associated with the valley is approximately coincident with the top of bank. As such, the valley corridor includes the.top of bank plus 10 metres. This area should be renaturalized with native trees and shrubs appropriate for the soil conditions, re-zoned to an. Open Space designation and transferred to public ownership. Development, including rear yards, roads, and accessory structures, etc. are not permitted in the buffer.. We are willing. to discuss the appropriate location for a public access trail relative to the buffer zone if such access is required by the City of Pickering. Please note that the Master Plan dated August 17, 2006 does not respect a.1 0 metre buffer from. top of bank. In addition, we request that the Regional Stor- m an3iOTYear s orm oo a eva Ifons-5e plo e on-the Site Plam In any future'--d-amldpM- nt- applications. E wironmental Impact Study We did not request to review an Environmental Impact Study, provided the appropriate buffer was-achieved. However, our Ecologist has reviewed the Study and has significant concerns with the section entitled Opportunities and Constraints, including: 1) the recommendation for a 10 metre buffer is inconsistent with the Figure 7, Development Concept; 2) a planting plan for the buffer should be recommended; 3) stormwater should not be directed to a new outfall to the valley, if at all possible; and 4) the study should identify best management practices for stormwater management and groundwater infiltration.' Recommendation In light of the above, we have no objection to the approval of the Zoning Amendment subject to the valley corridor (including 10. metres from the illustrated top of bank) being re-zoned in an open space category that would have the effect of prohibiting development, including rear yards, roads, and accessory structures, etc. We request that the valley corridor be renaturalized and transferred into public ownership as part this or any future planning application. We trust this is satisfactory. Please feel.free to contact me if you have any further questions. Sinc ly, Steven H.. Heuchert, MCIP, RPP, MRTPI Manager, Development Planning and Regulation Planning and Development Extension 5311 cc: Steven M. Warsh, Partner, S & R Development Group Limited (by e-mail) Stephen.l. Fagyas, Commercial Focus Advisory Services Inc. (by e-mail) F:\HOME\PUBLIC\DEVELOPMENT SERVICES\DURHAM REGION\PICKERING\1215 - 1235 BAYLY 2.DOC Attachment #2 to Report #PD 47-08 ATTACHMENT# L-TO REPORT# PD 160 N7JT70' Y m 0 2 E I N ~I 1 H O m I , \ cn 114 \z N • 45.720 \g N61'OJ'30T \ r \ \ - 1 L.S t Y` I 4 2 AM 7 - I O P.. 21 N - - > L -~J > I \J ~ > to i a J a r J IL J k O «..n O • • 4°/ Y VJ LY YJ LY YJ / YJ ~Y Y~ °Ik \ n i 1 /'I I i\ 1 v, LEGEND ~\n ni\n ni ul \ I U1 LIMITS OF x eie se\Yi \YJi LY Ys & Tow s`~ C3 BUFFER AREA WALKWAY FROM TOT LOT TO BAYLY ST. •L.S. LIGHT STANDARD Extract from Approved Landscape plan Attachment #3 to Report #PD 47-08 ATTACHMENT# / - TO Area Calculations* REPORT# PD 161 Net Developable Area of the Site 3.174 ha (7.840 ac) Buffer Lands 0.199 ha (0.494 ac) Valleylands 0.609 ha (1.505 ac) Walkway 277 sq. m. Buffer Lands as a % of Net Developable Area 6.27% Walkway as a % of Buffer Lands 13.8% Walkway as a % of Net Developable Area 0.7% * Based on Final Approved Site Plan SP-01 last revised September 27, 2007 ATTACHMENT#=T0 C`ty REPORT# Po 'V~- 0_2 REPORT TO - PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT I KERIN COMMITTEE 162 Report Number: PD 36-08 Attachment #4 to Report #PD 47-08 Date: October 6, 2008 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance - File: S2/07 Recommendation: 1. That Council confirm the requirement that S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. pay the sum of $533,250 in lieu of the conveyance of parkland in relation to the redevelopment of the lands in the former Bay Ridges Plaza shown on Attachment #1 to Report PD 36-08. Executive Summary: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. ("SR&R") disputes the amount that City staff have calculated to be payable in lieu of the conveyance of parkland. This report sets out the positions of both SR&R and staff, and recommends that Council confirm the $533,250 parkland payment calculated by staff. Financial Implications: If Council adopts the recommendation contained in this report, the City will collect a total of $533,250 as payment in lieu of parkland conveyance for the redevelopment of the property. If Council accepts the offer contained in a letter from SR&R's lawyer (William Friedman) dated June 18, 2008, the City will only collect a total of $150,000. Sustainability Implications: Other than the financial implications set out above, there are no sustainability implications. 1.0 Background: The relevant background information is as follows: 1. On October 3, 2006, Council approved SR&R's zoning by-law amendment application to permit a mixed use development on the lands in the former Bay Ridges Plaza site, shown in Attachment #1 and Attachment #2 (the "Lands"). The issue of parkland was addressed in the recommendations report (PD 45-06) as follows: ATTACHMENT# TO Report PD 36-08 REPORT# PD October 6, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 2 163 The City will be requiring cash-in-lieu of parkland from the applicant in order to satisfy the full provisions of Section 42(1) of the Planning Act. Further, the applicant will be required to design and construct certain amenity areas, including a parkette' within the development in order to provide outdoor amenity space for residents of the project. For development of this nature, and in accordance with the Planning Act, the City of Pickering Official Plan provides two options for the calculation of required parkland dedication. The first is the conveyance of land or cash-in-lieu of land at an amount of five percent of the proposed land to be developed. The second option, as an alternative for High Density Residential Area or Mixed Use Areas, requires land or cash-in-lieu of land at a rate of up to one hectare for each 300 dwelling units proposed. It is recognized that the second option may have significant financial impact on the viability of the project. The first option, being the five percent calculation, is recommended as this may assist the economics of site development, especially when considering the significant costs associated with sanitary sewer upgrades and installation. If Council had chosen to use the second option, SR&R's payment in lieu of parkland conveyance would have been up to approximately $5,578,000 based on the current zoning for 497 units and the most recent appraisals that show that the market value of the residential portion of the Lands is $10,665,000. Even if SR&R's payment was calculated based on the price SR&R paid to purchase the Lands prior to rezoning ($6,333,000), this second option would have required SR&R to pay up to approximately $3,312,000 in lieu of parkland conveyance based on the current zoning for 497 units. 2. Section 5 of Schedule C to the Development Agreement signed by SR&R and registered against title to the Lands on February 14, 2008 provides as follows: CALCULATION OF AMOUNT PAYABLE IN LIEU OF PARKLAND CONVEYANCE Prior to the issuance of the first permit for the construction of any building on the Lands, the Owner shall: (1) Obtain a written appraisal, prepared by a professional land appraiser acceptable to the City, of the value of the Lands, as of the day before the issuance of the permit; and (2) Pay the sum equal to 5% of the appraised value, which sum shall be provided in the form of cash or certified cheque, and which sum the City shall accept in full satisfaction of the Owner's obligation to provide parkland. 3. SR&R disputes the amount that staff have calculated to be payable in lieu of parkland conveyance (the "parkland amount") in relation to the redevelopment of the Lands. Pending a resolution of the issue, staff agreed to process up to 110 building permits for the townhouse units on the Lands (areas zoned SA-8, SA-LW and MD-1-16 on Attachment #2) on the condition that SR&R paid $200,000 to the City to be applied against whatever amount Council determines should be paid. SR&R also agreed to provide the City with an appraisal showing the current market value of both the commercial and residential components of the Lands. Attachment #3 to this report is a copy of a letter dated February 29, 2008 confirming this agreement. ATTACHMENT# TO Report PD 36-08 REPORT# PD._LY-L~ October 6, 2008 164 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 3 4. SR&R has provided two appraisals dated March 17, 2008 and July 24, 2008. The March 17, 2008 appraisal indicates that the market value of the Lands is $12,765,000. The July 24, 2008 appraisal indicates that the market value of the commercial portion of the Lands is $2,100,000. Therefore the residential portion of the Lands is $10,665,000. 5. The first building permits were issued on March 13, 2008. 6. By letter dated June 18, 2008 from SR&R's lawyer (William Friedman) to the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer (see Attachment #4), SR&R has set out its position on the issue of parkland dedication. SR&R has clarified that its offer is to pay the City a total of $150,000 in lieu of parkland; in addition to the costs it will incur to implement improvements in the buffer lands and the ravine stewardship plan. Consequently, SR&R requests that it be reimbursed $50,000 of the $200,000 payment already made to the City. 7. The laws, by-laws and policies relevant to the calculation of the parkland amount are as follows: (a) Section 42 of the Planning Act (extracts in Attachment #5); (b) Section 15.28 of the Pickering Official Plan (Attachment #6); and (c) City Parkland By-law 5373/98 (Attachment #7): 8. The City has recently received applications from SR&R to amend the City's Official Plan and zoning by-Paws to facilitate the redevelopment of the former 'Square Boy Plaza' lands. If these applications are approved, SR&R will be required to pay a further parkland amount. 2.0 Discussion: Staff's responses to each of the points raised in Mr. Friedman's letter dated June 18, 2008- as well as two other arguments that SR&R has previously put forward in relation to this issue are set out below. Valley Land and Buffer Land Contributions SR&R Positron 1. "Bay Ridges has conveyed to the City 4.94 acres, the Buffer Lands, for park or public recreation purposes. This represents the entire 5% required to be conveyed for Parkland." 2. `in addition Bay Ridges has been required to convey an area equal to 1.505 acres. This area is known as the valley lands." ATTACHMENT# / . TO Report PD 36-08 ~iEPORT# PD October 6, 2008 165 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 4 Staff Response In accordance with the registered Development Agreement, SR&R conveyed Part 2 (517.88 m2), Part 3 (139.50 m), Part 4 (48.44 m2) and Part 6 (1,287.41 m2) on Plan 40R-25170 for Buffer Lands. These parts total 0.1993 hectares or 0.492 acres, not 4.94 acres. The valley lands total 1.505 acres. Therefore, SR&R has conveyed just under two acres of land for such purposes. The buffer lands and valley lands are shown separately on Attachment #1. They are shown together as the area zoned OS-HL in Attachment #2. The conveyance of the buffer lands into public ownership is a requirement of the TRCA and is necessary for the protection of the natural heritage system. Buffer lands constitute an integral component of the natural heritage system. They provide space for the protection and ecological function of valley lands. The City does not accept valley lands, environmental buffer areas, or other lands unsuitable for park development as parkland dedication. This policy is outlined in the City's Official Plan (section 15.28(c)) and.this approach has been upheld by the Ontario Municipal Board (K.P. Isberg Construction v. Toronto (City) (2007), 56 O.M.B.R. 418). Conveyance of environmental buffer areas to public authorities has become common in development approval processes. For example, the Environmental Servicing Plan for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood has identified significant buffer areas beyond the physical top-of-bank of the Ganatsekiagon Creek that must be conveyed to an appropriate public authority through the development approvals process. While these buffers are beyond the physical top-of-bank of valley systems, they are considered part of the ecological function of the natural heritage system and are therefore contained outside of the development area. These buffer lands will not be considered as parkland conveyance or as' any amount payable in lieu of such conveyance. If they were to be accepted as parkland in fulfillment of Planning Act dedication requirements, the City would not be able to secure sufficient lands for its active neighbourhood parks without purchasing such lands at market value and passing this cost on to the taxpayer. Consequently, qualifying buffer lands as parkland conveyance in fulfillment of Planning Act requirements would have serious implications on the City's parks program. Ravine Stewardship Plan SR&R Position 3. "Bay Ridges has also agreed to provide a three year Ravine Stewardship Plan for the Valley lands at a cost of $50, 000.00" ATTACHMENT#_-__-TO Report PD 36-08 'IEPORT# PD October 6, 2008 166 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 5 Staff Response The Development Agreement requires that SR&R secure $36,000.00 (not $50,000.00), which represents 100% of the anticipated cost of preparing and implementing the Ravine Stewardship Plan. TRCA required that SR&R fund the cost of the Plan as a condition of site plan approval (see letter from TRCA dated July 3, 2007 - Attachment #8). The value of the Ravine Stewardship Plan ($36,000.00) was determined by TRCA. This TRCA requirement has nothing whatsoever to do with the City's requirements for parkland dedication. While the Stewardship Plan is an initiative in support of. envirorimehtal responsibility and is commendable, the cost of such program initiatives should not be credited against parkland amounts. Site Plan Improvements SR&R Position 4. "Bay Ridges has agreed to make certain improvements to the Buffer Lands conveyed to the City at a cost of $46,000,00. Staff Response SR&R has agreed to make certain improvements to the buffer lands as a condition of site plan approval. Staff cannot determine if the cost estimate of $46,000 is accurate without more detailed information from SR&R. Site improvements are a standard requirement for any major development in the City of Pickering. They can be on private property and/or on public property (i.e. boulevard planting; pedestrian connections to existing sidewalks). As a condition of the City's approval of the site plan for this redevelopment and with the approval of TRCA, SR&R was required to construct a walkway within a section of the Douglas Ravine buffer area. Certain landscaping features have been incorporated into the walkway design. The costs associated with these site improvements are part of the overall site development requirements. The City does not credit the cost of improvements like these against parkland dedication requirements. Previous Parkland Dedications SR&R Position 5. "Bay Ridges is entitled to (sic) pursuant to Section 42(9) of the Planning Act to a credit for any amounts previously conveyed with respect to the Lands for park or other recreational purposes or paid in lieu thereof." ATTACHMENW / TO Report PD 36-08 IEPORT# PD /Y October 6, 2008 167 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 6 Staff Response Staff have reviewed all development agreements and subdivision agreements relating to the Lands and most of the lands that make up the communities of Bay Ridges and West Shore. We did not find any evidence of any parkland dedications in relation to the Lands. In fact, staff did not find any parkland dedications relating to any commercial lands in either the Bay Ridges community or the West Shore community. Staff did, however, locate several parkland dedications and cash-in-lieu contributions in relation to residential development in these communities. For example, a combination of parkland and cash-in-lieu was given to the City to facilitate the construction of the East Shore Community Centre as a condition of the development of all three of the residential condominium projects located immediately south of the Bay Ridges Plaza (agreements were dated February 12, 1969 and December 30, 1970). Consistent with the City's current parkland policy, staff are not aware of any situation in which the City has taken parkland or cash-in-lieu for any commercial development (including the Bay Ridges Plaza). Based on the foregoing, it is staffs opinion that no credit is available to SR&R pursuant to subsection 42(9) of the Planning Act. Commercial Component Credit SR&R Position 6. "Bay Ridges is entitled to a credit for the value of the commercial component of the development. This is estimated as follows: a) Total commercial/retail space is 24,721 sq. ft and assuming a typical yield from commercial land of 27%, then the total acreage required to develop and build this amount of commercial/retail space would be 89,892 sq. ft or 2.063 acres. b) Land for commercial purposes in Pickering is worth $800, 000 to $1,100, 000. And by taking the mid-point of say 950, 000 the land required to build this amount of commercial/retail would be $1,959,850. C) Therefore (sic) the residual land value of the commercial/retail space that will be built amounts to $1,959,850 and should be deducted from any values. before calculating the 5% in lieu." ATTACHMENT# TO F ~ort PD 36-08 REPORT# PD_:L- October 6, 2008 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 7 Staff Response Staff agree that the base figure used to calculate the parkland amount should be reduced to reflect the fact that a portion of the development is commercial. In fact, City staff made SR&R aware of the need to make this adjustment to the parkland amount at a meeting held on February 27, 2008 and committed in writing to make the adjustment based on an appraisal from a qualified. land appraiser (see Attachment #3). This approach ensures that SR&R's parkland amount is calculated in a manner consistent with Section 3 of the City's Parkland By-law (see Attachment #7) which provides that parkland conveyance is not required as a condition of any development or redevelopment of land for commercial or industrial purposes. In the opinion of staff, the City should not rely upon the calculations in Mr. Freidman's letter dated June 18, 2008. Instead, the proper figure to use is the appraiser's estimate of the value of the commercial portion of the Lands .($2,100,000). Accordingly, the figure used to calculate the parkland amount is $10,665,000 which represents the difference between the appraised value of the Lands ($12,765,000) less the appraised value of the commercial portion of the Lands ($2,100,000). Purchase Price v. Market Value SR&R Position In discussions with staff, SR&R representatives have repeatedly argued that the parkland amount should be calculated based on the price it paid to purchase the Lands. They feel that City staff previously advised them of this. SR&R purchased the Lands on July 29, 2005 for $6,333,000. If the initial purchase price was accepted as representing land value, SR&R would be required to pay 5% of $6,333,000 or $316,650 as its parkland dedication. Staff Response In the opinion of staff, for the purpose of calculating the parkland amount, the value of the Lands should be determined as of the day before the first permit was issued (March 13, 2008) and not as of the date that SR&R purchased the Lands. This is what is explicitly provided for in subsection 42(6.4) of the Planning Act and section 5 of Schedule C of the Development Agreement between SR&R and the City. In fact, it is only as a result of the rezoning of the Lands (which happened after the Lands were purchased) that the City acquired the legal authority to collect a parkland amount see subsection 42(7) of the Planning Act). ATTACHMENT / Report PD 36-08 REPORT# PO- Y- -,Q October 6, 2008 6 19 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page 8 Staff have previously used a developer's purchase price as the basis to calculate a parkland amount, but only where (a) the payment was made within 1 year of the date that the property being developed or redeveloped was purchased and there was no reason to believe that the property value had materially increased; and (b) there had not been any intervening change in land use or increase in the density for the site. This is done to save the developer an unnecessary expense. The City does not use a developer's purchase price to calculate a parkland amount where there has been an intervening change in land use or increase in. density. Tot Lot SR&R Position In discussions with staff, SR&R representatives have argued that the parkland amount should be reduced because they are providing a tot lot on the Lands. Staff Response A tot lot is being constructed on the Lands. It is an important component of the condominium project. With developments that produce the density that is planned at this site, there is always a need for outdoor amenity space, and specifically an area for children's play facilities. This is a common City requirement for any residential development of this nature and it represents an important site design component. The tot lot is located on private property for the use of the residents of the condominium project. The City does not credit the cost of a site improvement like this against parkland dedication requirements. 3.0 Conclusion: As discussed above, SR&R already received the benefit of a significantly lower parkland amount when Council elected not to require land or cash-in-lieu of land at a rate of up to 1 hectare for each 300 dwelling units in the development. SR&R will also receive the benefit of a deduction in the amount payable to reflect the fact that a portion of the redevelopment is commercial. In the opinion of staff, there are no other reduction options or credits available under the Planning Act, the City's Official Plan or the Parkland By-law. Accordingly, it is staff's position that the proper parkland amount in relation to the redevelopment of the Lands is 5% of the appraised market value of the residential portion of the Lands as of the day before the first permit was issued. The amount payable should therefore be 5% of $10,665,000 or $533,250. ATTACHMENT# 1 TO Report PD 36-08 REPORT# PD 1 Y_ 0 October 6, 2008 170 Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. -Parkland Conveyance Page 9 Attachments: . 1. Location Map 2. Schedule II to By-law 6705/06 as amended by By-law 6786/07 3. Letter dated February 29, 2008 from City Solicitor to William Friedman 4. Letter dated June 18, 2008 from William Friedman to the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer 5. Extracts from Section 42 of the Planning Act 6. Section 15.28 of the Pickering Official Plan 7. City Parkland By-law 5373/98 8. Letter dated July 3, 2007 from TRCA to Tyler Barnett ATTACHMENT#®TO' Report PD 36-08 REPORT# PD `y _p October 6, 2008 . Subject: S.R.&R. Bay Ridges Ltd. - Parkland Conveyance Page loll 71 2 9 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: ~J Ross Pym, MCIP, P T mas J. Qui Principal Planner- Development Review Chief Administ tive Officer Approved/Endorsed By: Neil Carr Director, Panning & Development Approved/Endorsed By: Gillis Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer. Approve WEndo ed By: EveretAuntshig' Director, Operations & Emergency Services Approved/Endorsed By: Andrew C. Allison City Solicitor RP: jf Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Cit . Cou cil it Th s J. Quinn, D , CMM III Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT#--L/-TO ATTACHMENT #~TO REPORT# PD U REPORT # PD _ , - ~ SAY 401 BAYLY s?REED . w 0 z Q DOL/GLA RA VIN RADOM STREET City of Pickering Planning & Development Department a. DEVELOPMENT SITE-7.823 acres (3.166 ha) DATE: AUG. .26,2008 ® VALLEY LAND BUFFER-0.492 acres (0.1993 ha) onto sour...: Q Teron.t Ent.rpri... Ina. and d. .uppli.r.. ® All right. Reserved. Not p plan of survey. - VALLEY LAND-1.505 acres (0.6091 ha) Re 2005 MPAC and It. supplier.. All right. ..rued. Not o plan of Survey. krTACHI,9ENT #---.Q',-TO ATTACHMENT# ~/TO REPORT # Pg_ _ pA REPORT# PD d U 1?3 G0~ N0A\N N CNRI 11 3.Om 1 t 1 t Om , , 1 RH-MU-2 E 3 o ` al 1 1 4.Om 1 / L--3.Om / W a S-HL - - ~ ~ MD-H6 f WAYFARER U) cn z BUILD-TO-ZONE BUILDING ENVELJPE \ RADOM STREET N SCHEDULE H TO BY-LAW 6 7 0 5/ 0 6 AMENDED BY BY-LAW 6786/07 PASSED THIS 23rd DAY OF _.J U LY 2007 ORIGINAL SIGNED BY MAYOR - DAVID RYAN ORIGINAL SIGNED BY CITY CLERK - DEBI A. BENTLEY _ ^1 Pickering Civic Complex Citq 04 ATTACHMENT# T® j One The Esplanade Ontario ~iEPORT# PD Canada Pickering, L1V6K7 It c `I . ",a " I I Direct Access 905.420.4660 N ^ • Toll Free 1.866.683.2760 PICKERI (~J' cityofpickering.com ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT Legal Services 174 Division 905.420.4626 Facsimile 905.420.3534 legal@city.pickering.on. ca February 29, 2008 William Friedman Barrister & Solicitor 3550 Victoria Park Avenue Suite 110 Toronto, ON M2H 2N5 Subject: SR&R Bay Ridges Ltd. - File: L-3210-001-06 I can confirm that the City is prepared to issue up to 110 building permits for single attached units on lands zoned SA-LW, MD-H6 and SA-8 within the property legally described as Parts 1, 5 and 7 on Plan 40R-25170 (the "Property") provided, (a) all requirements relating to the issuance of building permits of the City's Chief Building Official are met; and (b) SR&R Bay Ridges Ltd. ("SR&R) pays $200,000.00 to the City to be applied towards the amount owed by SR&R in lieu of parkland dedication. can also confirm that City staff, if requested by SR&R, will prepare a report for consideration by Council at its meeting on March 25, 2008 seeking direction on the total amount payable in lieu of parkland dedication provided, (a) SR&R has conveyed the valley lands legally described as Parts 12, 13, 14 (save and except Part 3 on Plan 40R-25170), 15 and 16 on Plan 40R- 24800 to the City free and clear of all encumbrances save and except the encumbrances set out in Schedule A attached; (b) SR&R has provided a certified appraisal showing the current market value of both the commercial and residential components of the Property; and (c) SR&R agrees to, remit whatever amount Council determines to be the appropriate amount payable in lieu of parkland dedication (less the ATTACHMENT# TO SR&R Bay Ridges Ltd, REPORT# PD IL 22 February 29,202 Page 2 75 . $200,000.00 already paid) forthwith alter Council's decision subject however to any rights of appeal to the OMB. Finally, I can confirm that the commercial component of the market value of the Property will be deducted from the overall market value for the purpose of calculating the amount owed in lieu of parkland dedication. If these conditions are acceptable to your client, please sign and forward to my office the enclosed copy of this letter. Yours truly Andrew C. Allison City Solicitor ACA s Attachment Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Director, Operations & Emergency Services Director, Planning & Development Manager, Development Review Supervisor, Property & Development Services Senior Planner-Site Planning SR&R Bay Ridges I.W. agrees to the conditions set out in this letter. UPZO AR&Ravyidges Ltd. Daled: u~ by its licitor, William Friedman ATTACHMENT 70 ATTACHMENT#-L-TO REPORT # PD_ FOORT# f~D 2 176 Schedule "A" 1. The reservations, limitations, provisions and conditions expressed in the original grant from the Crown and all unregistered rights, interests and privileges in favour of the Crown under or pursuant to any applicable statute or regulation. 2. Liens for taxes, local improvements, assessments or governmental charges or levies not at the time due or delinquent. 3. Zoning restrictions, restrictions on the use of the Lands. 4. Any unregistered right-of-way, watercourse, rights-of-water or other easements not disclosed by the registered title and the survey, if any, provided to us and any defects in or omissions disclosed by the survey. 5. Any subdivision, servicing, development, engineering, site plan, performance agreement or other similar agreement with a municipal or other public authority. 6. All applicable governmental orders, laws, by-laws and regulations. 1. The reservations, limitations, conditions and exceptions to title set out in the Land Titles Act (Ontario). 8. Pail Lot Control By-Law registered March 7, 1961 as Instrument No. LTC 2521; A 1 ACfi ` "i+t l # ~o rUt7 <<_ ;.PORT # lag ~ " C ATTACHMENT# L TO . REPORT# PD AL 0 2 177 WILLIAM FRIEDMAN B.C.L., 1B Barrister & Solicitor 150 Ferrand Drive, Suite 802 Tel: 416.496-3340 Toronto, Ontario, Canada, Fax: 416-497-3809 M3C 3E5 E-mail: wf(cl prl oxa By Email ¢patersonCcit ,.pickerine.on.ca June 18, 2008 By Courier Gillis A. Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer The Corporation of the City of Pickering One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario, Canada L1V 6K7 Dear Sir: Re: Parkland Dedication - SR & R Bay Ridges-Mixed Use Development 1215.1235 Bayly Street, Pickering, Ontario Pursuant to Section 42(1) of the Planning Act (the "Act"), the council of the City of Pickering as a condition of development or redevelopment of land may require that land in an amount not exceeding 21/o, in case of a commercial or industrial development or redevelopment and in all other cases 5% of land be conveyed to the municipality for park or other recreational purposes. Section 42(6) of the Act permits the City to require payment of money to the value of the land otherwise required to be conveyed in lieu of a conveyance. DETERMINATION OF VALUE Pursuant to the Planning Act the value of the land shall be determined as of the day before the day the building permit is issued in respect of the development or redevelopment or if more than one permit is required on the day before the day the first permit is issued. Section 42(9) of the Act then provides that in the case where land has been previously conveyed for park or recreational purposes or a payment of money has previously been made in lieu a conveyance and the land was originally proposed for commercial or ATTACHMENT I TV REPORT # PD- 178 ATTACHMENT- 1 o TO REPORT- PDT. industrial purpose and has now been proposed for another purpose then the land previously conveyed or money previously paid shall be included in determining the amount of land or money required to be conveyed or paid in connection with the new development or redevelopment. Accordingly this section requires the City to credit the amount of previous payment or conveyance against what is now to be paid or conveyed. If there is a dispute as to value of the land or as to the credit for previous payment then the matter can be brought before the OMB. POSITION OF SR & R BAY RIDGES LTD. Bay Ridges takes the position that: 1. Bay Ridges has conveyed to the City 4.94 acres, the Buffer Lands, for park or public recreational purposes. This represents almost the entire 5% required to be conveyed for Parkland. 2. In addition Bay Ridges has been required to convey an area equal to 1.505 acres. This area known as the valley lands, 3. Bay Ridges has also agreed to provide a three (3) year Ravine Stewardship Plan for the Valley lands at a cost of $50,000.00 4. Bay Ridges has agreed to make certain improvements to the Buffer Lands conveyed to the City at ,a cost of $46,000. 5. Bay Ridges is entitled to pursuant to Section 42(9) of the Planning Act to a credit for any amounts previously conveyed with respect to the Lands for park or other recreational purposes or paid in lieu thereof. 6. Bay. Ridges is entitled to a credit for the value of the commercial component of the development. This is estimated as follows, a) Total commercial/retail space is 24,271 and assuming a typical yield from commercial land of 27%, then the total acreage required to develop and build this amount of commercial/retail space would be 89,892 sq. ft. or 2.063 acres. - b) Land for commercial purposes in Pickering is worth $800,000 to $1,100,000. and by taking the mid-point of say $950,000 the land required to build this amount of commercial/retail would be $1,959,850 c) Therefor the residual land value of the commercial/retail space that will be built amounts to $1,959,850 and should be deducted from any values before calculating the 5% in lieu. The value of the lands as at the issue of the first building permit was determined by appraisal to be $12,800,000. Five (5%) percent thereof is $640,000.00. Based on the foregoing it would appear that no further sum is owed or needs to be conveyed to the yiT:aCi;i_~7 TO 0'9T J ~ A*ACHMENT# TO REPORT# PD 7 City. Moreover an argument can be made that Bay Ridges has conveyed and/cr paid an 179 amount in excess of what it is required to convey or pay under the Planning Act. Rather than enter into a prolonged dispute resolution process, Bay Ridges is prepared to resolve the issue relating to the parkland conveyance by paying an additional amount of $150,000,00. It is more than a reasonable amount given the various credits noted above to which Bay Ridges believes it would otherwise be entitled. /!#irdiedman cc, Mayor Dave Ryan Councillors Bonnie Littley, Bill McLean, Rick Johnson, Jennifer O'Connell, Doug Dickerson, David Pickles 8 0 ATTACHMENT #~T0 / TO r~RT .1 P ATTACHMENT# I, EPORT# Conveyance of land for park purposes 42. 1 As a condition of development or redevelopment of land, the council of a local municipality may, by by-law applicable to the whole municipality or to any defined area or areas thereof, require that land in an amount not exceeding, in the case of land proposed for development or redevelopment for commercial or industrial purposes, 2 per cent and in all other cases 5 per cent of the land be conveyed to the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes. Alternative requirement M Subject to subsection (4), as an alternative to requiring the conveyance provided for in subsection (1), in the case of land proposed for development or redevelopment for residential purposes, the by-law may require that land be conveyed to the municipality for park or oth.er.public recreational purposes.at a rate of one hectare for each 300 dwelling units proposed or at such lesser rate as may be specified in the by-law. Official plan requirement The alternative requirement authorized by subsection (3) may not be provided for in a by-law passed under this section unless there is an official plan in effect in the local municipality that contains specific policies dealing with the provision of lands for park or other public recreational purposes and the use of the alternative requirement. Payment instead of conveyance The council of a local municipality may require the payment of money to the value of the land otherwise required to be conveyed under this section in lieu of the conveyance. No building without payment 6.1 If a payment is required under subsection (6), no person shall construct a building on the land proposed for development or redevelopment unless the payment has been made or arrangements for the payment that are satisfactory to the council have been made. Determination of value 6.4 For the purposes of subsections (6) and (6.2), the value of the, land shall be determined as of the day before the day the building permit.is issued in respect of the development or redevelopment or, if more than one building permit is required for the development or redevelopment, as of the day before the day the first permit is issued. Where land conveyed If land has been conveyed or is required to be conveyed to a municipality for park or other. public purposes or a payment of money in lieu of such conveyance has been received by the municipality or is owing to it under this section or a condition imposed under section 51.1 or 53, no additional conveyance or payment in respect of the land subject to the earlier conveyance or payment may be required by a municipality in respect of subsequent development or redevelopment unless, ATTAWINMRI If ±u REPORT f pD ATTACHMENT# TO (a) there is a change in the proposed development or reuUNT,p 1 8 1 would increase the density of development; or (b) land originally proposed for development or redevelopment for commercial or industrial purposes is now proposed for development or redevelopment for other purposes. Changes If there is a change under clause (7) (a) or (b), the land that has been conveyed or is required to be conveyed or the payment of money that has been received or that is owing, as the case may be, shall be included in determining the amount,of land or payment of money in lieu of it that may subsequently be required under this section on the development, further development or redevelopment of the lands or part of them in respect of which the original conveyance'or payment was made. Disputes In the event of a dispute between a municipality and an owner of land on the value of land determined under subsection (6.4), either party may apply to the Municipal Board to have the value determined and the Board shall, in accordance as nearly as may be with the Expropriations Act, determine the value of the land and, if a payment has been made under protest under subsection (12), the Board may order that a refund be made to the owner. Same 11 In the event of a dispute between a municipality and an owner of land as to the amount of land or payment of money that may be required under subsection (9),_ either party may apply to the Municipal Board and the Board shall make a final determination of the matter. Payment under protest 12 If there is a dispute between a municipality and the owner of land under subsection (10), the owner may pay the amount required by the municipality under protest and shall make an application to the Municipal Board under subsection (10) within 30 days of the payment of the amount. Notice 13 If an owner- of land makes a payment under protest and an application to the Municipal Board under subsection (12), the owner shall give notice of the application to the municipality within 15 days after the application is made. ATTACHMENT, ATTACHMENT# To 182 REPORT # PD ~ 3EPORT# PD Enabling Policies This section of the Plan provides policies that outline how the City will obtain its park land through development applications, and how road widenings will be secured. .15.28 City Council, CITY POLICY Parkland.• Conv~ance of . (a) shall as a condition of residential Land for Park or Other development, and may as. a condition of Public Rimational Purpa.re.r other development, except for the uses described in (b), (i) require the. conveyance of land to. the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes in an amount not. exceeding 5% of the proposed land to be developed; (ii) may, as an alternative to requiring conveyance of land as provided for in (1) above, in 'the High Density Residential Areas and Mixed Use Areas, require land to be conveyed for park or other public recreational purposes at a rate of up to one hectare for each 300 dwelling units proposed, whichever is greater; and (iii) may, in lieu of a portion or all of the land conveyance stipulated by (i) or .(ii) above, require the payment of money to the value of the land that would otherwise be required to be conveyed for park purposes; (b) may, as a condition of commercial or industrial development, (i) require the conveyance of land to - the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes in an amount not exceeding 2% of .the proposed land to be developed; and (ii) may, in lieu of a portion or all of the land conveyance stipulated by (i) above, require the payment of money to the value of the land that would otherwise be required to be conveyed for park purposes; and ATTACHMENT # Tp, ATTACHMENT#~TO Mr,AT ,.c . s..._... REPORT# PD /'V _0_2 183 CITY POLICY (c) shall not accept as parkland conveyance Park/and: Conygance of Land far lands required for drainage; valley and Park_orOther Public Remationa! stream corridor or shoreline protection Purpore.r (cont'd) purposes; lands susceptible to flooding; steep valley slopes; hazard lands; lands - required to be conveyed to a public agency other than the City of Pickering; and other lands unsuitable for park development. CITY POLICY 15.29 City Council shall secure, at no charge to the Road Wlideningr municipality, the right-of-way widths in accordance with section 4.10 for roads shown on Schedule If, through the subdivision, land severance and/or site plan control process, and/or through development agreements, and/or by dedication or conveyance, subject to, (a) exact right-of-way widths being determined at the time of development, considering the proposed land use, intensity of development, road function, cultural and heritage features of the area, and development guidelines prepared for Detailed Review Areas; and (b) road widenings being taken equally from both sides of the road measured from the centreline, except in areas where special circumstances exist (such as areas containing unusual soil, topographic or other environmental features; areas where existing buildings or structures warrant protection; and where jog-eliminations are proposed at intersections), which circumstances require that more of the required road widening is taken from one side than the other. ATTACHAENT# ATTACHMENT! TO REPORT# PO 184 REPORT # PD 3 f6 - A THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF PICKERING BY-LAW N0. 5373/98 Being a by-law to require the conveyance of land for park or other public recreational purposes as a condition of development or redevelopment, or the subdivision of lands. WHEREAS sections 42, 51.1, 51(25) and 53 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 provide that the Council of a local municipality may by by-law require that land be conveyed to the municipality for park or other public recreational purposes as a condition of development or redevelopment or the subdivision of lands; WHEREAS sections 42 and 51.1 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13, provide for an alternate parkland rate of one hectare for each 300 dwelling units proposed for development provided the municipality has an official. plan that contains specific policies dealing with the provision of lands for park or other public recreational purposes at such a rate; WHEREAS the Official Plan of the Town of Pickering contains specific policies dealing with the provision of lands for park or other public recreation purposes at the conveyance rates referred to in the Planning Act, WHEREAS the Council of The Corporation of the Town of Pickering wishes to use these provisions to further the acquisition of lands for parks or other public recreational purposes. NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE TOWN OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. For the purposes of interpretation of this by-law, the following definitions shall apply: (a) "Development" means the construction, erection or placing of one or more buildings or structures on land or the making of an addition or alteration to a building or structure that has the effect of substantially increasing the size or usability. thereof; and (b) "Redevelopment" has the same meaning as Development. (c) "Subdivision" means the process referred to in section 50 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13. 2. This Bylaw shall apply to the whole of the Town of Pickering. 3. As a condition of development or redevelopment of lands for any purpose other than commercial or industrial purposes, Council shall require that land be conveyed to the Town, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, for park or other public recreational purposes in the amount of five percent (5%) of the land proposed for such development. 4. As a condition of subdivision of lands for any purpose other than commercial or industrial purposes, Council shall require that land be conveyed to the Town, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, for park or other public recreational purposes in *the amount of five percent (5%) of the land proposed for such development. 5. As an alternative to sections 3 and 4 above, as a condition of development or redevelopment or in the case of subdivision of land as a condition of approval of Irn ATTACHMENT # -7 - To ATTACH REPORT # PD ___,3- - O8 I,EPORT# sudivision of lands for development in the High Density Residential Areas and Mixed Use Areas in accordance with the Town of Pickering Official Plan, Council may require that land be conveyed to the Town for park or other public recreational purposes at a rate of one hectare for each 300 dwelling units proposed. However, in no case shall the parkland dedication be less than that required in sections 3 and 4 above. b. As an alternative to sections 3, 4 and 5 above, Council may require the payment of money equal to the value of any land otherwise to be conveyed under this by-law, or such combination of land and money as Council may require. . 7. This By-law shall at all times be subject to the provisions of sections 42, 51.1, 51(25) and 53 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13, as amended from time to time, or any successor thereto. 8. By-Law No. 4152/93 of The Corporation of the Town of Pickering being a by-law "To require that land be conveyed to the Town for park or other public recreations purposes as a condition of development or redevelopment anywhere in the Town", is hereby repealed. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this. 8th day of Septenber, 1998. Wayne Arthurs, Mayor Bruce Taylor, Clerk TOWN OF' !.E DU, T. ATTACHMENT # TO CTORONTO AND RFGiON"'1/- REPORT; PD onserva tion 18 6 for The L i yi ng City July 3, 2007 RECEIVED CFN 38686.01 XREF CFN 39234 VIA E-MAIL AND MAIL JUL 0 2007 Tyler Barnett CITY OF PICKERING Planning and Development Department PLANNING a DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City of Pickering Pickering Civic Complex One. The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1V 6K7 Re: Site Plan Application No. S02/07 1215 -1235 Bayly Street (San Francisco by the Bay, Bay Ridges Piaza) City of Pickering S..R. 8 R. Bay Ridges Limited Dear. Mr. Barnett: Thank you for the opportunity to review the second Site Plan application submission. We have reviewed the following documents: Drawing Nos. SP-01 to SP-04, prepared by Kirkor Architects, dated April 4, 2007, Revision No. 3, revised April 9, 2007, received.on May 8, 2007; SWM Report, prepared by Sernas, dated May 8, 2007, received May 14, 2007; Drawing No. GEO-1, Pine Creek Bank Stabilization and outfall Channel Design, prepared by Sernas, dated May 2007; Drawing No. SD-1, Site Drainage Area Plan, prepared by Sernas, dated October 2006; Drawing No. SG-1, Site Grading Plan, prepared by Sernas; dated October 2006; • Drawing No. SS-1, Site. Servicing Plan, prepared by Sernas, dated October 2006; Drawing No. ERS-1, Erosion/Sediment Control Plan, prepared by Sernas: dated October 2006; and Drawing Nos. L-1 to L-7, prepared by James McWilliam Landscape Architect, dated March 2007; Revision 3, revised April 5, 2007, received on May 8, 2007. We offer the follo" ing comments. Slope V bilify 1. The'proposed outfall and limits of development are satisfactory with respect to slope stability. Stormwater Management .2. Please provide confirmation whether the proposed future development was taken into account for total imperviousness calculation and Visual Otthymo calculation for total contribution from Catchment 116. Please provide a summary of the total area and. percent imperviousness of the existing, proposed and future development.. Please provide an electronic copy of the. . modified V02 model. Review of ail details regarding minor systerri flow, flow capacity and conveyance of on site flows through minor systems,' and major overland flow conveyance is deferred to City staff.' Confirmation should. be provided via a copy of City comments that City staff has no concerns in this regard. FAHOMETUBLIODEVELOPMENT SERVICESDURHAM REG10NTICKERINMI215 -'1235 BAYLY 4.DOC AAomhpr of rnnsen/ation Ontario ATTACHMENT# TO JEPORT# PD > U G/ _ 187 Tyler Barnett .2- July 3. 2007 3. Figure SO-1 shows that major overland flow is directed towards the valley wall on the east side of the property. Please be advised that TRCA policy does not support discharge of unattenuated concentrated major flow into the valley as shown in Drawing No. SG-1. Acceptable alternatives to the current proposal would include grading of the southeast corner of the site to provide temporary attenuation of flow and dispersal of flow into the valley wall through a level spreader or curb acting as a weir, or conveyance of major system flows via a pipe to an outfall located at the bottom of the valley wall. 4. Please describe the implications of site construction phasing on the function of the temporary pond and stormwater flow patterns on site, and confirm that the function of the pond will be maintained through all phases. 5. Please provide appropriate proposed contours of the pond and volume calculation on Drawing No. ERS-1. 6. The outlet of the pond is very close to the inlet of proposed temporary swale for proposed ponds on the east and west side, as shown on Drawing No. ERS-1. This will reduce retention time and therefore affect the performance of the pond to effectively settle sediment. Please change the location of the inlet of the temporary swale or orient the temporary pond so that there is sufficient travel time provided to the outlet of the pond. 7. Please note that the TRCA Erosion and Sediment Control Guideline require a minimum 48 hour drawdown time with minimum 75 mm orifice. Please. provide calculation of the drawdown time. Further, an emergency spillway must be provided to safely pass the 100 year storm event and supporting calculations must be provided. Please provide a note on the plan stating sediment basin must be constructed prior to any construction activities except for topsoil stripping and grading operations associated with the construction of the ESC pond.. All details and calculations regarding to the pond should confirm,to the TRCA Erosion-and Sediment Control Guideline for Urban Construction, December 2006. The Guideline can be downloaded from www sustainabletechnologies.ca. 8. Please provide appropriate drawings to demonstrate erosion and sediment control measures that will be provided during construction of the temporary pond, site stripping and. grad(ng, outlet structures, stormwater pipes, sanitary sewer and manhole. - Appropriate notes.on construction staging, phasing,.maintenance.and good site practice should be provided.- Additionally, erosion control and site stabilization will be required during and. after construction of the 250 mm sanitary sewer in the valley. 9. Please provide some spot elevations for the swale on Drawing No. ESC-1, and provide . rational for temporary interceptor swale sizing calculation. It is preferred the swage. conveys the "first flush" with majority of the sediment laden water directed to the temporary sediment control pond. A preliminary hydrologic calculation (rational method or V02) for an estimate of flows from a 1.5-25 mm storm event to confirm. the flow that can. be conveyed through the temporary interceptor channel. 10.. Please provide the location of topsoil stockpile on Drawing No. ERS-1 or a separate drawing and provide heavy duty sediment fence at the perimeter. of topsoil stockpile. Please provid e details. of the seeding or other stabilization measure for the topsoil stock pile. 11. The proposed outfall should join the watercourse at a flat angle and avoid the outside bend if possible. Please look into opportunities to orient the outfall, if possible, so that the outfall is FAHOMEIPUBLICID5VELOPMENT SERVICESIDURHAM REGIONIPICKERINGI1215 -1235 BAYLY 4.DOC `ry ATTACHMENT# REPORT# Tyler Barnett .3-- July 3, 2007 south of the proposed location and intercepts the watercourse at a flatter angle. Please provide velocity calculations of all proposed erosion control treatment types. Please provide a note on Drawing No. GEO-1 to avoid disturbance to the low flow channel of the watercourse. Further, please indicate sediment control fence around the perimeter of the proposed cascade pool and modify "construction phasing" on Drawing No. GEO-1. 12. Page 2 of the Stormwater Management Report states the infiltration trench will be able to handle all runoff to the 25 year design storm event and refers to an attached spreadsheet. Please forward this spreadsheet to TRCA staff Shahzad Khan by e-mail at skhan@trca. on.ca. The approximate 25 year storm runoff from a 600 sq. m roof is 22 cu.m where as the volume of the infiltration trench is 14 cu m. It would appear that for a 25 year runoff capture the size of the infiltration trench should be larger; please explain this discrepancy. Further, please . confirm•whether roof flaw control device will be provided for the building in front of Street G. 13. Further to the previous comment, .it would appear that the infiltration facility could capture a greaterlotal volume of rainfall if it received drainage from other parts of the site.. For example, if the trench volume provided could capture runoff from up to the 25 mm storm over the entire site instead of the 25 year storm -runoff from a small portion, a much greater.. proportion of the total annual runoff from. the site could be managed in this facility. 14. Please provide appropriate drawings and details to describe the configuration of the infiltration facility, including a typical cross-section. 15. It is not typical for an infiltration basin design to allow excess flows to surcharge to the ground. through a catch basin and discharge overland. Typically, the overflow system is directly connected to the storm sewer if feasible; we recommend investigation of this alternative as most proponents have found this to be an improved design. Further the catch basin connected to the infiltration basin will allow runoff from the paved area to enter the basin which, if not the intent of the design, will decrease the lifespan and the performance of the facility due to poor water quality. 16. The City of Pickering has Identified, in its ongoing Frenchman's Bay Stormwater Management Master Plan, that Pine Creek and Frenchman's Bay are highly degraded and will.require dramatic water quality improvements to restore their ecological function. While the proponent should be recognized for providing an innovative infiltration facility as a component of their stormwater management strategy, this treats only a small portion of the site and additional . measures should be provided to maximize erosion control and water quality treatment... While we note that oil/grit separators have been provided, it is our opinion that these typically do' not achieve Level 1 water quality. control in real-world conditions, which is supported by recent research and the evolving position of other municipalities such as the City of Toronto qn OGS. use.. Please revise the stormwater management strategy to include other measures in addition to OGS that will provide an additional degree of ero"sion control and vrater,quality treatment. Potential measures include parking. lot bioswales'and enhanced drainage swales plus enhanced capture from the proposed infiltration facility, although there are many other measures that could be applied. Landscape plans 17. A. Ravine Stewardship Plan should be prepared for the valley slopes. The plan should be prepared by a qualified Ecologist or Forestry specialist and include a plan and costing for staged removal of invasive *species and replacement with native species over an appropriate time period. We recommend that the City hold•a Letter of Credit for this work. F:IHOMEIPUBLICIDEVELOPMENT SERVICESIDURHAM REGIONIPICKERING11215 -1235 BAYLY 4.DOc - ATTACHMENT#_. / REPORT# PO `f -62 Tyler Barnett -4. July 3. 20078 18. Please replace sod in the majority of the 10 metre buffer with a native seed mix. A small strip of sod along the edge of the visitor parking area may be appropriate. We may have some minor adjustments to the species list and,will respond shortly. We apologize for the delay. Conveyance of Valley Lands 19. The valley lands including the buffer should be conveyed to public ownership. This requirement may be included in the Site Plan Agreement. Sewer Connection 20. We are currently reviewing preliminary design for the proposed sanitary sewer crossing of the Pine Creek south of Radom Street, west of Douglas Avenue in Douglas Park. We. understand this sewer connection is required to service the San Francisco by the Bay development. The existing sewer crossing, to be replaced, Is located within an earthen embankment as it crosses the creek. The embankment itself is located on top of five corrugated steel pipe culverts. The culverts convey the Pine Creek and are perched at the downstream end. A pedestrian trail is located on the top of the embankment which connects Douglas Park to the townhouse. complex at Radom Street. As currently proposed in the preliminary drawings, the new sewer line is to be constructed within the embankment, leaving the five culverts in place. Based upon our observations during a site visit on March 16, 2007, we note that the present preliminary proposal for the crossing (with the five culverts and embankment) has several significant ecological drawbacks: a. Hydraulics. Based upon our review of the profile of.the Regional Storm Floodplain at this location, it is evident that there is a significant backwater behind the crossing due' to the high embankment of this crossing as well as the Radom Street crossing. A more open crossing at this location could help to reduce the larger problem of the Pine Creek.Floodplain upstream north of Highway 401. b. Fish Passage, The perched culverts are a barrier to fish passage and prevent any movement of fish upstream of this location. C. Erosion. The location of the culverts is causing significant undercutting of the embankment and erosion of the downstream banks of the Pine Creek. The culverts have created a large plunge pool downstream and have constrained the natural meander of the watercourse, preventing it from continuing to form naturally. d. Wildlife Passage. The culverts and embankment may impair wildlife passage along the Pine Creek valleylands: e. Maintenance/Replacement. It appears that the upstream end of.the culverts regularly becomes blocked with. detritus flowing down the creek.. A larger opening may reduce this'. The CSP culverts will eventually require repair or replacement. In addition, the new sewer infrastructure, may be at risk from storm events. Therefore, it may be advantageous to avoid a future need to repair or replace the culverts with an improved design now. The proposed sanitary sewer improvements continue to utilize the present culvert/ embankment configuration of the crossing and do not resolve the issues identified above. New sewer infrastructure at this location using the present configuration precludes any improvement to the present situation in the near-term. ` Given this, we strongly encourage an alternate design be considered which'would not utilize the culvert/embankment configuration F:IHOMEIPUBLICIDEVELOPMENT SERVICESIDURHAM REGIONIPICKERINGI1215 -1.235 GAYLY 4.DOC ATTACHMENT #_?~.TQ ATTACHMENT# TO REPORT I. PD L C - C 7 REPORT# PD % V 0 S 190 _ 5 . Jul 3 2007 Ty ler Barnett but would allow for improvements to the watercourse and valleylands. For example, it may be possible to provide for a siphon underneath the creek or a new, wider, open-fceted culvert. TRCA staff is more than willing to discuss this matter further with the Region, City and proponent in order to arrive at a satisfactory solutiQn. TRCA Permit Requirements 21. The,applicant has applied for an Ontario Regulation 166/06 permit three Be lts m nt and new outfall. Upon final Site Plan approval, the applicant should submit , to TRCA: Drawing Nos. L-1, L-4 and L-7; Drawing following drawings, revised as necessary of the Nos. GEO-Ce ERS-1, SSA, and SG1. In addition, a permit application will be required for the sewer crossing downstream. Recommendation In light of the above, we have no objection to the approval of the Site Plan application subject to the owner addressing Comment Nos. 2 to 16, above, to TRCA satisfaction, and the Owner agreeing in the Site Plan Agreement to the following: of Pl 1, Owner to gratuitously convey the valleyiands and buffer to the for ley City the val k s lo. to T. 2. Owner to prepare and implement a Ravine •S P Plan satisfaction. The Plan shall be prepared by a qualified Ecologist or Forestry specialist and include a plan and costing for staged removal of invasive species and replacement with native species over an appropriate time period. 3*.. Owner shall provide a Letter of Credit to the City of Pickering for 100% of the cost of the Ravine Stewardship Plan. 4. Owner shall revise the Landscaping Plans to TRCA satisfaction. 5 Owner shall apply for and receive a TRCA permit under Ontario Regulation 166/06. We request that the applicant respond in a cover letter addressing have any further question number. We trust. this is satisfactory. Please feel free to contact me y Sincerely, Steven H. Heuchert, MCIP; RPP, MRTPI Manager,'Developriment Planning and Regulation Planning and Development Extension 5311 cc; Steven M. Warsh, Partner, S & R Development Group Limited (by e-mail) Stephen I. Fagyas, Commercial Focus Advisory Services Inc. (by e-mail) Bob Starr, City of Pickering (by e-mail.) Peter Castellan, Region of Durham (by e-mail) P.\HOME\PUBLICIDEVELOPMENT SERVICESIDURHAM REGIONTICKERINGU215 -1235 BAYLY_4.DOC City REPORT TO ' COUNCIL I KERI Report Number: OES 14-09 Date: March 23, 2009 ! 91 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Operations & Emergency Services Subject: Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project - Tender No. T-17-2008 - Request for Additional Funding - File: A-1440-001-09 Recommendation: 1. That Report OES 14-09 regarding additional funding for the Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project be received; 2. That additional expenditures in the total amount of $150,000 (GST excluded) be approved; 3. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the additional required expenditures from funds received under the "Investing in Ontario Act, 2008"; and 4. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take any actions necessary to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: The Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project was approved by Council on November 17, 2008 as per Report OES 37-08 by the Director, Operations & Emergency Services. As noted in the above report, the original budget for this project was $1.5 million, but this was increased by Council to $1.9 million to reflect the Tender amount which took into account the real costs given the economy and market trends. Additional funding to make up the difference at the time of the tender award was made available by a combination of Federal Gas Tax (50%) and funds the City received from the "Investing in Ontario Act, 2009" (50%). Report OES 14-09 March 23, 2009 Subject: Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project - Tender No. T-17-2008 i 192 - Request for Additional Funding Page 2 The tender for the above noted project was awarded to BWK Construction Company Ltd. by Council on November 17, 2008 at a total project cost as follows: T-17-2008 $1,698,000 Consultant Fees 150,000 Tender & Misc. Costs 2,000 Construction Contingency 50,000 Total Project Costs $1,900,000 It should be noted that the construction contingency, noted above at $50,000, represents only 2.9% of the tender cost which is significantly less than a standard contingency of 10-15% for this type of aged facility. The project is approximately 40% complete to date, but due to the age of the existing facility and unforeseen problems encountered during the initial stages of construction, a number of additional costs have been incurred which has depleted the Council approved contingency amount of $50,000.00. The purpose of this report is to request additional funding in the amount of $150,000 to complete the project as originally envisioned and to correct the inherent problems with the structural and mechanical/electrical systems. Early in the construction phase, as the existing building envelope was exposed, it was discovered that the original masonry and block work was poorly constructed, necessitating a costly change order to rectify. The existence of asbestos and mould was also uncovered and had to be dealt with in an expeditious manner in order to avoid construction delays. A detailed listing of the required additional costs is attached to this report. Financial Implications: The majority of the additional expenditures do not appear to qualify under the criteria for Federal Gas Tax Funding. Therefore, the required additional funding of approximately $150,000 is recommended to come from the Provincial grant provided under the "Investing on Ontario Act, 2008". A total of $3.9 million was originally provided to the City of which $200,000 was previously committed for this project. CORP0227-07101 revised Report OES 14-09 March 23, 2009 193 Subject: Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project - Tender No. T-17-2008 - Request for Additional Funding Page 3 Sustainability Implications: The existing roof structure and mechanical systems have reached the end of their useful life cycle, and currently are experiencing failure in several key areas. As a result of roof leaks, the brick veneer and structural elements are also experiencing failure and will need total replacement if not repaired soon. Replacement of the roof will resolve the leakage issues and improve the insulation factor, thus resulting in the reduction of maintenance costs. In addition, removal of the asbestos materials and mould as identified on the project will provide for a healthy sustainable workplace for both patrons and employees. Background: During the course of some of the early stages of construction, as some of the building fagade was removed, a number of deficiencies and concerns came to light which needed immediate attention. The consultant has prepared a detailed listing of these issues and their related costs,. which is attached to this report. Major issues on the project related to asbestos and mould removal, rectifications to original masonry and block work, as well as a number of mechanical and electrical deficiencies. The purpose of this report is to request additional funding in the amount of $150,000 to complete the project as originally envisioned and to correct the inherent problems with the structural and mechanical/electrical systems. Attachments: 1. Report to Executive Committee OES 37-08 2. Summary of Additional Costs Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Ton Pr edeI Everett Buntsma Division Head, Facilities Operations Director, Operations & Emergency Services CORP0227-07/01 revised Report OES 14-09 March 23, 2009 Subject: Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project 194 - Tender No. T-17-2008 ' - Request for Additional Funding Page 4 Approved/Endorsed By: Gillis Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer TP:mld Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council ~A f-T~ Thomas J. Q n, RDMR, M III Chief Administrative Officer CORP0227-07/01 revised Cary o~ TOREPORT#iF'CCj uu_._7 REPORT TO EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE 19 r P ~ ER Report Number: OES 37-08 2 7 Date: November 10, 2008 From: Everett Buntsma Director, Operations & Emergency Services Subject: Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project - Tender No. T-17-2008 - File: A-1440 Recommendation: 1. That Report OES 37-08 regarding T-17-2008 for the Dunbarton Indoor. Pool Renovation Project be received; 2. That Council ratify the approval by the Chief Administrative Officer during Council's summer recess of proposal no. RFP-4-2008 for the supply of energy ventilation and pool dehumidification systems for the Dunbarton Pool; 3. That Tender T-17-2008 submitted by BWK Construction Company Ltd., at a cost of $1,782,900 (PST and GST included) be accepted; 4. That the total gross project cost of $1,995,000 (GST included) and a net project cost of $1,900,000 including the tender amount and other associated costs be approved; 5. That Council approve the re-allocation of the Federal Gas Tax funds associated with the 2008 capital project for the Frenchman's Bay - Master Plan Phase One (5410.0805.6182) and that these funds be re-submitted in the 2009 Capital Budget; 6. That Council authorize the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer to finance the project as follows: a) the sum of $1,000,000, as provided for in the 2008 approved Capital Budget, to be funded from Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund; b) the sum of up to $500,000, as provided for in the 2008 approved Capital Budget, to be financed by the issue of debentures through the Regional Municipality of Durham, over a period not exceeding fifteen (15) years, at a rate to be determined; c) the additional project costs estimated to be $400,000 be funded from the Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund ($200,000) and from the funding the City will receive from the "Investing in Ontario Act, 2008" ($200,000) including any additional unanticipated costs; s± 1 9 r-~c Report OES 37-08November 10, 2008 Subject: Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project Page 2 28 t of i d) the annual repayment charges in the amount of approximately $49,800 be included in the annual Current Budget for the City of Pickering commencing in 2009, continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid, -and any financing cost to be paid out of the Current Budget; e) the Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has updated the City's 2008 Annual Repayment Limit and the repayment thereof falls within the City's Annual Repayment Limit for debt and financial obligations, as established by the Province for municipalities in Ontario and would not cause the City to exceed the updated limit, and therefore, Ontario Municipal Board approval is not required prior to City Council's authorization; f) undertake the financing of this project or portions thereof -that cannot be accommodated through the foregoing through internal loans, Infrastructure Ontario - OSIFA Loan Program, or a financial institution offering long term financing under similar terms and conditions; g) the Treasurer is authorized to take any actions necessary in order to effect the foregoing; 7. That the draft by-law attached to this report be enacted; and 8. That the appropriate City of Pickering officials be authorized to take necessary action to give effect thereto. Executive Summary: The Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project was approved by Council in the 2008 Capital Budget for the amount of $1,500,000. As an integral part of this project, and in order to expedite delivery of the required mechanical equipment, RFP-4-2008 was approved on August 7, 2008 in the amount of $277,000 plus GST to allow Engineered Air to commence the fabrication. The existing roof structure at Dunbarton Pool has reached the end of its useful life cycle, and the existing structural components are showing signs of failure. 'This needs to be repaired as soon as possible in order to protect the integrity of the facility. As well as the structural degradation, the internal mechanical, ventilation, filtering and dehumidification systems have also reached the end of their useful life cycle and need replacement. CORP0227-07101 revised Report OES 37-08 November 10, 2008 197 Subject: Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project Page 3 The successful bidder is BWK Construction Company, with a bid of $1,698,000 (net of GST). Adding additional costs for consulting, miscellaneous and contingency translates to a final estimated cost of $1,900,000 (net of GST). The approved Capital Budget for this project is $1,500,000 resulting in an additional capital requirement of $400,000. The additional costs will be funded from two sources: 50% from Federal Gas Tax Funds and 50% from the funds the City will receive from the "Investing in Ontario Act, 2008". When the City prepared its 2008 Capital Budget, it utilized 100% of the available 2008 Federal Gas Tax funding. Staff have become aware that the Frenchman's Bay Master Plan Projects - Phase 1 funded 100% from Federal Gas Tax funding will be delayed this year. This project is delayed mainly due to Provincial staff concerns that are being addressed by City staff. Therefore staff are recommending that this project be re-budgeted in 2009 and that the 2008 Federal Gas Tax funds originally allocated to this project (Frenchman's Bay) now be transferred to fund the portion of the additional expenditure attributable to the Federal Gas Tax portion of the Dunbarton Pool project. As a result of other funding being available, awarding of this contract will have no financial impact on the 2008 Capital Budget. It is evident by the small spread between the three low tenders, that the low bid reflects the real cost given the current economy and market trends. It is recommended that the low tender be accepted and Council adopts the revised funding strategy for this project. Financial Implications: 1. TENDER AMOUNT T-17-2008 $ 1,698,000 GST 84,900 Total including GST 1,782,900 GST Rebate ( 84.900) Total $ 1,698,000 2. APPROVED SOURCE OF FUNDS Culture & Recreation Capital Budget Location Proiect Code Source of Funds Budget Required Dunbarton Indoor 5713.0804.6181 15 year debt 500,000 500,000 Pool Renovation 5713.0804.7505 Federal Gas Tax 1,000,000 1.000,000 Project Funds Available 1,500,000 1,500,000 CORP0227-07101 revised 1 1- 9 a; tw~sw~"' Report OES 37-08 al November 10, 2008 Subject: Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project Page 4 30 3. ESTIMATED PROJECT COSTING SUMMARY Associated Costs T-17-2008 - Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project $1,698,000 Consultant Fees 150,000 Tender & Miscellaneous Costs 2,000 Construction Contingency 50,000 Total Project Costs 1,900,000 GST 95,000 Total Gross Project Cost 1,995,000 GST Rebate (95,000) Total Net Project Cost $1,900,000 4. Project Costs under/(over) Approved Funds ($400,000) 5. FINANCING FOR OVER-EXPENDITURES Federal Gas Tax $200,000 Investing in Ontario Act, 2008" 200.000 Provincial Grant $400,000 The Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer has provided the funding recommendations and concurs with this report. Sustainability Implications: The existing roof structure and mechanical systems have reached the end of their useful life cycle, and currently are experiencing failure in several key areas. As a result of roof leaks, the brick veneer and structural elements are also experiencing failure and will need total replacement if not repaired soon. Replacement of the roof will resolve the leakage issues and improve the insulation factor, thus resulting in the reduction of maintenance costs. Background: Tenders have been received which closed on Wednesday, October 8, 2008 for the Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project. An advertisement was placed in the Daily CORP0227-07/01 revised A-FrA Hl`'i E NT 4_ e r ? i I` + ~S f ? Report OES 37-08 -'L----° November 10, 2008 199 Subject: Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project Page 5 31 Commercial News and on the City's website. Fourteen (14) companies picked up a tendering package. A mandatory site visit was held on Monday, September 29, 2008 and fifteen (15) general contractors attended of which seven (7) bidders responded and submitted a bid for this project and one (1) was unable to bid at this time. One (1) addendum was issued during this tender call. Our consultant, TSH Architects Ltd. (TSH) has undertaken the necessary reference checks related to the general contractor and their sub-contractors, and are recommending acceptance of the low bid, being BWK Construction. BWK Construction is currently working for the City of Pickering on the Recreation Complex Expansion. The consultant's letter also provides an explanation of the higher than expected construction costs. The bidding summary is attached. It is evident by the small spread between the three low tenders, that the low bid reflects the true cost given the current economy and market trends. It is recommended that the low tender be accepted and that Council adopts the revised funding strategy for this project. BWK Construction provided three (3) references; one being the City of Pickering as they are currently working on the Recreation Complex Expansion. Staff have no concerns recommending BWK Construction as they were a pre-qualified contractor previously and all references were checked. TSH's original budget estimate for this work was approximately $1,500,000. The majority of the cost increases can be attributed to the following items: • significantly more structural work is required to reinforce the mechanical room floor and adjacent roof areas to carry the weight of the new mechanical equipment • a new electrical service has to be brought in from the adjacent high school • existing light fixtures in changerooms need to be replaced • additional privacy change cubicles need to be added • four de-stratification fans to the Natatorium need to be added • handicapped lift to pool deck needs to be added • revisions are required to the gas service and an allowance has been included in the tender for this work • a number of existing conditions involving locations of pipe chases have been encountered requiring additional scope to deal with them • ceilings in washrooms and showers were not originally planned to be replaced, however replacement will be necessary due to work in the mechanical penthouse • the tender for the supply of the mechanical equipment is slightly higher than originally budgeted for CORP0227-07/01 revised 2 00 I~,i:N rz iTEFORT#Ct- /LI CJ~I Report OES 37-08._ ag November 10, 2008 Subject: Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project Page 6 32 The Dunbarton Indoor Pool operates seven (7) days per week, starting as early as 5:00 am and ending at 10:30 pm. Users of the facility include: 1. Pickering Swim Club 2. Durham Board of Education 3. Learn to Swim Programs 4. Masters Swim Club 5. Female Only Swim 6. Public Swimming Program 7. Durham Synchro 8. Pickering Dragonboat The Learn to Swim Programs alone have a total of over 700 participants, including 100 children in leadership programs that feed into our staff complement. Revenues from Learn to Swim lessons were approximately $256,000 in 2007 and other revenues from rentals, admissions and memberships was $115,000. It is important to note that, even through the cost on this project has increased; the overall cost of undertaking the^renovations is still far cheaper than the alternative of building a new facility, the cost of which would also include demolishing the old one. For comparison purposes, the cost of a total reconstruction of the existing pool facility on the same site was estimated to be approximately $7.8 million by our consulting and the cost a new small community centre with a pool was estimated to be $11.7 million excluding land and site development costs. A copy of this report is attached for information purposes. In May of this year, the Provincial Government passed the "Investing in Ontario Act, 2008" that allows the Province to allocate a portion of its surplus to address the Province's accumulated deficit and to fund municipal capital projects. Under this Act, the Province is going to allocate $1.1 billion to municipalities of which Pickering's share is $3,912,526. Ontario Regulation 277/08, made under the "Investing in Ontario Act," confirms that the funds can be used for capital expenditures. Due to the complexity of the project, and the ancillary need to provide a facility changeroom as part of the renovations, the total project cost is over the approved budget by the amount of $400,000. In addition, whenever a renovation occurs for a building that is over thirty-five years old, there is a small possibility that there may be additional unanticipated costs. If these additional costs occur, amounts exceeding the $50,000 construction contingency identified will be funded from the City's "Investing in Ontario" funds. CORP0227-07/01 revised :`°€'T.ACt- MENT#...J_,__- i REPORT# ~~j Report OES 37-08 of November 10, 2008 01 Sub' Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project Page 7 2 The Health & Safety Policy, Workplace Injury Summary Report, current WSIB Council Amendment to Draft #7 (CAD-7), Certificate of Clearance issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board and Certificate of Insurance as submitted by BWK Construction has been reviewed by the Coordinator, Health & Safety and is deemed acceptable. In closing, staff recommends the award of this contract to BWK Construction. This report has been prepared in conjunction with the Manager, Supply & Services and the Senior Financial Analyst. Attachments: 1. Supply & Services Memorandum dated October 14, 2008 2. Facilities Operations Memo dated August 5, 2008 3. Consultant's Report (TSH) dated October 15, 2008 4. Consultant's Memo (TSH) dated January 17, 2008 5. By-law to authorize the Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project and the issuance of debentures in the amount of $500,000. Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Tony Prevedel E?ve tt sma Divi sion Head or, Operations & Emergency Facilities Operations ces Approved/Endorsed By: Gillis Paterson Director, Corp rate Services & Treasurer Vera A. Felgemach , CPP, CPPO, CPPB,, PM, CMM III Manager, Supply & Services CORP0227-07/01 revised A7TACHMENT# TOREPORT# 202 of Report OES 37-08 November 10, 2008 Subject: Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project Page 8 34 TP:mld Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration it of Pickering Ci Co T m s J. Qui RDM MM III Chief Administra ive Officer CORP0227-07/01 revised City v~ J 1_1 ATTACHMENT# 1 --a. fO REPORT#.L 203 of C, 1 c RI MEMO To: Tony Prevedel October 14, 2008 Division Head, Facilities Operations From: Vera A. Felgemacher Manager, Supply & Services Subject: Tender for Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovations Tender No. T -17 - 2008 Tenders have been received for the above project by the closing date of October 8, 2008. Ten bidders were invited to participate. An advertisement was placed in the Daily Commercial News and on the City's Website. Fourteen (14) companies picked up a tendering package for a non- refundable fee of $100.00. A mandatory site visit was held on Monday, September 29, 2008 and 15 general contractors attended of which eight (7) bidders responded and submitted a bid for this project and one (1) unable to bid at this time. One (1) addendum was issued during this tender call. A copy of the Record of Tenders Opened and Checked used at the public tender opening is attached. Tenders shall be irrevocable for 60 days after the official closing date and time. Purchasing Procedure No. PUR 010-001, Item 10.03 (r) provides checking tendered unit prices and extensions; unit prices shall govern and extensions will be corrected accordingly, which has been done. All deposits other than the low three bidders may be returned to the applicable bidders as provided for by Purchasing Procedure No. PUR 010-001, Item 10.03(w). Three (3) bids have been retained for review at this time. SUMMARY PST included, GST included Bidders : Total Tendered After Calculation Amount $ Check BWK Construction $1,782.900.00 $1,782.900.00 Charterhouse Projects Inc. $1,800,750.00 $1,800,750.00 J.J. McGuire General Contractors $1,857,450.00 $1,857,450.00 A-Plus Contractors $2,092.650.00 $2,092.650.00 Ross Clair Contracting__ $2,225,475.00 $2,225;475.00 Tasis Contractors Inc. $2,257,500.00 $2,257,500.00 Ga Company Limited Unable to Bid D.J. McRae Contracting Automatic rejection - Bid deposit not sufficient. Reference: Purchasing By-law No. 5900-01, Procedure No. PUR 010-001, 10.04, Item 9(d), IB Item 18, 19„ 20; TS Item 1, 2, 3. Z O AITTACHMENT # T O REPORT# t14-._OCj Pursuant to Information to Bidders Item 2t; ~trle'f6~g will be requested of the low bidder for your review during the evaluation stage of this tender call. Please advise when you wish us to proceed with this task'. 36 (a) a copy of the Health and Safety Policy to be used on this project; (b) a copy of the current Workplace Injury Summary Report issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board (in lieu of the Workplace Injury Summary Report document, a copy of the current CAD 7, NEER, or MAP reports may be submitted); (c) a copy of the current Clearance Certificate issued by Workplace Safety & Insurance Board; (d) the City's certificate of insurance completed by the bidder's agent, broker or insurer; (g) list of sub-contractors in accordance with GC Item 30, Form FT-2 Include the following items in your Report to Council: (a) if items (a) through (h) noted above, are acceptable to the Co-ordinator, Health & Safety (b) any past work experience BWK Construction Company Ltd. including work location; (c) without past, work experience, if reference information is acceptable; (d) the appropriate account number(s) to which this work is to be charged; (e) the budget amount(s) assigned thereto; (f) Treasurer's confirmation of funding; (g) related departmental approvals; (h) any reason(s) why the low bid of BWK Construction Company Ltd. is not acceptable; and (i) related comments specific to the project. TSH Architects Ltd.-as the consultant on this project will be reviewing submissions and making recommendations to you. The consultant should also review carefully all submittal information based on tendering instructions. If the consultant notices any infractions or information rn)ssing during the evaluation, please contact a member of Supply & Services as soon as possible. Please do not disclose any information to enquiries except you can direct them to the City's website for the unofficial bid results as read out at the Public tender opening. Bidders will be advised of the outcome in due course. If u require further information, please feel free to contact me or a member of Supply & Se ices. •j yVera A. Felgemacher of Attachments October 8, 2008 Page 2 Tender No. T-17-2008, Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovations z } y;AChMENTt l.,._s f. W EPOR 37 205 U L W S_ N • O 0 0 • ~ 0 CL 0 r C 0 0 O Q o8 V 0 h ~n- Lli cc cc U a o - ~ Q N Q o v Z Q 2~ s Wz ~x > > cu Ir W w 0 F- LL O w w 13 I}_- Z 3 a m , U w F- is a O o ~ ca O o m oh c N m 0 \ \ I- F Z c N 5.0 W W W W W W W } } } } } } } } m r a= H y Z O W t5 .6 W cc @ C U a a E o c ~ ca w rn U y c LL z' c d Q v a F- m U o o c E cn m m o 105 U y U F}- m U E 2 w c c@a co U m U U U 0 - v p 7 N N Y t' U aJ 20 kc l s`e rr.~._.l 38 _ FQREPORT# 6rS-14- ~ I Ott MEMO To: Thomas J. Quinn August 5, 2008 Chief Administrative Officer C~ From: Tony Prevedel Division Head, Facilities Operations E TO Copy: Director, Operations & Emergency Services COPY C, 1 R, _ <,CULAtL Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer _j - Division Head, Culture & Recreation ' )UPICIL PK4. i CA0 MG NIT COM r O { Subject: RFP-4-2008 Request for Proposal j Supply of Energy Ventilation and Pool Dehumidification System Dunbarton Indoor Pool File: 0-8000 f The City Council approved budget for this overall project is $1.5 Million. A large component. of the total project involves pre-ordering of ventilation and humidification equipment due to the large lead time required from ordering to delivery on site. Public tenders were issued on two separate occasions by Supply & Services. On the first deadline for submission, there was only one bid but it was late and therefore rejected. On the second deadline for submission, there was only one bid and it was rejected due to lack of a tendering deposit. Copies of the summary memoranda from Supply 8 Services is attached. As time was of the essence in processing the necessary equipment, Supply & Services initiated a process to obtain proposals directly from a shortlist of qualified suppliers, with the technical assistance of our consultants, TSH. A copy of the summary from Supply & Services is attached. Two proposals were received, and we recommend that the City issue a purchase order in the amount of $277,000 plus applicable taxes to Engineered Air in order to initiate the delivery process of the necessary equipment. Co-ordinator, Health. & Safety has confirmed a WSIB certificate of clearance is not required from a supplier building the equipment on their own. site. What insurance coverage is required will be checked with Stan Karwowski or Gil Paterson. If required, this must be received prior to confirmation of a purchase order and work start. The two proposals have been reviewed by our consultant, who recommends the award to the low bid from Engineered Air. A copy of the consultant's recommendation is attached. 39 C - a 7 h l~OrU g TSH Architects Ltd. . 300 Water Street Whitby, Ontario, Canada LIN 9.12 architects (905) 668-9363 Fax: (905) 668-0221 E-mail: tsh@tsh.ca www.lsh.ca October 15, 2008 Tony Prevedel, P.Eng, O~EMT O S a -s Division Head IIECEtVEO Facility Operations Division FILE City of Pickering Mck Pickering Civic Complex AKEY TO One the Esplanade ~ 1E . tilAYO COUNCIL Pickering, Ontario CAO CtEhK L 1 V 6K7 i aec coleIN SEIIVKE8 UPI WMAN NIOUR ai M►E O/S CENTRE IEOAL FAC OIERATIONS OFFICE SUSTAIN Dear Mr. Prevedel 0! AN & nEv Re: Tender for Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovations Tender No. T-17-2008 TSH Project No. 22-32135 TSH has been given copies of the three low bids received for the above project for review and evaluation. As requested we report herein. Bidders Amount Tendered GST Total Amount Tendered BWK Construction $1,698,000.00 $84,900.00 $,1,782,900..00 Charterhouse Projects Inc, $1 795,000.00 $85,750.00 $1,800,750.00 J.J. McGuire General Contractors $1,769,000.00 $88,450.00 $1,857,450,00 The above noted bidders had the three lowest tender submissions of the seven tenders that were opened on October 8, 2008. One other tender was received however it was deemed non-compliant by the Purchasing Department as the Bid deposit was not sufficient. Tendering for this project followed a general advertised tendering process. That is, bidders were not subject to a pre-qualification process resulting in an invited list of bidders. All Bidders were in attendance at the mandatory site visit held on September 29, 2008. All tenders were received prior to the specified tender closing time. All bidders acknowledged receipt of the one addendum that was issued during the tender period. B.Knoll of TSH was in attendance at the tender opening along with the following individuals from the City of Pickering: Vera Felgemacher, June Karas and Christine Richardson. City of Pickering TO REPORT Dunbarton Pool 2 l~ - October 15, 2008 2 T Several Unit Prices were requested of the Bidders. All three of the above bidders submitted comparable prices for unit prices for additional masonry work. These unit prices will be used during construction to evaluate additional masonry restoration work that may arise. Completion of the List of Subcontractors was not a mandatory requirement of the tendering process and only one of the above bidders completed this form at the time of tender submissions. The Tender Amounts include Cash Allowances per the following: Independent Inspection and Testing. $8,500.00 The Supply and installation of the Splash Aquatic lift to be installed On the pool deck, providing access to the pool by handicapped $8,000.00 persons , Building Signage $2,000.00 For the services of a Pest Control Company to treat the length of the beam between the high school roof and the pool roof for carpenter ants while the roof is opened for roof repairs. $,2,500.00 Mechanical Allowances (Refer to Section 15000 Art. 17. the Mechanical Contractor to include in the tender Price to the General Contractor Cash Allowances of $339,100.00 Total Cash Allowances Included $369,100.00 It is noted that the above mechanical allowance includes an amount of.$299,160.00 for the supply of the mechanical units. These units were previously tendered and the City has issued a Purchase Order for this work. The City's Purchase Order will be assumed by the Mechanical Sub-contractor upon award of the contract. It is to be noted, that the Cash Allowances do not include for a contingency allowances for additional costs incurred during construction for unforeseen work. BWK provided three references; one being the City of Pickering as they are currently. working on the addition to the Pickering Recreation Complex and the other two being two school boards for school additions. We contacted the school boards however, we have not yet had a response from these prior to completion of this letter. Recreation Complex project and all references were satisfactory at that time. . TSH's original budget estimate for this work was approximately $1,500,000. The majority of the cost overruns can be attributed to the following items: • Significantly more structural work was required to reinforce the mechanical room floor and adjacent roof areas to carry the weight of the new mechanical equipment. • A new electrical service had to be brought in from the adjacent high school. • Existing light fixtures in Changerooms were replaced. • Additional privacy change cubicles were added. • New staff change/washroom facilities (not originally in budget) • Four de-stratification fans to the Natatorium were added City of Pickering Dumbarton Pool ; #'•ea, R!!'9 TMl -O REPORT#-6 G 1 Ocher 15, 2008 c 3 II 209 • Handicapped lift to pool deck was added • Revisions were required to the gas service and an allowance has been included in the tender for this work. • A number of existing conditions involving locations of pipe chases were encountered requiring additional scope to deal with them. • Ceilings in washrooms and showers were not originally planned to be replaced, however replacement became necessary due to work in the mechanical penthouse above the ceilings. • The tender for the supply of the mechanical equipment was slightly higher than originally budgeted for. Based upon the low tender submission of BWK Construction Company Ltd. we recommend that the city give consideration to this company for the award of Dunbarton Pool Project to them. Yours very truly, B P1111'. Manager, Architecture 1 0 ATTACHMENTA- 1 70REPORT# 06 fG -6 J 42 MEMORANDUM TO: Len Hunter FROM: Barry Knoll DATE: January 17, 2003 RE: Dunbarton Pool TSH Project No. 22-32135 Re-Construction of Dunbarton Pool Option 1 Scone of Work • Demolition of entire building structure down to slab on grade • Removal ofcntire Pool Filtration system, underwater lighting, piping etc. associated with Pool System including new drain line • Removal of existing ceramic tile from pool deck and pool tank • Construction of slightly enlarged Change Room/Lobby area (subject to negotiations to increase foot print with Durham District School Board) • Construction of state of the art Natatorium Area with windows new finishes and mechanical system. Natatorium constructed slightly enlarged towards the south and west (subject to negotiates with School Board) • Construction ofnew second level viewing area with second level meeting space • New elevator to second level • Include contractor overhead and profit, design fees, contingency allowance of $200,000. . Total Budget Estimate $7,757,000. GST not included Option No. 2 Construction of a small community center having the Pool as the focus. Facility would include the following components: • Natatorium - G lane leisure style pool with separate therapeutic tank and hot tub/whirlpool. Co-ed sauna. 12,350SF • Gymnatorium, dividable full size single gym, sprung wood floor 6400 • Aquatic staff offices 500 • Aerobic studio .1800SF • Change Rooms 8300 • Smaller multi-purpose/community use rooms 3500 • Public Washroom 750 • Pool Mechanical 1200 • Storage 750 • Mechanical Mezzanine 2200 • Circulation space, Lobby, entrance viewing 6500 Total Building Area 44,250. SF QA 071 1:11'ICOJIiC`I'S'~3•I'raiccts'~2.321J~'•1{LIIiN'1'CORRI:51'oNt)[NCC:1111?\10RANDUM I K-01-MA(V T~ 0I!•■ 4 3 ~t 4 R PORT 'Cr Ivtcmot~ndum to January 17, 2008 2 211 Estimated Building Construction Cost $8,500,000. Bait nark Site Development $700,000. Contractor OH & Profit $800,000. Pecs and Contingencies $1,440,000. Furnishings and Equipment $300,000. Total Estimated Cost 11,740,000 Not included in the above is purchase of land, GST, extensive site development costs. i I 1:'.I'RojPC'rS1.'2.1'r(+'ccts'22-321331i-CI.11:NT C01t111:S1'C)NDI:NCL-*.Nll.•NIO1tANDUkI I I6-01-08.doc TM ~'O REPORT #1Lu''~~ _ THE CORPORATION 4 4 2' ~ F PICKERING BY-LAW NO. Being a by-law to authorize the Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project in the City of Pickering and the issuance of debentures therefor in the amount of $500,000. WHEREAS Section 11 of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a lower- tier municipality may pass by-laws respecting matters within the spheres of jurisdiction described in that Section; and, WHEREAS Subsection 401(1) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a municipality may incur a debt for-municipal purposes, whether by borrowing money or in any other way; and, WHEREAS Subsection 401(3) of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, provides that a lower-tier municipality in a regional municipality does not have the power to issue debentures; and, WHEREAS The Regional Municipality of Durham has the sole authority to issue debentures for the purposes of its lower-tier municipalities including The Corporation of the City of Pickering (the "City"); and, WHEREAS the Council of the City wishes construction to proceed in respect of the Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project; and, WHEREAS before authorizing the construction,to proceed in respect of the Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project on the date hereof the Council of the City, had the Treasurer update the City's Annual Repayment Limit, the Treasurer calculated the estimated annual amount payable in respect of such project and determined that such annual amount would not cause the City to exceed the updated Limit and, therefore, Ontario Municipal Board approval is not required as per Section 401 of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended, and the regulations made thereunder', AND WHEREAS after determining that Ontario Municipal Board approval is not required, the Council of the City approved Report OES 37-08 on the date hereof and awarded Tender T-17-2008 for the Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation Project. BY-LAW NO Page 2 213 NOW THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the City proceed with the construction of the project referred to as "Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation"; 2. That the estimated costs of the construction in the amount of $1,900,000 be financed as follows: a) That the sum of $500,000 be financed by the issue of debentures by The Regional Municipality of Durham over a period not to exceed fifteen (15) years; b) That the sum of $1,200,000 be funded from the Federal Gas Tax Reserve Fund; and c) That the sum of $200,000 be funded from the Provincial grant under the "Investing in Ontario Act, 2008". . 3. That the funds to repay the principal and interest of the debentures be provided for in the annual Current Budget for the City commencing in 2009 and continuing thereafter until the loan is repaid. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 17th day of November, 2008. y David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk 2 1 4 wad .b.. Project: Dunbarton Indoor Pool Renovation AECOM Project Number: 22-32135 Date February 22, 2009 SUMMARY OF ADDITIONAL COSTS Reference Description Amount PC-01/BWK#5 Miscellaneous Mechanical Revisions $15,100 PC-02/BWK#6 Additional Structural Reinforcing to Mezzanine due to Mechanical Equipment weight increase $2,900 PC-03/BWK#7 Miscellaneous Electrical Breakers and disconnect for condensing unit $2,700 PC-04/BWK#8 Miscellaneous Electrical $2,100 BWK#9 Room 102C Floor Drain $1,500 PC-05/BWK#10 Sloped Masonry Wall Removal, New Metal Siding at North Elevation $24,200 PC-06/BWK#11 Miscellaneous Electrical $9,000 PC-07/BWK#15 Paint Pool Ceiling, add double doors to exterior $26,900 PC-08/BWK#12 Miscellaneous Electrical $8,200 PC-09/BWK#13 Prepare and epoxy paint existing pool light surrounds $2,700 PC-10/BWK#16 Replace existing hair dryers $4,300 BWK#14 Storage costs for mechanical units $2,800 BWK#19 Relocate rain water leader in the penthouse $1,800 Page 1 , OES u 6 215 Reference . Description Amount BWK#20 Remove and replace existing water valves $1,400 BWK#21 Replace cracked valve in entry vestibule $1,200 Mould removal in Natatorium $15,000 PC-11 Support for cracked Siporex roof panel $12,000 BWK#22 Restore drywall and paint where removed due to asbestos $6,400 BWK#23R Ceramic tile repairs and restoration work $4,400 PC-12 New basement light fixtures $4,000 Miscellaneous $1,400 Total $150,000 Page 2 21 6 ft March 23, 2009 NOTICE OF MOTION 1) Councillor Pickles and Councillor Littley gave notice that they will at this meeting of Council be presenting a motion as follows: INCREASING ORGAN DONATIONS - SAVING LIVES WHEREAS according to media reports there are nearly 1,700 Ontarians waiting for organ transplants; and WHEREAS according to media reports, there are about 4,000 Canadians waiting for organ transplants; and WHEREAS according to media reports, 140 to 250 people die each year in Canada awaiting organ transplants; and WHEREAS according to the Canadian Medical Association Journal presumed consent, making every eligible person automatic organ donor upon death unless they specifically opt out ahead of time, is practiced in various forms in Europe in countries such as Belgium and Spain; and WHEREAS the current system in Ontario requires persons who want to donate their organs to fill out a donor card to notify family members who are then asked to provide final consent even if the donor filled out an organ donor consent card; and WHEREAS many good organs that could be donated are being buried or cremated rather than harvested for those in great need or even dying on waiting lists; and WHEREAS a recent Toronto Star - Angus Reid poll has found that 64% of Ontarians support provincial legislation that would make everyone an automatic organ donor unless they explicitly opt out; and WHEREAS such legislation would cut a long standing chronic shortage of organ donors across the province and save many lives. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT The City of Pickering encourage and support provincial legislation for making every eligible person an automatic organ donor upon death unless they specifically opt out ahead of time to address the chronic shortage of organ donations and saving many lives. 217 This motion be forwarded to the Canadian Transplant Association, the Trillium Gift of Life, all municipalities in Durham Region, Regional Health & Social Services Committee, Ontario Municipal Association, and MPP's for Ajax-Pickering and Scarborough East- Pickering. 218 PICKERING March 23, 2009 BY-LAWS 6937/09 Being a by-law to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for the purpose of enforcing parking restrictions on private property. (By-law attached) 219 THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING BY-LAW NO. 6937/09 Being a by-law to appoint By-law Enforcement Officers for the Purpose of Enforcing Parking Restrictions on Private Property WHEREAS pursuant to section 15(I) of the Police Services Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.15, as amended, a municipal council may appoint persons to enforce the by-laws of the municipality; and WHEREAS pursuant to section 15(2) of the said Act, municipal by-law enforcement officers are peace officers for the purpose of enforcing municipal by-laws; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE CITY OF PICKERING HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. That the following people be hereby appointed as municipal law enforcement officers in and for the City of Pickering in order to ascertain whether the provisions of By-law 2359/87 are obeyed and to enforce or carry into effect the said By-law and are hereby authorized to enter at all reasonable times upon lands municipally known as: a) 1600 Bayly Street Spiro Bakoussis 2. The authority granted in section 1 hereto is specifically limited to that set out in section 1, and shall not be deemed, at any time, to exceed the authority set out in section 1. 3. This appointment shall expire upon the person listed in section 1a) ceasing to be an employee of The Properties Group or upon The Properties Group ceasing to be agents for 1600 Bayly Street, whichever shall occur first. 220 By-law No. 6937/09 Page 2 4. The provisions of this by-law shall come into force and take effect on the day of the final passing thereof. BY-LAW read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 23rd day of March, 2009. David Ryan, Mayor Debi A. Wilcox, City Clerk City "o Minutes Pickering Advisory Committee On Race Relations & Equity PI p_xA,, February 5, 2009 7:00 PM Main Committee Room Attendees: Councillor David Pickles, Chair Raymond George Facey, Community Appointee Devinder Kaur Panesar, Community Appointee Tiera Dookhie, J. Clarke Richardson School Becky George, Pickering Public Library Chris Gordon - Pine Ridge Secondary School Margaret Lazarus, Valley Farm Public School Fred Gibson, Pickering Carib Canadian Cultural Association Marisa Carpino, City of Pickering Linda Roberts, Recording Secretary Absent: Steve Holt, Community Appointee Sethu Madhavan, Community Appointee Kirk Mark, Community Appointee . Emily Honsberger, Dunbarton High School Brandyn Mascall, St. Mary Catholic School Sylvie Morel-Foster, Durham Catholic District School Board Philip Howard, Durham District School Board Item Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items I / (summary of discussion) Status Ref (include # deadline as appropriate) 1.0 Welcome All Councillor Pickles welcomed everyone to the meeting, and introductions were made around the table. He informed the Committee that he had invited the Tamil Association to attend as well. 2.0 Review & Approval of Agenda & Minutes All Marisa reviewed the action items from the January 8th meeting minutes and provided an update. The agenda and minutes were approved by the Committee. 3.0 Updates Heritage Day Celebration Marisa provided an update for the Committee with respect to Heritage Day. She informed everyone that there is a strop line u of performers for this event, and circulated a listing of the performers to the members. The performances will take place from 11:15 through to 4:00 pm. Councillor Pickles will make welcoming remarks at 1:30 pm and introduce any other dignitaries present at that time. Space will be tight this year as the stage takes up a lot of space, with less seating as well. Councillor Pickles suggested we forward letters to all groups and Marisa to organizations normally invited to attend this event in -the past, to inform them action of the change in venue this year due to our lack of space. Marisa asked for the assistance of Committee members to help out on the day of the event and noted that we will need to man the booths until at least 4 or 4:30 pm. The following members were confirmed for the following times: Raymond - 11 -12 Kirk-12-1 Devinder - could fill in as needed, she pointed out she will be there all day as she is also assisting with the Heritage Pickering display. [YOUlnity's Diversity Leadership Camp - March 2009 Tiera provided an update on [YOU]nity's Diversity Leadership Camp; • Circulated a copy of the flyer they have designed • Suggestion was made to add -'space is limited, sign up today' on the Tiera to flyer - Tiera will make changes and forward final version to Marisa action • Registration forms will be available at the Library • Will take place on Monday and Tuesday of March break (16th and 17t")from 9am-3 pm • Students from grades 6 through 8 will participate • Proposing a budget of $150.00 • 25 participants last year - hope to have 50 registrations for this year • Keep registrations to a maximum of 50 • Provide participants with a certificate of participation at the conclusion of the camp - have Councillor Pickles sign certificates • OPG will sponsor T-shirts for the camp counsellors • Confirmation of guest speaker -Itah Sadu - will update at next meeting • Ensure parents arrive with the participants as well as rides at the end of the day • Marisa requested the guidelines be passed onto her to review, as we must ensure safety • Pre-registration is required It was suggested Tiera work with Marisa on the budget, as additional funds could be provided. It was noted we could do the certificates in the City's print shop. Discussion ensued with respect to guest speakers and 2 honorariums. Contributions to charities is not allowed. It was suggested they try to have more local speakers from within the community involved as well. Marisa suggested asking Keith Richards from the Durham Regional Police Service. Councillor Pickles suggested that the flyer be sent to everyone on our regular distribution list of cultural organizations as well. Margaret noted this Marisa to could be distributed to all the schools through inclusion in their newsletters. action Marisa will, provide a copy of our press release to Margaret. Fred Gibson offered to distribute flyers as well. Marisa noted she will need a formal budget from [YOU]nity Race Relations Forum Marisa provided the Committee with an update on the Race Relations Forum which will take place on Wednesday, March 25th at 7 pm in the Council Chambers; • Winners have been confirmed' • Letters have been approved and have been sent out to the schools, judges and cultural organizations as well as Committee members • Alvin Curling has been confirmed as guest speaker • Promotional Campaign has been launched - website, press release, etc. • Display will be in lobby at the Civic Complex the month of March • Encourage other organizations to attend as well Discussion ensued with respect to the Creative Arts entries and how best to recognize them. It was suggested when they are invited up, their entries could be displayed on the screen behind them, and they could be asked to provide an explanation on their piece. They should be asked to prepare this ahead of time. Email membership a copy of the press release. All Committee members were encouraged to attend. 4.0 2009 Annual Work Plan Councillor Pickles advised the Committee we need to think about presenting our annual report to Council. Discussion ensued with respect to having the presentation in April, along with a delegation as was done last year, with one Committee member and one youth. Margaret Lazarus volunteered for the presentation. Marisa will prepare the report for review at the next meeting. Marisa to 3 Marisa reviewed the suggestions for the work plan from the January meeting action and discussion ensued; • Prepare a banner to recognize events for display at the Civic Complex and Recreation Complex in order to refer residents to the Library displays • Marisa advised there may still be time to do up something for Asian Month, but not Black History Month, due to time restraints • Get input on the banners from the different organizations • Devinder inquired about the Committee's participation in the bicentennial activities in 2011 • Outreach - ongoing item • Cultural holidays - expand website calendar • Town hall symposium - may be easier to hold events at locations such as the mall, due to concerns with attendance. • Name tags have been ordered - should be in next week • Continued recruitment - it was noted Emily and Tiera will be graduating this year It was suggested the Committee follow up with Kirk and Steve with respect to a Town hall symposium, as they may have experience in this area they could share regarding the format for such an event. This could possibly be considered for a future item. It was suggested we decide on a topic. Committee members were asked to give this some thought. Marisa will contact principals to encourage more students to come out. Marisa to Community survey - Marisa will forward survey template to members to get action comments, and also will send out the draft letter. It was suggested we send out a general invitation to organizations to attend and speak for the first 10 to 15 minutes at each of our meetings. Committee was in agreement. Tiera suggested Devi Mander youth group and Chris suggested the Muslim student Youth group from Pine Ridge Secondary School - Chris will get contacts for them. It was suggested any possibilities be directed to either Marisa or Councillor Pickles. 5.0 Colleges & Universities Recruitment of students for membership Raymond made the following points: • UOIT and employment agencies could be invited to our meetings to speak or have representatives attend on a regular basis • Invite representatives from other colleges and universities as well • This could be the focus of a symposium on such topics as resume 4 development and how to enhance employment opportunities • Suggestions to contact at UOIT: Louise Farr, Diana Hills-Milligan - Marisa will contact them to discuss recruitment of students • Councillor Pickles will speak with them regarding the possibility of a symposium in the future. 6.0 Other Business 6.1) Black History Month Fred Gibson noted the Pickering Carib Canadian Cultural Association will be holding a dance on February 28 at the Complex this year. Advertising will be on our website and at the Library Marisa noted she had submitted a request to Council for a proclamation for Black History Month. Becky updated the Committee with respect to the events happening through the Library and will continue to provide updates with respect to any events on Asian Heritage Month. 6.2) Correspondence received from the Ministry of Culture & Immigration regarding nominations for Newcomer Champion Awards for Ontarians who have facilitated cultural understanding and diversity or helped newcomers to successfully settle and integrate. Deadline for nominations is March 15, 2009. 6.3) Correspondence received from the Office of the Lieutenant Governor of Ontario, David C. Onley, with respect to nominations for the Order of Ontario, which recognizes anyone for extraordinary achievements or contributions which have had an impact on their local community, province, country or beyond. Deadline for nominations is March 16, 2009. Committee members were asked to submit any suggestions to Marisa, in order to nominate as a Committee. 7.0 Next Meeting Next Meetin : March 5, 2009 at 7 pm in the Main Committee Room Meeting Adjourned: 8:53 pm Copy: City Clerk 5 City a¢~ Minutes Pickering Advisory Committee i i On Race Relations & Equity 5, 2009 PICKERIN March 7:00 0 PM Main Committee Room Attendees: Raymond George Facey, Community Appointee Steve Holt, Community Appointee Sethu Madhavan, Community Appointee Devinder Kaur Panesar, Community Appointee Tiera Dookhie, J. Clarke Richardson School Becky George, Pickering Public Library Emily Honsberger, Dunbarton High School Fred Gibson, Pickering Carib Canadian Cultural Association Marisa Carpino, City of Pickering Linda Roberts, Recording Secretary Absent: Councillor David Pickles, Chair Margaret Lazarus, Valley Farm Public School Kirk Mark, Community Appointee Sylvie Morel-Foster, Durham Catholic District School Board Philip.Howard, Durham District School Board Item Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / / (summary of discussion) Status Ref (include # deadline as a ro riate 1.0 Welcome All M. Carpino welcomed everyone to the meeting and introductions were made around the table. She then introduced Keith Richards, Diversity Coordinator with Durham Regional Police Service. K. Richards provided background information on his association with the Durham Regional Police Service, which he has been involved with for the past 18 years. He explained how the position of Diversity Coordinator was developed and provided an overview of their community outreach. He explained the youth initiative mentoring program which has been highly popular, and noted the following; • Open to all youth between the ages of 14 and 18 • Opportunity to work with the officers over the summer months • Learn a variety of skills, including CPR/first aid, public speaking, fitness, K9 unit, traffic • Pro active approach, recruitment is not the intent • Youth can in turn mentor other young individuals • Region wide program • Still space available - email K. Richards if you know of anyone who may be interested in participating K. Richards advised that he would be available to attend our meetings whenever possible, in order to be the Committee's contact for the Durham Regional Police Service. Marisa introduced Lucy King, Membership Director for the Hispanic Canadian Alliance of Ontario. L. King provided background information on the Hispanic Alliance organization which was founded in 1996 by a group of volunteers in order to assist newcomers with social needs and to provide support and similar interests in culture and language, as well as providing resource information for new residents. She noted they are trying to put together two fundraising initiatives per year, as they do not receive any funding. They will be having a dinner and dance on May 30th and would like to do something similar in November to include children as well. They are trying to involve youth between the ages of 4 and 12 years with sports activities throughout the year. She noted this is open to everyone. M. Carpino suggested they could form a youth sub-committee, such as our own [YOU]nity in order to involve more youth. In this way, youth enjoy working with others their own age and plan activities for their own age group. 2.0 Review & Approval of Agenda & Minutes All Marisa reviewed the action items from the February 5th meeting minutes and provided an update. The agenda and minutes were approved by the Committee. 3.0 Updates 3.1) jYOUlnity's Diversity Leadership Camp E. Honsberger provided an update on the Diversity Leadership Camp to be held on March 16th and 17th at the Pickering Library from 9am - 3 pm: • Grades 6 - 8 to participate • Budget is complete - was provided to M. Carpino • Guest speaker has been confirmed • [YOU]nity attended principal's meeting to explain camp and seek support in choosing students • 17 registrations to date • Still time to register if you know anyone who would like to participate - registration will be open until next week • Emailed reminder to all principals • Still following u on the sponsorship of the t-shirts 2 Certificates - B. George to email names to M. Carpino as soon as possible to move ahead with having the certificates printed Becky/Marisa to action 3.2) Race Relations Forum M. Carpino provided an update on the Race Relations Forum scheduled for Wednesday, March 25 at 7:00 pm in the Council Chambers. She informed the Committee that everything had been completed, with everyone being confirmed. She noted the invitations had gone out to the members via email and requested that everyone please RSVP. She noted that during the ceremonies, the members will be recognized, so she encouraged everyone to attend. K. Richards noted that he would be attending. M. Carpino noted the display of winning entries will be up in the main lobby for the month of March. 4.0 Review 4.1) 2009 Annual Work Plan & 2008 Annual Report M. Carpino reviewed the details of the 2009 Annual Work Plan and the following was noted: • Proclamations - It was noted that June 21St is National Aboriginal Day M. Carpino requested that should anyone be aware of other proclamations, to please let her know • Outreach - M. Carpino has contacted Louise Farr-Chambers who works for UOIT, Durham College and Trent University in the hopes of having students come out to the Race Relations meetings. Louise will get back to Marisa with an update to her request • Members were reminded and encouraged to attend any other events being hosted by other cultural organizations • S. Holt recommended using an online interactive community survey on the website S. Holt also inquired about a Town hall symposium - M. Carpino will Marisa to follow up on this item with Councillor Pickles action • The 2009 Annual Work Plan will be placed on April agenda for final review 2008 Annual Report Marisa to action Community Survey - M. Carpino will send to members again - to be placed on April agenda Multi-faith calendar - it was suggested we add an explanation along with the event to include the history and meaning of that particular celebration, which could be a way to generate more interest. Marisa to action M. Car ino will make an changes to the 2009 Annual Work Plan and 2008 3 Annual Report. She will discuss the possible date for presentation to Council with Councillor Pickles. The Committee was in agreement to handle the presentation in the same manner as last year, with one committee appointee and one youth member participating in the presentation. 5.0 Other Business 5.1) Coffee House E. Honsberger provided a brief overview of this event, stating this is art oriented, with songs and poetry. She noted this was a relaxed talent show, which is all youth oriented. S. Holt questioned whether the committee had considered obtaining judges, possibly from the music industry, and indicated he could provide contacts for them. Larger venues for this event were also discussed. 5.2) Sikh Khalsa Day Parade D. Panesar informed the committee of the Shikh parade which will be taking place on April 26th starting at 12:00 pm at the Better Living Centre in Toronto Devinder to and ending at Nathan Phillips Square. Events will begin at 9:00 am which action will include food, information, martial arts demonstrations. This is a free event. She noted she will bring flyers to the next meeting. 6.0 Next Meeting Next Meeting: April 2, 2009 at 7 m in the Main Committee Room Meeting Adjourned: 8:45 pm Copy: City Clerk 4 Committee of Adjustment Citq vo Meeting Minutes iii Wednesday, February 11, 2009 CRERING 7:04 pm Main Committee Room PRESENT: David Johnson - Chair Eric Newton - Vice-Chair Keith Wilkinson ALSO PRESENT: Ross Pym, Secretary-Treasurer Lesley Dunne, Assistant Secretary-Treasurer ABSENT: Kevin Ashe Susan Kular (1) ADOPTION OF AGENDA Moved by Keith Wilkinson Seconded by Eric Newton That the agenda for the Wednesday, February 11, 2009 meeting be adopted. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (II) ADOPTION OF MINUTES Moved by Keith Wilkinson Seconded by Eric Newton That the minutes of the 1St meeting of the Committee of Adjustment held Wednesday, January 21, 2009 be adopted. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 1 Committee of Adjustment city oo Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 11, 2009 7:04 pm pr-T= p1 j EM, Main Committee Room (III) REPORTS 1. P/CA 05/09 - D. Munch & J. Rauh-Munch 509 Marksbury Road (Part of Lots 10, 11, 12, Plan 270 Parts 1 - 6, 40R-24840) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 2511, to permit a 4.5 metre front yard depth to a proposed two-storey detached dwelling with an attached garage, whereas the by-law requires a minimum front yard depth of 7.5 metres. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit. The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending refusal. Written comments were received from the City's Manager, Development Control expressing no concerns. Written comments were also received from C. & C. Bamford of 528 Marksbury Road and Peter Barton of Avtech Design both in support of the application. Jasmine Rauh-Munch, owner, was present to represent the application. Larry Field of TRCA, Alan May of 511 Marksbury Road, Paul White of Fairport Beach Neighbourhood Association was present in favour of the application. Correspondence received from C. & C. Bamford indicated they are the neighbours directly across the street from the subject property and have no objections to the plans outlined in this application. Jasmine Rauh-Munch explained the variance is for the garage portion of the proposed two-storey detached dwelling. Jasmine Rauh-Munch also provided a letter from her architect in support of the application, photos for the Committee to review, a history of the land acquisition with TRCA and building restrictions that have been placed on the lot. Larry Field gave an overview of the waterfront land acquisition, provided an air photo for the Committee to view existing dwellings in the area surrounding the subject property, and stated in his opinion, the community design and street views will be enhanced once the proposed dwelling is built and the old dwelling is removed. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Larry Field explained the waterfront trial as it currently exists today to the east of Marksbury Drive and the future waterfront trail to the west of Marksbury Drive. 2 Committee of Adjustment Cif v~ Meeting Minutes i i Wednesday, February 11, 2009 PICKE 7:04 pm Main Committee Room Alan May is the neighbour directly to the north of the subject property and supports the minor variance application. Paul White indicated he was speaking on behalf of the Community Association and they support the application. He noted he was a former Committee Member and recalls dealing with many similar variances in the surrounding area that were approved. He also stated there are a number of large dwellings in the surrounding neighbourhood and that he supports the application. In response to a question from a Committee Member, Paul White indicated the Fairport Beach Community Association has not yet had any formal meetings to discuss the application. Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That application P/CA 05/09 by D. Munch & J. Rauh-Munch, be DEFERRED until the next meeting in order to give the Committee Members an opportunity to visit the site. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY 2. P/CA 06/09 - J. Fletcher 1775 Track Street (Lots 4 & 5, Plan 94, Part of Lots 2, 3, 7 & 8 and Closed Mary Street Road Allowance) City of Pickering The applicant requests relief from Zoning By-law 3037, to recognize the subject property not fronting onto an opened and maintained public street therefore providing 0.0 metre lot frontage, to recognize an existing 3.0 metre and 2.1 metre front yard depth to an existing dwelling and porch respectively, to permit a 3.6 metre and 2.5 metre rear yard depth to a proposed two-storey addition and rear yard deck respectively and to recognize an existing accessory structure located in the side yard, whereas the by-law requires a lot to front onto an opened and maintained public street, a minimum lot frontage of 22.0 metres, a minimum front yard depth of 9.0 metres, a minimum rear yard depth of 9.0 metres and for all accessory structures to be located in the rear yard. The applicant requests approval of this variance in order to obtain a building permit and approval from the Region of Durham Land Division Committee. 3 Committee of Adjustment Cif n~ Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 11, 2009 l 7:04 pm PICXE J Main Committee Room The Secretary-Treasurer outlined comments received from the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department recommending approval subject to conditions. Written comments were received from the City's Manager, Development Control expressing no concerns. Written comments were also received from Councillor Rick Johnson and resident Daniel Black of 5277 Old Brock Road in support of the application. Written comments from the Durham Regional Health Department stating they are unable to comment until the owner provides the total daily sewage flow for the structure and the location of any well(s) and private sewage disposal system(s). Bruce Fletcher, owner, was present to represent the application. Ron Hedges of 1767 Track Street, John & Gail Simms of 1783 Track Street and Denise Heapey of 1791 Track Street were present in favour of the application. Bruce Fletcher explained the application and requested clarification on the conditions if application is approved. The Secretary-Treasurer explained the conditions and how they relate the building permit and land division process. Ron Hedges explained the history of property and he is in full support. John Simms and Denise Heapey both stated they are in full support of the application. Moved by Keith Wilkinson Seconded by Eric Newton That application P/CA 06/09 by J. Fletcher, be APPROVED on the grounds that the subject property not fronting onto an opened and maintained public street, a 3.0 metre and 2.1 metre front yard depth to an existing dwelling and porch, a 3.6 metre and 2.5 metre rear yard depth to a proposed two-storey addition and rear yard deck and to recognize an existing accessory structure located in the side yard are minor variances that are desirable for the appropriate development of the land, and in keeping with the general intent and purpose of the Official Plan and the Zoning By-law, subject to the following conditions: 1. That these variances applies only to the existing dwelling, porch and proposed two-storey addition and rear yard deck, as generally sited and outlined on the applicant's submitted plans with this application. 4 Committee of Adjustment Caq n~ Meeting Minutes Wednesday, February 11, 2009 7:04 pm PICKEPUNG Main Committee Room 2. That the applicant obtains final clearance from the land division committee for an easement onto the subject property within eighteen months of the date of this decision, or this decision shall become null and void. 3. That the applicant obtains a building permit for the proposed construction within six months of the date of this decision, or this decision shall become null and void. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY (IV) ADJOURNMENT Moved by Eric Newton Seconded by Keith Wilkinson That the 2nd meeting of 2009 the Committee of Adjustment be adjourned at 7:42 pm and the next meeting of the Committee of Adjustment be held on Wednesday, March 4, 2009. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY Date e Chair Assistant Secretary-Treasurer 5 City o0 Minutes I Meeting Summary Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee _ February 24, 2009 I KERI 7:00 pm Main Committee Room Attendees: Jim Simpson, Chair Richard Fleming, Vice-Chair Terence Arvisais Keith Falconer Susan Gardner Joanne Glasser Rhonda Lawson Kelly McLean Gordon Zimmerman Linda Roberts, (Recording Secretary) Absent: Councillor Johnson Shirley Curran Devinder Kaur Panesar Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items /Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) 1.0 Welcome Richard Fleming, Vice-Chair, began the meeting with introductions, as Jim Simpson, Chair would be arriving later. Rhonda Lawson requested that three items be added to the Other Business section of the agenda. 2.0 Approval of Minutes Rhonda questioned the tracking for the action items. Linda Linda to action noted that these were tracked on our New and Unfinished Business list and that once updated, they would be emailed to the members. Moved by Rhonda Lawson Seconded by Kelly McLean That the minutes of the January 27th meeting be approved. Carried Page 1 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) 3.0 New and Unfinished Business 3.1) 2009 Meeting Schedule Copies of the 2009 meeting schedule were handed out. No changes were made at this point, Committee Coordinator will notify all members of any changes to the schedule. Jim explained the importance of attendance and the need for a quorum. 3.2) Review of Draft 2009 Workplan Jim provided the Committee with a presentation of the 2009 workplan. He provided an overview of the structure and goals for the year, the three main areas being designations, education and building on infrastructure. A working discussion was held and Jim made additions to the workplan as suggested. Members names were added to the workplan in the areas they volunteered for. Jim informed the Committee he would be presenting the 2008 annual report and the 2009 workplan to the Executive Committee on March 9th, 2009. Once the 2009 workplan is complete, Jim will forward to Linda Jim/Linda to action in order to be forwarded to all members electronically. Discussion ensued with respect to the extension of the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District. Jim requested that the Committee be provided with a status report for the next meeting. Gordon provided a brief overview of the Municipal Heritage Register and the process involved with placing properties on the register. It was suggested we obtain maps for the members to use as Linda to action they look for potential listings for the register. It was requested we ask the City Clerk to attend March meeting to respond to questions regarding the budget and also provide Linda to action an update on having a student. Place on March agenda Moved by Richard Fleming Seconded b Kell McLean Page 2 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropnate) That the draft 2009 workplan as presented at the February 24th meeting of the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee be approved. Carried 3.3) Municipal Heritage Register The register was discussed during the 2009 workplan Linda to action discussions. It was suggested we obtain an updated listing on the proposed properties to be listed. 3.4) Whitevale Heritage Conservation District This item was discussed under the 2009 workplan. It was suggested we defer this until the workplan has been approved. 4.0 Correspondence 4.1) City of Pickering Duffin Heights ESP Implementation Correspondence was received from the City of Pickering with respect to an open house (March 30) and public meeting (April 6) regarding the Duffin Heights ESP Implementation. This correspondence was passed around to all members present and was received for information purposes. 4.2) Town of Markham Correspondence was received from the Town of Markham with respect to Federal tax incentives for heritage properties. The correspondence was passed around to members present and received for information purposes. 5.0 Other Business 5.1) Expropriation of lands for Highway 7 widening Rhonda questioned whether the City of Pickering had received Linda to action this information and whether there was anything that could be done to determine whether any heritage properties would be affected. Were the properties on the heritage register cross Page 3 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items /Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) referenced with the lands being expropriated. It was requested we check with staff to determine whether any comments would be made. It was requested that the Committee be provided with an update at the next meeting. 5.2) 2011 Anniversary Celebrations Rhonda inquired about the possibility of Heritage Pickering Linda to action becoming involved with the 2011 anniversary celebrations. It was suggested we contact Councillor Johnson with respect to this. 5.3)Registered Cemeteries Rhonda provided a brief overview of the workshop she attended with respect to two cemeteries located in Whitevale. Discussion ensued with respect to the process for Committees to provide comments relating to public meetings. 5.4) Whitevale United Church Gordon Zimmerman provided a brief update on the Whitevale United Church which is a significant building currently at risk. 5.5) Greenwood Schoolhouse Gordon Zimmerman noted that the package has been prepared in order to proceed with the designation process for the Greenwood schoolhouse and will be available at the next meeting. Members questioned whether this could be made available prior to the next meeting. Gordon will check on this and also noted that he would invite John Sabean to attend our Gordon to action next meeting. 5.6) Richard provided the Committee with further background information on the Ward Family. This had been discussed at our January meeting. The Committee is still looking into having this added to the register. 6.0 Next Meeting: March 31, 2009 7.0 Adjournment Page 4 CORP0228-2/02 Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items /Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) Moved by Rhonda Lawson Seconded by Keith Falconer That the meeting be adjourned Carried The meeting adjourned at 9:10 pm Copy: City Clerk Page 5 CORP0228-2/02 City 00 Minutes I Meeting Summary i*i Accessibility Advisory Committee i i Wednesday, February 25, 2009 PI rKERI 7:00 pm. CAO's Boardroom Attendees: Kelly Collins, Chair Stephen Little, Co-Chair Terence Arvisais Aisha Heywood Zoia Horne Councillor Littley Gwelda MacDonald-Tuttle Prem Noronha-Waldriff Lisa Harker, Recording Secretary Absent: Alton Atkinson Patricia Dawn Korol Keith Falconer Sharon Farrell Kathi Joy Mayer Jacques Tardif Item / Details & Discussion & Conclusion Action Items / Status Ref # (summary of discussion) (include deadline as appropriate) 1. Welcome KC Kelly Collins gave an overview of the Committee and its mandate for the new members. All members then provided an introduction of themselves. 2. Adoption of Minutes November 26, 2008 All Moved by Aisha Heywood Seconded by Stephen Little That the Minutes of the November 26, 2008 meeting be adopted. CARRIED 3. Fire Services - Emergency Plan GF & SA Page 1 CORP0228-2/02 Gord Ferguson, Deputy. Fire Chief & Simon Almond, Deputy Fire Chief appeared before the Committee to discuss accessibility issues in the City of Pickering's Emergency Plan. • Discussed: What is considered an emergency? • The goal of tonight's meeting is to take back any concerns from the Committee that would not have been thought about and discuss how the Committee and Fire Services can strengthen their team effort to address any outstanding issues. • The Provincial government mandates that in any emergency, "All people must be self-sufficient for 72 hours". This is due to insufficient resources to reach everyone in an emergency situation. • The City of Pickering's Emergency Plan is very generic in nature and not risk-specific. • Fire Services has formed a good working relationship with Red Cross. • In 2009, all Fire Services staff will be trained in accessibility issues. • Gord & Simon answered questions regarding a dispatch database that could identify or list those with disabilities in case of an emergency. Obstacles to this database include the cost (1.5 million) and issues regarding the security of those vulnerable individuals. • Councillor Littley will enquire about this database at Councillor Littley to the Regional Health & Social Services Committee action meeting and follow up with the Committee. • Gord & Simon also responded to questions regarding evacuation plans for those with disabilities, including plans for group homes, residential homes and seniors homes. 4. 2009 Accessibility Work Ian All Kelly & Stephen outlined their thoughts and ideas for the Committee's 2009 goals. • Brochure Launch. • Working towards broadening the Committee's exposure in the Community. • Community events - partnering with other events and setting up a booth. • Participation in the Regional Accessibility Expo in September 2010. Page 2 CORP0228-2/02 Councillor Littley suggested a Poster Contest for schools for Councillor Littley to Accessibility Issues. The prize would be free sailing lessons action on behalf of Frenchman's Bay Yacht Club. Councillor Littley to speak with Jim Dike from the Frenchman's Bay Yacht Club Kelly to action to discuss further. Kelly Collins to speak with her contact at Durham Region District School Board to enquire about holding such a contest. • AODA Standards - ensuring the community is aware of the standards. Councillor Littley suggested a presentation to the Ajax/Pickering Board of Trade to pass on the standards to their members. • Kelly suggested setting aside a percentage of the yearly budget for promotions. • Prem to speak with the Supervisor, Marketing, Research & Communication regarding getting the Prem to action Committee involved at all City events. • Lisa to speak with the Planning & Development Department regarding whether or not the business Lisa to action standards are being communicated to developers and regarding feedback about the incorporation of accessibility standards into the sustainable design standards. 5. Standards for Customer Service PNW Prem gave an overview of the City's progress to date with regards to Policies, Procedures and Training for the Standards for Customer Service. Training is to be completed for all full-time staff by the end of March, and for all part-time, contractors and volunteers by the end of the year. 6. Other Business & Adjournment All • Provincial Grants - Prem to follow up with facilities to discuss obtaining grants to complete Accessibility Prem to action Workplan items. • Prem to invite Tony Prevedel, Division Head, Facilities Prem to action Operations to discuss how items in the Accessibility Workplan are prioritized and completed. 7. Next Meeting All • The next meeting has been scheduled for March 25, 2009. Meeting Adjourned: 9:00 pm Copy: City Clerk Page 3 CORP0228-2/02