The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutJune 7, 2010 i Ctrq o0 Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, June 7, 2010 PICKERING Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor McLean PART "A" PAGES PLANNING INFORMATION MEETING Information Report No. 08 -10 1 - 11 SUBJECT; Request for Site Specific Exception to the Council Adopted Development Guidelines for the Rosebank Neighbourhood DG 1 /10 James Micklewright 447 Toynevale Road (Lot 1, Plan 389), City of Pickering PART "B" PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT REPORTS DELEGATIONS Paul Lowes, Sorensen Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Inc. Re: Report, PD 20-10 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review - Status Update i 1. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 20-10 12-29 Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review -Status Update RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 20-10 of the Directors, Planning & Development and Office of Sustainability, respecting an update on the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review, be received for information; and Accessible For information related to accessibility requirements please contact Linda Roberts P I C K E D IN G Phone: 905.420.4660 extension 2928 TTY: 905.420.1739 Email: Irobertsa.citvofpickerina.com Planning & Development Committee Agenda _ Monday, June 7, 2010 PICK RING Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor McLean 2. Further, that a copy of Report PD 20-10 be forwarded to the Region of Durham, the Ministries of Municipal Affairs and Housing and Energy and Infrastructure, and the Seaton Landowners Group. 2. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 14-10 30-36 Duffin Heights Restoration Works Terrestrial Habitat and Fish Habitat Restorations Part of Lots 15 to 24, Concession 3 City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 14-10 of the Director, Planning & Development on terrestrial habitat and fish habitat restorations within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood be received; 2. That, notwithstanding the City's Purchasing Policy, City staff be authorized to enter into appropriate agreement with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to undertake City approved terrestrial habitat and fish habitat restoration works as identified in the Duffin Heights Environmental Servicing Plan; 3. That the appropriate officials of the City be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto; and 4. Further, that the City Clerk forward a copy of Report PD 14-10 to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and the Duffin Heights Landowners Group. 3. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 15-10 37-76 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 21/09 Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd. Part 1 40R-3466, Parts 2, 3, 4 and 5 40R-5805 and Part 1 40R-11779 (1800 Kingston Road) City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 15-10 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 21/09, submitted by Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd. on lands being Part 1 40R-3466, Parts 2- 5 40R-5805 and Part 1 40R-11779 to broaden the range of commercial uses for the I Cttq o0 Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, June 7, 2010, P CKERING Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor McLean subject lands to include offices, personal service uses, health club and limited retail uses within the existing building be approved; and 3. Further, that the draft zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 21/09, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 15-10, be forwarded to City Council for enactment. 4. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 16-10 77-114 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 20/09 M. Gonsalves 531 Rougemount Drive (Part of Lot 44, Plan 350) City of Pickerinq RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 16-10 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 20/09 submitted by M. Gonsalves to amend the zoning of the subject property to an "R4" - Fourth Density Residential zone in order to permit the creation of two lots with minimum frontage of 15.0 metres on lands being Part of Lot 44, Plan 350, City of Pickering, be approved; and 3. Further, that the draft zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 20/09, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 16-10, be forwarded to City Council for enactment. 5. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 17-10 115-140 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 3/10 Cosima Daniell 1979 Woodview Avenue (North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329) City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 17-10 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 3/10 submitted by Gary Daniell on behalf of Cosima Daniell, to permit four residential lots and conservation uses on lands being the North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329 be approved; C14 o0 Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, June 7, 2010 PI ' RI Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor McLean 3. That the draft zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 3/10, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 17=10, be forwarded to City Council for enactment; and 4. Further, that the proposed conditions of approval for the future land severance application for 1979 Woodview Avenue (North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329), as set out in Appendix II to Report PD 17-10 be endorsed. 6. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 18-10 141-171 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 4/10 Loblaw Properties Limited 1792 Liverpool Road (Part of Lot 23, Concession 1 South) City of Pickering _ RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 18-10 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 4/10 submitted by Loblaw Properties Limited, on lands being Part of Lot 23, Concession 1 South, City of Pickering, to amend the zoning by-law to also permit a commercial- recreational establishment and a commercial school use, be approved; and 3. Further, that the draft zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 4/10, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 18-10, be forwarded to City Council for enactment. 7. Director, Planning & Development, Report PD 19-10 172-196 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 2/10 City Initiated Application 1167 and 1199 Kingston Road South Part of Lot 24, Concession 1 City of Pickering RECOMMENDATION 1. That Report PD 19-10 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 2/10 submitted by the City of Pickering, to amend the zoning on lands being South Part of Lot 24, Concession 1 to permit additional commercial uses be approved; and, C--ttq oo Planning & Development Committee Agenda Monday, June 7, 2010 PICKERING Council Chambers 7:30 pm Chair: Councillor McLean 3. Further, that the draft by-law to implement Zoning By-law amendment application A 2/10, to permit additional commercial uses as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 19-10, be forwarded to Council for enactment. (II) OTHER BUSINESS (III) ADJOURNMENT City oo Information Report Report Number: 08-10 For Public Information Meeting of PICKERING Date: June 7,.2010 01 This report is prepared for the purpose of providing information to the general public and the request is not a Planning Act application Subject: Request for Site Specific Exception to the Council Adopted Development Guidelines for the Rosebank Neighbourhood DG 1/10 James Micklewright 447 Toynevale Road (Lot 1, Plan 389) City of Pickering 1.0 Background • a conceptual proposal to sever the subject property was received from the . applicant on July 9, 2009 • the proposal consisted of severing the lot into two, where the retained parcel would maintain a 15.2 metre lot frontage with a 30.4 metre lot depth along Toynevale Road and the severed parcel would have a 30.4 metre lot frontage with a 15.2 metre lot depth along Oakwood Drive (see Information Compiled from Applicant's Proposed Plan, Attachment #3) • the applicant consulted with City staff to determine the appropriateness of the application • City staff advised the applicant that although the proposal to create a lot conforms with the existing zoning by-law requirements, the proposal did not comply with the minimum lot depth requirements of the Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines • the applicant was further advised that if adopted by City Council, a procedure will be developed to address applications requiring a stand-alone exception to any Neighbourhood Development Guidelines • on October 5, 2009, City Council endorsed a procedure recommended by the Planning & Development Department to circulate an Information Meeting Notice through a mail out to residents within 150 metres.of the subject property • in April 2010, the applicant requested the initiation of the Guideline exception process to proceed and to circulate the proposal to the public for comments 2.0 Property Location and Description • the subject property is located on the southeast corner of Toynevale Road and Oakwood Drive, west of Rosebank Road (see Location Map, Attachment #1) • the subject property fronts Toynevale Road (approximately 15.0 metres) and flanks Oakwood Drive (approximately 60 metres) (see Information Compiled from Applicant's Current Plan, Attachment #2) Information Report No. 08-10 Page 2 02 • the subject property has a lot area of 929 square metres • the subject property contains a one-storey detached dwelling and is surrounded by single detached dwellings 3.0 Applicant's Proposal • the applicant has made a request for a site specific exception to Council Adopted Development Guidelines for the Rosebank Neighbourhood to permit a lot frontage of approximately 30 metres and a minimum lot depth of 15.2 metres to a proposed severed lot • the applicant intends on retaining the existing dwelling, sever the rear portion of the subject property through a future appliction to the Durham Land Division Committee and varying a number of zoning performance standards through a future application to the Pickering Committee of Adjustment to permit the construction of one new detached dwelling on the severed lot • the property is subject to the provisions of the Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines (RNDG) and is situated within Design Precinct No. 2 • Design Precinct No. 2 requires for all new lots to have a minimum lot depths ranging between approximately 30 metres and 36 metres (see Attachment #3) • prior to filing development applications with the Region of Durham (Land Division) and the City of Pickering (Committee of Adjustment) the applicant is seeking approval of a site specific exception to the Guidelines 4.0 Official Plan and Zoning 4.1 Durham Regional Official Plan • the Regional Plan designates the subject property "Urban System - Living Areas" • "Living Areas" are to be used predominantly for housing purposes • the proposal appears to comply with the Durham Regional Official Plan 4.2 Pickering Official Plan • the City of Pickering Official Plan designates the subject property as "Urban Residential - Low Density Areas" within the Rosebank Neighbourhood • "Urban Residential - Low Density Areas" are intended primarily for residential uses • properties designated as low density permits a maximum of 30 units per net hectare • despite the maximum density provisions of the Plan, all properties located within the Rosebank Neighbourhood, west of Rosebank Road permit a maximum density of 17 units per,net hectare • the creation of one additional lot on the subject property will propose a net residential density of approximately 21.5 units per net hectare • the Plan designates Toynevale Road as a Collector Road, which is designed to provide access to individual properties to local roads and other collector roads Information Report No. 08-10 Page 3 03 • although the applicant's proposal to sever the lot appears to meet the general intent of the Plan, the proposal does not comply with the absolute density requirements established by the Plan for the individual lot • the proposal will be assessed against the policies and provisions of the Pickering Official Plan 4.4 Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines (RNDG) • the subject property is situated within the Rosebank Neighbourhood and is. part of the RNDG • RNDG were originally adopted by Council on January 22, 1979 and last modified on October 19, 1992 • RNDG are intended to provide a framework for new lot creation within the neighbourhood • the property is situated within Design Precinct No. 2 of the RNDG • Design Precinct No. 2 requires all new lots to have a minimum lot frontage of approximately 15.0 metres and minimum lot depths ranging between approximately 30 metres and 36 metres • the applicant's proposal does not meet the intent of the development guidelines for minimum lot depth 4.5 Zoning By-law 3036 • the subject property is zoned "R4" - Fourth Density Residential Zone under Zoning By-law 2511, • this zone permits a single detached dwelling with a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres and a minimum lot area of 460 square metres • the by-law requires minimum front and rear yard depth of 7.5 metres • the applicant is proposing to construct a dwelling that will result in a reduced front and rear yard setbacks a with a functional rear yard amenity area in one of the side yards (see Attachment #2) 5.0 Results of Circulation (see Attachments #4 & 5) 5.1 Resident Comments • upon writing this report, two comments have been received: Greg Jizmejian - does not support the proposed development (552 McLeod Crescent) - concerns with proposed increased density and house siting (see Attachment #4) Robert Carriere - not opposed to the amendment (444 Toynevale Road) - requests for the proposed development to strictly adhere to the existing "R4" zoning performance Information Report No. 08-10 Page 4 _ standards architectural design should be considered as a condition of development (see Attachment #5) 5.2 Staff Comments • in reviewing the application to date, the following matters have been identified by staff for further review and consideration: • examining whether the proposed development will maintain the character of the area • examining whether the proposed development will maintain spirit and intent of the Pickering Official Plan • evaluation of the proposed in terms of the siting and functional layout of the future lot and dwelling • ensuring that the proposed development is compatible with, and sensitive to, the existing surrounding development • reviewing comments received at the Information Meeting as well as. comments received during the processing of the appliction 6.0 Procedural Information • written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the Planning & Development Department • oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting • all comments received will be noted and used as input in a Planning Report prepared by the Planning & Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council 7.0 Other Information 7.1 Appendix No. • list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City Departments that have commented on the applications at the time of writing report 7.2 Information Received • full scale copies of the Applicant's submitted plan are available for viewing at the offices of the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department Information Report No. 08-10 Page 5 05 7.3 Company Principal • the owner and applicant of the subject property is James Micklewright kn y Y earwo d Ross Pym er I (Acting) Manager, Development Review AY:RP:ld Attachments Copy: Director, Planning & Development 6 Appendix No. I to Information Report No. 08-10 Commenting Residents and Landowners (1) Greg Jizmejian (2) Robert Carriere Commenting Agencies (1) none received to date Commenting City Departments (1) 'none received to date ATTA+GkiMENT# -A, TO RT C)8-10 07 K~NOS~ 0 Q z r J W 1 W ° a o ° a 0 N\pN~P( FRONTIER J z a U TOYNEVALE ROAD TOYNEVALE ROAEll D w BJEC ~ROPERI o z U w U cn w ROSEBAN D PUBLIC z ? SCHOOL L W A/2F COURT w z YZ z ° a J U MEMORIA DRIVE ° a g = °w PN u ps1 w c 0 z ~p9o o p MAITLAND DRIVE O z O w Y o O A Y z Q M 0 HM Op , COWAN C ~G City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION LOT 1, PLAN 389 OWNER J. MICKLEWRIGHT DATE May 17, 2010 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. DG 1/10 SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY AY N o Tera atrcEnlerprises Inc. antl its suppliers. All rights Rese-etl. Not c plan o/ e„rvey. PN-1 2009 MPAC antl its suppliers. All rights Reservetl. Not a plan o/ Survey. ATTACHMENT 2 'r 08-l0 INFO RTMATIO 1 REPOT 0 8 INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANT'S PROPOSED PLAN DG 1/10 J. MICKLEWRIGHT TOYNEVALE RD. . PROPOSED, DWELLING PLACEMENT #1 E I< y - t ~t > ! Q O j r I- i~ PROPOSED G DWELLING PLACEMENT C3 I #2 ' ~ C~ O U C7o %V C7 I' 15.2m ~ I E ~ iV THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PLANNING INFORMATION SERVICES DIVISION MAPPING AND DESIGN, SEPT. 11, 2009. ATTACH ENT# 3-M INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANT'S CURRENT PLAN 09 DG 1110 J. MICKLEWRIGHT .TOYNEVALE RD. 15.2m r ~I I I , E E 4 Lr? I{ Lo Lo r. r- 5.2m -oi I EXISTING I DWELLING i I ! t 1.3m > j 1 1.3m EXISTING o GARAGE r- O i F EXISTING CHAIN LINK t! FENCE s } EXISTING! CHAIN LINK FENCE I 15.2m I THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, PLANNING INFORMATION SERVICES DIVISION MAPPING AND DESIGN, SEPT. 11, 2009. A1TAe NT#_4_.TO 0 INFORMATION RE T# - 0 0 Yearwood, Ashley From: Jizmejian, Greg [greg.jizmejian@nbpcd.com] Sent: May 11, 2010 8:20 AM To: Yearwood, Ashley Cc: Erica Jizmejian Subject: DG 1/10 - 447 Toynvale Rd. Attachments: ATT00001.txt Dear Ashley, I reside at 552 McLeod Crescent, close to this property that is seeking to get a "Site Specific Exception". Unfortunately, I am unavailable to attend the Public Meeting on June the 7th due to a business trip. If my wife is available that night, she may attend the meeting, but here are my thoughts and comments. 1. 1 am apposed to any higher density plan in our neighbourhood. There is a distinct and unique feel to our area. Tall trees, individually designed homes, and space. Any increased concentration of buildings will contribute to a change to that perceived unique environment. 2. Although this change is being requested on an exceptional basis, there are other projects all vying for "exceptions" to approve plans for more homes on less land. This is a trend that must be stopped. 3. This specific proposal would cause the northern lot to have a home too close to Toynevale Rd. and on the west side, too close to Oakwood Dr. This would crowd the street and possibly cause restricted view of traffic at that intersection. While I can appreciate a property owner's desire to capitalize on potential ways of increasing value, it should not be at the expense of the neighbourhood. We look for win/win situations. This is a win/loose proposition, and hope that it is denied. Regards, Greg Jizmejian CFP, CLU, CH.F.C. I Estate & Insurance Advisor I Vice President 11 First Canadian Place, 47'h floor Toronto, ON, M5X 1 H3 I P 416 359-5660 F 416 359-4941 1 gregjizmeiian CCD.nbpcd.com "More people should learn to tell their dollars where to go instead of asking them where they went. " Roger Babson All insurance products are offered through BMO Nesbitt Burns Financial Services Inc. by licensed life insurance agents, and, in Quebec, by financial security advisors. Life insurance sales are made by Estate & Insurance Advisors. You may also wish to seek independent legal and/or tax advice on your personal circumstances. i ATTACH MENT# 5 TO INFORMATION REPORT# O -l0 1 1 Yearwood, Ashley From: Robert Carriere [robert.carriere@gmail.com] Sent: May 13, 2010 11:54 AM To: Yearwood, Ashley Cc: Shields, Debbie Subject: Comments regarding DG 1/10 - Request for site specific exception Good morning Ashley; This email is in response to your letter regarding DG 1/10 with property location 447 Toynevale Rd. I live directly across the street from the proposed site at 444 Toynevale Rd. Please add the following comments to this application and any other matters for the Rosebank neighbourhood if applicable: In principle, there seems to be a bigger issue with the R4 zoning guidelines that could dilute the appeal to this neighbourhood. Although the R4 guidelines allow for lot sizes of roughly 50 feet by 100 feet, this now seems to be small for this area. If I have my facts correct, when Rosebank Public School was being planned, zoning was changed for Moorelands/Cowan to allow for higher density housing in order, to justify the school. This made sense at the time, about 30+ years ago. With the introduction of much larger houses in this area over the last several years, more affluent individuals are looking for housing in Pickering beyond Deercreek and are spotting at this area as a place to build their homes. There are already many areas within, Pickering with smaller lot sizes so to continue splitting lots in this area to minimally adhere to R4 zoning doesn't make sense. That said, any larger developments requiring a Development Agreement with the City in this area must strictly adhere to R4 zoning guidelines until a review of such guidelines (if any) is completed. Specific to application DG 1/10, it appears that the exception is minor in nature with a concern I have plus considerations the City may need to review: 1) Concern: No architectural designs have been submitted with the application so I want to ensure that the houses being constructed are in line with what has been built in the Rosebank area over the last five to ten years. A good example is 480 Oakwood which was completed within the last year. If done properly, I look forward to seeing the final product from the builder through my front window! 2) Consideration: Slope on Oakwood Drive. I live at the top of this street and during the winter, I can't count the number of times cars have ploughed into my driveway/lawn due to the slope on Oakwood; this is where one of the proposed houses will face, potentially creating dangerous conditions based on the driveway location. Last winter, my boulevard tree (a 20 foot Maple) was taken out by a car that couldn't stop so homeowners pulling out of this proposed driveway may be at risk which may be compounded by a potential lot design that must consider a very shallow depth (15.2 metres). I'm not sure how the design and house location can litigate this risk, if it needs to be considered at all. Bottom line: Splitting one lot into two is fine but the R4 zoning guidelines are outdated for this neighbourhood and developments larger than three houses must strictly adhere to R4 guidelines today until they can be reviewed to better reflect the neighbourhood for the next 20 years. Debbie, I would like to receive notices of future meetings and any updates on this application if possible please. Feel free to contact me'for clarification or other requests/questions. Robert Carriere 444 Toynevale Rd. Pickering, ON, L1W 2111 905 509 6913 1 Ciw 00 _ Report to Planning & Development PICKERING Committee Report Number: PD 20-10 12 Date: June 7, 2010 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Tom Melymuk Director, Office of Sustainability Subject: Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review - Status Update Recommendation: 1. That Report PD 20-10 of the Directors, Planning & Development and Office of Sustainability, respecting an update on the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review, be received for information; and 2. Further, that a copy of Report PD 20-10 be forwarded to the Region of Durham, the Ministries of Municipal Affairs and Housing and Energy and Infrastructure, and the Seaton Landowners Group. Executive Summary: This is the second update Report on the progress of the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review, which is being undertaken for the City by a consulting team lead by Sorensen Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Inc. The work program for this review has six modules, the first of which is now completed . (background studies and the first round of public consultation). Work is currently underway on the second and third modules (the general conformity amendment and the neighbourhood plan amendment). As part of these modules, a second round of public consultation is planned for September. Also, attached to this Report is a chart showing the relative timelines of the major studies,, approvals and activities required to be completed before building permits can be issued in Seaton (see Attachment #2). This information is provided in response to a request made at the April Planning & Development Committee meeting. Financial Implications: Not applicable. Report PD 20-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review Page 2 13 Sustainability Implications: Receiving this Report provides information to Committee members and other stakeholders, and therefore relates to the objective of a healthy society. The Neighbourhood Planning Review, and the other required Seaton studies as a package will implement many aspects of the sustainable objectives of the Central Pickering Development Plan. 1.0 Background: 1.1 The Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review 1.2 The first update Report on the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review was provided to Planning & Development Committee in April On April 19, 2010, Council received for information Report PD 07-10, which provided an update on the status of the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review and other implementation studies required under the Central Pickering Development Plan. A copy of Report to Planning & Development Committee PD 07-10 is provided as Attachment #1. The City's consulting team is led by Sorensen Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Limited (SGL). SGL is working in conjunction with a number of other sub-consultants. The work program has six modules, (which are described in more detail in section 2. 1.1 of Report PD 07-10), as follows: 1. Background Studies 2. Conformity Amendment to the Pickering Official Plan 3. Neighbourhood Plans 4. Development Guidelines 5. Approval of Amendments 6.. Development Review 1.3 The consulting team will complete Module 1 of the work program in June Most of the emphasis in Module 1 was on reviewing existing and on-going studies submitted by the landowners, the Region and the Province, and commencing preparation of new studies as required. Since the preparation of the last update Report, the consultants have been finalizing a series of background reports. These Draft reports will be circulated in the near future to stakeholders for review and comment. The reports are: • Evaluation of Retail/Service Needs, prepared by Robin Dee & Associates • Affordable Housing prepared by Lapointe Consulting • Whitevale Road Heritage Corridor Review, prepared by Bray Heritage • Sustainability Report, prepared by The Planning Partnership • Seaton Landowners' Neighbourhood Plan Gap Analysis Letter, prepared by SGL Report PD 20-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review Page 3 14 At the June 7, 2010 Planning & Development Committee meeting, Paul Lowes of SGL will present an overview of the work completed to date. The Reports will be made available on the City's website, as well as at the Planning & Development Department Counter. 1.4 The first round of public consultation was held as part of Module 1 Three public workshops were held during April and May on the key topics of neighbourhood design and planning principles, heritage along the Whitevale Road corridor, and sustainability actions for Seaton. Each session started with a brief overview of the Central Pickering Development Plan, an explanation of the Neighbourhood Planning Review process,. and a presentation on the topic for the workshop. Next, working in groups, the attendees were asked to answer three questions related to the topic. Approximately 15 - 25 residents attended each workshop. Copies of the presentations are on the City's website. Paul Lowes will also be presenting an overview of the results of the consultation at the June 7th. Planning & Development Committee. A Report entitled "Public Input", which summarizes the input from the workshops, is being prepared and will be made available to interested stakeholders. In addition to public consultation, the module also includes a meeting with the technical review agencies including the landowners' consultants. This meeting is scheduled for June 11, 2010. 1.5 Work is also progressing on other parts of the work program The consulting team is also working on Modules 2 and 3 of the work program, which comprise the general conformity amendment to the Pickering Official Plan and the detailed Neighbourhood Plan amendments. Public, agency and other stakeholder consultation for the amendments is anticipated for September. Work on Module 4, preparation of Development Design Guidelines, will be undertaken in the late summer or early fall. However, a preliminary design review of the developers' proposed submitted neighbourhood plans has already been undertaken. Module 5, Council consideration of the official plan amendments is anticipated for January/February 2011. Pickering's amendments will require the subsequent approval of the.Region of Durham. Module 6, review of the submitted draft plans of subdivisions, will also be in the winter of 2010/2011. Report PD 20-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review Page 4 15 2.0 Other Matters 2.1 Activities on other studies are continuing Since the preparation of the Report PD 07-10 in April 2010, the following main activities have occurred: • Master Environmental Servicing Plan (MESP): an Oversight Committee meeting was held April 6; the third Public Information Centre (PIC) was held April 13; the MESP Phase 2 report is anticipated.to be released in late May for comment • Region's Class Environmental Assessment for Infrastructure: the first Technical Advisory Committee meeting is scheduled for June 3; the first PIC is anticipated for mid June • Highway 407 Interchange Locations: a representative of the Ministry of Transportation provided an overview of the December 2009 interchange location report at the Intergovernmental Coordinating Group meeting; the Seaton landowners were also in attendance; other meetings are being scheduled to discuss this issue, including representatives from the 407 ETR • Provincial Seaton Implementation Plan: provincial staff are reviewing a draft report from their consultant (BDP) 2.2 There are many factors affecting the ultimate timing for construction in Seaton At the Planning & Development Committee meeting of April 6, 2010, the Committee requested that a chart be prepared identifying the timing for the development of Seaton. A chart has been prepared that identifies key "tasks" (including studies, approval processes, environmental assessments, and engineering) that must take place prior to construction occurring (see Attachment #2). For each of those tasks, a potential timeline is estimated, using current information. While the landowners group is suggesting residential occupancies in 2013, staff consider 2014 more realistic. This timing, however, should be considered preliminary at best. The timing of development will be affected by a number offactors, many of which are beyond the control of any one of the landowners, the City, the Region or the Province. Further, there are still many unanswered questions around the opening up of the employment lands in conjunction with residential development, and the delivery of required infrastructure and services, such as the external road connections, transit, parks, libraries and recreation facilities. Report PD 20-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review Page 16 Attachments: 1. Report to Council PD 07-10 2. Chart with Estimated Timelines for Completion of Major Tasks Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Catherine Rose, MCIP, OP, Nei Carrot Q, RPP, Manager, Policy Director, P ing & Development Thomas E. Me ymu , MCIP, Director, Office of ustainability CR:jf Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer Director, Operations & Emergency Services Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council t1 7// T s J. Quin` D MM III Chief Administrative Officer ATTACHMENT#~-TO REPORT# PD moo- Report to ' Planning & Development I - KERI N G Committee Report Number: PD 07-10 Date: April 6, 2010 17 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Thomas E. Melymuk Director, Office of Sustainability Subject: Seaton Updates Neighbourhood Planning Review and Other Implementation Studies Recommendation: 1. That Report PD 07-10 of the Directors, Planning & Development and Office of Sustainability, respecting a status update on the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning -Review and other implementation studies required under the Central Pickering Development Plan, be received for information. Executive Summary: On September 21, 2009, City Council considered Addendum to Report CAO 05-09 and accepted the proposal of the consulting team lead by Sorensen Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Inc. (SGL) to undertake the Seaton Neighbourhood Planning Review. This Report to the Planning & Development Committee provides an update on SGL's progress. In addition, it provides an update on the other interrelated studies that are required to be completed under the CPDP. SGL is currently in the middle of the Background Studies part of their work program. Public consultation workshops are being scheduled on key topics related to the heritage review of Whitevale Road, sustainability, and a broader session on the other findings from the background review, and policy options to implement the background studies. The Neighbourhood Planning Review requires the integration of relevant information from a number of studies, some that are underway, and some that have been completed. Studies currently underway include: the Province's Seaton Implementation Plan; the Region's Class Environmental Assessment for Regional Services for Central Pickering; the Seaton Landowners' Master Environmental Servicing Plan; and the Seaton Landowners' Fiscal Impact Analyses for both the Region and the City. For each of these studies, the City is represented by staff from one or more Departments. Report PD 07-10 ATTACHMENT _L_m April 6, 2010 REPORT# Pn Subject: Seaton Updates Page 21 - Studies that have been completed by the Province include: the Highway 407 (Seaton Lands) Economic Development Study; the Natural Heritage System Management Plan and Master Trails Plan; the Durham/TorontoNork Area Transportation Plan Study; the Wetlands Water Balance Evaluation; and the Highway 407 - Preliminary Functional Planning Study for Two New Interchanges. Studies not yet underway include the City's Development Charges Study and By-law for Seaton; the Region's Development Charges Study and By-law for Seaton infrastructure and transit; and the Region's conformity amendments to the Durham Regional Official Plan. Staff will continue to update Council on the progress of the Neighbourhood Planning Review and the other on-going studies. Financial Implications: Not applicable. Sustainability Implications: Receiving this Report provides information to members of Committee and others and therefore relates to the objective of healthy society. The Neighbourhood Planning Review, and the other required Seaton studies as a package will implement many aspects of the sustainable objectives of the Central Pickering Development Plan including: restoring the natural heritage system of Seaton; providing a transportation network including active transportation alternatives such as walking and cycling; offering parks and recreational opportunities for the future residents; creating employment opportunities; and developing innovative, transit-supportive mixed use neighbourhoods. 1.0 Background: 1.1 The Central Pickering Development Plan (CPDP) requires a number of studies to be completed concurrent with or prior to the processing of the plans of subdivision Along with the preparation of Neighbourhood Plans for Seaton Community, the CPDP requires other studies to be completed to bridge the gap between a plan and the development of a community. In some instances, the CPDP identified who is responsible to undertake a required study, and in other instances, it did not. The following sections of this Report identify and provide a status update on the required studies, as well as on additional implementation studies that are underway or completed. The studies are grouped.by who is leading the study: the City; the Province; the Region; and the Seaton Landowners. Report PD 07-10 ATTACHMENT# April 6, 2010 REPORT# PO, Subject: Seaton Updates Page 3 19 2.0. City - Led Studies 2.1 As required by the CPDP, the City retained .a consulting team led by Sorensen Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Inc. in 2009 to undertake the Neighbourhood Planning Review 2.1.1 The consulting team was retained conditional upon execution of a funding agreement between the City and Seaton landowners On September 21, 2009, Council considered Addendum to Report Number CAO 05-09 respecting the approach to completing the required Seaton Neighbourhood Plans. Through Resolution #224/09, Council accepted the recommendation to retain the services of Sorensen Gravely Lowes Planning Associates Inc. (SGL), in association'with The Planning Partnership, LEA Consulting Inc., SCS Consulting Group Ltd., N. Barry Lyon Consultants Limited (now replaced by Lapointe Consulting Inc. because of a conflict), Robin Dee & Associates, and Bray Heritage. The Proposal by SGL identified the following six modules to address the City's requirements: 1. Background Studies (review of existing and on-going studies submitted by the landowners, Region and the Province, and preparation of new studies as required); 2. Conformity Amendments to the Pickering Official Plan (review of landowners' submitted proposed neighbourhood plan policy, and preparation of/revisions to official plan amendments as required); 3. Neighbourhood Plans (review of landowners' submitted proposed neighbourhood plans and preparation of/revisions to official plan amendments as required) 4. Development Guidelines (review of landowners' submitted proposed guidelines and preparation of/revisions to the guidelines as required); 5. Approval of Amendments (finalize draft regional official plan amendment; and finalize local official plan amendments and guidelines for statutory open house, public information meeting,.and consideration by Planning & Development Committee and Council); and 6. Development Review (review of landowners' submitted proposed draft plans and zoning by-law amendment applications, and recommend revisions to comply with the Official Plan amendments). Report PD 07-10 ATTACHMENT#. April 6; 2010 REPORT# PD a0 - / o Subject: Seaton Updates Page 4 . ~n 2.1.2 The required funding agreement was executed on February 2, 2010 A draft funding agreement was included in Addendum to Report Number CAO 05-09. The agreement, between the City and the landowners, including the Province of Ontario, provides that the landowners fund modules one to five of the work program. Further, the agreement acknowledges that the City will fund module six from revenue received for the Seaton draft plans and zoning by-law amendment applications. 2.1.3 The City's consulting team is about half way through the Background Studies Module There is a considerable amount of existing information that has been prepared to date on Seaton. Accordingly, to start the Review, the consulting team is reviewing: • existing information and preparing new work where required to establish sustainability performance measures and benchmarks to be incorporated into the neighbourhood plans and used to review the development applications; • existing studies on heritage to respond to Council's resolution on a potential expansion of the. Whitevale Heritage Conservation District designation; • existing socio-economic, demographic and housing trends to identify an affordable housing strategy; • existing retail studies and preparing new work where required to address the hierarchy, amount and location of retail uses in Seaton; • the urban design of the submitted neighbourhood plans and development applications at a variety of scales from community to neighbourhood to site; • the Seaton landowners' submitted proposed neighbourhood plans and studies; • existing completed Provincial studies; and • other information available to date and attending meetings respecting the on-going studies. 2.1.4 An introductory Technical Group Meeting was held in December 2009 The Technical Group comprises City staff and external agency representatives involved in reviewing, commenting and approving official plan amendments, draft plans of subdivisions and zoning amendments. The landowners' consultants, and the Province's consultants undertaking the Seaton Implementation Plan (SIP) were also in attendance. The purpose of the meeting was to outline the City's Neighbourhood Planning Review work program and schedule, and seek initial input from the Group. l eoort PD 07-10 ATTACHMENT#--TO April 6, 2010 1 REPORT# PD Subject: Seaton Updates Page 5 21 As a follow-up to the Technical Group meeting, the heritage consultant on the City's consulting team met with the Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee in early March 2010. The purpose was to discuss preliminary observations, and allow an exchange of information on how Heritage Pickering wishes to be involved in the Neighbourhood Planning Review process. 2.1.5 Following public consultation sessions in mid to late April, draft reports will be prepared and presented to the Technical Group and to Council in May Three upcoming public consultation sessions are being organized and scheduled for mid to late April. The topics of the sessions are as follows: the heritage review of Whitevale Road; • sustainability; and • other findings from the background review, and policy options to implement the background studies. Considering the results of the public consultation, draft reports will be prepared on the Whitevale Heritage Conservation District Extension Review, a Retail Analysis, an Affordable Housing Strategy, a Sustainability Actions Report and a Summary of Consultation. The revised drafts will then be made available and meetings will be held with the Technical Group, the landowners and Council. Subsequently, the reports will be finalized. The original schedule anticipated the background reports to be presented to Council in March. The schedule was aggressive and the consultant's start-up was delayed. The consultants are working ahead on other parts of the work program, particularly the general policy amendments. However, further delays are anticipated. Certain elements of the policy and design work will need to incorporate information arising from other studies which are not yet in available (such as the MESP and the SIP), and final interchange, arterial and collector road locations and NHS crossings will affect detailed neighbourhood design. 2.1.6 First Nations consultation will be occurring through a process led by the Province As part of the Province's duty to consult with First Nations about activities on its land, the Ontario Realty Corporation (ORC) is organizing the consultation process respecting the potential location of infrastructure within the Natural Heritage System (NHS), protection of significant archaeological sites within the developable areas, and facilitating the First Nations involvement in the on-going planning and development of Seaton, as set out in the CPDP. Report PD 07-10 ATTACHMENT#. !._.-TO April 6, 2010 REPOW PD ,2 0- /O Subject: Seaton Updates Page 6 22 Three on-going and interrelated studies, the Master Environmental Servicing Plan (MESP), the Region's Class Environmental Assessment (EA) and the City's Neighbourhood Planning Review, may result in recommendations for infrastructure within the NHS. This could include roads, water pipes and sanitary sewers and facilities, stormwater management facilities and utilities. In addition, the arrangement of land uses could be instrumental in protecting and commemorating significant sites and lands. ORC is therefore organizing a coordinated approach to consulting with First Nations (and Metis) involving the Region and its consultants undertaking the EA, Sernas Associates undertaking the MESP, and the City and its consultants undertaking the Neighbourhood Planning Review. This coordinated approach will be more efficient and effective than if each study team were to undertake a consultation on its own. 2.2 In the future, the City will need to undertake a Development Charges Study & By-law for. Seaton The City's current DC By-law does not include Seaton. Information is required through the Neighbourhood Planning Review before this study can be undertaken. The Seaton landowners have appealed the City's current DC By-law because it does not include a development charge for Seaton. 3.0 Region - Led Studies 3.1 The Region's Class EA for infrastructure and transit services for Central Pickering is underway, and is expected to take 18 months (to mid 2011) to complete The Region of Durham retained a consulting team, led by GENIVAR Ontario Inc., to undertake the Class EA study for the provision of Regional services, including water, wastewater, transportation, transit and service facility infrastructure to service the lands identified for development in Seaton. The Notice of Study Commencement was given in December 2009, and the first Public Information Forum is anticipated in the spring of 2010. The study area boundary extends beyond the boundary of the CPDP area to identify and accommodate required Regional infrastructure for the Federal lands and future development areas identified by the Region's Growth Plan Implementation Study. _ReD9rt PD 07-10 ATTACHMEN111 'ro April 6, 2010 REPORT# PD Subject: Seaton Updates Page 7 23 3.2 In the future, the Region will need to update its Development Charges Study & By-laws to. include provisions for Seaton with respect to water, sewer and transit The Region's current DC By-law includes a development charge for the soft services and roads for Seaton, but not for water, sewer or transit. Additional information is required through the EA process before this study can be undertaken. The Seaton landowners have appealed the Region's DC By-laws as they do not completely address Seaton. 3.3 The Region will need to adopt conformity amendments to bring its Official Plan into conformity with the CPDP Part of SGL's work is to prepare a draft Regional Official Plan amendment to implement the CPDP. Durham has been awaiting the outcome of the City's Neighbourhood Planning Review prior to initiating amendments to its Official Plan.. In this manner, both the local and Regional amendments could be dealt with as a package. However, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) recently released a draft decision on Regional Official Plan Amendment 128, which implements the Provincial Growth Plan. In that draft decision, MMAH staff are proposing some modifications to the amendment to the Regional Plan to implement the CPDP. The City will take into consideration the content and status of the draft modifications in deciding whether there is any need for SGL to continue with that element of the work program. 4.0 Provincially - Led Studies 4.1 Although not identified as a required Provincial study under the CPDP, the Province retained in the fall of 2009 a consulting firm led by BDP to undertake a Seaton Implementation Plan (SIP) This recent initiative of the Province is to prepare options and strategies that can be implemented by all stakeholders in order to achieve the Province's vision for Seaton. The Plan will constitute advice to the Province on a number of matters including: energy initiatives such as the use of renewable energy sources; innovative building standards and compact neighbourhood design; and transportation and transit initiatives. A draft SIP report is expected this spring, which will be subsequently circulated to various stakeholders, for review. City staff is part of the Steering Committee led by ORC and the Ministry of Energy and Infrastructure (MEI). Report PD 07-10 ATTACHMFM# -TO April 6, 2010 REPORT# PD 0 - / o Subject: Seaton Updates Page 8 24 In undertaking the Neighbourhood Planning Review, the City's consulting team will be considering the recommendations of the SIP, as well as any staff or Council comments on that Study. 4.2 The Ministry of Transportation (MTO) recently released a detailed design study for the two Highway 407 interchanges proposed at Sidelines 22 and 26 The CPDP indicates that the interchanges at Sidelines 22 and 26 and the resultant spacing of them must meet applicable design, safety and operational standards. In 2007, the MTO retained the consulting firm of Morrison Hershfield to review the location of the two new interchanges at Sidelines 22 and.26. The consultant's "Highway 407 - Preliminary Functional Planning Study for Two New Interchanges" Final Report, dated December 2009, has been provided to the City, the Region, ORC and the Provincial Ministries of MEI, MMAH, and Natural Resources. The consultant identified three alternative interchange locations and configurations that vary somewhat from the locations shown in the CPDP. The consultant selected a technically preferred alternative that in their evaluation has the least impact on the natural environment and satisfies highway intersection spacing criteria. If this is the Provincial position, the effect would be a westerly shift of the Sideline 22 interchange by about 200 metres and a westerly shift of the Sideline 26 interchange by about 400 metres. City staff as well as other agencies are reviewing the consultant's Report. The precise locations of the interchanges at Sidelines 22 and 26 are critical inputs to moving forward with a number of required studies such as the MESP, the Regional EA, and the City's Neighbourhood Planning Review. 4.3 As required by the CPDP, the Province retained AECOM (previously TS H) in 2006 to undertake the Durham/Toronto/York Area Transportation Plan'Study MMAH requested MTO to lead a strategic transportation study to support the development of Seaton and the broader Durham/Toronto/York Study Area. This Study, finalized in September 2009, identified the key transportation investments that are required to address long term regional road and transit network deficiencies.' The Study findings and recommendations on transportation and transit infrastructure investments for the area will serve as advice to the Province.. A copy of the Study is available on the City's website. City staff was part of the Study Team along with representatives from the Ministries of MEI and MMAH; ORC; Durham Region; York Region; and the City of Toronto. City staff provided comments to MTO generally supportive of the study's "transit-first" strategy for implementing new transit and road infrastructure to support growth in Seaton and the surrounding area. Fepart PD 07-10 ATTACHMENW, - TO April 6, 2010 REPORT# PD 70 /a Subject: Seaton Updates Page 9 25 In undertaking the Neighbourhood Planning Review, the City's consulting team will be considering the recommendation of this Study, as well as the staff comments on that Study. 4.4 As a requirement of the CPDP, the MMAH retained the consulting firm of Schollen & Company in 2006 to prepare a Seaton Natural Heritage System Management Plan and Master Trails Plan Study (NHSMP and MTP) The Study, finalized in late October 2008, represents the consultant's advice to the Province on how to restore the natural heritage system in Seaton, create a complete trail network for walking and biking and a program to respect the cultural heritage of Seaton. A full copy of the completed study is available at the City of Pickering Planning & Development counter, and selected extracts are available on the City's website., In June 2009, Pickering Council passed Resolution #178/09 and adopted staff recommendations that the Seaton NHSMP and MTP be supported as a detailed guide to achieve a sustainable Seaton NHS consistent with the objectives of the CPDP, and that the Seaton NHS remain in public ownership and its implementation costs not be borne by existing Pickering taxpayers. Council also requested the Ministers of Municipal Affairs and Housing and Energy and Infrastructure to expand the range of uses permissible within the NHS to include recreational uses such as parks and playfields in those lands that buffer the key natural heritage features. However, based on recent conversations with Provincial staff, a policy change is not anticipated. In undertaking the Neighbourhood Planning Review, the City's consulting team will be considering the recommendation of this Study, as well as the Council comments on that Study. 4.5 As a requirement of the CPDP, the Ontario Realty Corporation (OCR) retained a consulting team led by Hemson Consulting in 2006 to prepare the Highway 407 (Seaton Lands) Economic Development Study The Study, finalized in April 2007, represents the consultant's advice to the Province, as the owners of the Employment Lands, on the following matters and: the types of businesses that will be attracted to the area; marketing and servicing strategies; and a land use concept and phasing plan to maximize the economic value of the lands. A copy of this Report is available on the City's website. One of the recommendations of the Study is that the Province take an active role in marketing the lands in conjunction with the City and Region. During 2009, ORC identified approximately 80 hectares, located between the two interchanges at Sideline 22 and 26 for which ORC will be preparing a plan of subdivision. Report PD 07-10 ATTACHMENT#=_TO April 6, 2010 REPORT# Pn a0 Subject: Seaton Updates Page 10 26 In undertaking the Neighbourhood Planning Review, the City's consulting team will be considering the recommendation of this Study, as well as the staff comments on that Study. 4.6 Although not a requirement of the CPDP, the Province retained a consulting team led by Morrison Environmental to undertake a Wetlands Water Balance Evaluation This Study, finalized in March 2008, monitored eight representative wetlands over a three-year period, and resulted in a model for managing wetlands elsewhere in Seaton. This technical Report is input to the MESP. A copy of the Executive Summary is on the City's website. 5.0 Landowner - Led Studies 5.1 As a required study under the CPDP, the landowners retained a consulting team led by Sernas Associates in 2007 to undertake a Master Environmental Servicing Plan (MESP) The MESP will address a number of matters of City interest that are interrelated with Neighbourhood Planning. These matters include: local road locations, cross sections, and crossings of the NHS; the stormwater management system including facilities; major community facilities and municipal services; major utility locations; and phasing recommendations for infrastructure. During 2009, a significant amount of field work was undertaken to complete additional groundwater and wetland monitoring, to augment the information from the Provincial Wetland Water Balance Evaluation. In addition, the scope of the MESP work was expanded to include collection of baseline environmental conditions for the expanded study area of the Regional EA. During 2010, several meetings have taken place between the Sernas-led consulting team, City staff, consultants for the City's Neighbourhood Planning Review, the Regional EA staff and consultants, the Provincial SIP consultants, other agencies and service providers on a number of issues related to the MESP. Information was exchanged on the approach to stormwater management, the location and size of major community facilities including schools, and detailed road locations and crossings of the NHS. Discussions continue. To assist Sernas in completing the MESP; an Oversight Committee was established, consisting of various stakeholders including City staff to provide input on the results of the analyses at key milestones. Two Oversight Committee meetings have.been held to date. A third meeting scheduled for early April 2010 to discuss the work done to date, and seek consensus on information being presented at the next the Public Information Centre (PIC). Sernas anticipates scheduling the PIC later this spring and subsequently releasing the draft MESP for comment over the summer. ATTACHMENT#_~ To Report PD 07-10 REPORT# PID - !D April 6, 2010 Subject: Seaton Updates Page 11 27 In addition, the City is continuing to pursue landowner funding to cover the cost of the technical assistance to review the MESP, specifically the stormwater management and municipal infrastructure components. It should be noted that preliminary information is suggesting an extensive stormwater management system, including over 70 stormwater facilities as well as a number of mitigation measures to maintain water balance and/or drainage to natural features, and to reduce in-stream erosion potential. 5.2 The landowners have retained IBI to undertake Fiscal Impact Analyses of the development of Seaton on both the Region and the City Although both these studies commenced.in 2005, work has been concentrated at the Regional level, developing and refining assumptions to be used in the fiscal impact model. Little work has taken place at the local level. The results of the Neighbourhood Planning Review will be a critical input to the modeling for the City. The City has Watson Associates assisting us on the review of IBI's work. 6.0 Next Steps Staff will continue to update Council on the Neighbourhood Planning Review, and other related Seaton implementation studies on a regular basis. \ Report PD 07-10 ATTACHMENT #=T0 April 6,'2010 'REPORT# PDD Subject: Seaton Updates Page 12 28 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Grant McGregor, MCI Y RPP Neil Carr P; RPP Principal Planner - Policy Director, P arming & Development Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Thomas E. M lym , MCIP Manager, Policy Director, Office of Susta.inability GM:CR:ld Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Director, Corporate Services & .Treasurer. Director, Operations & Emergency Services Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Ci Co cil as J. Q.u'' , RD MA, CMM III Chief Administrative Officer o~ d p W W W W N N N' N N N N N N N W N O (D 00 co aD V O A N W N ~p V m (J~ A W N O t0 W V 01 Cn A W N O T m CD N (D cC f0 U2 O N o n f7 C7 Tf ;U ;U m O !n ~7 !A M M O•' O 2 0 ~ T1 O n < ~ 4 (D CD CD D << o m m N M (D fU (D 7 (D m o m o= z (n (o (o m N 7 O d -0 CD n N T m N om. v Q o? ? 0 m N s y 0 (D _ N d d z N N (D p~ O 3 d 61 •O D D -7 y n -I R1 ? (A O c Q C) O O 0) m y C/) n w' - c D o D o 3 E :3 to M a CD n , o m N (D CD ° D<. v o D c o• p < n a .•D to N O( CD D- cnm a o a a (D N N N A N IJ O q O . N N c r. 9 w O a p m _ N p - N Q° CD CL 3• - N N O W ~ J a O ~ A O f0 . cn p o 7 N O . - p `O• N o CD' ~ p c 3 a 3 z N p O m D m ~y1 o D o N ale p h p I p N N ~ Citq o~ Report to Planning & Development ~R Committee PI KEING Report Number: PD 14-10 Date: June 7, 2010 30 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Duffin Heights Restoration Works Terrestrial Habitat and Fish Habitat Restorations Part of Lots 15 to 24, Concession 3 City of Pickering Recommendations: 1. That Report PD 14-10 of the Director, Planning & Development on terrestrial habitat and fish habitat restorations within the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood be received; 2. That, notwithstanding the City's Purchasing Policy, City staff be authorized to enter into appropriate agreement with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority to undertake City approved terrestrial habitat and fish habitat restoration works as identified in the Duffin Heights Environmental Servicing Plan; 3. That the appropriate officials of the City be authorized to take the necessary action to give effect hereto; and 4. Further, that the City Clerk forward a copy of Report PD 14-10 to the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority and the Duffin Heights Landowners Group. Executive Summary: The Environmental Servicing Plan (ESP) for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood identified areas of development that are subject to compensation payment to enhance the natural environment. The Duffin Heights Official Plan policies require that compensation payments be made as a condition of development in the identified areas. Further, all developers are required to contribute to a separate fund that will be used to improve fish habitat in the Ganatsekiagon and Urfe Creeks. Both these funds are to be held in trust and administered by the City of Pickering. The Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) was a key participant in the review of the Environmental Servicing Plan and supported the principle of applicants compensating for the loss of natural heritage and aquatic features from developable lands and the restoration of the natural heritage system. This principle was also supported by the Ministry of Natural Resources. Report PD 14-10 Date: June 7, 2010 Duffin Heights Restoration Works Page 2 Al TRCA has considerable knowledge, experience and success in undertaking restoration projects throughout the Greater Toronto Area and is considered the most appropriate and effective body to undertake this work. Notwithstanding the provisions of the City's Purchasing Policy, it is therefore recommended that TRCA be retained, through and in consultation with the City, to undertake the restoration works identified in the Duffin Heights ESP. Financial Implications: The City, as an owner of lands that are identified for compensation will be responsible for paying into the funds established for terrestrial habitat and fish habitat restorations. The approximate cost to the City, as owner of a proportionate share of the lands would be $7,200 for terrestrial habitat and $35,000 for fish habitat. These costs will be capitalized as part of the cost of asset and be recovered from revenues from the eventual sale of the City owned lands involved. This was provided for in the 2008 Capital Budget. Sustainability Implications: The contributions from applicants will assist in achieving the environmental sustainability objectives endorsed by Council for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood through restoration works. 1.0 Background: 1.1 TRCA was a key participant in the review of the Duffin Heights ESP and supported the principle of compensation for impacts from development on natural heritage features and watercourses TRCA was a key participant in the preparation and review of the Duffin Heights ESP. The recommendations of the ESP ensure that future development would not only have minimal impacts but would have positive benefits on the area's environment. The recommendations included but were not limited to, enhancing the central tableland woodlot, establishing natural heritage buffers, improving fish habitats and accommodating open water drainage features such as bioswales and infiltration trenches. These measures have set the environmental bar higher for future developments. TRCA also supported the principle of compensation for the loss of natural heritage and aquatic features from developable lands through the restoration of the natural heritage system on provincially-owned lands. 1.2 The Duffin Heights Official Plan policies require applicants to compensate for the loss of natural heritage and aquatic features within developable areas The Official Plan policies for the Duffin Heights Neighbourhood embody the enirvonmental objectives set out in the ESP to minimize and mitigate impacts to the natural environment from future development. In this regard, compensation is required from developers for the loss of natural heritage and aquatic features identified within their developable areas. Report PD 14-10 Date: June 7, 2010 Duffin Heights Restoration Works Page .3 32 Also, in recognition of the direct impacts of development on two reaches of the Ganatsekiagon and,Urfe Creeks, all developers are required to contribute funds in order to achieve a net gain in fish habitat as required by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). 1.3 City staff, TRCA and the Duffin Heights Landowners Group agreed to an approach to compensate for the loss of terrestrial habitat within Duffin Heights Properties where terrestrial habitat loss requiring compensation would occur through future development and the extent of the loss by major habitat type were identified. Similarly, suitable locations for the enhancement of terrestrial habitat to compensate for these losses were identified. As part of this work, the following three areas of terrestrial habitat loss were identified: Area A North of Dersan Street, east side of 3.0 ha woodland and 0.3 ha central woodlot (multiple owners wetland Area B Cougs Property 5.8 ha woodland and 0.56 ha wetland Area C Future stormwater pond #4, north of 1.3 ha woodland and 1.3 Third Concession Road (future riparian/wetland multiple benefiters The total area requiring compensation is 12.26 ha (10.1 woodland and 2.16 ha wetland). To compensate for the loss of terrestrial habitat, restoration opportunities were identified. Potential areas include the valleys associated with Ganatsekiagon and Urfe Creeks, the woodlot north of the Lebovic lands on the west side of Tillings Road, and open areas on lands south of Old Taunton Road. 1.4 An appropriate formula was developed to.calculate the cost of implementing the required compensation measures for the loss of terrestrial habitat Based on TRCA's past experience, the cost (materials, design, and implementation) for replacing the loss of terrestrial habitat is: o $10,000 per ha for forest habitat • $30,000 per ha for wetland habitat Report PD 14-10 Date: June 7, 2010 Duffin Heights Restoration Works Page 4 33 When applied to the areas identified above, the total cost of terrestrial compensation is as follows: Area A 3.0 ha woodland $30,000 0.3 ha wetland $9,000 Area B 5.8 ha woodland $58,000 0.56 ha wetland $16,800 Area C 1.3 ha woodland $13,000 1.3 ha riparian/wetland $39,000 The total cost for the area of 12.26 ha (10.1 ha woodland and 2.16 ha wetland) is $165,800. In assessing the cost of compensation to the affected landowners (Areas A, B or C), a blended rate per ha of compensation was derived that would be used to assess each area. This cost per ha is therefore calculated as follows: $165,800/12.26 ha = $13,525/ha The terrestrial compensation levy will be applied as a condition,of site plan or subdivision approval. For future stormwater pond #4, the City'would be responsible for paying its share (20.39%) of the compensation along with all benefiting landowners along Brock Road. For the City's share, the cost for the City would be $7,200 (rounded) (2.6 ha x $13,525 x .2039). The terrestrial compensation fund would be collected and administered by the City. 1.5 To achieve a net gain in productive capacity of fish habitat, a number of restoration opportunities were identified The ESP recommended restoration opportunities assure a net gain in the productive capacity of fish habitat in accordance with DFO's policy. The restoration areas selected and costs associated with the two reaches of the Ganatsekiagon and Urfe Creeks are provided in a chart (see Attachment #1). The cost of the selected fish habitat restorations is $139,000 plus 30% Engineering and Contingencies for a total of $180,000 (rounded). All new development will contribute to the overall fish habitat compensation fund. Based on a total development area of 119 hectares, the contribution per hectare would be as follows: $180,000/119 ha = $1,513/ha This amount per hectare would be applied as a condition of site plan or subdivision approval. For all of the City's lands that are developable, the total cost for the City would be $35,000 (rounded) (23 ha x $1,513). The funds would be collected and administered by the City. Report PD 14-10 Date: June 7, 2010 Duffin Heights Restoration Works Page 5 34 2.0 Discussion: 2.1 In recognition of TRCA's knowledge and experience, staff recommends that TRCA be retained by the City to undertake the restoration works identified in the Duffin Heights ESP TRCA's Restoration Services Section has considerable knowledge, experience and success in undertaking restoration projects throughout the Greater Toronto Area. TRCA staff are professionally trained in the field of terrestrial and aquatic habitat restoration. Also, an integral part to the restoration will be the provision for community volunteers such as students to complement and support the work of TRCA staff. Consequently, there are inherent efficiencies to having TRCA carry out this work. The City of Pickering's purchasing policy requires that three formal written quotes be obtained for the provision of goods and services at the proposed dollar value for these works. Based on TRCA's experience and expertise, staff is recommending that Council retain TRCA to undertake the restoration works identified in the Duffin Heights ESP and not seek additional quotes. City staff would manage the restoration program, identify the required works to be performed by TRCA, and issue payment upon satisfactory completion. Both the Director, Operations & Emergency Services and Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer have been consulted with regard to this matter and concur with this recommendation. 2.2 Specific accounts have been set up in order to apply the contributions from applicants for the required restoration works in Duffin Heights Accounts have been set up to accommodate the contributions from applicants for the required works. identified in the Duffin Heights ESP. Once sufficient funds have accumulated, City staff will initiate the restoration progam to implement the required works. 3.0 Next Steps: With Council's concurrence, City staff will enter into an appropriate agreement with TRCA to undertake the restoration works identified in Duffin Heights ESP, notwithstanding the provisions of the City's Purchasing Policy. Attachment: 1. Fish Habitat Compensation Table Report PD 14-10 Date: June 7, 2010 Duffin Heights Restoration Works Page 6 35 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Grant McGregor, MCA RPP N 16C a Principal Planner - Policy Director, ning & Development Everett Buntsma Director, Operations & Emergency Services Gillis Paterson Director, Corporate Services & Treasurer GM:jf Attachment Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City ncil k 7 G T o as . Qui ih MR, C III Chief Adm rative Officer ATTACHMENT L_,TO REPORT # PD I y - I U 36 Fish Habitat Compensation Table i Location Restoration Compensation Estimated Opportunity Cost Ganatsekiagon The culvert under Replace the structure $25,000 Creek the CPR railway to concentrate low (at CPR railway) and the rubble at flows and enhance the outlet creates the fish passage a permanent barrier to fish passage Ganatsekiagon The small drop at Create backwater $10;000 Creek the culvert condition through the (at CPR railway) creates a culvert through the seasonal barrier installation of grade to fish passage control Urfe Creek A concrete Remove the structure $30,000 l structure and re-stabilize the upstream from banks using the golf course bioengineering restricts flow techniques Urfe Creek The stop log dam Remove the on-line $74,000 is a barrier when pond and reinstate logs are present natural channel form using natural channel design. Restore the riparian areas with aggressive restoration plan, City Report to - Planning & Development PICKERING Committee Report Number: PD 15-10 37 Date: June 7, 2010 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 21/09 Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd. Part 1 40R-3466, Parts 2, 3, 4 and 5 40R-5805 and Part 1 40R-11779 (1800 Kingston Road) City of Pickering Recommendation: 1. That Report PD 15-10 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 21/09, submitted by Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd. on lands being Part 1 40R-3466, Parts 2- 5 40R-5805 and Part 1 40R-11779 to broaden the range of commercial uses for the subject lands to include offices, personal service uses, health club and limited retail uses within the existing building be approved; and 3. Further, that the draft zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 21/09, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 15-10, be forwarded to City Council for enactment. Executive Summary: The subject lands are located on the southwest corner of Finch Avenue and Kingston Road (fronting Kingston Road east of Brock Road (see Attachment #1 - Location Map). The application involves two adjacent properties; the first is generally triangular-shaped and contains a vacant car dealership building; the second property is generally rectangular in shape and is vacant. The application to rezone was originally submitted only for the triangular portion of the lands that contains the existing building. Subsequently the owner requested to add the rectangular parcel of land that contains no buildings to the application. This report provides recommendations on the basis of both parcels being included. The applicant requests an amendment to the zoning by-law to permit limited additional retail and service commercial uses. The requested uses include a pharmacy, financial institutions, medical and other professional offices; as well as complementary retail and service commercial uses. Subsequent to the public meeting, the owner specifically requested that commercial recreational facility/health club uses be included in the requested zoning by-law amendment. Report PD 15-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd. (A 21/09) Page ,2 38 Staff do not consider the additional requested uses to constitute significant change to the application and therefore do not consider a recirculation or an additional public meeting to be necessary. The subject lands are located within a Flood Plain Special Policy Area (SPA). The 2005 Provincial Policy. Statement spedifies that development and site alteration shall not be permitted within areas that would be rendered inaccessible to people and vehicles during specific hazardous events including flooding, unless it can be demonstrated that the site can provide safe access appropriate to the nature of the development and the natural hazard. The applicant is requesting that the proposed uses be permitted in the existing building on the subject lands as a way of ensuring that the requested change of use will not have a measurable impact on the extent of the hazard potential already associated with the property (see Applicant's Submitted Plan and Applicant's Proposed Elevations, Attachments #2 & #3). The proposed uses are compatible and appropriate for the subject lands in this neighbourhood and offer the opportunity for a reuse of the existing building in conformity with the Official Plan. The recommended zoning by-law includes a "H"- hold provision to ensure the execution of a new site plan agreement to secure, among other things, the required implementation of flood protection/flood-proofing measures for the vacant parcel of land and revision to the site's access location on Kingston Road for the portion of the site with the building. Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the proposed development. Sustainability Implications: Staffs review of the application against the City's Draft Sustainable Development Guidelines resulted in a score below the Level 1 standard. Due to the nature of the proposal of adding additional commercial uses within an existing commercial building to utilize existing vacant retail space, there are limited opportunities to achieve a Level 1. The development proposal provides opportunities for commercial intensification, efficient use of vacant retail space, greater diversity of commercial uses for the area and takes advantage of existing infrastructure within the City's urban area. The applicant's proposal to reuse the already existing building helps to keep existing resources viable and keeps the materials out of landfill sites for an extended period of time. In addition, there will be an opportunity to improve the sustainable aspects of the subject site through the site plan review process. Background: 1.0 Introduction The owner of the properties has requested to add retail and service commercial uses including a pharmacy, financial institutions, medical and other professional offices as well as complementary retail and service commercial uses including a commercial recreational facility/health club to the existing site specific zoning category. Report PD 15-10 June 7, 2010 I Subject: Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd. (A 21/09) Page 3 39 Currently, only vehicle sales and rental are permitted on the subject lands. The proposal will be subject to site plan. review to ensure that the City's, Durham Region's and the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority's (TRCA) requirements are addressed prior to the existing building being available for the proposed uses. 2.0 Comments Received 2.1 At the March 1, 2010 Public Information Meeting (see text of Information Report & Meeting Minutes, Attachments #4 & #5) Catherine Reidt of 1744 Finch Avenue, appeared at the Public Information meeting and advised of the cordial relations between area residents and the former car dealership. She further noted that the residents in the area were concerned about a potential increase in the amount of traffic on Finch Avenue, that they would prefer uses with regular hours and quiet weekends and that they were looking forward to providing input into the process. 2.2 Written Public Submissions on the application A letter from Z. Schmerler of Brockington Plaza Inc., objecting to the proposed expansion of uses on the property was received. The letter outlined that an additional commercial plaza on Kingston Road would aggravate businesses that are already struggling to survive and that Brockington Plaza currently has vacancies and experiences frequent changes in tenants. Z. Schmerler also suggested that the new uses would exacerbate traffic congestion at the intersection of Bainbridge and Kingston Road (see Attachment #6). 2.3 Neighbourhood Meeting Held After Public Information Meeting On March 23, 2010 the applicant hosted a neighbourhood meeting in order to further explain the application and the proposed uses that were being requested. The area residents that were in attendance advised of their general concerns with the application and noted various uses that they would consider acceptable. A petition from area residents indicating concern regarding potential uses, and an email from area residents indicating general agreement with the proposed uses have been received (see Attachments #7 & #8). 2.4 City Departments and Agency Comments Region of Durham - the site is designated "Living Area" in the Planning Department Durham Regional Official plan, permitting limited office and retailing uses - the application has been screened in accordance with Provincial Interests and Delegated Review and there is no concern with the application as certain requirements can be addressed through conditions Report PD 15-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd. (A 21/09) Page '4 40 - Region of Durham - Kingston Road is a Regional Corridor intended to Planning Department be planned and developed for mixed-uses, (continued) including residential, commercial and service areas with higher densities - the proposal is in conformity to the Regional Official Plan the City is requested to investigate the of provision of a sidewalk along Kingston Road the existing municipal water and sanitary sewer service are provided to the site and the redundant 50 mm water connection is to be disconnected - there is a need a relocate the access to the signalized intersection a hold provision is requested to ensure implementation of a site plan agreement (see Attachment #9) Toronto and Region = the subject lands are within a Special Policy Area Conservation Authority (SPA). Site specific policies in the Official Plan (TRCA) are provided to allow for the continued viability of existing uses within SPAs - TRCA staff object to the addition of commercial uses to the vacant parcel (rectangular site) since the SPA is not meant to provide for new or intensified development - TRCA does not object to the additional uses in the existing building as long as the new uses are not prohibited in the Pickering Official Plan - that a holding provision be applied to the zoning by-law amendment to ensure implementation of a site plan agreement incorporating plans including flood protection/flood-proofing measures to the satisfaction of the TRCA (see Attachment #10) No other agency that provided comment has any objection to the subject applications. Report PD 15-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd. (A 21/09) Page 5 41 3.0 Discussion 3.1 The application has been explained and circulated to the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMHA) Development applications involving lands within Flood Plain Special Policies are required to be circulated to MNR and MMHA. The subject application has been discussed with representatives of MNR, has been explained in detail in written correspondence and has been circulated to both ministries for comment. No comments or concerns have been received from either ministry. 3.2 The TRCA objects to the rezoning of the vacant rectangular parcel of land at the southeast corner of Finch Avenue and Brock Road TRCA has.advised that it objects to new use rights being provided to the vacant parcel of land as these lands are within the SPA. Since the draft zoning by-law deals with both properties, a special requirement has been placed on the vacant land parcel that does not provide any new use rights for this parcel until appropriate measures are provided to the satisfaction of both the City and TRCA respecting flood plain management. The draft zoning by-law (Appendix I to this report) contains a."(H)" Holding Provision that requires the owner to address the flood plain issues associated with the vacant rectangular parcel of, land to the satisfaction of the City, in consultation with TRCA, prior to the implementation of the proposed commercial uses. 3.3 A neighbourhood meeting was held on March 23, 2010 and an email was received providing general agreement of the neighbours to the proposed uses Jerry Gazarek, a principal owner of Gazarek Realty Holdings, hosted a neighbourhood meeting where he explained the SPA and economic issues affecting the property. General discussion occurred on the uses desired by the neighbours and it was concluded that the neighbours would provide planning staff with their list of acceptable uses for the property. An email was received providing general agreement of the neighbours to the proposed uses with provisions that certain uses, that might involve garbage storage or odour emissions, should have site plan approval provisions implemented. It is noted that any site plan solutions such as the requirement for indoor garbage storage facilities and exhaust controls for restaurants must be implemented within the existing building envelope. Other concerns included: • keeping Finch Avenue as a dead end (there is no foreseeable Regional intention to open the east end of Finch Avenue to traffic) • no access to Finch Avenue from the subject property and traffic concerns (the owner has an existing access from the both the triangular and rectangular parcels from Finch Avenue). To date, the owner has not used these driveways as public access locations to the site Report PD 15-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd. (A 21/09) Page 6 42 • increasing and caring for the tree barrier along the north edge of the property • height restrictions due to resident concerns of potentially living in the shadow of tall buildings. A height restriction is not appropriate at this time, since this zoning by-law amendment relates only to the existing structure on site. Any change to the height of the building or a request for a new structure on the subject lands would require a new zoning by-law amendment application • drainage - no changes, affecting site drainage, will be effected through this development proposal (see Attachment #7) • the neighbours responded favourably to the new request to add commercial recreational and health club uses to the application 3.4 'The proposed uses comply with the Regional Official Plan, the City's Official Plan and the Kingston Road Development Guidelines The applicant's proposal conforms to the Region of Durham Official Plan which designates the subject properties "Living Area" and "Regional Corridor". Regional Corridors are intended to be used for residential, commercial and service areas with higher densities, supporting transit service and featuring a high degree of pedestrian oriented design. Although the proposal does not involve-the intensification through built form, it does provide intensification of use through a greater mix and number of office, recreational, retail and service commercial uses. The City of Pickering Official Plan designates the subject properties "Mixed-Use Area - Mixed Corridor" (Village East Neighbourhood). The proposed uses are in keeping with the Official Plan policies which encourage mixed uses to serve a broader area at a community scale and intensity. Approval of the zoning by-law amendment to permit the requested uses conforms to the City's Official Plan. The site falls within the Brock Road Corridor Precinct of the Kingston Road Development Guidelines. The precinct is expected to remain an auto-oriented corridor with auto-dependant land uses. The proposed reuse of the existing auto dealership building does not conflict with any design expectations of the Guidelines. 3.5 Expansion of uses will not prejudice review of the Corridor The City is currently undertaking a review of the Pickering Official Plan in order to bring it into conformity with the Provincial Growth Plan. Specific areas of the City including the Kingston Road Corridor are being reviewed as potential locations for increased density of residential and employment uses. Approval of the proposed zoning by-law amendment will in no way jeopardize the City's ability to complete its conformity review exercises as they may apply to the subject lands. Report PD 15-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd. (A 21/09) -Page 7 43 3.6 The proposed uses are appropriate and compatible to existing neighbouring uses The proposed uses would be appropriate, as: • the subject lands are conveniently located to serve both local and community-wide residents • the site already contains well over the required supply of parking spaces for the proposed uses (5.5 spaces per 93 square metres of gross leasable floor space are required, whereas over 7 spaces per 93 square metres of gross leasable floor space are provided) • the increase in intensity of use is expected to have a minimal impact on the existing residents on Finch Avenue due to the transition space provided by Finch Avenue and the on-site landscape features, as long as access points and nuisance issues (such as odour and garbage) are controlled through the site plan approval process • the exclusive reuse of the existing building ensures that minimal visual impact to the neighbours from the subject rezoning amendment would result 3.7 Market Impact Study not required For development proposals involving 2,500 square metres or greater of new or expanded gross leasable floor space, the Pickering Official Plan policies may require the submission of a market impact study as determined by staff through application pre-consultation. The proposed additional commercial uses do not involve the creation of new or expanded gross leasable floor space and a market impact study is therefore not required. The owner did, however, submit a statement prepared by a retail market specialist evaluating the potential need for the study in this instance. This evaluation concluded that recent.market studies conducted in Pickering have identified that current and future market is available. Additions of retail space are both needed and can be accommodated without adverse impact on the market place (see Attachment #11). 3.8 Technical Issues will be dealt with at site plan approval stage The following matters are to be addressed in the required site plan agreement: • relocation of the site access and potential changes to area of paved surfaces and landscaping • ensure that no cut-through traffic will occur between Kingston Road and Finch Avenue • potential need for additional traffic signal equipment • potential minor road widening or sight triangle dedication at the Bainbridge Drive intersection for Kingston Road Report PD 15-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd. (A 21/09) Page 8 44 • the need for a Traffic Impact study • implementation of measures to ensure elimination of nuisance issues such as restaurant garbage and odours • abandonment and removal of a redundant 50 mm water connection • timing and opportunity for provision of a sidewalk • provision of flood protection/flood-proofing measures 3.9 The amending Zoning By-law will include a "(H)" Holding Provision It is recommended that the amending Zoning By-law include the proposed uses within the existing building on the triangular-shaped site. A "(H)" Holding Provision has been included to ensure requirements of the City, TRCA and the Region are implemented prior to the reuse of the building. For the vacant parcel of land the "(H)" Holding Provision will also include flood plain management matters being satisfied prior to any new use rights being granted. The following chart provides a use summary of the existing zoning use rights compared to the recommended zoning use. Existing, Uses Permitted "CA 3" Pro osed.Additional Uses "CA34' Vehicle sales or rental retail commercial establishment personal service pharmacy financial institution medical and other professional offices and complementary retail and service commercial uses commercial recreational facility health club vehicle sales or rental establishment 3.10 By-law to be forwarded to Council The draft by-law is included as Appendix I to this report which implements staff's recommendation. It is recommended that the attached by-law be forwarded to Council for enactment. 4.0 Applicant's Comments The applicant is aware of the recommendations of this report and concurs with the recommendations. Report PD 15-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd. (A 21/09) Page 9 45 Appendix: Appendix I: Draft Amendment to By-law 1055/79 Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Applicant's Submitted Plan 3. Applicant's Proposed Elevations 4. Text of Information Report 5. Minutes from March 1, 2010 Statutory Public Meeting 6. Landowners Comment - Z. Schmerler, Brockington Plaza 7. Resident Comment - Catherine Reidt 8. Resident Comment - Neighbouring Residents Petition Expressing Concern 9. Agency Comments -Durham Region Planning Department, dated March 23, 2010 10. Agency Comments -TRCA, dated April 12, 2010 11. Market Impact Statement by Malone Given Parsons, dated December 29, 2009 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: L Isa Jame CIP, RPP Neil Cariol , P, RPP Planner I Director, Plan ' g & Development a~ Ross Pym, MCI V, RPP (Acting) Manager, Development Review Uld Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Co 'I e 27// T s. Q in , R MR., C Chief Adminis rative Officer i Appendix Ito 4 6 Report PD 15-10 Draft Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 21/09 4 7 The Corporation of th f Pickering - B -Io.xxxx Being a by-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as amended by 1055/79 and By-law 6134/03, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering in the Region of Durham, Part 1 40R-3466, and Parts 2, 3, 4 and 5 40R-5805, and Part 1 40R11779, City of Pickering. (A 21/09) Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to amend the existing zoning of the subject lands to replace a "CA3" zone with a "(H)CA3-4" zone, in order to permit additional commercial uses, including retail and service commercial, restaurant, offices, drug store, commercial recreational facility, commercial club and commercial school uses within the existing building on the subject lands being Part 1 40R-3466, Parts 2-5 40R-5805, and Part 1 40R-11779, in the City of Pickering; And whereas an amendment to By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1055/79 and By-law 6134/03, is therefore deemed necessary; Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Schedule Amendment - Schedule "I" to By-law 1055/79 as amended by By-law 6134/03, is hereby amended by replacing the zoning category "CA3" with zoning category "(H)CA3-4°. 2. Text Amendment (1) Section 2. -Area Restricted of By-law 1055/79 as amended by By-law 6134/03, is hereby amended by replacing zoning category "CA3" with "(H)CA3-4" as follows: The provisions of this By-law shall apply to those lands in Lot 18 and the North Part of Lot 18, Concession 1, Pickering, designated "(H)CA3-4" on Schedule "I" attached hereto. (2) Section 4. - Definitions of By-law 1055/79 as amended by By-law 6134/03, is hereby amended by adding the following definitions and re-alphabetizing and re-lettering the subsections (a) to (u): B -I f x 0 Page 2 48 (b) "Body Rub Parlour" shall mean any premises or part thereof where a body rub is performed, offered or solicited in pursuance of a trade, calling, business or occupation, but does not include any premises or part thereof where the body rubs performed are for the purpose of medical or therapeutic treatment and are performed or offered by persons otherwise duly qualified, licensed or registered so to do under the laws of the Province of Ontario; (c) "Business Office" shall mean a building or part of a building in which the management or direction of business, a public or private agency, a brokerage or a labour or fraternal organization is carried on and which may include a telegraph office, a data processing establishment, a newspaper publishing office, the premises of a real estate or insurance agent, or a radio or television broadcasting station and related studios or theatres, but shall not include 'a retail store; (d) "Commercial Club" shall mean an athletic or recreational club operated for gain or profit and having public or private membership; (e) "Commercial School" shall mean a school which is operated for gain or profit and may include the studio of a dancing teacher or music teacher, or an art school, a golf school or any other such school operated for gain or profit, but shall not include any other school defined herein; (f) "Commercial-Recreational Establishment" shall mean a commercial establishment in which indoor recreational facilities such as bowling alleys, miniature golf courses, roller-skating rinks, squash courts, swimming pools, and other similar indoor recreation facilities are provided and operated for gain or profit, and which may include an arena or stadium but shall not include a place of amusement or entertainment as defined here; (g) "Discount Department Store" shall mean a discount department store, as defined by Statistics Canada, such as but not limited to, Zellers and Wal-Mart, engaged in general merchandising of a wide range of commodities and services which may include, but is not limited to, apparel, hardware and household goods, garden supplies, automotive supplies, leisure, pet and drug items and toys; (h) Drug Store shall mean a building or part of a building in which pharmaceutical prescriptions are compounded and dispensed to the public, and where medicine, medical supplies and associated merchandise, confectionary items, cosmetics, toiletries, periodicals, or similar items of day-to-day household necessity are stored, displayed and offered for retail sale; By-law Page 3 49 (i) "Financial Institution" shall mean a building or part of a building in which money is deposited, kept, lent or exchanged; Q) "Floor Area" shall mean the aggregate of the floor areas of all above and below grade storeys, but shall exclude the floor area of any stairwells, elevators, and any part below established grade used exclusively for storage purposes; (k) "General Merchandise Store" shall mean a general merchandise store as defined by Statistics Canada, such as but not limited to, Bi-Way, Bargain Harolds, and Stedmans, engaged in general merchandising of a wide range of commodities and services, which may include but is not limited to apparel, hardware and household goods, garden supplies, automotive supplies, leisure, pet and drug items and toys; (1) "Gross Leasable Floor Area" shall mean the aggregate of the floor areas of all storeys above or below established grade, designed for owner or tenant occupancy or exclusive use only, but excluding those areas used exclusively for storage purposes which are below established grade or within mezzanines, (m) "Lot" shall mean an area of land fronting on a street which is used or intended to be used as the site of a building, or group of buildings, as the case may be, together with any accessory buildings or structures, or a public park or open space, regardless of whether or not such lot constitutes the whole of a lot or block on a registered plan of subdivision; (n) "Major Department Store" shall mean a major department store as defined by Statistics Canada, such as but not limited to, Sears and The Bay, engaged in general merchandising of a wide range of commodities and services, which may include but is not limited to, apparel, hardware and household goods, garden supplies, automotive supplies, leisure, pet and drug items and toys; (o) "Personal Service Shop" shall mean an establishment in which personal service is performed and which may include a barber shop, beauty salon, a shoe repair shop, a tailor or dressmaking shop or a photographic studio, but shall not include a body rub parlour as defined in the Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.M..45, as amended from time-to-time, or any successor thereto; (p) "Professional Office" shall mean a building or part of a building in which medical, legal or other professional service is performed or consultation given, and which may include a clinic, the offices of an architect, a chartered accountant, an engineer, a lawyer or a physician, but shall not include a body-rub parlour as defined by the. Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.M. 45, as amended from time-to-time, or any successor thereto; B =1a 1 Page 4 5 Q pill- (q) "Restaurant - Type A" shall mean a building or part of a building where food is prepared or offered or kept for retail sale to the public for immediate consumption on or off the premises, but shall not include a drive-thru; (r) "Retail Store" shall mean a building or part of a building in which goods, wares, merchandise, substances, articles, or things are stored, kept and offered for retail sale to the public, but shall not include a food store, a discount department store, a major department store, or a general merchandise store; (s) "Specialty Food Store shall mean a retail store specializing in a specific type or class of foods such as an appetizer store, bakery, butcher, delicatessen, fish, gourmet and similar foods; (3) Subsection 5.A. Uses Permitted is hereby amended by replacing zone category "CA3" with "(H)CA34' and by including the following uses as follows: 5. Provisions A. Uses Permitted ("CA3-4" Zone) (a) No person shall within the lands designated "CA34' on Schedule "I" hereto undertake any use for any purpose except as follows: (i) business office (ii) commercial club (iii) commercial school (iv) commercial recreational establishment (v) drug store (vi) financial institution (vii) personal service shop (viii) professional office (ix) restaurant - type A (x) vehicle sales and rental establishment (b) The permitted uses shall only occur within the building existing as of the day of the passing of this by-law on the property being Part 1 40-R3466 and Parts 2-5 40R-5805 generally as shown on the site plan approved on June 21, 2005. Page By-law 1 WL[q., 5 (4) Subsection 5.B. Zone Requirements is hereby amended by replacing zone category "CA3" with "CA3-4" as follows: B. Zone Requirements (a) No person shall within the lands designated "(H)CA3-4" on Schedule "I" hereto, use any lot or erect, alter or use any building or structure except in accordance with the provisions of this subsection. (5) Section 5. is hereby amended by adding a subsections C. and D. as follows: C. Uses Permitted Zone Requirements ("(H)" Zone) (a) Until such time as the "(H)" Holding Provision is lifted, the lands shall not be used for any purpose other than vehicle sales and rental establishment. D. Removal of the "(H)" Holding Symbol (a) The "(H)" Holding Symbol shall not be removed from the "CA3-4" Zone until such time as an updated Site Plan Agreement has been executed and registered to the satisfaction of the City of Pickering and the Region of Durham for the lands being Part 1 40R-3466, Parts 2-5 40R-5805. (b) The "(H)" Holding Symbol shall not be removed from the "CA3-4" Zone for lands being Part 1 40R-11779 until such time as the flood plain issues associated with the lands have been addressed to the satisfaction of the City in consultation with the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority. 3. By-law 3036 By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1055/79 and By-law 6134/03 is hereby further amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as set out in Sections 1 and 2 above. Definitions and subject matter not specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by the relevant provisions of By-law 3036, as amended. By-law No. xxxx/10 Page 6 5 4. Effective Date This By-law shall come into force in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 21 st day of June, 2010. RA David Ryan, Mayor n9A Debbie Shield'?, City Clerk 'S3 ~i~ ` \ \ \ \ 1 `1 ~ ~ 11 11 ~ ANNE \ \ 4oR,3g6 585 3- PPFtIS 2 P PRA PO O O~ SCHEDULE I TO BY-LAW 1055 79 AMENDED BWBY-LA 1 34 03 " AMENDED B XXXX/10 PASSED THI DAY OF MAY 2003 SIGNED goof MAYOR .W& pAr V ED CLERK ATTACHMENTS®TO REPORT# PD 15~ /a 54 a ISLAMIC m w CENTRE LL, 0 } J Q N O j 1 ti• Y RE U NITY PARK m DU ~~I NS CRESCENT co w m FINCH AVENUE FINCH AVENUE ROAD a a 0 ly- w 0 S CT > OPERTY 0-- w } > 0 ~ ~N w o 0 ~\NGS O o o ~ w m o p m Z m C0 DRIVE BAINBRIDGE O ~ J Z W w U COURT w 1RC~E o DENMAR Of < U z PARK > E > o X EECHLAW Y v DRIVE PARK > A m FTMcn City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION CON 1, PT LOT 18, RP 40R-3466 PART 1 AND RP, 40R-5805 PART 2 TO 5 w OWNER GAZAREK REALTY HOLDINGS LTD. DATE JAN. 22, 2010 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. A 21/09 SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY RP /V Data -rces: rpriaea Inc. anal A, euppliera. All right. Re-ed. Not a plan of s-y. PN-9 2009 MPAC anal its s'.ppl;er.. All rights Resen,etl. Not a plan of Survey. ATTACHMENT#- TO 5 5 REPORT# PD. l3' v - C\l m ~WOrF~ , W W ~ ti Y / W w~ 0 b U) ) C a o - J 1. , .1 _ 0 0) Q 0 N Oda c LL c ~ Y W W J cr d Q 00, U z 0 a o z _ z >13000 0000 H HMENW-3-TO s c NOW PD Z~o e e ~ d ~ 56 c i 0 0 i H z W V ' W V) J Q I I I I I I , ~ s I e ~ I I e , w I ° 1 V I 4 I w Z I n 1 I I Z O I 1 Q cco Z Z Fa- I z I m o O m Z I z W~Cl)0 z CR ~ W I w W ZY U) V IL O Z I m O ' CL p m co z T N W ~ O U Q 3 z I I I p I 8 I Q lie? I Z O I Z I a` Z ~ o z Q U Q t3 oW _ a - I Z W W = O 04 _ ~s ATTACHMENT#-T0 5 C offr# PD 1s-`n Information Report Report Number: 01-10 For Public Information Meeting of PICKERING Date: March 1, 2010 In Accordance with the Public Meeting Requirements of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment - A 21/09 Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd. (Fieldgate Commercial Properties Ltd.) 1800 Kingston Road (Part 1 40R-3466, Parts 2-5 40R-5805 and Part 1 40R-11779) City of Pickering 1.0 Property Location and Description - the subject lands are located on the north side of Kingston Road east of Brock Road and are approximately 2.6 hectares in area (see Location Map - Attachment #1); - a former vehicle dealership with showroom, offices and repair facilities (now vacant) occupies the eastern portion of the site; - the western portion of the site is undeveloped, but was used as a secondary parking area for the vehicle dealership; - the surrounding land uses include: north - Finch Avenue, large-lot detached houses and townhouses; south - Kingston Road and a one storey shopping centre and townhouses along Bainbridge Drive; west - Canada Post and Durham Regional Police, Finch Avenue and townhouses (under construction); east - Kingston Road and townhouses. 2.0 Applicant's Proposal - the applicant has requested to amend the zoning by-law to permit retail and service commercial uses including a pharmacy, financial institutions, medical and other professional offices as well as complementary retail and service commercial uses (see Applicant's Submitted Plan - Attachment #2); - the applicant is not requesting permission to enlarge or to build additional or new structures on the subject lands; - the proposed uses will occur in the existing building; - the automobile sales and servicing function of the site has been discontinued; - the use of potentially noxious materials required for the servicing of vehicles has ceased. and these materials will be removed from the site; - surface parking (for the eastern, paved section of the site) exists for 266 cars. ATTACHMENT#--4-Z -TO Information Report No. 01-10 REPORW PID Page 2 58 3.0 Official Plan and Zoning 3.1 Provincial Growth Plan - Places to Grow (the Provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe) requires intensification of land uses within municipalities' built boundaries; - the required review of the Pickering Official Plan (to bring it into conformity with Places to Grow) may result in changes to the boundaries, designations, prescribed densities, and other policies pertaining to the subject and other adjacent properties; 3.2 Durham Regional Official Plan - the Regional Plan designates the subject property "Urban System - Regional Corridor''; - "Urban System - Regional Corridor" areas are to be planned and developed as mixed-use areas, including residential, commercial and service areas with higher densities; - the proposal appears to comply with the Durham Regional Official Plan; 3.3 Pickering Official Plan - the City of Pickering Official Plan designates the subject property "Mixed-Use Area - Mixed Corridor" (Village East Neighbourhood); - the City is undertaking a review of the Kingston Road Corridor as part of the work required to bring the Pickering Official Plan into conformity with the Provincial Growth Plan and specific policy amendments relating to land use, site development and built form will be considered through this process; - the current Mixed Corridor designation is intended primarily for residential, retail, community, cultural and recreational uses at a scale serving the community; - the subject lands are located within a "Flood Plain Special Policy Area". The Pickering Official Plan allows lands within "Flood Plain Special Policy Areas" to be developed where water velocity or depth during certain flood conditions would not create unacceptable hazard to life or property, when restricted to uses that are not considered highly vulnerable, and where the development would not result in potential environmental impacts and when provided with appropriate flood protection measures; - the. proposal complies with the Pickering Official Plan; 3.4 Kingston Road Corridor Urban Design and Development Guidelines - these guidelines establish a general design framework that supports the long-term vision for the Kingston Road Corridor, and must be considered when evaluating development proposals fronting Kingston Road; - the subject property falls within the Brock Road Corridor Precinct which is to be established as the eastern entrance to Pickering, from Kingston Road and Highway 401; ATTACHMENT#~TO Information Report No. 01-10 REPDRT# PD Page 3 59 the precinct is expected to generally remain an auto-oriented corridor with auto-dependant land uses, but with strengthened pedestrian connections at significant intersections; 3.5 Zoning By-law 3036 - the subject property is currently zoned "CAY - Commercial AutomotiveNehicle Sales and Rental Establishment; - an amendment to the zoning by-law is required to allow any other use on the site; - the applicant has requested an appropriate zone that would permit the proposed retail/commercial uses. 4.0 Results of Circulation 4.1 Resident Comments - none received in response to the circulation to date; 4.2 Agency Comments - Toronto Region and Conservation Authority • accepts the findings and conclusions of the Letter Report describing the flood susceptibility and potential flood-proofing measures for the subject lands and will provide detailed comments as part of their formal response to the rezoning application; 4.3 City Department Comments Development Control • no concern with the application provided that no site changes with respect to grading, drainage or site servicing are proposed; 4.4 Staff Comments - the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement specifies that "(a) Special Policy Area is not intended to allow for new or intensified development and site alteration, if a community has feasible opportunities for development outside the flood plain." (The Planning Act classifies a change in zoning land use category as new development); - staff note that the proposed rezoning does not involve any changes to the site or building form and removes the automotive uses from the subject lands, thereby reducing the chance potential contamination of the Duffins Creek through a flooding event. The TRCA, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) and the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) are aware of staffs position that the proposed rezoning be considered as an interim use until such time as the City completes its conformity exercise including the work necessary to update its Special Policy Areas to align with the most recent TRCA flood plain mapping and MNR and MMHA policies.; ATTACHMENT# Z/ Information Report No. 01-10 REPORT# PD Page 4 60 in reviewing the application to date, the following matters have been identified by staff for further review and consideration: • whether a road widening may be required for Kingston Road; • the site currently has an over-supply of parking. Staff are evaluating whether there is merit in proposing the removal of some of the impervious parking to allow for larger landscape areas even though the proposal is for an interim use; • ensuring that the proposed uses are viable for the location, compatible with and sensitive to existing surrounding development, including traffic, noise, level of activity, scale and intensity of the uses; • resident and neighbouring owner concerns; • agency comments with respect to the uses that could be considered high risk for inclusion within the flood plain; • in consideration of the interim nature of the zoning amendment application a sustainability report was not required. Staff will, however, evaluate and report back on the sustainable aspects of the application. I 5.0 Procedural Information - written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the Planning & Development Department; - oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting; - all comments received will be noted and used as input in a Planning Report prepared by the Planning & Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council; - if you wish to reserve the option to appeal Council's decision, you must provide comments to the City before Council adopts any by-law for this proposal; - if you wish to be notified of Council's decision regarding this proposal, you must request such in writing to the City Clerk. 6.0 Other Information 6.1 Appendix No. I - list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City Departments that have comments on the applications at the time of writing report; 6.2 Information Received copies of the plans and studies listed below are available for viewing at the offices of the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department: Conclusions summarized here are for information purposes only. Further review and staff/agency comments are still required; ATTACHMENT#_~Z_1o Information Report No. 01-10 REPORT#PC Ls-io Page 5 61 Planning Justification Letter (comments required from City and Region) • concludes that the reuse of the existing building and site is a sustainable approach to development of the land and that the proposed uses are more appropriate to the neighbourhood than the former vehicle sales and rental establishment; Limited Phase 11 Geo-Environmental Subsurface Investigation, 2003 (comments required from City Engineering) • concludes that subsurface conditions on the site meet Ministry of the Environment guidelines for commercial uses; - Proposed/Existing Site Plan; (comments required from City and Region Engineering); - Proposed Elevations; 6.3 Company Principal - the owner of the subject property is Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd.; Fieldgate Commercial Properties Ltd. (Matthew West) is the applicant. ORIGINAL SIGNED BY ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Isa James, MCIP, RPP Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Planner II Manager, Policy IJ:jf Attachments Copy: Director, Planning & Development ATTACHMENT#'TO REPORT# PD /5-10 Appendix No. I to Information Report No..01-10 62 Commenting Residents and Landowners (1) none received to date Commenting Agencies (1) Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Commenting City Departments (1) Development Control i ATTACHMENT# ? ~TO REPORT# PO " 40 Excerpts from City Planning & Development - Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, March 1, 2010 63 7:30 pm - Council Chambers. Chair: Councillor O'Connell (III) PART `A' INFORMATION REPORTS 1. Zoning By-law Amendment - A 21/09 Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd.. (Fieldgate Commercial Properties Ltd.) 1800 Kingston Road (Part 1, 40R-3466, Parts 2-5 40R-5805 and Part 1 40R-11779) 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. Ross Pym, (Acting) Manager, Development Review gave an outline of the requirements for a Statutory Meeting under the Planning Act. He also noted that if a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions to the City before the by-law is passed, that person or public body are not entitled to appeal the decision of City Council to the Ontario Municipal Board, and may not be entitled to be added as a party to the hearing unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Isa James, Planner II, gave an overview of zoning amendment application A 21/09. Gerry Gazarek the applicant appeared before the Committee in support.of the application. Mr. Gazarek noted that he had not expected to be before Council requesting rezoning but also noted that he had not expected to be told that his GM dealership was to shut down. Mr. Gazarek stated that he needed the rezoning in for his become viable again. He also noted that ezoning n order r h s property to . rezoning was required because there were no opportunities for him to continue in the auto industry at this time. Mr. Gazarek noted that he was willing to work with his neighbourhood and was looking for support after 32 years of contributing to the community. He stated that he had no confirmed tenants for the property and was not interested in opening up the Finch Avenue driveway to the property. A representative for the application appeared before the Committee in support of the application. He noted that the potential of housing in this area was unlikely and stated that they were investigating what would work in the area. He noted that they were aware they would have to work with the residents and were more than happy to work on the plan together. 1 i I ATTACHMENT WORT# PD D Excerpts from City 0~ _ Planning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, March 1, 2010 64 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor O'Connell Catherine Reidt, 1744 Finch Avenue, appeared before the Committee and stated that the Gazarek's are great neighbours and noted that the residents in the area were looking forward to adding input into the process. She stated that they liked the idea of a Medical Centre or professional buildings and noted that they would like to see something with regular hours and quiet weekends. She noted that the residents were concerned with additional traffic on Finch Avenue and also noted that they would like to see an increased tree barrier. Ms. Reidt questioned how much height could be placed on the building and noted that the residents did not want to be shadowed by a high building. She also noted additional concerns of drainage problems, additional fill on the site and garbage. Ms. Reidt stated that she realized there would be future meetings and wanted to make sure they were kept informed of the application. She also noted that residents would like to see the driveway that goes onto Finch Avenue not incorporated into the new uses and also stated that she did not want to see a strip mall. A letter from Brockington Plaza Inc. and a petition from area residents were submitted as correspondence to the application. . 2 ATTACHMENT#=TO REPORT# PDT' Z9 65 BROCKINGTON PLAZA INC. 17 Portsmith Road, Toronto, ON M2L 3W7 phone 416 445-8913 fax 416 445-0940 FACSIMILE TRANSMISSIO REC E I V E CITY OF PICKE;RING FAX 4905 420-9685 FEB 1 b 201(j February 17, 2010 FEB 2 2 2010 CORPORATE SERVICES ~CITY OF PICKERfNG City of Pickering PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, ON LI V 6K7 Re: Re-Zoning of the property known as 1800 Kingston Rd. Pickering, ON Zoniniz Amendment Application - A 21/09 We are the owners of the plaza across the street from the applicant. It is our opinion, based on 20 years experience of owning the plaza at 1725 Kingston Road, Pickering, ON, that an additional commercial plaza on Kingston Road will only aggravate businesses who are already struggling to survive. We have vacancies at this time and tenants keep changing quite frequently due to lack of business. The applicant wants to put a pharmacy, there is already a pharmacy at 1725 Kingston Road, restaurants are closing down due to lack of business, and any additional commercial plaza in the area will just expedite the closing by the existing merchants. In addition, the traffic at the intersection of Bainbridge and Kingston Road is already over congested and additional commercial development will have a negative impact on an existing traffic situation a traffic study should be done prior to any consideration given to the application. The applicant claims that the existing plaza has outlived its usefulness, we can argue with this sort of claim, its true that GM closed many of the dealerships due to their restructuring however, there are car imports who still do a thriving business and this location is still a desired dealership and car servicing. Therefore we believe that the present use shall be maintained and for the above reasons we are objecting to the above re-zoning. Yours truly BROCKINGTON PLAZA INC. Z. Schmerler ATTACHMENT# 7 To REPORT# PD /S- 66 From: gordon reidt [mailto:reidtathome@sympatico.caj Sent: April 8, 2010 12:30 PM To: James, Isa Subject: Zoning Amendment Application - A21/09 Greetings Isa, Thank you so much for your call. When we met as a community prior to the March 1 meeting, this is the list of uses that we produced: Medical centre Expanded post office Financial institution Retirement facility Government building of some kind Funeral parlour Professional office, law, insurance etc As we talked we determined that the qualifications that all of these seem to share are that they have regulated hours and are generally quiet in the evening and on weekends. We would be most unhappy with any use that involved food, as garbage and odours are huge concerns. Our other concerns are as follows: Keeping Finch Ave. dead-end No access to Finch from the subject property Increasing and caring for the tree barrier along the north edge of the property Height restrictions - we do not want to live in a shadow Traffic Drainage A question - since the property is undergoing change - would this be the perfect time to realign the exit to that it is situated directly across from Bainbridge and the existing traffic light would contribute to safety and traffic flow? Take care. With thanks, Catherine Reidt ATTACHMENT#-IL-TO I-Cu ,~d I` `A N 6 7 REPORT# PD. S'-i o #zw .To: City of Pickering Feb 20th 2010 Re: Zoning Amendment Application - A 21/09 s I Attention: Debbie Shields City Clerk As residents of the Finch Ave. neighborhood adjoining the subject property, we are KS concerned about the proposed changes. ~ We look forward to being part of a collaborative discussion which will profoundly shape the eastern "gateway to Pickering". We are grateful for your support with past issues and we :tre confident that once again we. be involved in making choices that are beneficial to all. We are looking forward to the March I" meeting and request the opportunity to express our concerns. cc: Mayor David Ryan Ward 1 Regional Councillor Bonnie Litteley Ward 1 City Councillor Jennifer O'Connell Ward 2 Regional Councillor Bill McLean Ward 2' City Councillor Doug Dickerson Ward 3 Regional Councillor Rick Johnson Ward 3 City Councillor David Pickles Sincerely: Name Address Contact # . G S L-e?P R D J 9- (o (o F i cc-f+ Aola 4cs. ' £slo. -449(4 q` 1-)TEFE 1..EP D x-66 F►Qcl`, qos 86. 4a -E?)ivlr) F0, L0La 1,710 5,NGI4 19VR- C/ ar - 1 V f V E N Imo wL 173© f=I^)cI-f K1v'g low ? - V JL-1% vvlr s0.✓ F~~~ =~~✓~cJ/dva ~dS ~Z~ q?,'T Page l of 2 ATTACHMENT#____..---TO REPORT# PD--/.:;f - / 0 68 Re: Zoning Amendment Application - A 21/09 i Name Address Contact # o6E~ '9 so►.~ j73'4-FtMcrt Pu o5--4;Z-2- 902 9`'{' MARL i i I- i 033 -7 g W E OV. U4 l oo N V 6 6- q22 I fA c Al S cif OQt/ 76o F/ti °l~~S L 6 - 3s e; c~(R~~ / sG~fo~~/ Floc 1 o _ X26 - 3s~o 1C2fSi ~N o✓C t 1~6a F'l~(/c ~e %91 - 26 - ~fl j 7 ~f 8 I'i ►v cH A vE CIO's - Z 3 q- q JAG, Lvi2 171E-~ Cr /4-v s i s - c,4 A vli Rogaz TLS d L u Y.3 b 15 - <3• S f39?J-rLL;Y 117 o Luc: rte'- - 5 gl L 85 '1Z ~J .j p'ly' i J <rCC?S~ 6453 --76,9 Page 2 of 2 . I ~ ATTACHMENT#- ~/TO REPORT# PO 6 March 23, 2010 RECEIVED MAR 2 6 20101. Ms. Isa James, MCIP, RPP CITY OF PICKERING PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT Planner II DEPARTMENT Planning & Development Department City of Pickering One The Esplanade The Regional - Pickering, Ontario Municipality L1V 6K7 of Durham Planning Department 605 ROSSLAND ROAD E Re: Application to Amend the Zoning By-law Z21109 4TM FLOOR Applicant: Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd. PO BOX 623 Location: Part of Lot 18, Conc. 1 WHITBY ON L1 N 6A3 CANADA 1800 Kingston Road 905-668-7711 Municipality: City of Pickering Fax: 905-666-6208 Email: planning@durham.ca We have completed our reviewed of the above-captioned rezoning application, www.durham.ca and comments are provided regarding conformity to the Durham Regional A.L. Georgieff, MCIP, RPP Official Plan, delegated Provincial Plan policies, Regional Transit, the Commissioner of Planning proposed method of servicing, and transportation. The applicant is requesting to amend the zoning of the subject site designated CA3 to permit additional site-specific commercial uses for redevelopment of the existing building. Official Plan Conformity The subject site is designated "Living Area" in the Durham Regional Official Plan. This designation permits limited office development and limited retailing of goods and services. The proposed application conforms with the Regional Official Plan. Kingston Road is designated as a "Regional Corridor," and as a "Transit Spine." It is the intent of this Plan that sites along Regional Corridors be developed as mixed-use areas, which include residential, commercial and service areas with higher densities, supporting transit service and featuring a high degree of pedestrian oriented design. The proposal to permit additional site-specific commercial uses at the site supports higher density developments adjacent to Regional Corridors which is consistent with the policies of Regional Official Plan. "Service ExceHence ror our Comh7unities" G) 1001Y.; Post Consumer i ATTACHMENT -2.10 - i orfr# PD-/S-/o 70 2 Delegated Provincial Plane Policy We have completed the screening of delegated Provincial Plans policy for this application. The subject site was previously an automobile dealership. We will require an environmental site assessment to be completed at the property to ensure there is no evidence of site contamination. There are no other matters of provincial interest applicable to this application. Regional Transit The recently completed Long Term Transit Strategy has recommended the early installation of higher-order transit along this section of Kingston Road. There are no sidewalks provided along the north side of Kingston Road adjacent to the subject site which limits access to and from public transit. We would request the City of Pickering to investigate the possibility of connecting sidewalks along this portion of Kingston Road as part of this application. Regional Servicing The existing 50 mm water connection from Kingston Road is no longer in use and must be disconnected and abandoned at full cost of the applicant. Should upgrades to existing municipal services are needed to support the redevelopment, the applicant may resolve servicing requirements at site plan approval process. Transportation It is expected the redevelopment of the site will increase traffic levels, therefore, the driveway must be relocated to align with the intersection of Kingston Road and Bainbridge Drive to improve the level of service for both pedestrians and vehicles from a safety and operations perspective. The applicant will be responsible for payment of all costs associated with the alignment of the driveway including additional traffic signal equipment. There appears to be sufficient right-of-way across the Kingston Road frontage, however, the Region may require minor road widening or sight triangle dedication at the Bainbridge Drive intersection. This will be determined at the initial design for the traffic signal. ~I A7TACWMENT#-2- -TO 71 REPORT# 3 Traffic Impact Study The preparation of a traffic impact study will be required to support this application. The Region may require additional road improvements based on projected inbound and outbound movements to support the redevelopment. Please do not hesitate to call me at (905) 668-4113, ext.. 2543, if you have. any questions with respect to our comments. Yours truly, Vannitha Chanthavong, MCIP, RPP Planner Current Planning cc: Peter Castellan, Regional Works Department ATTACHMENT#L---TO REPORT# PDT- TORONTO AND )CREGIONT 7 2 onservan for The Living City April 12, 2010 CFN 43477.01 X-REF CFN 41813.04 VIA MAIL AND EMAIL (Iiames cityofpickering.com) Ms. Isa James City of Pickering Pickering Civic Centre 1 The Esplanade Pickering ON L1V 6K7 Dear Ms. James: Re:. Zoning By-law Amendment Application A21/09 on Lands Municipally Known As 1800 Kingston Road Part 1 of Plan 40R-3466 and Parts 2-5 of Plan 40R-5805 and Part 1 40R-1179 (Gazarek Realty Holdings) Staff at the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) have received notice of the application above and, as you know, have participated in pre-application consultations with the Owner and the Owner's agents. We have now had an opportunity to review the application and wish to provide the following comments. Purpose of the Application We understand that the purpose of the application is to amend Zoning By-law 3036, which currently permits a 'Vehicle Sales and Rental Establishment' on the subject lands, by adding additional commercial uses. We further understand that the Owner's application seeks to add additional commercial uses in order to facilitate the re-use of the former automobile dealership building. We note that the Owner's application, as currently set out also seeks to add additional commercial uses to the vacant parcel of land fronting Finch Avenue and Brock Road. Special Policy Area Designation The subject lands are within a Special Policy Area (SPA), as delineated on Schedule III, Resource Management of the Pickering Official Plan. The SPA designation has been approved by the provincial Ministries of Natural Resources and Municipal Affairs and Housing in order to recognize that this portion. of the City of Pickering has historically existed in the flood plain and that site specific policies are required with respect to flood plain management in order to provide for the continued viability of existing uses. The SPA designation provides for relaxed regulation of development within the flood plain recognizing the historically existing uses in the area and the hardship that strict adherence to provincial policies concerning development would cause. A is the understanding of TRCA staff that amendments to zoning by-laws within the SPA to add uses requires approval from the provincial ministries. We further understand that City of Pickering staff have made efforts to contact provincial staff with respect to this application. We encourage city staff to continue to seek provincial concurrence with the application prior to the enactment of the amending By-law. F:\Home\Public\Development ServicesOurham RegionTickering\1800 Kingston_1.wpd Member of Conservation Ontario ~R 1 .5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca i ATTACHMENTS LO TO 7 3 REPORTS PD_ 1S' to Ms. Isa James -2- April 12, 2010 Objection to Additional Uses on Vacant Parcel TRCA staff object to the addition of commercial uses to the vacant parcel located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Finch Avenue and Brock Road. This aspect of the amendment is not consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, 2005 (PPS 2005); as the SPA is not meant to provide for new or intensified development (See definition of SPA in PPS, 2005). Recommendation Through our pre-application consultation with the Owner, the Owner's agents and city staff, we understand that the Owner seeks to add a limited number of additional commercial uses to allow the existing floor plate of the vacant automobile dealership on the subject lands to remain commercially viable and to be re-used for new commercial uses outside of the former automobile dealership use. In addition, efforts are to be made as part of a future site plan application to increase the flood protection to the existing structure where feasible. Given this prescribed context, TRCA staff do not object to the application subject to the following: • that introduction of new commercial uses shall exclude the prohibited uses set out in Policy 15.31(i)(i) to 15.31(1)(iii) of the City of Pickering Official Plan; • that the amendment include a holding symbol with provisions in the By-law allowing removal subject to the owner having entered into a site plan agreement with the City of Pickering that incorporates plans to the satisfaction of the TRCA with respect to flood p rotection/flood proofing measures and the issuance of a TRCA permit pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06; • that the amendment apply to the existing floor plate of the vacant automobile dealership and not to any vacant lands. We would appreciate a copy of the draft By-law once it has been drafted in order to provide further technical input, as necessary. Please contact the undersigned if you have any questions or concerns with the contents of this letter. Yours truly, c Chris Jones, MCIP, ~RPP ' Senior Planner Planning and Development Extension 5718 CJ/ cc: Russel White, Fieldgate Developments (via email only russelw@fieldgatedevelopments.com) Terry Fancy, Ministry of Natural Resources (via email only theresa.fancy@ontario.ca) Louis Bitonti, Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (via email only louis.bitonti@ontario.ca) Steve Heuchert, TRCA (via email only, sheuchert@trca.on.ca) F:\Home\Public\Development Services\Durham Region\Pickering\1800 Kingston_1.wpd ATTACHMENT TO 74 m _ . o # 5- REPORT # PD /MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. December 29, 2009 140 Renfrew Drive, Suite 201, Markham, Ontario, Canada L3R 6B3 Tel: 1-905-513-0170 x106 Fax: 1-905-513-0177 Planning & Development Department www.mgp.ca City of Pickering jjaque@mgp.ca One The Esplanade Pickering, ON L1 V 6K7 09:1891 Attention: Isa James, Senior Planner - Policy Re: The Question of Whether There is a Need for a Market Impact Study in Support of a ZBA Application for the Addition of Retail & Service Uses at 1800 Kingston Rd. As discussed during Pre-consultation meetings with Staff, the owners of the commercial property at 1800 Kingston Rd in the City of Pickering, Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd, asked Malone Given Parsons for a Letter of Opinion to be provided to the City regarding the question of whether there is a need for a market impact study in support of their ZBA application. It is my understanding that Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd plans to redevelop the former Sheridan Chevrolet Cadillac car dealership located at 1800 Kingston Rd and requires a ZBA to expand the uses permitted on this property to include retail and service uses. I have examined the subject site and the redevelopment proposal, have discussed this matter with Jerry Gazarek, with Fieldgate Developments and with the City's Planning and Development Staff and have reviewed the applicable City of Pickering Official Plan policies. I am satisfied that in view of the nature and limited scale of the proposed redevelopment and the location of this property and in view of the current Pickering market analysis information which is available and the general market context it identifies, that the City's Staff and Council should not require a market impact study for the purposes of evaluating the Gazarek Realty Holdings Ltd ZBA application. 1800 Kingston Rd is situated in the Kingston Road Corridor a short distance from the Brock Road and Kingston Road intersection, is designated Mixed Use, forms part of a commercial cluster that has evolved since the original zoning for the automobile dealership was put in place and is adjacent to the City's Specialty Retailing Node. While the uses currently permitted are restricted to automotive related retail, this is a commercial site in the City's main commercial corridor and is an appropriate retail and service and professional office use location. 7 5 ATTACHMENT t # TO Isa James, City of Pickering REPURT # PD December 29, 2009 Page 2 (09:1891) The main property totals approximately 4 acres and the existing automobile dealership building is approximately, 40,000 square feet (3,585 square metres). The preliminary development proposal contemplates retaining the existing building and modifying it to accommodate uses such as a pharmacy and medical clinic, professional offices and retail and service commercial tenants ranging in size from 1,750 to 9,015 square feet (162.6 square metres to 837.54 square metres) of ground floor area with some second floor mezzanine or professional space with an estimate of about seven tenants at grade. The City of Pickering Official Plan policies relating to Development Review (15.4) state that: Outside the Downtown Core, City Council in the review of development proposals for new or expanded gross leasable floor space for the retailing of goods and services, a) shall, for the development of 2,500 square metres or greater, of floor space, and b) may for the development of less than 2,500 square metres offloor space as determined through a pre-submission consultation in section 15.2, require a market impact study 1. to justify the proposed floor space for the retailing of goods and services, and 2. to demonstrate that such additional floor space will not unduly affect the viability of any lands designated or developed for the retailing of goods or services. As market consultant engaged by the City of Pickering to carry out Peer Reviews and provide advice to the City on market related matters, I have examined two major Pickering retail market studies that have been conducted in the past two years. These studies addressed development in the Specialty Retailing Node and in Pickering's overall commercial structure, and analyzed retail market demand throughout the City of Pickering and its market area. In my opinion a new market impact study undertaken at this time would not provide fundamentally different information regarding the market support for additional retail space at locations in the Eastern part of the South Pickering urban area than is currently available to staff in the recent studies that have been submitted to the City in support of other applications. The possibility of adverse impacts on established Pickering commercial areas relates in large part. to the nature and size of a development, its location and the presence or absence of market support. The amount of retail and service space in the 1800 Kingston Rd redevelopment will vary according to the proportion of medical and professional facilities in the total 3,585 square metres of project tenant mix. It does appear likely that the retail and service space proportion may exceed the threshold size of 2,500 square meters but in my view can still be regarded as being quite minor in scale and not of a scope likely to have disruptive impacts on other commercial areas. ATTACHMENT #TO C Isa James, City of Pickering REPORT # PD 7V December 29, 2009 co9:is9>> Page 3 Recent market studies have identified Pickering as experiencing a market situation where fairly significant increases in population and expenditure potential are forecast to occur over the near to medium term. This typically provides circumstances where market support is available and additions of retail space are both needed and can be accommodated without significant adverse impact consequences. The objective of the tests in the City's Official Plan is to ensure that new retail developments or expansions to existing retail developments do not have adverse affects that would change the nature of the City's established and future commercial areas or impair their capacity to function as planned. . The information already available to Staff is sufficient to provide a sound basis on which to determine that the addition of a limited quantity of medical, professional office, retail and service uses at the 1800 Kingston Road location would pose no threat to the planned function of the City's Downtown Core Area and commercial areas and will not unduly affect the viability of any lands designated or developed for the retailing of goods or services in Pickering or elsewhere in Durham Region. I trust these comments are helpful. Please do not hesitate to call me if you have questions or wish to discuss these matters or if any aspect of this matter needs to be addressed in further detail. Cordially, JERYL JAQUE wL.l Consultant to MALONE GIVEN PARSONS LTD. Ciur Report To Planning & Development PICKERING - committee Report Number: PD 1.6-10 77 Date: June 7, 2010 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 20/09 M. Gonsalves 531 Rougemount Drive (Part of Lot 44, Plan 350) City of Pickering Recommendation: 1. That Report PD 16-10 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 20/09 submitted by M. Gonsalves to amend the zoning of the subject property to an "R4" - Fourth Density Residential zone in order to permit the creation of two lots with minimum frontage of 15.0 metres on lands being Part of Lot 44, Plan 350, City of Pickering, be approved; and 3. Further, that the draft zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 20/09, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 16-10, be forwarded to City Council for enactment. Executive Summary: The application proposes to amend the existing "R3" Residential zoning which requires a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres to an "R4" Residential zoning in order to facilitate a future severance application to create two residential lots with a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres on Rougemount Drive (see Location Map and Applicant's Submitted Plan, Attachments #1 & #2). The subject property currently supports a detached dwelling. The recommended zoning for this application will establish performance standards for the subject lands which will permit the development of two lots that are compatible with the surrounding neighbourhood and conform to the Pickering Official Plan. The City's specific development requirements, including a tree inventory report, will be addressed through conditions of any future land severance application. The proposed by-law contains requirements that will allow the development of detached dwellings with appropriate building height and front yard depth standards to further assist with compatibility of any future development. Report PD 16-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: M. Gonsalves (A 20/09) Page '2 78 It is recommended that this application be approved and the draft by-law amendment be forwarded to Council for enactment. Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the proposed development. Sustainability Implications: Staff's review of the application against the City's Draft Sustainable Development Guidelines resulted in a score below the Level 1 standard. Given the small scope of the application and the infill nature of the project, there is limited opportunity to achieve a Level 1. The proposed development will take advantage of the existing infrastructure and services within the City's urban area. The applicant intends to preserve existing trees on the property to the greatest extent possible, and to undertake remedial planting. Further opportunities exist for the builder to consider sustainable options in the construction process. Background: 1.0 Comments Received 1.1 Prior to the Information Meeting Correspondence was received from Michael and Sheila Wallace of 527 Rougemount Drive advising of their opposition to the application with the concern that the change the zoning will result in an increase in density of the area (see Attachment #4). 1.2 At the March 1, 2009 Information Meeting (see text of Information Report and Meeting Minutes, Attachments #5 & #6) Six area residents spoke at the Information Meeting and expressed concerns pertaining to: the reduction of lot sizes; no sidewalks on Rougemount Drive; destabilization of the neighbourhood; lack of parks in the area; and low water pressure experience in the area. 1.3 Following the Information Meeting Richard Amero and Darlene Wasney of 531 Rougemount Drive, advised they are opposed to the application as insufficient information is available for the development of the property. Concerns expressed related to drainage, removal of mature trees and the size of future detach dwelling. They requested that any approved be subject to a condition that the applicant provides a sediment and erosion control plan to address drainage concerns. They are oppose to removal of trees on the subject property and that a proposed site plan of the future development be required to determine the appropriateness of the size of the future detached dwelling (see Attachment #7). Report PD 16-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: M. Gonsalves (A 20/09) Page 3 79 Michael Wallace of 527 Rougemount Drive (adjacent property to the south), requested that if the application is approved it be subject to the condition that the applicant erect a 1.5 metre to 1.8 metre high temporary fence from the front of the property along the entire length of the south property line approximately 26 metres in length to meet the existing fence. The fence is to be erected before any demolition or reconstruction begins to ensure trespassing does not occur during the construction stage (see Attachment #8).. Bill Kennedy of 516 Pine Ridge Road submitted a letter with an attached petition signed by 69 residents. The letter states the residents are opposed to the Zoning By-law. Amendment A 20/09 and/or other process which would 'change or degrade the existing Zoning By-law by creating multiple lots, new lots for dwellings, semi-detached dwellings or multi-storied/multi unit buildings. The reasons for opposition included: the proposed development changing the character of, the neighbourhood; setting a precedent in the neighbourhood and the inability of the aging infrastructure supporting the existing and increased loading without adequate and transparent studies (see Attachment #9). 1.4 City Department and Agency Comments Durham Region Planning - proposed application conforms with the Department Regional Official Plan - no matters of the provincial interests are applicable - municipal water supply and sanitary sewer servicing is available to the subject site (see Attachment #10) Toronto and Region - no objection as the subject lands not within Conservation Authority TRCA regulated area (TRCA) (see Attachment #11) Veridian - no objections (see Attachment #12) Development Control - no comments or concerns (see Attachment #13) Report PD 16-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: M. Gonsalves (A 20/09) Page 4 80 2.0 Discussion: 2.1 The proposed 15.0 metre lot frontage and resultant development of two detached dwellings is appropriate and compatible with the character of the neighbourhood and area The Pickering Official Plan recognizes the significance of the Rosebank Neighbourhood character. The Plan specifically restricts the maximum residential density for lands west of Rosebank Road and along Rodd Avenue to 17.0 units per net hectare, whereas, a maximum density of up to and including 30.0 units per net hectare is permitted in other areas of the City designated "Urban Residential Areas - Low Density Area". The Council adopted Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines provides guidance on neighbourhood development at a more detailed level than the Pickering Official Plan including recommendations of lot•areas and frontages. The minimum lot frontage of .15.0 metres (50 feet) as specified in the Development Guidelines, are common to the existing developed area of the Rosebank Neighbourhood. The proposed development will result in a density of 8.0 units per net hectare and a lot frontage of 15.0 metres (50 feet) which conforms with both the Official Plan policies and the Development Guidelines. Properties north of the subject lands on Rougemount Drive and south of Toynevale Road are zoned "R4% Residential Zone with a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres (50 feet). While properties south of the subject lands have lot frontages greater than 15.0 metres, it is staff's opinion that a prominent change of neighbourhood character only emerges immediately south of the Rougemount Drive/Pine Ridge Road intersection with larger lot frontages and front yard depths (see Attachment #3). The subject property is north of the Rougemount Drive/Pine Ridge Road intersection and therefore staff considers the proposed development to be compatible with this immediate character area. There are five lots (including the subject property) on the east side of Rougemount Drive north of Pine Ridge Road that have lot frontage of 30.0 metres (100 feet). Two of these lots are zoned "R4" which requires a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres. It is recognized that similar consideration for.severance may be requested for the 30 metre frontage lots immediately north and south of the subject property, although this is improbable at this time as both lots have dwellings that are newly constructed and/or well maintained. Further, approval of the subject application would not, in our opinion, set a precedent for smaller lot frontages south of the intersection. Report PD 16-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: M. Gonsalves (A 20/09). Page 5 2.2 The proposed development is compatible with existing development and the subject property is recommended to be zoned "R4" A variety of front yard depths and detached dwelling building heights exist on Rougemount Drive between Toynevale Road and Pine Ridge Road from original one storey "cottage" style dwellings to substantial new two and two and a half storey detached dwellings. To minimize the impact of new development on existing dwellings and the character of the neighbourhood, it is recommended that front yard depth and building height be controlled to ensure compatibility. It is recommended that the subject property be zoned "R4" - Residential zone for detached dwellings, with specific standards for front yard depth and building height. The proposed performance standards would include a minimum frontage of 15.0 metres, a minimum lot area of 460 square metres, a minimum front yard depth of 10.0 metres and a maximum building height of 9.0 metres. 2.3 City's interests related to development matters will be addressed through conditions of Land Severance The applicant proposes to demolish the existing dwelling and sever the property into two lots for the construction of two new detached dwellings. The proposed land severance plan is provided for reference (see Attachment #2). In order to ensure appropriate development on the proposed lots, City requirements will be included as conditions of approval for the severance application. These conditions will address standard matters such as, but not limited to, grading & drainage, parkland dedication, construction management, and securities. Further, additional specific conditions will be imposed to address tree preservation and neighbourhood compatibility. Tree Preservation & Sediment and Erosion Control .Prior to any development occurring on-site, the following matters must be implemented: 1. a sediment and erosion control plan be submitted and approved by the City for the site preparation, construction and post-construction phases; 2. a silt and snow fence be installed along the subject property boundaries prior to commencement of any site preparation in order to contain the construction within the subject property; 3. a tree inventory report and preservation/enhancement plan identifying trees to preserve and to be planted in the development process be submitted and approved by the City. i Reoort PD 16-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: M. Gonsalves (A 20/09) Page 6 82 Architectural Design That prior to the finalization of the severance application, the owner prepare a report to the satisfaction of the Director, Planning & Development outlining siting and architectural design objectives for the proposed development that includes streetscape/architectural design matters. The applicant intends to submit a severance application to the Region should Council approve this application. 2.4 By-law to be forwarded to Council The attached draft by-law included as Appendix I to this report implements Staff's recommendation for approval of the application. It is recommended that the attached by-law be forwarded to Council for enactment, should Council approve this zoning amendment application. 3.0 Applicant's Comments The owner has been advised and concurs with the recommendations of this Report. Appendix: Appendix I Draft Implementing Zoning By-law Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Applicant's Submitted Plan 3. City Prepared -Area Lot Frontage Map 4. Resident Comment - Michael and Sheila Wallace 5. Text of Information Report 6. Minutes from Statutory Public Meeting 7. Resident Comment - Richard Amero and Darlene Wasney 8. Resident Comment - Michael Wallace 9. Resident Comment Letter with attached Petition - Bill Kennedy 10. Agency Comments - Region of Durham Planning Department 11. Agency Comments - Toronto and Region Conservation Authority 12. Agency Comments - Veridian 13. City Comments - Development Control Report PD 16-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: M. Gonsalves (A 20/09) Page 7 83 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Mila Yeung Neil Carr IP, RPP Planner I Director, Planning & Development Ross Pym, MCI , RPP (Acting) Manager, Development Review MY:ld Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Cou i Tho a J. Quinn, RD ",MM III Chief Administrativ fficer Appendix I to Report PD 16-10 84 Draft Implementing Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 20/09 8 5 The Corporation of the City ickering By-la DRA Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 2511, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham in Plan 350 Part of Lot 44 in the City of Pickering (A 20/09). Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to rezone the subject property, being Part of Lot 44, Plan 350, in the City of Pickering in order to permit the creation of two lots for detached dwellings; And whereas an amendment to By-law 2511, as amended, is therefore deemed necessary; Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Schedule I Schedule "I" is hereby amended by changing the current "R3" zoning designation to "R4" as shown on Schedule "I" attached thereto. 2. Text Amendment Section 10 - Residential Detached Dwelling Zone - "R4" is hereby amended by adding the following subsection after subsection 10.3.3 10.3.4 Part of Lot 44, Plan 350 Despite the height requirement provision of Subsection 5.10 and the front yard requirement provision of Subsection 10.2.3 of this By-law, where any lot having frontage on Rougemount Drive on lands known as Part of Lot 44, Plan 350 in the City of Pickering, is used for a detached dwelling, the following provision shall apply: (a) Dwelling Height (maximum): 9.0 metres; (b) Front Yard Depth (minimum): 10.0 metres; 3. By-law 2511 By-law 2511, as amended, is hereby further amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as set out in Section 1 and 2 above. Definitions and subject matter not specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by relevant provisions of By-law 2511, as amended. By-law No. xxxx/10 Page 2 86 4. Effective Date This By-law shall come into force in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. By-law read a first, second, and third time and finally passed this day of 12010. David Ryan, M 3~ Ar 01 Debbie Shields, City Clerk ATTACMMENT# l TO 7 REPORT# PD / (1 %O a O X01 p Q O K N\GN~P( CRORTIER J z a v TOYNEVALE ROAD TOYNEVALE ROAD p 582 Q 580 W 578 Q' 581 576 p 579 H W O 574 Z 575 W Li U 572 573 N z 570 569 W 568 567 m ~ U RQS 566 565 7-\ 564 D PU A/ O 562 563 z SC 560 559 COURT tip W Z J 558 557 W ME 556 555 U 554 551 p W 552 549 DRIVE Q 548 z = 546 547 p Q 599 O p 543 = O 542 W 511 Q U Q G 540 ~ 539 536 O K 534 530 535 z ~0 532 Q 90 MAITLAND DRIVE 528 O 52] > 7TT ` 524 523 520 513 516 PR 509 510 506 507 y zz 04 504 500 m W 496 (n 498 494 492 COW ~7 oGZ @~ U l1 O~ 00 GILLMO 400 G30O nM40O Y ROA i 0 ,i ~F F;:~ City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION PLAN 350, PART LOT 44 -1~ OWNER M. GONSALVES DATE DEC. 21, 2009 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. A 20/09 SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY RP N coI etrcEnterpri- Inc. and il. supplier.. All right. R..-d. Not a plan of e,r.,*y, PN-2 c 2005 MPAC pntl it. u ppl . All right. Reserved. Not . plan of Survey. I -J! ATTACHMENT # TO REPORT # PD Ito-(0- INFORMATION COMPILED FROM APPLICANTS SUBMITTED PLAN M. GONSLAVES 8 8 A 20/09 W F-- Z W v, 82.2m 3 3 N 3 PROPOSED SEVERANCE LINE 0 _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - 3. 3 N THIS MAP WAS PRODUCED BY THE CITY OF PICKERING, PLANN/NC & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, - INFORMADON k SUPPORT SERVICES, ' DECEMBER 21, 2009 pp~~ pp -~4' - 50 - 49 49 49 j. 49 52 49 I711#f~r_ - - 3 I _ - Q( 49 1 65 56 52 52 52 52 52 52 58 50 60 50 49 49 _ 75 t5 8 97 60 72 1 66 72 7 TOYNEVALE ROAD 45 _ _ - - 130 50 60 57 57 60 72 72 - _l 50 24 0 ! 50 100 100 -51 l F-- 51 sp - 72 72 f 72 72 78 78 78 ,x'"65 100 . i--_ 50_y 5o 1 .-5° 50 i LLl 60 50 i - t so 50 l 50 50 - %L 65 t - - 36 i 35 ~ ~ - 50 i ~ 60 50 - 50 ~ - 35\ ~l r-- 259 l - - 49 'S0 50 50 _ 50 _ 60 98 49 50 50 50 64 Fq 50 _ _ _ 5 - 0 ~ 49 ~ 49 50 0 ~ ~ - ~ 50_ ~ 50 49 49 50 75 I 49 - 53 - 55 b0 0 49 I 49 50 I 49 g 100 A _ i 2 50 i i8 - I 121 ~ i 49 50 75 49 - l i m I C OURT 50 87 I 45 50 - _ - - 50 '49 5 54 51 58 - :50 50 ? 49 49 49 ~i~50i ~i 40 52 76 / O .120 ! 42 I ` 50 s0 50 t 38 ti 41 i 37 - 100 / c~ - - DRIVE ° % 5b..._ 50 59 - Z 100 50 53 49 _49 49 49 58 64 5b 100 i A 66 -51 0 So 60 I 50 h 50 _ 100 i~ 61 49 LiJ 50 50 < i 50 50 - \ ~ _ - Q h-~.._.. ---....100 i 89 70 0 50 E 50 - ~~0A•. ~ 0 ...100 7i 50 - - ~y 73 74 _ i f l / _ 50 I 50 50 t ~ ;i 100 ~ v ~ 100 V 100 -7 50 - 50 51 / / ~r 1 - 50 - 50 50 69 I / 51 50 50 j 100 100 so _ 0 50 l 50 4 100 50 50 50 W . - - - - - ~ 75 E 50 / 50 ~i ~ ~ 100 ~ j _ ~ 0 \ 75/ i~ 50 -j i V 112 50 /V ` j~ J 100 - i~ j ~25 ~ ~ % ~ _76 ~(~V 0 % 88 ~i 0 50. - 1oa es / 80 \ o 9a ~ as-- = , ~ izo ~ vo , 111 / O = , 55 - _ i , ' so i~ 85 i ; 50 YW n1 ' i 50 72 O _ _a Ci 55 50 r f 55 50 104 City of Pickering Area Lot Fronts a Ma feet Plannin & Develo ment De artment Legend Subject Property Rosebank Neighbourhood Lot Frontage(feet) City Boundary Source: MPAC Property Assessment - February 2010 nat Ac Inc. and . l Hera. All ri d. Reserved. Note lan er a~rve . pN- 1 ~daea uPP a P Y DATE: Mar. 23, 2010 SCALE: 1:3,458 MPAC and its su iers. All ' hts Reserved. Not a Ian of Svve . r ATTACHMENT # TO REPORT # PD Ib-lO 9 Yeung, Mila From: Roberts, Linda Sent: February-11-10 3:07 PM To: Yeung, Mila Subject: FW: zoning bylaw amendment application A 20/09 Forwarding for your information. 0 From: Shields, Debbie M~rN Sent: February 11, 2010 2:20 PM To: Roberts, Linda Subject: FW: zoning bylaw amendment application A 20/09 Please circulate to Planning. From: mwallace. prod uctions@sympatico.ca [mailto mwallace. prod uctions@sym patico. ca] Sent: February 11, 2010 10:45 AM Shields, Debbie r .,oject: zoning bylaw amendment application A 20/09 Please do not allow a change to the current zoning.We have resided for 37 years on the adjoining property and appreciate very much the low density of this zoning. Yours sincerely, Michael and Sheila Wallace 527 Rougemount Drive Pickering On L1W 2C1 1 I City o¢~ ATTACHMENT # To REROR7 # PQ /6-/0 Information Report Ant Report Number:.03-10 PI K_ w For Public Information Meeting of Date: March 1, 2010 In Accordance with the Public Meeting Requirements of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 20/09 M. Gonsalves 531 Rougemount Drive (Part of Lot 44, Plan 350) City of Pickering 1.0 Property Location and Description - the subject property is located on the east.side of Rougemount Drive, north of the intersection of Rougemount Drive and Pine Ridge Road (see Location Map, Attachment #1); - the subject property is currently zoned "R3" - Third Density Residential Zone, which allows for a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres; - the subject property has an area of approximately 0.25 hectare, a lot frontage of 30.48 metres and currently supports a detached dwelling with an attached garage; - the land uses surrounding the subject property are detached residential with various lot frontages. 2.0 Applicant's Proposal - the applicant has requested to amend the existing zoning from "R3" - Third Density Residential Zone (minimum lot frontage 18.0 metres) to "R4" - Fourth. Density Residential Zone to allow for the creation of two lots with a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres, and to allow for the future development of two new detached dwellings (see Applicant's Submitted Plan, Attachment #2) - the existing detach dwelling will be demolished to allow for the future development; - the applicant has not submitted a land severance application to the Durham Region Land Division Committee. 3.0 Official Plan and Zoning 3.1 Durham Regional Official Plan - the Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject property as "Urban Areas - Living Area"; lands in this designation shall be used predominantly for housing purposes; - in the General Policies for "Urban Areas - Living Areas", the Plan indicates that the areas shall be comprised of communities; each community shall ATTACHMENT # 5 TO Information Report No. 03-10 REPORT # PD 16 -io Page 2 92 incorporate the widest possible variety of housing types, sizes and tenure to provide living accommodations that address various socioeconomic factors; the proposal appears to conform to the Durham Region Official Plan; 3.2 Pickering Official Plan - the City.of Pickering Official Plan designates the subject property as "Urban Residential - Low Density Area" within the Rosebank Neighbourhood; lands with this designation are intended primarily for housing; - policies for the Rosebank Neighbourhood restrict lands west of Rosebank Road to the development and infilling of single detached dwellings having a net residential density of 17 units per net hectare (the net residential density proposed by applicant is approximately 8 units per net hectare); - to protect and enhance the character of established neighbourhoods, the Official Plan identifies that such matters as building height, yard setback, lot coverage, access to sunlight, parking provisions and traffic implications should be considered; - the proposal appears to conform with the policies of the Official Plan; 3.3 Compendium Document to the Official Plan (Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines) - the subject property is situated within Design Precinct No. 1 of the "Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines"; - residential development shall be limited to the provision of single detached dwelling only; - new lots created in this precinct area shall have a minimum lot frontage of approximately 15.0 metres and minimum lot depths ranging between approximately 33 metres and 60 metres unless the character of the area is such that a smaller lot frontage or smaller lot depth is desirable; the application proposes lots with 15.2 metres frontage and 82 metres depth; 3.4 Zoning By-law 2511 - the subject property is zoned "R3" - Third Density Residential Zone; the "R3" zoning permits a detached dwelling on a residential lot with a minimum lot frontage of 18.0 metres and a minimum lot area of 550 square metres; - an amendment to the existing zoning by-law is required to allow for a land severance resulting with the creation of two lots with a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres. ATTACHMENT # 5 TO Information Report No. 03-10 REPORT # PD 16-10 Page 3 9~ 4.0 Results of Circulation 4.1 Resident Comments as of the writing of this Report, one comment has been received; a neighbouring resident had concern with the change of zoning resulting to an increase in density from the current low density zoning; 4.2 Agency Comments - Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) • no objections as the subject property is not within a TRCA "Regulated Area" or within any other areas of TRCA intent; 4.3 City Department Comments Development Control no comments or concerns; 4.4 Staff Comments - in reviewing the application to date, the following matters have been identified by staff for further review and consideration: • while the density of the proposed development and proposed lot frontages and depths meet the minimum requirements stated in the policies of Pickering Official Plan and the Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines, staff will evaluate whether the proposed 15.0 metre lot frontages and resultant development will maintain the character of the neighbourhood; • in examining whether the proposed development will maintain the character of the area, staff will undertake a review of the range of existing lot frontages, setbacks and defining characteristics in the Rosebank Neighbourhood to identify the appropriateness of the proposed future development of two new detached dwellings; • staff will evaluate whether the proposed development and land severances will result in a precedent for the neighbouring properties of similar frontages and depths, and whether the cumulative effect of additional severances would significantly alter the character of the area; • the applicant is requesting the "R4" zoning standards; however, the "R4" zone is an older category of zoning and it does not have the same level control as current by-laws for newer residential areas; staff will evaluate the adequacy of the "R4" zoning in determining whether additional zoning controls are required (such as but not limited to restricting garage projections or restricting building height) to ensure that development is compatible and in character with the surrounding area; • currently the driveway and rear yard are bordered with mature trees planted as landscaping; staff will examine the placement of the new detached dwellings and the opportunities of preserving and retaining existing trees. Information Re ort No. 03-10 ATTACHMENT # TO Pa e 4 P REPORT # PD 9 94 5.0 Procedural Information - written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the Planning & Development Department; - oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting; - all comments received will be noted and used as input in a'Planning Report prepared by the Planning & Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council; - if you wish to reserve the option to appeal Council's decision, you must provide comments to the City before Council adopts any by-law for this proposal; - if you wish to be notified of Council's decision regarding this proposal, you must request such in writing to the City Clerk. 6.0 Other Information' 6.1 Appendix No. I list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City Departments that have commented on the applications at the time of writing report; 6.2 Information Received - copies of the plans and studies listed below are available for viewing at the offices of the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department: Conclusions summarized here are for information purposes only. Further review and staff/agency comment are still required; - Planning Justification Letter (comments required from City and Region) • applicant is seeking to conform with the existing character of the current neighbourhood; - Sustainable Development Report (comments required from City and Region) • applicant indicates that any future proposed development to be built on the subject property will use new building materials that are more energy efficient than the current dwelling on the property and that mature trees will be preserved and/or replaced with new trees if removal is necessary due to the proposed development. ATTACHMENT # Information Report No. 03-10 REPORT # PD 16=10 TO Page 5 95 6.3 Company Principal the applicant advises that the owner of the subject property is Michelle Gonsalves ORIGINAL SIGNED BY ORIGINAL SIGNET) BY Mila Yeung Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Planner I Manager, Policy MYAd Attachments Copy: Director, Planning & Development i ATTACHMENT # TO REPORT # PD ~6, Appendix No. I to Information Report No. 03-10 96 Commenting Residents and Landowners (1) Michael and Sheila Wallace Commenting Agencies (1) Toronto Region Conservation Authority Commenting City Departments . (1) Development Control ATTACHMENT #-TO REPORT # PD old Excerpts from 97 Citq _ Planning & Development _Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, March 1, 2010 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor O'Connell (III) PART `A' INFORMATION REPORTS 3. Zoning By-law Amendment Application - A 20/09 M. Gonsalves 531 Rougemount Drive (Part of Lot 44, Plan 350) 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. Ross Pym, (Acting) Manager, Development Review gave an outline of the requirements for a Statutory Meeting under the Planning Act. He also noted that if a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions to the City before the by-law is passed, that person or public body are not entitled to appeal the decision of City Council to the Ontario Municipal Board, and may not be entitled to be added as a party to the hearing unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Mila Yeung, Planner I, gave an overview of zoning amendment application A 21/09. A representative for the applicant appeared before the Committee in support of the application and to answer any questions if required. Phillip David, 507 Rougemount Drive appeared before the Committee in opposition to the application. Mr. David felt that the applicant should have to obey the by-laws put in place and noted that when they submitted an application for a severance they had to conform to the by-laws. Richard Fraser, 540 Rougemount Drive appeared before the Committee in opposition to the application and stated that he.felt the neighbourhood was being degraded by the continuous reduction in lot sizes. Trina Chiarelli, 524 Pineridge Road appeared before the Committee in opposition to the application. She noted that her property consisted of two 50 foot lots and she was not able to divide it and questioned why this application was being considered. She noted that there were no parks in the area, no sidewalks and the water pressure was low so why would we continue to add additional housing in the area. 1 ATTACHMENT # TO REPORT # PD_ 6b-te Excerpts from City o¢~ _ Planning & Development 98 Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, March 1, 2010 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor O'Connell Bill Kennedy, 516 Pineridge Road appeared before the Committee and noted that he had lived in the area since 1982 and had seen several severances of property in the neighbourhood. He noted that the zoning was k3 and should not _._be.changed to allow for the continuation of sub dividing property. Maurice Brenner, 711 Sunbird Trail appeared before the Committee and noted that Rougemount Drive did have set guidelines in the Official Plan. He stated that with each severance you are changing the features. John Miron, 314 Dyson appeared before the Committee and noted that the top part of Rougemont Drive needed to be planned better and felt that the continuation of lot severances would standardize Rougemount Drive. Councillor O'Connell called for a recess from 9:40 pm to 9:50 pm. Councillor O'Connell gave the Chair to Councillor. Pickles and Councillor Pickles called the meeting to order. 2 9 9 ATTACHMENT # 7 TO REPORT # PD 16-10 Yeung, Mila From: Richard [richard.amero@sympatico.ca] Sent: March-08-10 10:42 AM. To: Yeung, Mila Subject: Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 20/09 for Part Lot 44, Plan 350 ( 531 Rougemount Drive ) Dear Ms. Yeung, With regards to the subject property 531 Rougemount Drive, we would like to submit a few areas of concern that we have relating to the future development of this property. We live directly behind ( east ) of the mentioned property at 534 Mountain Ash Drive and are the original residents having resided here for thirteen years. Our main concerns moving forward are drainage, removal of mature trees and size of homes being considered. Drainage has been a problem because of the higher elevation of the property at 531 Rougemount Drive along with the high clay content. We have had planting material washed out to the front of our home from the backyard during heavy rainfall because of poor drainage and runoff. If future development is to be considered an engineering report outlining drainage and soil compaction should be considered before approvals on the whole site. Regarding the Tree concern, my wife and I took almost two years to find a neighborhood like the one we live in now with ature trees and abundant wildlife so removal of existing trees especially at the back of the subject property would result our opposing this zoning amendment. Our final concern. is the dwelling sizes to be considered for the proposed site and the setbacks front and back. If we do not know this information how are we supposed to agree or disagree on a zoning amendment. Perhaps if the subject property had a specific site plan with the outline of the dwellings' being proposed this whole matter would be more clear to everyone concerned. In closing due to the insufficient information relating to the subject property ( 531 Rougemount Drive) we oppose this zoning amendment. Richard Amero & Darlene Wasney 534 Mountain Ash Drive Pickering, Ontario L1W 3Z8 i ATTACHMENT # $ TO REPORT # PD /A-~ Yeun , Mila From: mwallace. prod uctions@sy mpatico. ca APR 0 ~ 201Q Sent: April-07-10 7:59 AM To: Yeung, Mila CITY or-- oICKERONG Subject: zoning bylaw amendment app A 20/09, Part Lot 44,PIan 350. PLANNING 8,R ~ELOPI ENT I live at 527 Rougemount Drive, the adjoining property on the south side of the property requesting the amendment. As part of the approval of this application please make sure the approval is CONDITIONAL on the Owner erecting a 5'-6' temporary Fence from the front of the property along the south side property line approx 85 feet in length to meet the existing fence,This fence to be erected BEFORE any demolition or reconstruction begins. This will alleviate our concerns regarding trespassing onto our property during this construction process. Please confirm this condition will be approved so that we know if we need to take this matter further. Thankyou. Michael Wallace 1927 Rougemount Drive ering i ATTACHMENT TO REPORT # PD 16 -/b ; 101 rR Ii-E; FE_ To, Mila Yeung, Planner of Record April 27 h, 2010 The City of Pickering F)~ P R ' , , 101 P! AN'FNYG ANA DEVELONA ENT DEPARTMENT I respectfully request that the attached petition and the statistical results be considered by the Planning staff when preparing their recommendations to the next Planning & Development Committee meeting dealing with application A 20/09, and that the petition text and the statistical results below be read into the minutes of that meeting. Those who have signed this petition are in opposition to Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 20/09 and/or any other process which would change or degrade the existing Zoning By-laws thereby creating multiple lots, dwellings, semi-detached dwellings or multi storied/ multi unit buildings within "Design Precinct No. 1 (Ref. "Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines") not withstanding the Pickering Official Plan. Our committee randomly contacted 70 residents of Rougemount, Woodgrange, and Pine Ridge Roads for their support in opposition to the application in question. 69 residents or 98.6 % agreed with and signed the petition witness the attached. We request the Planning and Development Committee consider this expression of will by the residents they represent when ruling on this and similar applications in the future. Sincerely ) Bill Kenne 51 dPi idge Road Pickerin Attachments cc Bonnie Littley and Jennifer O'Connell ATTACHMENT # TO REPORT # PD !6 /O March/April, 2010 page _of 2 To Mayor, Dave Ryan Councillors; Bonnie Littley, Jennifer O'connell, Bill Mclean, Doug Dickerson, Rick Johnson, David Pickles Planner 1, , Mila Yeung The Planning & Development Committee, and March 1St, 2010 Public Meeting Attendees Those who have signed this petition are in opposition to Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 20/09 and/or any other process which would change or degrade the existing Zoning By-laws thereby creating multiple lots, dwellings, semi-detached dwellings or multi storied/ multi unit buildings within "Design Precinct No. 1 (Ref. "Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines") not withstanding the Pickering Official Plan. Our reasons are: 1. 531 Rougemount Drive is one of four adjacent 30.4m / 100ft. lots and is opposite three lots with frontages of 21.3m / 70ft or 30.4 / 100ft. The proposed minimum frontage change from Zone 3 (18m / 60ft.) to Zone 4 (15.2m / 50ft) and city style buildings would significantly neighborhood character for the'existing single and side split change the bungalows. 2. We are especially concerned that this application will become a precedent for more significant changes that will irreversibly alter a mature, unique neighborhood in a way that is not consistent with the expectations of many of it's existing residents. 3. We are greatly concerned about the safe design limits of the neighborhood's aging infrastructure to support existing or increased loadings without adequate and transparent studies. Examples of our concerns are the failures of the Rodd Avenue sewage pumping station, periodic low water pressures and frequent power failures. Signatory Address Date Fv~_ S 7 t, ol,~ ll / G~ ' r C. 10 , Z al///I r Z-4 23 Of 'sli Z~_ e-41 10 i/~ / din ATTACHRIENT # q TO March/April, 2010 REPORT # PD 16-10 page of 103 To Mayor, Dave Ryan Councillors; Bonnie Littley, Jennifer O'connell, Bill Mclean, Doug Dickerson, Rick Johnson, David Pickles Planner 1, Mila Yeung The Planning & Development Committee, and March 1", 2010 Public Meeting Attendees Those who have. signed this petition are in opposition to Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 20/09 and/or any other process which would change or degrade the existing Zoning By-laws thereby creating multiple lots, dwellings, semi-detached dwellings or multi storied/ multi unit buildings within "Design Precinct No. 1 (Ref. "Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines,,) not withstanding the Pickering Official Plan. Our reasons are: 1. 531 Rougemount Drive is one of four adjacent 30.4m / 100ft. lots and is opposite three lots with frontages of 21.3m / 70ft or 30.4 / 100ft. The proposed minimum frontage change from Zone 3 (18m / 60ft.) to Zone 4 (15.2m / 50ft) and city style buildings would significantly change the neighborhood character for the existing single and side split bungalows. 2. We are especially concerned that this application will become a precedent for more significant changes that will irreversibly alter a mature, unique neighborhood in a way that is not consistent with the expectations of many of it's existing residents. 3. We are greatly concerned about the safe design limits of the neighborhood's aging infrastructure to support existing or increased loadings without adequate and transparent studies. Examples of our concerns are the failures of the Rodd Avenue sewage pumping station, periodic low water pressures and frequent power failures. Si nato Address Date -r - kid CL9 Za / `A / 1 1:~, -T~AGQ LA pAC, LX11 /0 To Mayor, Dave Ryan Councillors; Bonnie Littley, Jennifer O'connell, Bill Mclean, Doug Dickerson, Rick Johnson, David Pickles rE L6 uT~~ac►~rl~laTO 1 0 4 Planner 1, Mila Yeung RE 'OR 7 # PCB e6 0 The Planning & Development Committee, and March 1St, 2010 Public Meeting A-He-ndees Those who have signed this petition are in opposition to Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 20/09 and/or any other process which would change or degrade the existing Zoning By-laws thereby creating multiple lots, dwellings, semi-detached dwellings or multi storied/ multi unit buildings within "Design Precinct No. 1 (Ref. "Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines") not withstanding the Pickering Official Plan., Our reasons are: / 1. 531 Rougemount Drive is one of four adjacent 30.4m 100ft. lots and is opposite three lots with frontages of 21.3m / 70ft or 30.4 / 100ft. The proposed minimum frontage change from Zone 3 (18m / 60ft.) to Zone 4 (15.2m / 50ft) and city style buildings would significantly change the neighborhood character for the existing single and side split bungalows. 2. We are especially concerned that this application will become a precedent for more significant changes that will irreversibly alter a mature, unique neighborhood in a way that is not consistent with the expectations of many of it's existing residents. 3. We are greatly concerned about the safe design limits of the neighborhood's aging infrastructure to support existing or increased loadings without adequate and transparent studies. Examples of our concerns are the failures of the Rodd Avenue sewage pumping station, periodic low water pressures and frequent power failures. Si atory Address Date 17/ 3,i6f 60 "vim 11 / `f / 1 u J ~ c!~) C)A (-I 04D To Mayor, Dave Ryan Councillors; Bonnie Littley, Jennifer O'connell, Bill Mclean, Doug Dickerson, 105 Rick Johnson, David Pickles ATTACHMENT `f TO r REPORT # PD /6/ -/o Planner 1, Mila Yeung The Planning & Development Committee, and March 1", 2010. Public Meeting Attendees Those who have signed this petition are in opposition to Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 20/09 and/or any other process which would change or degrade the existing Zoning By-laws thereby creating multiple lots, dwellings, semi-detached dwellings or multi storied/ multi unit buildings within "Design Precinct No. 1 (Ref. "Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines") not withstanding the Pickering Official Plan. Our reasons are: 1. 531 Rougemount Drive is one of four adjacent 30.4m / 100ft. lots and is opposite three lots with frontages of 21.3m / 70ft or 30.4 / 100ft. The proposed minimum frontage change from Zone 3 (18m / 60ft.) to Zone 4 (15.2m / 50ft) and city style buildings would significantly change the neighborhood character for the'existing single and side split bungalows. 2. We are especially concerned that this application will become a precedent for more significant changes that will irreversibly alter a mature, unique neighborhood in a way that is not consistent with the expectations of many of it's existing residents. 3. We are greatly concerned about the safe design limits of the neighborhood's aging infrastructure to support existing or increased loadings without adequate and transparent studies. Examples of our concerns are the failures of the Rodd Avenue sewage pumping station, periodic low water pressures and frequent power failures. a Address Date q '71 1-7 01// /0 - 7/1 RK;: T !i `//Cl I ~ ~ /0 C'') F :w ~Z ~~G ? f 7II j.. ~_ez, 7~le Mare.b/April, 2010 TAUHAAENT # CI To page -of REPORT # PD 14 _ To Mayor, Dave Ryan Councillors; Bonnie Littley, Jennifer O'connell, Bill Mclean, Doug Dickerson, Rick Johnson, David Pickles Planner 1, Mila Yeung The Planning & Development Committee, and March 1St, 2010 Public Meeting Attendees Those who have signed this petition are in opposition to Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 20/09 and/or any other process which would change or degrade the existing Zoning By-laws thereby creating multiple lots, dwellings, semi-detached dwellings or multi storied/ multi unit buildings within "Design Precinct No. 1 (Ref. "Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines") not withstanding the Pickering Official Plan. Our reasons are: 1. 531 Rougemount Drive is one of four adjacent 30.4m / 100ft. lots and is opposite three lots with frontages of 21.3m / 70ft or 30.4 / 100ft. The proposed minimum frontage change from Zone 3 (18m / 60ft.) to Zone 4 (15.2m / 50ft) and city style buildings would significantly change the neighborhood character for the'existing single and side split bungalows. 2. We are especially concerned that this application will become a precedent for more significant changes that will irreversibly alter a mature, unique neighborhood in a way that is not consistent with the expectations of many of it's existing residents. 3. We are greatly concerned about the safe design limits of the neighborhood's aging infrastructure to support existing or increased loadings without adequate and transparent studies. Examples of our concerns are the failures of the Rodd Avenue sewage pumping station, periodic low water pressures and frequent power failures. Signatory Address Date TtjApril, 2010 ATTACti ENT # y TO page of II REPOPT # PD 16 !O To Mayor, Dave Ryan Councillors; Bonnie Littley, Jennifer O'connell, Bill Mclean, Doug Dickerson, Rick Johnson, David Pickles Planner 1, Mila Yeung The Planning & Development Committee, and March 1St, 2010 Public Meeting Attendees Those who have signed this petition are in opposition to Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 20/09 and/or any other process which would change or degrade the existing Zoning By-laws thereby creating multiple lots, dwellings, semi-detached dwellings or multi storied/ multi unit buildings within "Design Precinct No. 1 (Ref. "Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines") not withstanding the Pickering Official Plan. Our reasons are: 1. 531 Rougemount Drive is one of four adjacent 30.4m / 100ft. lots and is opposite three. lots with frontages of 21.3m / 70ft or 30.4 / 100ft. The proposed minimum frontage change from Zone 3 (18m / 60ft.) to Zone 4 (15.2m / 5 Oft) and city style buildings would significantly change the neighborhood character for the existing single and side split bungalows. 2. We are especially concerned that this application will become a precedent for more significant changes that will irreversibly alter a mature, unique neighborhood in a way that is not consistent with the expectations of many of it's existing residents. 3. We are greatly concerned about the safe design limits of the neighborhood's aging infrastructure to support existing or increased loadings without adequate and transparent studies. Examples of our concerns are the failures of the Rodd Avenue 'sewage pumping station, periodic low water pressures and frequent power failures. Si ndo/r Y Address Date 52(-( f` /0-010 i..J~ •l.i ~kJ ! IJrv~.,l ~Z 1 ~i.~.2~ 1L~ ~c.~Q.. 1-v ~~-U / ~ / ~l~ ~Z P, 1~ rte; r-t- 2> l ~f lL o~ To Mayor, Dave Ryan CQWillors; Bonnie Littley, Jennifer O'connell, Bill Mclean, Doug nickerson, Rick Johnson David Pickles ATTACHMENT #_TO RE:POR ! # PD /6 <d Planner 1, Mila Yeung The Planning & Development Committee, and March 1St, 2010 Public Meeting Attendees Those who have signed this petition are in opposition to Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 20/09 and/or any other process which would change or degrade the existing Zoning By-laws thereby creating multiple lots, dwellings, semi-detached dwellings or multi g storied/ multi unit buildings within "Design Precinct No. 1 (Ref. "Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines") not withstanding the Pickering Official Plan. Our reasons are: 1. 531 Rougemount Drive is one of four adjacent 30.4m / 100ft. lots and is opposite three lots with frontages of 21.3m / 70ft or 30.4 / 100ft. The proposed minimum frontage change from Zone 3 (18m / 60ft.) to Zone 4 (15.2m / 50ft) and city style buildings would significantly change the neighborhood character for the'existing single and side split bungalows. 2. We are especially concerned that this application will become a precedent for more significant changes that will irreversibly alter a mature, unique neighborhood in a way that is not consistent with the expectations of many of it's existing residents. 3. We are greatly concerned about the safe design limits of the neighborhood's aging infrastructure to support existing or increased loadings without adequate and transparent studies. Examples of our concerns are the failures of the Rodd Avenue sewage pumping station, periodic low water pressures and frequent power failures. S,~gna Address Date a G n i r' 5-oly C) 49n 9 /7 1,;26 t 17 /coo o e March/April, 2010 ATTACHMENT ~ G To page _of 109 REPORT # PD To Mayor, Dave Ryan Councillors; Bonnie Littley, Jennifer O'connell, Bill Mclean, Doug Dickerson, Rick Johnson, David Pickles Planner 1, Mila Yeung The Planning & Development Committee,. and March 1st, 2010 Public Meeting Attendees Those who have signed this petition are in opposition to Zoning By-Law Amendment Application A 20/09 and/or any other process which would change or degrade the existing Zoning By-laws thereby creating multiple lots, dwellings, semi-detached dwellings or multi storied/ multi unit buildings within "Design Precinct No. 1 (Ref. "Rosebank Neighbourhood Development Guidelines") not withstanding the Pickering Official Plan. I Our reasons are: 1. 531 Rougemount Drive is one of four adjacent 30.4m / 100ft. lots and is opposite three lots with frontages of 21.3m / 70ft or 30.4 / 100ft. The proposed minimum frontage change from Zone 3 (18m / 60ft.) to Zone 4 (15.2m / 50ft) and city style buildings would significantly change the neighborhood character for the existing single and side split bungalows. 2. We are especially concerned that this application will become a precedent for more significant changes that will irreversibly alter a mature, unique neighborhood in a way that is not consistent with the expectations of many of it's existing residents. 3. We are greatly concerned about the safe design limits of the neighborhood's aging infrastructure to support existing or increased loadings without adequate and transparent studies. Examples of our concerns are the failures of the Rodd Avenue sewage pumping station, periodic low water pressures and frequent power failures. Si nato Address Date r' - /100r. KA, bs-~_G cam cs^ -7 530 e,, ( j V c ) j y w ` ,J L. ~-~.L. S'+ E~~.'~.~11~-~ ~)~t j ±~4~L ~t~1C,~. ;t~ ~~Y ~ /14.SF J ATTACHMENT & TO ~ REPORT # PD 10 !ro -iD April 6, 2010 RECEIVED APR 0 8 2010 Ms. Mila Yeung, Planner 1 Planning & Development Department CITY OF PIKERING One The Esplanade P11-41I GAD E VELOPMEN1 • Pickering, ON L1 V 6K7 Dear Ms. Yeung, The Regional Re: Zoning Amendment Application A 20/09 Municipality 9 of Durham Applicants: Michelle Gonsalves and James Micklewright Planning Department Location: 531 ROugemount Drive Municipality: City of Pickering 605 ROSSLAND ROAD E FLOOR Po BOX 623 We have completed our review of the above-captioned application, and P WHITBY ON L1N 6A3 comments are provided regarding conformity to the Durham Regional Official ,AivADA 905-668-7711 Plan, delegated Provincial Plan policies, and servicing. Fax: 905-666-6208 Email: planningQdurham.ca Official Plan conformity www.durham.ca The subject site is designated "Waterfront Area in the Durham Regional Official A.L. Georgieff, MCIP, RPP Commissioner of Planning Plan. The predominant uses in this designation may consist of marina, recreational, tourist, cultural and community uses, as well as residential uses which support and complement the predominant uses. The proposed application conforms with the Regional Official Plan. Delegated Provincial Plan Policies This application had been screened for delegated Provincial Plan, policies and no matters of provincial interest are applicable. Regional Servicing Municipal water supply and sanitary sewer servicing is available to the subject site. If you have any questions concerning our-comments, please do not hesitate to call me at (905) 668-4113, ext. 2543. Yours truly, Van.nitha Chanthavong, MCIP, RPP Planner Current Planning cc: Peter Castellan, Regional Works "Service Exceflence fc Commanities" 100% Post Consumer ATTACHMENT # ~r TO REPORT # PD llO /D Yeung, Mila From: Chris Jones [cjones@trca.on.ca] Sent: February-01-10 9:09 AM To: Yeung; Mila Subject: Zoning Amendment Application A20/09 Hello Mila: We have received notice for the application captioned above. TRCA staff have no objection to the application, as the subject lands are not within a TRCA Regulated Area or within any other area of TRCA interest. Thank you, Chris Jones, MCIP, RPP Senior Planner Planning and Development. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority ,JoShoreharn Drive vnsview, Ontario M3N 1S4 none: (416) 661-6600 ext: 5718 Fax: (416) 661-6898 cionesa--)trca.on.ca www.trca.on.ca ' *r>l.l:. isl; c•rw.rilir:R rue cnron:~~c;vT l+xr ~ r.>rell~r~r., Tc:) l~Rr~TTIns ~ress.~cr Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Confidentiality Notice: The information contained in this communication including any attachments may be confidential, is intended only for use of the recipient(s) named above, and may be legally privileged. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, disclosure or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited ifyou have received this communication in error, please resend this communication to the sender and delete it permanentlyfrom your computer system. Thank you. " 1 ATTACHRfENT # TO REPORT # PD /6 /d p tANNrrVr ®/ck' P, /IV VERLDlA.N DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW PROJECT NAME: Michelle Gonsalves / James Micklewright ADDRESS/PLAN: Part Lot 44, Plan 350 Rougemount Drive MUNICIPALITY: Pickering [REF NO.- A 20/09 SUBMISSION DATE: January 28, 2010 The following is an overview of the general requirements the Applicant is likely to meet in order to obtain a complete electrical power supply system to this site and within the site where subdivision in some form is involved. The . comments below are based on preliminary information only and are subject to revision. In all cases Veridian's standard Conditions of Service document sets out the requirements, terms and conditions for the provision of electric service. i . This review does not constitute an Offer to Connect. 1. Electric service is currently available on the road allowance directly adjacent to this property. ' Servicing will be from the west side of Rougemount Drive and Veridian's supply voltage will be at 27.6kV. 2. Individual metering for 'each unit is required. 3. A directional bored underground road crossing will be required. The Applicant will be required to complete this work and cover all costs associated with this requirement. 4. Veridian's existing distribution facilities located on the east side of Rougemount Drive will have to be relocated at the Applicant's cost to accommodate the proposed new homes. 5. The Applicant must make direct application to Veridian for electrical servicing as soon as possible. A written, faxed or email request will permit Veridian to begin the work necessary to identify specific requirements and arrangements and related work for this project, and to make an Offer to Connect. The applicant is cautioned _ that tenders, contracts, or work they may initiate prior to obtaining an Offer to Connect from Veridian may create con c s v- a route o ane' s o the e ec ca s rvi set out in the 0551 Lo Connect fox which Veridian can bear no responsibility. 6. A Servicing Agreement must be signed with Veridian in order to obtain servicing for. this site. 7. The electrical installation(s) from the public road allowance up to the service entrance and all metering arrangements must comply with Veridian's requirements and specifications and may also be subject to the requirements of the Electrical Safety Authority. 8. Prior to obtaining a building permit, the Municipality may require the Applicant to provide evidence of having obtained and accepted an Offer to Connect. 9. Where cranes or material handling equipment or workers must work in proximity to existing overhead wires, where there is risk of contact or coming within the limits of approach, the Applicant shall pay all costs for the temporary relocation, burial, or other protection of the wires, or whatever other action is deemed necessary by Veridian to provide for worker safety and the security of the electrical system. ATTACHMENT # CZ- TO 1 1 J REPORT # PD /6-!6 10. Veridian will not attend scheduled City of Pickering DART Meeting for this Development. 11. Veridian has no objection to the proposed development. Please direct the Applicant to contact Veridian as soon as servicing is contemplated. Municipality, please forward a copy of first submission civil design to Veridian. Please note that an Offer to Connect must be completed at least three (3) /six (6) months prior to the required electrical servicing date. 12. Other: Existing service pole on the property (P111141) to be removed and new pole installed on boulevard at north end of adjacent house #527. This will be the service pole for the 2 new homes and also for the existing overhead service for house 527. Technical Representative: Dave Bell Telephone: Ext. 3233 f/df P:\dfrizzell\Development Application Review\Pickering\2010\Michelle Gonsalves & James Micklewright -Part Lott 44 Plan 350 Rougemount Drive.doc Page 2 of 2 Form #E00002 Veridian Connections Development Application Review Rev. Date - July 15, 2008 C`i 1 1 4 PICKERI ~G M.E.MO To: Mila Yeung February 9, 2010 PlannerI From: Robert Starr Manager, Development Control Copy: N/A Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment - A 20/09 Part of Lot 44, Plan 350 Michelle Gonsalves/James Micklewright City of Pickering We have reviewed the above-noted application and have no comments or concerns: 4 J41 PH:jlm J:tDocumentsVewtopmanl Contmi18OB5TARRMemos%applicationshoning amendmenAA 20-09 Michelle Gonsalves.doe . Cary Report to Planning & Development -P J <ERENG Committee Report Number: PD 17-10 Date: June 7, 2010 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 3/10 Cosima Daniell 1979 Woodview Avenue (North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329) City of Pickering Recommendation: 1. That Report PD 17-10 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 3/10 submitted by Gary Daniell on behalf of Cosima Daniell, to permit four residential lots and conservation uses on lands being the North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329 be approved; 3. That the draft zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 3/10, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 17-10, be forwarded to City Council for enactment; and 4. Further, that the proposed conditions of approval for the future land severance application for 1979 Woodview Avenue (North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329) as set out in Appendix II to Report PD 17-10 be endorsed. Executive Summary: The applicant proposes to amend the existing "A" - Agriculture Zone to permit the creation of four lots for detached dwellings with minimum lot frontages of 15.0 metres on the east side of Woodview Avenue just south of Finch Avenue (see Location Map and Applicant's Submitted Plan, Attachments #1 & #2). The proposal, if approved, will facilitate the transfer of a portion of the Townline Provincially Significant Wetland Complex, and associated buffer lands that is partially located on the subject lands, into public ownership (see Proposed Lotting Plan, Attachment #3). The applicant's proposal would realize an infill opportunity in a manner that is compatible with the surrounding land uses. The proposal is in keeping with the developing Woodview Avenue streetscape and complies with the intent of the Pickering Official Plan and the Rouge Park Neighbourhood Plan. The City's requirements respecting the development of the lands will be addressed through conditions applied to future land severance applications. I Report PD 17-10 June 7, 2010 S#Ject: Cosima Daniell A 3/10 Page 2 16 The draft by-law accompanying this report amends the existing zoning for the developable portion of the subject lands to a zoning similar to that currently applicable to abutting properties. The "S1-14" zone category would allow detached dwellings on the proposed new lots and establish appropriate performance standards. An open space zoning category would be applied to the Townline Provincially Significant Wetland Complex and buffer. Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the proposed recommendation. Sustainability Implications: Staffs review of the proposal indicated that it does not achieve Level 1 of the City's Sustainable Development Guidelines. However, due to the infill nature of the project and the need to respect the character of the existing neighbourhood there is limited opportunity to achieve Level 1. The proposal does increase the sustainability of the neighbourhood by adding additional density to the area, taking advantage of existing infrastructure within the City's urban area, and introducing greater control over the conservation of an existing wetland complex by bringing it into public ownership. Further opportunities exist for the builder to consider sustainable options during the building design and construciton process. The applicant may not necessarily be the builder. Background: 1.0 Introduction Cosima Daniell proposes to redevelop the subject property to permit the construction of four detached houses fronting onto Woodview Avenue. A vacant bungalow currently occupies the site. The bungalow will be removed to permit the construction of the proposed houses. The site includes lands that contain a portion of the Townline Provincially Significant Wetland Complex. A Scoped Phase 1 Environmental Impact Study has been submitted in support of the application. If the rezoning is approved the owner will apply to the Regional Land Division Committee for permission to create three additional lots. 2.0 Comments Received 2.1 At the April 6, 2010 Public Information Meeting (see text of Information Report & Meeting Minutes, Attachments #4 & #5) No members of the public attended the public information meeting. Report PD 17-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Cosima Daniell A 3/10 Page 3 X17 2.2 Written Public Submissions on the application Correspondence from Michael Fearon of 620 Westney Road - Greenwood (received on March 29, 2010) indicating concern that the proposed new building lots may infringe on the wetland complex (see Attachment #6). 2.3 City Department and Agency Comments Toronto and Region - the Scoped Environmental Impact Study (EIS) Conservation Authority submitted in support of the application is satisfactory - the Wetland Complex and the varying width buffer must be zoned within a single environmental/open space zone category (see Attachment #7) Region of Durham - the property is designated "Living Area" Planning Department - the southern and eastern portions of the property are identified as Key Natural Heritage and Hydrologic Features - a Stage 1 and 2 Archaeological Assessment report is recommended to be conducted - a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment is recommended to be conducted - a noise impact study is recommended to be conducted - servicing is available from the existing municipal water supply system and sanitary sewer system on Woodview Avenue - the proposal does not present any significant Durham Region Transit or transportation impacts (see Attachment #8) Development Control - a development agreement is required to secure all City requirements, financial and otherwise through the land severance process No other agency that provided comment has any objection to the subject applications. 3.0 Discussion: 3.1 Minimum Lot Frontages of 15.0 metres for Detached Dwellings in this Neighbourhood are Compatible with the Community and the Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines The Council adopted Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines which provides guidance on neighbourhood development at a more detailed level than the Pickering Official Plan, including recommendations on minimum lot areas and lot frontages. Report PD 17-10 June 7, 2010 Suhiect: Cosima Daniell A 3/10 Page 4 118 Lot frontages of 15.0 metres are now common to the developed areas of the Rouge Park Neighbourhood. The proposal meets the requirements of the Neighbourhood Guidelines and the Environmental Master Servicing Plan. 3.2 Staff have satisfied Michael Fearon's concerns regarding the wetland complex Staff have been in contact with Michael Fearon and have provided him with information on the legislated requirements for development of lands involving identified natural heritage features. Michael Fearon is satisfied that the wetland complex will be protected through its transfer together with an environmental buffer to a public authority. 3.3 Municipal Water and Sanitary Services are Available Four water service, sanitary sewer and storm sewer connections were installed to the proposed subject properties at the time of the reconstruction and urbanization of Woodview Avenue. 3.4 By-law to Implement the Staff Recommended Plan The attached draft by-law and schedule included as Appendix I to this Report, includes special provisions for the most southerly proposed lot (Lot 4) on the subject lands. The wetland complex is located closer to Woodview Avenue at this point in the plan, creating a shallow lot condition due to the buffer area which is added to the wetland complex. Staff recommend that the rear yard depth provision for this lot be reduced to 6.0 metres (from 7.5 metres), the front yard depth be reduced to 4.0 metres (from 4.5 metres), and the maximum lot coverage be increased to 40 percent (from 38 percent) to permit a house of a size that will be compatible with the neighbourhood. Staff note that the new house on the proposed southern lot may be minimally closer to the street line than the other houses along this section of Woodview Avenue. A similar condition of a reduced front yard depth exists on a few lots located just north of Pine Grove Road . A positive effect of the potentially reduced front yard depth of the house face would be the provision of visual relief from what otherwise might become an overly regimented streetscape pattern in this part of Woodview Avenue. The other lots in the plan would have zone provisions applied to them identical to the existing lots to the north. An Open Space Hazard Lands zone is proposed for the wetland complex and associated buffer. The proposed lots would not extend into the wetland complex buffer. Report PD 17-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Cosima Daniell A 3/10 Page 5 119 3.5 City's Interests to be Addressed Through Conditions of Land Severance The City's requirements for developing the subject lands will be addressed through conditions of the future land severance applications. Among other conditions; the owner will be required to enter into an appropriate development agreement with the City to address matters typically included in subdivision agreements such as, but not limited to, reserves, storm sewer servicing, grading, drainage, architectural design, noise attenuation, tree preservation and boulevard tree planting, driveway aprons, utilities, fencing, parkland dedication, contribution to the Rouge Park Neighbourhood Study, securities, insurance, and downstream cost sharing. The required agreement will be a condition of land severance. The proposed conditions of approval for, the future severance application are outlined in Appendix II of this report. The owner will also be required to convey the wetland and associated buffer lands to a public authority as part of the land severance process. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Due to the identification of a large number of motor vehicles on a property directly adjacent to the subject property, the Region recommends that a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment be conducted. This report may be prepared and submitted to the Region of Durham for review and approval as part of the land severance approval process. Archaeological Potential The subject site appears to be less than 300 metres from Petticoat Creek. The site is therefore identified as having archaeological potential. A Stage 1 and 2 Archaeological Assessment report is recommended to be conducted. The report may be prepared and submitted to the Region of Durham for review and approval as part of the land severance approval process. Noise Impact Study Due to the property's proximity to Finch Avenue, a noise impact study is recommended to address noise impacts from road traffic. This report may be prepared and.submitted to the Region of Durham for review and approval as part of the land severance approval process. Tree Preservation & Sediment and Erosion Control Prior to any development occurring on-site, the following requirements must be implemented: 1. a sediment and erosion control plan shall be prepared for the site preparation, construction and post-construction phases; 2. varying wetland buffers for the four lots shall be established for conveyance to a public authority; Report PD 17-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Cosima Daniell A 3/10 Page 612 0 3. a tree preservation plan shall be submitted to and approved by the City identifying trees to be preserved in the development process; 4. no tree removal or grading activity shall occur in the wetland complex or associated buffer; 5. a silt and snow fence shall be installed along the buffer line prior to commencement of any site preparation activities; 6. grading is to be designed to meet existing grades at the buffer line; 7. drainage patterns adjacent to the buffer lands shall be maintained to avoid a change in soil moisture resulting from the concentration/redirection of flows. These recommendations are partially derived from Section 7.0 of the applicant's Environmental Report, prepared by Niblett Environmental Associated Inc., dated December 2009. Architectural Design Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the owner will be required to prepare a report to the satisfaction of the Director, Planning & Development, outlining siting and architectural design objectives for the proposed development that includes streetscape/architectural guidelines. These guidelines will include the restriction of garage projections, and lot elevation treatments. 4.0 Applicant's Comments The owner is aware of the recommendations of this Report. Appendices: Appendix I Draft Zoning By-law Amendment and Schedule Appendix II Conditions of Approval for Proposed Land Severance Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Applicant's Submitted Plan 3. Proposed Lotting Plan 4. Text of Information Report 5. Minutes from April 6, 2010 Statutory Public Meeting 6. Resident Comment - Michael Fearon 7. Agency Comments - TRCA Comments 8. Agency Comments - Durham Region Planning Department Comments Report PD 17-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Cosima Daniell A 3/10 Page 7 . 121 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Isa James! MCIP, RPP N C r I, IP, RPP Plann_Al tDirector, anning & Development Ross Pym, MCI IV, RPP (Acting) Manager, Development Review IJ:RP:ld Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City C cil X !lr ~ T o as J. ui R., CM Chief Administrative Officer Appendix I to Report Number PD 17-10 122 Draft Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 3/10 123 The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-la VA Being a by-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 6537/05, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering in the Region of Durham, North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329, City of Pickering. (A 3/10) Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to permit the development of detached residential dwellings on lots with minimum frontages of 15.0 metres, on the subject lands being North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329, in the City of Pickering; And whereas an amendment to By-law 3036, as amended, is therefore deemed necessary; Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Schedule Amendment Schedule "I" to By-law 6537/05, is hereby amended by adding the North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329 and by changing the current "A" zoning category to "S1-14" and "OS-HL". 2. Text Amendment (1) Section 2. - Area Restricted of By-law 6537/05 is hereby amended by adding the North Part of Lot 18 to the zone and zoning category "OS-HL" as follows: _ The provisions of this By-law shall apply to those lands in Lot 16 and the North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329 in the City of Pickering, categorized "S1-14" and "OS-HL" on Schedule "I" attached to this By-law. (2) Section 5. - Provisions of By-law 6537/05 is hereby amended by adding subclause 5.(1)(b)(x) Exception as follows: (x) Exception Despite the zone requirements within Clause 5.(1) (b) of this By-law, a minimum 4.0 metre front yard depth, a minimum 6.0 metre rear yard depth, and a maximum lot coverage of 40 percent may be permitted on the most south-lying lot in the North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329 located within the "S1-14" zone shown as the hatched area on Schedule "I" to this by-law. By-law No. xxxx/10 Page 2 (3) A new Section 6. - Provisions is added and existing Sections 6. and 7. 2 4 are accordingly re-numbered as follows: 6. Provisions 1 Uses Permitted ("OS-HL") No person shall within the lands designated "OS-HL" on Schedule "I" attached hereto use any lot or erect, alter or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (a) preservation and conservation of the natural environment, soil and wildlife; (b) resource management; (c) pedestrian trails and walkways; (2) Zone Requirements ("OS-HL" Zone) (a) No buildings or structures shall be permitted to be erected, nor shall the placing or removal of fill be permitted, except where buildings or structures are used only for purposes of flood and erosion control, resource management, or pedestrian trail and walkway purposes. 3. By-law 3036 By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 6537/05 is hereby further amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as set out in Sections 1 and 2 above. Definitions and subject matter not specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by the relevant provisions of By-law 3036, as amended. 4. Effective date This By-law shall come into force in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this 21st day of June, 2010. David Ryan, M Debbie Shields, City Clerk 125 3~m \ \ \ \ P PRT Qo, 129 \ \ \ 0 G N \ P,p'Nk- 5o6. t . LP \ \ ao z- I L~ 3 \ \ / Q~ 30 Om V ~ G .09 \ y, of 6F y / f \ i P PRS 0° \ \ E5 `~~~ollxl \ i i i i i SCHEDULE I TO BY-LAW 6 5.3 7 0 5 " AMENDED BY BYBY' 11 O PASSED THIS DAY OF J u n e 2005 SI MAYOR VKArl SIGNED CLERK Appendix II to Report Number PD 17;~M 6 Draft Conditions of Approval for Proposed Land Severance Amendment Application A 3/10 127 Recommended Conditions of Approval for Proposed Land Severance for lands being the North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329 The City of Pickering's requirements for the approval of future land severance applications for the North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329 be subject to the following conditions of approval being fulfilled to the satisfaction of the City's Director, Planning & Development, prior to the final clearance of the severances: 1. Submission of a reference plan. 2. That the owner enter into a development agreement with the City to address matters typically included in subdivision agreements such as, but not limited to, reserves, storm sewer servicing, grading, drainage, architectural design, noise attenuation, tree preservation and boulevard tree planting, driveway aprons, utilities, fencing, parkland dedication, contribution to the Rouge Park Neighbourhood Study, securities, insurance, and downstream cost sharing. 3. The owner will also be required to convey the wetland and associated buffer lands to a public authority as part of the land severance process. 4. The owner prepare a report outlining siting and architectural design objectives for the proposed development. 5. Prior to any development occurring on-site, the following requirements must be implemented: 1. a sediment and erosion control plan shall be prepared for the site preparation, construction and post-construction phases; 2. varying wetland buffers for the four lots shall be established for conveyance to a public authority; 3. a tree preservation plan shall be submitted to and approved by the City identifying trees to be preserved in the development process; 4. no tree removal or grading activity shall occur in the wetland complex or associated buffer; 5. a silt and snow fence shall be installed along the buffer line prior to commencement of any site preparation activities; 6. grading is to be designed to meet existing grades at the buffer line; 7. drainage patterns adjacent to the buffer lands shall be maintained to avoid a change in soil moisture resulting from the concentration/redirection of flows. ATTACHMENT TO REPORT # PD 1-7-10 128 C.P.R. PvEN TRAIL NATURE N FINCH AVENUE = o D Z Q S BJEC PLACE PR PERTY 00 N w 0 0 0 QN RSA CRFSCFNT vQ~"~ o V SPN a 5 MELDRON V City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Plan 329, North Part of Lot 18 07\ OWNER C. Daniel DATE FEB. 18, 2010 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. A 03110 SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY lJ N -T-na n- ---terprln,n Inc. a d ita upplians. All right, R,,arvnd. Nol c plan of ,~rvey. PN-14 2003 MPAC and Its eu Iles. All rI 11 Reearvstl. Not a Ian of'SUrve . ATTACHMENT #__2___T0 129 RFPOR7#RD__1_-0_ Information compiled from applicants submitted plan - C. Daniell A 03/10 51.82m 52.12m 0 0 Ln PROPOSED LOT 1 Sri W 104.18m z w ' PROPOSED LOT 2 Q 104.45m E E C?? PROPOSED LOT 3 E 104.72m w PROPOSED LO 4 TREE o0 > rn 00 0 ° O N r~ 105.55m O Fhis mop ros produced by the City oI Pickering, P/onning R Oeve/op-nt 0 -t ent, • /nformatron S Support Services, Febrowy 23, 2010 L 4TTACHMENT # 3 TO r:EPOR7 # PD LZ-LC . Proposed Lotting Plan - 30 C. Daniell A 03/10 REAR LOT LINE OF PROPOSED NEW LOTS 74.3m 30.Om E PROPOSED LOT 1 W z 72.4m E PROPOSED j PROPOSED LOT 2 BUFFER Q o 49.9m o PROPOSED LOT 3 LIMIT OF X0 WETLAND 28.8m COMPLEX W E PROPOSED m LOT 4 r o W O N 0 5.0 o m 20.7m NI I 777is mop was produced.by the City of Pickering, Planning & Development Department, Information & Support Services, May 3 2010 ATTACHMENT # 14TO REPORT # ID---!- -1 Information Report 3 f'tq 00 Report Number: 05-10 _ PICKERING For Public Information Meeting of, 1 V Date: April 6, 2010 In Accordance with the Public Meeting Requirements of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 03/10 Cosima Daniell 1979 Woodview Avenue (North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329) City of Pickering 1.0 Property Location and Description - the subject property is located on the east side of Woodview Avenue, south of the intersection of Woodview Avenue and Finch Avenue (see Location Map, Attachment #1); - the subject property is approximately 0.65 hectare in area; - a vacant, detached bungalow is currently located on the site; - a portion of the Townline Provincially Significant Wetland is located on the south-eastern portion of the lot; - the wetland also occupies lands to the east and southeast of the subject property; - detached houses on lots with varying frontages and depths are located to the north, west and south. 2.0 Applicant's Proposal the applicant has requested to amend the zoning by-law to permit four lots with-a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres; (see Applicant's Submitted Plan, Attachment #2); the existing detached dwelling will be demolished prior to the redevelopment of the land; the applicant has. not submitted land severance applications to the Durham Region Land Division Committee. 3.0 Official Plan and Zoning 3.1 Durham Regional Official Plan the Durham Regional Official Plan designates the majority of the subject property as "Living Areas"; lands in this designation are to be used predominantly for housing purposes; ATTACHMENT TO Information Report-No. 05-10 REPORT # Pa Page 2 1. 32 the provincially significant wetland located on the subject property is designated "Major Open Space Areas"; the predominant use of lands designated in the "Major Open Space Areas" is for conservation and agricultural uses; the proposal appears to conform to the Durham Region Official Plan; 3.2 Pickering Official Plan - the City of Pickering Official Plan designates the subject property as "Urban Residential - Low Density Areas" and "Open Space System - Natural Areas" within the Rouge Park Neighbourhood; - "Urban Residential - Low Density Areas" are intended primarily for housing purposes, while lands within the designation "Open Space System - Natural Areas" are to be primarily used for conservation, environmental protection, restoration, education, passive recreation, and similar uses; . - the Official Plan states that in, order to protect and enhance the character of 'established neighbourhoods such matters as building height, yard setback, lot coverage, access to sunlight, parking provisions and traffic implications should be considered; - the City has adopted the Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines (RPNDG) that apply to the subject lands (see Section 3.3); - the proposal appears to conform with the policies of the Official Plan; 3.3 Rouge Park Neighbourhood Development Guidelines (RPNDG) - in the RPNDG the Townline Provincially Significant Wetland are located on and adjacent to the subject property; - the development proposed is located on lands delineated as the developable areas shown on the tertiary plan included in the Guidelines; - the Guidelines state that where appropriate, the conveyance of significant environmental features and their buffers to the City or other public agency may be required as a condition of development approval; - the Rouge Park Neighbourhood Environmental Master Servicing Plan (EMSP), being a companion document to the RPNDG, has been endorsed by City Council; - the EMSP outlines specific issues that are to be evaluated in the preparation of environmental reports submitted in support of proposed development in the area; - the EMSP identifies the provincially significant wetland on and adjacent to the subject property as having woodland and open pools for breeding amphibians, fish habitat, riparian corridor and potential for area-sensitive breeding birds; - the EMSP identifies potential negative impacts of residential development on the quality of the natural area; - the EMSP recommends that buffers between the features and the developable area be in public ownership and building setbacks be privately owned; i ATTACHMENT # TO Information Report No. 05-10 REPORT # PO_ 7-I Page 3 133 3.4 Zoning By-law 3036 - the subject property is zoned "A" - Agricultural Zone; - the current agricultural zoning uses and related performance standards are now considered inappropriate for this area as it has transitioned into a residential neighbourhood; - an amendment to the existing zoning by-law is required to allow for land severances creating four lots with a minimum lot frontage of 15.0 metres and neighbourhood-appropriate setbacks, coverage and building heights. 4.0 Results of Circulation 4.1 Resident Comments - none received to date; 4.2 Agency Comments none received to date; 4.3 City Department Comments - none received to date; 4.4 Staff Comments - in reviewing the application to date, the following matters have been identified by staff for further review and consideration: • the applicant's submitted plan does not include the buffer distances recommended by the Scoped Environmental Impact Study; the limits of the buffer must be identified on the plan; • the Scoped Environmental Impact Study states that the buffer lands can be included in the rear yard setbacks of the proposed lots whereas the buffers must be conveyed into public ownership along with the provincially significant wetland; • the buffer widths proposed in the Scoped Environmental Impact Study must be reviewed and determined to be appropriate by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) or be revised to meet TRCA's requirements; • determination that the proposal meets the requirements of the Neighbourhood Guidelines and the Environmental Master Servicing Plan; • determination of an appropriate zone category including minimum setbacks, and maximum coverage and height provisions to ensure that the resultant development will be in keeping with the character of the neighbourhood; • consideration of comments from neighbouring residents; • evaluation of the vegetation that may be lost through the redevelopment of the lands; and • evaluation of the application in terms of its level of sustainable development components. ATTACHMENT #~TO Information Report No. 05-10 REPORT # PD l7-ID Page 4 134 5.0 Procedural Information - written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to.the Planning & Development Department; - oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting; - all comments received will be noted and used as input to a Planning Report prepared by the Planning & Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council; - any member of the public who wishes to reserve the option to appeal Council's decision, must provide comments to the City before Council adopts any by-law for this proposal; - any member of the public who wishes to be notified of Council's decision regarding this proposal, must request such in writing to the City Clerk. 6.0 Other Information 6.1 Appendix No. - - list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City Departments that have commented on the applications at the time of writing this report; 6.2 Information Received copies of the plans and studies listed below are available for viewing at the offices of the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department; • Lotting Plan • Planning Justification Letter prepared by applicant • Sustainable Development Statement prepared by applicant • Scoped Environmental Impact Study, dated December 2009, prepared by Niblett Environmental Associates Inc. 6.3 Company Principal - the owner of the subject property is Cosima Daniell; - the applicant is Gary Daniell. ORIGINAL SIGN M Bl ORIGINAL SIGNM B Isa James Ross Pym, MCIP, RPP Planner II (Acting) Manager, Development Review IJ:jf Attachments Copy: Director, Planning & Development ATTACHMENT TO REPOPI # PD ~~-III Appendix No. I to 135 Information Report No. 05-10 Commenting Residents and Landowners (1) none received to date Commenting Agencies (1) none received to date Commenting City Departments (1) none received to date i ATTACHMENT #-,'-)TO REPORT # PR_ Q-10 Excerpts from 136 City dfi Planning & Development i~ Committee Meeting Minutes Tuesday, April 6, 2010 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Pickles (II) PART `A' INFORMATION REPORTS 2. Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 03/10 Cosima Daniell 1979 Woodview Avenue North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329 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. Ross Pym, (Acting) Manager, Development Review gave an outline of the requirements for a Statutory Meeting under the Planning Act. He also noted that if a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions to the City before the by-law is passed, that person or public body are not entitled to appeal the decision of City Council to the Ontario Municipal Board, and may not be entitled to be added as a party to the hearing unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Isa James, Planner II, gave an overview of zoning amendment application A 03/10. No members of the public were in attendance at the public information meeting to speak in support or opposition to the application. i 1 ATTACHP,4ENT # TO 1 3 7 REPGRy # PD 13_10 From: Mike Fearon [mailto:mfearon@media-vision.ca] ' Sent: March 29, 2010 5:43 PM To: James, Isa Subject: A 03/10 Importance: High Good afternoon. I am responding to the info I received in the mail about the proposed zoning amendment. To whom it may concern; I find it apprehensible that a detailed development would even be considered by The City, when the aforementioned infringes into MINISTRY OF NATURAL RESOURCES noted wetlands. With what we all know about the absolute necessity of wetlands, how could this application even be considered? Is the city Of Pickering not aware that wetlands are no longer swamps, and that every last one that remains, deserves preservation? If the construction on these 4 lots forges ahead, please MAKE SURE that the Wetland areas they contained are not disturbed in any way, shape or form. Please respond. Michael Fearon. 3620 Westney Road Greenwood Ontario. Office: 416-298-3407 Direct Long Distance: 877-667-7377 Cell: 416 525 8209 Fax: 416-298-1797 ATTACHIUENT # 7 To TORONTO AND REGION, REPORT # PD I - I o 138 onservation for The Living City April 21, 2010 CFN 43477.02 DELIVERED BY HAND AND EMAIL (iiames(-cityofpickering.com) Ms. Isa James City of Pickering 1 The Esplanade Pickering ON L1V 6K7 Dear Ms. James: Re: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 03110 North Part of Lot 18, Plan 329 on lands municipally known as 1979 Woodvie.w Ave. (Cosima Daniell and Gary Daniell) Staff at the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) have now had an opportunity to review the application captioned above. In the past we have participated in previous on-site staking- exercises and pre-consultation meetings with respect to the subject.lands. Our review of the application has focused upon the presence of the Provincially Significant Townline Swamp Wetland Complex on the subject lands and potential adverse environmental impacts to the wetland complex associated with the proposed amendment application. A Scoped Environmental Impact Study (EIS), prepared by Niblett Environmental Associates Inc., dated December 2009 has been prepared in support of the application and is satisfactory to TRCA staff: Purpose of the Application We understand that the purpose of the application is to amend the existing zoning designation of "A" - Agriculture established by Zoning By-law 3036 to permit four 15 metre wide residential lots. The amendment is required in order to facilitate a future land division. application. Zoning Designation for Environmental Buffer Areas The EIS recommends that environmental buffers to the wetland be established with widths that vary from 5 to 30 metres. We are satisfied with this recommendation, however we request that the buffer lands be designated within an appropriate zoning designation to implement the Open Space System - Natural Areas designation in the Pickering Official Plan. In addition, the proposed lots should not extend into the recommended environmental buffer areas. As part of a the future land division application, TRCA staff will request that the environmental buffer areas and wetland be contained within a single environmental block. Recommendation Subject to the placement of the environmental buffer areas within an environmental/open space zoning designation, we have no objection to the application. Yours truly, Chris Jones, MC , ~RPP Senior Planner, Planning and Development Extension 5718 cc: Steve Heuchert, TRCA (via email only: sheuchert@trca.on.ca) F:\Home\Public\Development Services\Durham Region\Pickering\1979 Woodview_1.wpd Member of Conservation Ontario R~5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3xN 1S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca ATTACHMENT #__8_T0 r 139 REPOR1 # PD- I 1 r ~l D May 7, 2010 ~ 2010 CIIT F PICKS Y NG . iaLJINE fit t-. Dc!VELOPIUI'-NF 1.r TN1ENT Isa James, Planner II Planning & Development Department City of Pickering The Regional One The Esplanade Municipality Pickering ON L1V 6K7 of Durham Planning Department Dear Ms. James: 605 ROSSLAND ROAD E Re: Zoning Amendment Application A03/10 4T" FLOOR Applicant: Cosima Daniell PO BOX 623 WHITBY ON Li N 6A3 Location: 1979 Woodview Avenue CANADA Lot 34, Concession 1 905-668-7711 Municipality: City of Pickering Fax: 905-666-6208 Email: planning@durham.ca The Regional Municipality of Durham (The Region) has reviewed the above noted www.durham.ca application and offers the following comments for your consideration. A.L. Georgieff, MCIP, RPP Commissioner of Planning The purpose of this application is to amend the zoning by-law on the subject lands to permit four lots with a minimum lot frontage of 15 metres. The subject property is currently zoned W- Agricultural Zone. Regional Official Plan The subject property is currently designated 'Living Area' in the Durham Regional Official Plan (ROP). Living Areas are to be used predominantly for housing purposes. The southern and eastern portions of the subject property are identified as Key Natural Heritage and Hydrologic Features on Schedule 'B' Map B1d of the ROP. A scoped Environmental Impact Study (EIS), dated December 2009, was submitted on behalf of this application by Niblett Environmental Associates, which recommended buffer widths of five (5) and thirty (30) metres between the proposed lots and the wetland. Please have regard to the forthcoming comments by the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority concerning this EIS. Provincial Interests and Delegated Review Responsibilities Site Contamination Although the site screening questionnaire submitted by the applicant did not indicate any site contamination on this or adjacent sites, April 2008 orthophotography of the area illustrates that there are a large number of automobiles on an adjacent site to the northeast of the subject property with the civic address of 169 Finch Avenue, Pickering. A Phase I Environmental Site "Assessment (ESA) is recommended to be conducted. "Service Excellence for, our Cor»niUnities" 100% Post Consumer L ATTACHMENT # g TO O REPORT # PD~Q Page 2 Archaeological Potential Archaeological potential has been identified as the subject site appears to be less than 300 metres from Petticoat Creek. A Stage 1 and 2 Archaeological Assessment report is recommended to be conducted. Road Noise The subject property is within 300 metres of Finch Avenue, which is designated a Type 'C' arterial road and as such, we recommend that a noise impact study be conducted. Regional Services Municipal water supply and sanitary sewer have been provided for under a previous development immediately north of the subject property. Any requirements of the Region concerning the provision of Regional services associated with the development of this property, financial and otherwise, will be addressed at the time of the Land Division application. Durham Region Transit & Transportation The proposal does not present any. significant Durham Region. Transit or transportation impacts. Please contact me at 905.668.4113 ext. 2571 should you have any questions or require additional information. Yours truly, A K f'rWVannitha Chanthavong, MCIP, RPP Planner Current Planning :dp cc: Regional Works Department - Pete Castellan I Report To Planning & Development PICKERING Committee Report Number: PD 18-10 141 Date: June 7, 201011 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 4/10 Loblaw Properties Limited 1792 Liverpool Road (Part of Lot 23, Concession 1 South) City of Pickering Recommendation: 1. That Report PD 18-10 of the Director, Planning & Development be received; 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 4/10 submitted by Loblaw Properties Limited, on lands being Part of Lot 23, Concession 1 South, City of Pickering, to amend the zoning by-law to also permit a commercial-recreational establishment and a commercial school use, be approved; and 3. Further, that the draft zoning by-law to implement Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 4/10, as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 18-10, be forwarded to City Council for enactment. Executive Summary: The applicant proposes to amend the zoning by-law to permit two additional uses, being a commercial-recreational establishment and a . commercial school (see Location Map and Applicant's Submitted Plan, Attachments #1 & #2). The current by-law permits a variety of commercial uses in the existing commercial complex on the subject property. The amendment is required to permit the proposed additional commercial uses proposed to operate within the vacant retail space (1580 square metres for the commercial-recreational establishment and 80 square metres for the commercial school) of the existing building. No exterior changes are proposed as a result of this zoning by-law amendment. The proposed commercial uses will not have an adverse impact on the appearance and operation of the property, on-site parking requirements or site function. Pedestrian accessibility and connectivity will be improved on-site as a result of the introduction of a sidewalk along the south side of Liverpool Road traffic aisle entrance. It is recommended that the application be approved and that the draft by-law be forwarded to Council for enactment. Report PD 18-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Loblaw Properties Limited (A4/10) Page 2 142 Financial Implications: -No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the proposed development. Sustainability Implications: Staff's review of the application against the City's Draft Sustainable Development Guidelines resulted in a score below the Level 1 standard. Due to the nature of the proposal (being the addition of two commercial uses within an existing commercial building to utilize existing vacant retail space), there are limited opportunities to achieve Level 1. The development proposal provides opportunities for commercial intensification, efficient use of vacant retail space, greater diversity of retail and entertainment, encourages a downtown destination and takes advantage of existing infrastructure within the City's urban area. The site is located on a designated transit spine and has access from both Kingston Road and Liverpool Road. Loblaw Properties Limited will submit a letter of undertaking for their commitment in the construction of the south sidewalk from the Liverpool Road access to provide improvements for pedestrian accessibility and connectivity. The applicant submitted a Sustainable Development Report for the proposal (see Attachment #3). The applicant indicated in the report that at the building permit application process, a detail design will be provided to address specifics of "Section 8. Resource Efficiency" of the City's Draft Sustainable Development Guidelines to ensure interior renovations addresses sustainable standards. The application generally represents a sustainable approach for the improvement of the subject lands. Background: 1.0 Comments Received 1.1 Prior to application submission and Information Meeting (see Attachment #4) Jacqueline Smart of 829 Fairview Avenue commented that there is no sidewalk on the south side of the Liverpool Road access to Loblaw Supermarket complex. She indicated that a sidewalk on the south of the Liverpool Road access will provide accessibility for people both walking and riding the Durham Transit buses to and from the site. 1.2 At the May 3, 2010 Information Meeting (see text of Information Report and Meeting Minutes, Attachments #5 & #6) Report PD 18-10 June 7, 2010 dub 3 t: Loblaw Properties Limited (A4/10) Page 3 No members of the public spoke in respect to this application. Planning & Development Committee members discussed the site's parking, pedestrian connectivity, the need for a sidewalk on the south side of the entrance from Liverpool Road, Kingston Road urbanization and site safety. 1.3 City Department and Agency Comments Durham Region Planning - proposed amendment is consistent with Department the Region's policies to develop higher density development no matters of provincial plan interest are applicable municipal water supply and sanitary sewer service is available to the subject property additional comments and conditions will be provided through a future site plan application process proposal does not present any significant Durham Region Transit or transportation impacts (see Attachment #9) Toronto and Region - no objection to this application given that Conservation Authority no exterior changes or additions are (TRCA) proposed - any changes to the existing building or existing grades along the western portion of the property would require approval from the TRCA (see Attachment #10) Development Control - no objection to this application given that as a condition of this rezoning the applicant be required to provide a cash-in-lieu payment or provide a security, for the placement of a sidewalk on the south side of the entrance from Liverpool Road - an estimated cost to construct sidewalk is $20,000.00 (see Attachment #11) 2.0 Discussion 2.1 Proposed Uses Complies with the Pickering's Development Guidelines The applicant is proposing to permit a commercial-recreational establishment and a commercial school use within the existing building. The property is situated within the area covered by the Pickering Downtown Core Development Guidelines and the Kingston Road Corridor Urban Development Guidelines. Report PD 18-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Lob law Properties Limited (A 4/10) Page 4 144 Both Development Guidelines encourage a destination area, pedestrian activity and connectivity, increased transit use and higher density and diversity of land use mix. The development proposal of additional commercial uses would intensify the site resulting with a higher intensity and diversity of uses creating a destination area. The application would comply with and help achieve the Development Guidelines' objectives. 2.2 Proposed Uses are Appropriate for the Existing Building and Compatible with Surrounding Existing Land Uses The proposed additional commercial uses make efficient use of vacant retail space (approximately 1,660 square metres) in an existing commercial building along two major transportation corridors, Kingston Road and Liverpool Road. The development proposal provides opportunities for commercial intensification and provides greater diversity of retail and entertainment thus encouraging a downtown destination while taking advantage of existing infrastructure within the City's urban area. In the Pickering Official Plan the subject property is designated as "Mixed Use Areas - Downtown Core" and is currently surrounded by a variety of commercial and office uses. The development proposal is appropriate for the existing building and compatible with surrounding existing land uses. . 2.3 Proposed.Commercial Uses will not negatively Impact Site. Function and On-site Parking In response to the Public Meeting the applicant submitted two correspondences, one by Zelinka Priamo Ltd (see Attachment #7) and one by LEA Consulting Ltd (see Attachment #8). Zelinka Priamo Ltd's letter specified that the busiest times for a fitness centre and a foodstore are different, therefore the two uses do not interfere with each other. Additional parking spaces would not be require as a result of the proposed additional commercial uses. The LEA Consulting letter indicated that based on the parking ratio requirement for the site, the site exceeds the required parking spaces. Trip rates were taken from the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation and compared against three land use categories; Health Fitness Club, Supermarket and Apparel Store. The trip rate comparison concluded that the trip rate for a fitness centre was lowest and thus generates a lower number of site trips in comparison to the other land use categories. The proposed additional commercial uses do not appear to have a negative impact to on-site function and on-site parking. Report PD 18-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: Loblaw Properties Limited (A 4/10) Page 5 14 5 2.4 Pedestrian Accessibility and Connectivity will be improved The applicant has committed to submit a letter of undertaking for the construction of a sidewalk on the south side of the entrance from Liverpool Road. The proposed sidewalk will improve pedestrian movements, increase pedestrian access opportunities and provide better site connectivity. Loblaw Properties Limited has committed to' provide the City of Pickering with a security for the requested amount of $20,000 for the sidewalk on the south side of the entrance from Liverpool Road. The Durham Region Long Term Transit Strategy Environmental Assessment is presently underway to provide improvements along Kingston Road. The City currently holds a Letter of Credit from Loblaw Properties Limited related to the urbanization of Kingston Road across its frontage. Future urbanization opportunities along Kingston Road will be explored after the conclusion of any additional land needs by Durham Transit. Sidewalk construction is also anticipated following the completion of the Environment Assessment. This work will improve pedestrian accessibility and connectivity. 2.5 No Significant Concern Anticipated on Operational Security In response to the concern raised regarding security, the applicant indicated the fitness centre is not a 24 hours facility. The hours of operation are 5:30am to 11-00pm Monday to Friday and 8:00am to 8:00pm on weekends. The Loblaws Supercentre hours of operation are weekdays from 8:00am to 10:00pm, Saturday 7:00am to 9:00pm and Sunday 9:00am to 7:00pm, which overlaps with the busiest time of fitness centre being 7:00am to 10:30am and 4:00pm to 7:30pm (see Attachment #7). The security will be improved with the additional commercial uses thereby attracting more activities and people to the property. The existing parking lot is lit according to the approved site plan. 3.0 Applicant's Comments The owner has been advised and concurs with the recommendations of this Report. Report PD 18-10 June 7, 2010 Subiect: Loblaw Properties Limited (A 4/10) Page 6 146 Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Applicant Submitted Plan 3. Applicant's Sustainable Development Report - Zelinka Priamo Ltd. 4. Resident Comment - Jacqueline Smart 5. Text Information Report 6. Minutes of Statutory Public Meeting 7. Response Letter - Zelinka Priamo Ltd. 8. Response Letter - LEA Consulting Ltd. 9. Agency Comments - Region of Durham Planning Department 10. Agency Comments - Toronto Region Conservation Authority 11. City Comments - Development Control Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: i Mila Yeung Neil arr IP PP Planner I Director, Planning & Development zeo~04 pnw-, Ross Pym, MCIP, PP (Acting) Manager, Development Review MY:ld Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of Pickering Cit Co it 71, T s J. Q inn M , CMM Chief Administrative Officer Appendix I to 1 4 7 Report PD 18-10 f Draft Implementing Zoning BY-law Amendment Application A 4/10 The Corporation of the City of Pickering 1 48 By-law No. Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1680/83, 1727/83, 2006/85 and 5235/98 to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering, Region of Durham, being Part of Lot 23, Concession 1 South, in the City of Pickering (A 4/10) Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to add a commercial recreation establishment use and a. commercial school use for Part of Lot 23, Concession 1 South, in the City of Pickering. And whereas as amendment to By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1680/83, 1727/83, 2006/85 and 5235/98, is therefore deemed necessary; Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Area Restricted The provision of this By-law shall apply to those lands in Part of Lot 23, Concession 1 South, in the City of Pickering. 2. Text Amendment 1. Section 4, Definitions, of By-law 1680/83, as amended by By-law 1727/83, 2006/85 and 5235/98, is hereby amended by renumbering and re-alphabetizing this subsection in order to incorporate the new definitions as following: (1) "Commercial-Recreational Establishment" shall mean a commercial establishment in which indoor recreational facilities such as bowling alleys, miniature golf courses, roller-skating rinks, squash courts, swimming pools, and other similar indoor recreation facilities are provided and operated for gain or profit, and which may include an arena or stadium but shall not include a place of amusement or entertainment as defined herein; (2) "Commercial School" shall mean a school which is operated for gain or profit and may include the studio of a dancing teacher or music teacher, or an art school, a golf school or any other such school operated for gain or profit but shall not include any other school defined herein. By-law No. xxxk/10 Page 2 149 2. Sub clause Section 5.(1)(a), Uses Permitted ("C7" Zone), of By-law 1680/83; as amended by By-law 1727/83, 2006/85 and 5235/98, is hereby amended by renumbering and re-alphabetizing this subsection in order to incorporate the new uses permitted: (1) Commercial-Recreation Establishment; (2) Commercial School 3. By-law 3036 By-law 3036, as amended, is hereby further amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as set out in Section 1 and 2 above. Definitions and subject matter not specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by relevant provisions of By-law 3036, as amended. 4. Effective Date This By-law shall come into force in accordance with the provisions of the Planning Act. By-law read a first, second and third time and finally passed this day of , 2010. David Ryan, 11,0' Debbie Shields, City Clerk ATTACHMENT # TO REFOR7 # PD ► 1 50 V) w --A H Q O r O O M cr m w J Ld p U w J U SG~N~ ny9 ~ 0 p~~~~G~pN o c,C cr_ D SUBJECT PROPERTY o J ~ n M N`pNW PY 401 GO TRANSIT STA TION STREET BAYLY =TT City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Concession 1 South Part Lot 23 OWNER Loblaw Properties Limited DATE Mar. 29, 2010 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. A 02/10 SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY MY N ra..: c oT2'0'0'5'* t Enterprie.a Ina. d It. .up,li- All fight. R..-d. Not a plan o1 PN-13 c MPAO nd lt. eu Ifere. All rights Ree-ed.- Not o Ian of S-e . ATTACHMENT # 2 TO REPORT # PD- 151 Information Compiled from Applicants Submitted Plan A 04/10 Loblaw Properties Limited EXISTING ~ri ,G5.~0 ~ \ I I III { rf ' i F y'~ l a 2¢j ! I I I f(1 n O ` 1 I 9 ( wr G EXG IN" -bj n BUILCJING 4 O yfo I r t j Y t To amend the zoning ' 1 1 1 I I WI l L i - i by-law to permit additional commercial I E I R uses I o , e u > 'It G FtF I'All_ RETAIL RET Irnl r ?Ik tri coNrr hty; t / I KISTIN11 ' RETAI _ I r EXISTING RETAIL A / 3 e 1 s This map was produced by the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department, Planning Information Services division Mapping and Design, Mar 29, 2010. ATTACHMENT # 3 TO RENURI # PD / ZELINKA PRIAMO LTD 152 r NOFESSiONAC ~LsthNisae~ ~NGt.etic~° TO: Mila Yeung Planner I City of Pickering FROM: Michael Hannay, BES., B.Arch., MRAIC, MCIP, RPP, LEED®AP Urban Designer/Principal Planner Zelinka Priamo Ltd. DATE: December 15, 2009 RE: Sustainable Development Report for Zoning By-Law Amendment 1792 Liver pool Road City of Pickering Our File: LPL/PCK/99-01 To assist in the preparation of the required Sustainability Report I have reviewed the City of Pickering's Sustainable Development Guidelines (May 2007) and the Zoning By-law amendment prepared by Heather Garrett of our office acting on behalf of Loblaw Properties Limited. I have reviewed both of these documents to better understand how this application and the contemplated interior renovations of the existing building might fit within the structure of the Sustainable Development Guidelines. Given the specific nature of the Zoning By-law amendment and its stated connection to the contemplated interior renovations it would appear that the this Zoning By-law amendment itself does not easily fit within the structure of these guidelines due to the following characteristics of the current zoning, the nature of the existing building and the scope of the proposed building renovations: • The subject lands are currently Zoned for Commercial Use; • No changes to the existing site are contemplated; • All new commercial activities resulting from the Zoning By-law Amendment will be conducted within the existing building envelop; • All renovations to the existing building will be stickled interior renovations; Only Section 5.3 Commercial Density (R) would appear to have bearing on this application in that the contemplated interior renovations would increase the interior floor area and hence the floor space index (FSI) of the exist building by the construction of a 465m2 mezzanine.level within a portion of the existing building envelope. This increase in the FSI would appear to address the intentions of this section to increase commercial density. 318 Wellington Road London, Ontario N6C 4P4 Tel: 519-474-7137 Fax: 519-474-2284 Email: zp@zpplan.com Website: zpplan.com ATTACK14ENT # TO oFPORT # PD 153 December 15, 2009 , However, it is clear that through the building permit application for the contemplated interior renovations, some portions of Section 8. Resource Efficiency will be applicable and must be addressed. However, application for a building permit cannot be made until the requested Zoning By-law amendment has been passed. It is anticipated that the architectural design, working drawings, specifications and building permit application will be prepared by the design firm Square Feet. It is also anticipated that a Sustainability Report addressing the specifics of Section 8 Resource Efficiency will be provided by the architects based on the specifics and details of their design for the interior renovations as documented in their working drawings submitted to the chief building official for review as part of the building permit process. To meet the requirements for the building permit a qualified mechanical/electrical engineer will provide mechanical and electrical drawings for the plumbing, lighting HVAC and control systems. At that time these drawings.can be used to accurately predict and assess the water and energy efficiency of the renovated space. In conclusion, the proposed Zoning By-Law amendment would permit a Goodlife Fitness Centre in an otherwise vacant space. The changes needed to accommodate the fitness centre would increase the interior floor area and the floor space index (FSI) of the existing building by introducing a 465m2 mezzanine level. This increase in the FSI would address section 5.3 Commercial Density (R) of this City of Pickering's Sustainable Development Guidelines.. Given the scope and nature of the envisioned renovations it would appear that a sustainability report for the most applicable sections of the guidelines would best be dealt with at the building permit stage as described in Guideline #2 Development Guidelines for Plans of Subdivision, Site Plan Approval, Rezoning and Building Permit Application on page 3 of the Sustainable Development Report, Terms of Reference. Yours very truly, ZELINKA PRIAMO LTD. Michael Hannay BES., B.Arch., MRAIC, MCIP, RPP, LEED® AP Urban Designer/Principal Planner Zelinka Priamo Ltd. Page 2 ATTACCHMENT # 7TO RE'OR11 # RD_ - 154 From: JACQUELI SMART [mailto:jsmart1057@rogers.com] Sent: October-29-09 2:18 PM To: Dickerson, Doug, Councillor; McLean, Bill, Councillor Cc: Council Web Email Subject: Sidewalk at Loblaws Supermarket, 1792 Liverpool Road, Pickering. Hi Doug (City Councillor) & Bill (Regional Councillor). I am wondering if you can address a problem that residents have including myself, when either walking, or riding the Durham Transit buses, to and from Loblaws Supermarket at 1792 Liverpool Road Pickering, ON, LTV 4G6. ien one walks north to Loblaws or gets on/off at the bus stop on Liverpool Road and Pickering Parkway both north and south, one ends up walking on the south side of Pickering Parkway west of Liverpool road, where there is no sidewalk, to reach the Loblaws Supermarket complex. - I realize that there is a sidewalk on the north side of Pickering Parkway west of Liverpool Road but why would one cross Pickering Parkway going north to access this walkway when one then has to cross back south to enter the Loblaws complex.. It is dangerous enough having to cross Liverpool Road when travelling north on the west side of Liverpool Road to get to the Loblaws Supermarket without further endagering one's life by having to attempt multiple crossings. This already happens when one has to cross Bayley Street to shop seeing that there is no longer a grocery store south of Bayley other than convenience stores which are far too expensive to shop at on a regular basis. I do not know who owns this property but seeing that Loblaws and the other businesses in the Loblaws Supermarket complex wants our business is there any way that yourselves and the rest of the COP council would approach them, obviously. the major one being Loblaws Supermarket and ask them to install a sidewalk. I also ask that whoever clears and salts the walkway on the north side of Pickering Parkway and west of verpool Road take on the responsibilty to also clear and salt the new sidewalk on the south side of Pickering arkway when installed. (You notice that I say when not if I know that many peolple walk this route and with winter snow fast approaching when one walks on the Pickering Parkway road, their safety and mine needs to be taken seriously, therefore, immediate action would. be greatly appreciated in resolving this concern. A return reply e-mail of your intentions would be appreciated. Also a return reply e-mail from Loblaws Head Office as to their intentions on this matter would be appreciated. P.S. I did persue this problem years ago through past City Councillor Mark Holland who did approach Loblaws without success. I trust that this time around Loblaws will be far more receptive to my request and that a walkway will be installed immediately. Yours truly Jacqueline Smart 829 Fairview Avenue Pickering, ON L1 W 1M7 905-839-2433 4 ATTACHMENT # 5 TO PQ !g~~ REPORT # Information Report 5 Report Number: 07-10 For Public Information Meeting of PICKERING Date: May 3, 2010 In Accordance with the Public Meeting Requirements of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter PA 3 Subject: Zoning. By-law Amendment Application A 4/10 Loblaw Properties Limited 1792 Liverpool Road (Part Lot 23, Concession 1 South) City of Pickering 1.0 Property Location and Description = the subject property is generally located behind the southwest corner of Kingston Road and Liverpool Road; a property location map is provided for reference (see Attachment #1); the subject property is approximately 4.7 hectares in area (see Applicant Submitted Plan Attachment #2); an existing commercial complex consists of a variety of retail stores types and sizes with the major retail anchor being the Loblaw's Superstore; - a total floor area of approximately 14,332 square metres occupies the site; - the surrounding land uses are: north - a commercial plaza and Kingston Road; west - vacant land contains an open channel of Pine Creek; south - vacant; east - Liverpool Road and commercial retail centre. 2.0 Applicant's Proposal the applicant has requested to amend the zoning by-law to permit additional commercial uses, specifically a commercial recreational establishment (a fitness club) and a commercial school use (see Applicant's Submitted Plan - Attachment #2); the proposed additional commercial uses would be operated within the existing commercial structure that is currently on site, no exterior changes to the building are proposed; no changes to the surface parking and parking layout are proposed. ATTACHMENT S TO ~'E'Uf~ ~ Pt? ~~ld Information Report No. 07-10 # Page 2 56 3.0 Official Plan and Zoning 3.1 Provincial Growth Plan - Places to Grow (the Provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe) requires intensification of land uses within municipalities build boundaries; - the subject lands are within the Urban Growth Centre of the City of Pickering; - Urban Growth Centres are to be planned as focal areas for investment, to support major transit infrastructure, to serve as high density employment centres, and to accommodate population and employment growth; 3.2 Durham Regional Official Plan - the Regional Plan designates the subject property "Regional Centre"; - lands in this designation shall be developed as the main concentration of urban activities within a municipality providing a fully integrated array of community, office, service and shopping, recreation and residential uses; - the proposal appears to conform to the Durham Region Official Plan; 3.3 Pickering Official Plan - the City of Pickering Official Plan designates the subject lands as "Mixed Use Areas - Mixed Corridors"; permissible uses within the "Mixed Uses Areas - Mixed Corridors" designation include, among others, retailing of goods and services, residential uses and community and cultural uses as well as limited office commercial uses; these areas are intended to have the widest variety of uses and highest levels of activities in the City; the subject lands are within the Town Centre Neighbourhood of the Official Plan, polices in this neighbourhood encourages the highest mix and intensity of uses and activities in the City; Schedule II of the Pickering Official Plan - "Transportation Systems" designates, Kingston Road and Liverpool Road, the roads the subject property have access to as "Type B - Arterial Roads"; Type B Arterial Road are designated to carry moderate speeds, within a municipality; the proposal appears to conform with the policies of the Official Plan; 3.4 Compendium Document to the Official Plan 3.4.1 Pickering Downtown Core Development Guidelines: - the subject property is within the Pickering Downtown Core Development Guidelines; - the urban design objectives for the downtown core encourages a destination downtown, a strong civic and cultural focus, an identifiable public realm and a mix of uses for housing, employment, retail and entertainment; ATTACHMENT # 5 TO Information Report No. 07-10 Page 3 157 the development guidelines indicates the subject property as a mixed use zone, with emphasis on residential rather than office uses on the upper floors; 3.4.2 Kingston Road Corridor Urban Design Development Guidelines: the subject property is within the Downtown Core Precinct of the Kingston Road Corridor Urban Design Development Guidelines; objectives for the Downtown Core Precinct include: • to create a regional landmark and destination area; • to establish the highest intensity of cultural, residential and economic activity, and the greatest density and diversity of land use mix; • to create the highest zone of pedestrian activity in the City, that functions as a true "main street" for Pickering; • to establish Liverpool Road as a "portal" to Kingston Road; • to recognize Liverpool Road as local gateways into the Downtown Core; • to encourage pedestrian activity along Kingston Road with amenity zones and strong north-south links at Liverpool Road; • the option for future transit/HOV lane should protected; 3.5 Zoning By-law 3036 as amended by 1608/83 - the subject property is currently zoned "CT - General Commercial; - the existing zoning permits a variety of commercial uses but specifically excludes the requested uses of a commercial recreational establishment and a commercial school use; - an amendment to the zoning by-law is required to allow for a commercial recreational establishment and a commercial school use as permitted uses. 4.0 Results of Circulation 4.1 Resident Comments - none received to date; 4.2 Agency Comments none received to date; 4.3 Staff Comments in reviewing the application to date, the following matters have been identified by staff for further review and consideration: • ensuring that the proposed application complies with the Pickering Downtown Core Development Guidelines and the Kingston Road Corridor Urban Design Development Guidelines; • ensuring that the proposed use is compatible with surrounding existing land uses; ATTACHMENT #_.,f_T0 Information Report No. 07-10 PEPURT # PQ Page 4 158 • reviewing the application in terms of its level of sustainable development components; • determining the appropriateness of the proposed commercial uses in the existing building on the subject lands; • site plan matters, including, but not limited to, parking, vehicle and pedestrian movements, and landscaped areas and features. 5.0 Procedural Information - written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the Planning & Development Department; - oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting; - all comments received will be noted and used as input in a Planning Report prepared by the Planning & Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council; - any member of the public who wish to reserve the option to appeal Council's decision must provide comments to the City before Council adopts any by-law for this proposal; - any member of the public who wish to be notified of Council's decision regarding this proposal must request such in writing to the City Clerk. 6.0 Other Information 6.1 Appendix No. I - list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City Departments that have commented on the applications at the time of writing report; 6.2 Information Received full scale copies of the Applicant's submitted plan are available for viewing at the offices of the City of Pickering Planning & Development Department: • Planning Justification Letter; • Sustainable Development Report; • Parking Study; 4TTACHMIENT # TO Information Report No. 07-10 P.PORT # Pow Page 5 + 159 6.3 Company Principal the owner of the subject lands is Loblaw Properties Limited; the applications have been submitted by Zelinka Priamo Ltd on behalf of Loblaw Properties Limited. ORIGINAL SIGN Y ORIGINAL S"IGNM Mila Yeung Ross Pym, MCIP, RPP Planner I' (Acting) Manager, Development Review MY:ld Attachments Copy: Director, Planning & Development ATTACHI'VIENT #5 TO # PD--373 / - 160 Appendix No. I to Information Report No. 07-10 Commenting Residents and Landowners (1) none received to date Commenting Agencies (1) none received to date Commenting City Departments (1) none received to date ATTACKo"CAT TO REPORT # PD Excerpts from 161 C`ty Ll/~/F-anning & Development Committee Meeting Minutes Monday, May 3, 2010 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Johnson (II) PART `A' INFORMATION REPORTS 1 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 04/10 Loblaw Properties Limited 1792 Liverpool Road (Part Lot 23, Concession 1 South) 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. Ross Pym, (Acting) Manager, Development Review gave an outline of the requirements for a Statutory Meeting under the Planning Act. He also noted that if a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions to the City before the by-law is passed, that person or public body are not entitled to appeal the decision of City Council to the Ontario Municipal Board, and may not be entitled to be added as a party to the hearing unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Mila Yeung, Planner I, gave an overview of zoning amendment application A 04/10. Michelle Doornbosch, a representative for the applicant of the. property appeared in support of the application. Ms. Doornbosch provided an overview of the purpose of the zoning application and noted that the rezoning will allow opportunities to use existing space and that the changes are strictly internal. A question and answer period ensued. No members of the public spoke, in support or opposition of the application. 1 ATTACH14ENT # 7 TO KPORI N PD =70 162 . Do ZELINKA PRIAMO LTD E Cree h l~raf'ess~oru+.c ~canix~ag ~raet,ce ;A g 4 4 19 ! CITY F PICKI-RING PLANN€NG & r"E'VELOPIAENT May 11, 2010 , PARTMIENT City of Pickering Planning & Development Department Pickering Civic Complex One The Esplanade Pickering, Ontario L1V 6K7 Attention: Mila Yeung, Re: Zoning By-law Amendment Application 1792 Liverpool Road - Pickering Loblaw Properties Limited Our File: LPL/PCK/09-01 Further to our meeting of May 10, 2010 and the Public Meeting of May 3, 2010 for the above noted . application, we are pleased to provide you with the following additional information: ■ A traffic letter is attached which outlines the expected cross-trips between the food store and the proposed fitness centre, indicates the expected trips generated by the food store, the previous Winners apparel use and the proposed fitness centre use and confirms that there is sufficient parking on site to meet the parking as required by the zoning by-law. ■ The Goodlife will cater to both men and-women and will likely operate from 5:3Oam to 11:00pm Monday to Friday and 8:00am to 8:00pm on weekends. ■ The centre will have approximately 3,500 members once mature. The facility itself can accommodate a maximum of 200 members and staff at one time. The busiest times at the fitness centre are typically 7:00am to 10:30am and 4:00pm to 7:30pm. Mondays are usually the busiest days for the fitness centre, whereas it is one of the slowest days for the foodstore. ■ The fitness centre will have a full range of fitness equipment. ■ There is a drainage ditch between the west side of the building and the adjacent field which restricts any pedestrian traffic in that area. The necessary parking lot and building lighting is provided to ensure the safety of fitness centre and food store customers. I trust that the above information is sufficient to proceed with the above noted application. Should you have any questions, or require further information, please do not hesitate to contact our office. Yours very truly, ZELINK~A~PPRIAMO LTD. Michelle Doornbosch Planner cc. Steve Thompson, Loblaw Properties Limited 318 Wellington Road London, Ontario N6C 41`4 Tel: 519-474-7137 Fax: 519-474-2284 Email: zn(o)znnlan.cnm Wahcit- 7nnlan nrm ATTACNT#` 8 TO 1 6 3 RENC)R i# PD-_ i io LEA Consulting Ltd. . _ ,.1 Consulting Engineers & Planners Suite 900, 625 Cochrane Drive Tel: (905) 470-0015 Markham, ON, UR 9R9 Fax: (905) 470-0030 CANADA www.LEA.ca i 11 May 2010 Our Ref.:8703.200 Michelle Doornbosch Zelinka Priamo Ltd. 318 Wellington Road London, Ontario N6C 4P4 Dear: Ms. Doornbosch, Re: Proposed Goodlife Fitness at the Loblaws Great Food, 1792 Liverpool Road, Pickering The letter was prepared to support the proposed 1,578 square metres (16,989 square feet) Goodlife Fitness within a vacant unit at the Loblaws Great Food located at 1792 Liverpool Road in the City of Pickering. The purpose of this report is to identify the various transportation elements with respect to parking, vehicle trip generation and site interaction between the Goodlife Fitness and the Food store. Parking As we understand it, the building has a total gross leasable floor area of 13,729 square metres (147,777 square feet). The current parking by-law requirement is 4.24 spaces per 93 square metres of gross leasable floor area rates for a requirement is for 626 spaces. The site has an overall supply of 640 spaces which meets the parking space requirement. Trip Generation A trip rate comparison was conducted to illustrate the notion that the proposed Goodlife fitness does not generated many site trips. Trip rates were taken from the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation (8"' Edition). We examine three (3) land use categories for the. subject site; Goodlife Fitness, Supermarket and Apparel. The `Supermarket' relates to the existing Loblaws food store while `Apparel' relates to the Winners once occupied on-site. The average trips rate was taken for the Weekday p.m. peak hour of adjacent street traffic between 4-6 p.m. and for the Saturday peak hour generator. Table 2 shows the different rates by land use category. ITE Land Avera e Rate Land use use Code Weekday p.m. Saturday Peak Peak Hour Hour Health/Fitness Club 492 3.53 2.78 Supermarket 850 10.50 10.85 _ _ _ _ _ Apparel Store 876 3.83 n/a Table 1: Comparison of Land use average trip rates - Source (ITE Trip Generation Book, 8`I' Edition) LErldership in engineering 1r planning solutions LetRep_ Goodlite_M ay 10Rev.doc - 11/05/2010 1 ATTACHMENT #__!2__T0 REPOR i # PD_-- 10-16 164 11 May 2010 Ms. Michelle Doornbosch Our Ref: 8703.200 Page 2 The table shows the Health/Fitness Club land use category has a lower average trip rate in comparison to the other land use categories for the weekday p.m. peak hour. We can presume the same conclusion holds true for the Saturday peak hour as the Saturday is traditionally the busier shopping day of the week. Consequently, we can conclude that the Goodlife fitness generates less site trips in comparison to the other land use categories. Cross-Site Trips With respect to cross-site trips, we have-obtained data from Loblaws that show the site trips between the Goodlife and the food store. An interview survey was conducted between August 26 and September 1, 2007 at five (5) Real Canadian Superstores which is part of the Loblaws Chain of food stores. The survey assesses how people patrons of the Goodlife Fitness shop at the food store. Exhibit 1 summarizes the interview survey. In general, the survey indicates a high intersection between the both land uses (Question 1). Goodlife patrons typically shop after a workout and generally purchase a reasonable amount of food store products (Question 3). Thus, the survey shows that the Goodlife site trips are also food store trips and the Goodlife does not generate much primary site trips. Conclusions This letter report was prepared to illustrate the various transportation elements in support of a proposed Goodlife Fitness at the City of Pickering's Loblaws Great Food located at 1792 Liverpool Road. The Goodlife has a size of 1,578 sq. in. (16,989 sq. ft.) is to occupy the space formerly occupied by the Winners clothing store, and most recently an outlet store. The parking space by-law requirement is 4.24/93 sq. in. of gross leasable floor area. With a total leasable floor of 13,729 sq. in. (147,777 sq. ft.), the requirement is 626 spaces. The site meets the by-law requirement with a supply of 640 spaces. A comparison of the average trip rates for the Goodlife, food store and the formerly occupied Winners was conducted. The trip rates were taken from the Institute of Transportation Engineers Book 8`1' edition. Results indicate that the trip rate for the Goodlife was lowest and thus generates a lower number of site trips in comparison to the other land use categories. An interview survey was conducted in 2007 at selected Real Canadian Superstores in Canada that examined the site interaction between the food store and the Goodlife. The resulting data indicates a high interaction between both land uses (with an average of 98%). This indicates that patrons of the Goodlife are shared trips with the food store and does not generate many primary site trips. i ATTACHMENT TO 165 # Pow 11 May 2010 Ms. Michelle Doornbosch Our Ref: 8703.200 Page 3 If you have questions regarding this information, I can be reached at 905-470-0015 extension 240. Yours very truly LEA Consulting Ltd. Anatole V. Kung, B.A. Senior Transportation Analyst :avk Encl.: cc: Andrew Brown, LEA Consulting Ltd. i ATTACHMENT # TO REPOR 7 # P1?~ l~ - 166 O O N r r• 0 o 0 0 0 0 ~ O l0 0 00- ks,& -Am Q 00 d) 0 ti V Z 0 0 0 0 N r 0 e o 0 0 o e ~ r p r M C N i N V O fM O M B N C m ~ 0) N • O O e o o e C: 0 00 n N V) U p O O O O w - Q ~ O T C) co 0 CY) IT IT W v -r MoMCflP-.- > .N Q N N N r N 0 0 0 0 o e i ° _0 0 0 0 0 0 O N V IT CD In O a ° NI N 00 O r N ~ r r r Z m ~ O V N \ O I- N c- O N O N . : Q ~ Cl. ui ' U 0 O O Co (O N O N - J Z -Z W c J m(D ° o o 0 0 o e o O t : 'c - o 0o co co a) °o co rn 0) r o 0) rn r CD N m > 0 0 0 Q M o co rn r -r` (D V O- O O U O N N N r N N N U. U) U) C ~S a° 3 ~d Q r CO O W G N CL v rIt co m _ r J (n E N fV N r N O aJi~ LL E o 3 E (n F- O° J m i=t ma m C~ Z r- m :3 L D CM -14 f. U O L x a C7 W % M O O i U- 1 6 7 ATTACHMENT `3 _TO May 17, 2010 f0offr# PD 18 - LO RECEIVED ~-~PiAY 1 9 2010 Mila Yeung, Planner • Planning & Development DepartmentIT` OF PICI PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT City of Pickering DEPARTMENT One The Esplanade Pickering ON L1 V 6K7 The Regional Municipality Dear Ms. Yeung: of Durham Planning Department Re: Zoning Amendment Application A04/10 Applicant: Loblaw Properties Limited 605 RossLAND ROAD E Location: 1792 Liverpool Road PO BOX FLOOR 623 Part Lot 23, Concession 1 South P `NHITBY ON Li N 6A3 Municipality: City of Pickering .ANADA 905-668-7711 Fax: 905-666-6208. The Regional Municipality of Durham (The Region) has reviewed the above Email: planning@durham.ca noted application and offers the following comments for your consideration. www.durham.ca The purpose of this application is to amend the zoning on the subject lands to A.L. Georgieff, MCIP, RPP permit additional commercial uses. These uses are a commercial recreational commissioner of Planning establishment (a fitness club) and a commercial school. The subject lands are currently zoned C7 - General Commercial. Regional Official Plan The subject lands are currently designated 'Regional Centre' in the Durham Regional Official Plan. Regional Centres shall be developed as the main concentrations of urban activities, providing a fully integrated array of community, office, service and shopping, recreational and residential uses. Further, Downtown Pickering is recognized as an Urban Growth Centre in accordance with the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, and shall function as a dominant Centre within the Region. Kingston Road (Regional Road Highway 2) and Liverpool Road are both designated as Type 'B' Arterial Roads and Kingston Road is a Transit Spine in the Durham Regional Official Plan. Development adjacent to Transit Spines shall provide for complementary higher density uses and buildings oriented towards the street. Amendment No. 128 to the Regional Official Plan was adopted by Regional Council on June 3rd, 2009 and forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing for approval. This amendment includes the redesig nation of. Downtown Pickering from "Regional Centre" to "Urban Growth Centre". Section 8A.2.2 states that Urban Growth Centres: ii) shall be planned as focal areas for institutional, region-wide public services, major office, commercial, recreational, cultural, entertainment "Service Excellence -fe Conununities" .4t 100% Post Consumer ATTACHMENT 2-To 1 6 H REPORT# PD I13 - Page 2 and residential uses, serving as major employment centres supporting higher order transit services; iii) should support an overall long-term density target of 200 persons and jobs combined per gross hectare and a floor space index of 10. The built form for the Urban Growth Centres should be a mix of predominantly high-rise development, with some mid-rise, as determined by area municipalities. The proposed amendment, which would permit additional commercial uses in an existing structure, is consistent with the Region's policies to develop higher density development. Provincial Policies & Delegated Review Responsibilities This application has been screened in accordance with the terms of the provincial plan review responsibilities. Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe The subject lands are within an "Urban Growth Centre" of the Growth Plan (GP). Section 2.2.4.4 of the GP directs Urban Growth Centres to be planned: a) as focal areas for investment in institutional and region-wide public services, as well as commercial, recreational, cultural and entertainment uses; b) to accommodate and support major transit infrastructure; c) to serve as high density major employment centres that will attract provincially, nationally or internationally significant employment uses; and d) to accommodate a significant share of population and employment growth.. Further, section 2.2.4.5 stipulates Downtown Pickering to achieve, by 2031 or earlier, a minimum gross density target of 200 residents and jobs combined per hectare. Since the proposed uses would be the result of an internal renovation of vacant or underutilized retail space, the application is consistent with the policies of'the GP. There are no other matters of provincial plan interest applicable to this application. Regional Services Municipal water supply and sanitary.sewer service is available to the subject property. ATTACHMENT#q _TO 6 9 REPORT# PD- ! % -i o Page 3 The Regional Works Department will provide detailed comments on the submitted Site Grading and Servicing Concept Plan to the applicant under separate cover. Additional comments and conditions will be provided through the site plan application process. Durham Region Transit & Transportation The proposal does not present any significant Durham Region Transit or transportation impacts. Please contact me at 905-668-4113 ext. 2571 should you have any questions or require additional information. Yours truly Vannitha Chanthavong CIP, RPP Planner Current Planning cc: Regional Works Department - Pete Castel [an Durham Region Transit - Neil Killens ATTACHMENT#....,.~.0 M TORONTO AND REGION.T REPORT# PD l O ; onservatton TM C-E ~a l E 17 0 9 '11-010 4. 1 for The Living City A°"€' April 26, 2010 CITY OFF PICKING CFN PLANNINIG & DEVEE_%3NAENT DEPARTMENT VIA MAIL AND EMAIL (myeung(~b-cityofpickering.com) Ms. Mila Yeung City of Pickering 1 The Esplanade Pickering ON L1 V 6K7 Dear Ms. Yeung: Re: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 4/10 Part Lot 23, Concession 1 South on Lands Municipally Known as 1972 Liverpool Road (Loblaw Properites Limited) Staff at the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority (TRCA) have now had an opportunity to review the application captioned above. We understand that the purpose of the application is to add two additional commercial uses within the existing building footprint, namely a commercial school- and a commercial recreation establishment. Lands Susceptible to Flooding and are Within a TRCA Regulated Area The subject lands are located immediately east of the channel of the Pine Creek, which is a tributary of Frenchmans Bay. Due to the closeness of the lands to Pine Creek, the western portion of the lands are located within the Regional Storm Flood Plain and are susceptible to flooding in the event of a Regional Storm. Any changes to the. existing building in this area or existing grades would require permission from the TRCA pursuant to Ontario Regulation 166/06. - - I Recommendation Based upon our understanding of the application the two additional uses proposed are to take place within the existing structure and no exterior changes or additions are proposed. Given this, we have no objection to the application. Please contact me if you have any questions or concerns with respect to this letter. Yours truly, Chris Jones, ll~ CIP, RPP Senior Planner Planning and Development, Extension 5718 CJ/ cc: Steve Heuchert, TRCA (via email only: sheuchert@trca.on.ca) R\HomeTublicTevelopment ServicesTurham Region\Pickering\1972 Liverpoo1_1.wpd Member of Conservation Ontario 5 Shoreham Drive, Downsview, Ontario M3N~1S4 (416) 661-6600 FAX 661-6898 www.trca.on.ca ~~n ATTACHMENT, REPORTS PD M'to Yeung, Mila 171 TO From: Macina, Jessica Sent: May-19-10 8:44 AM To: Starr, Robert; Yeung, Mila Subject:. RE: A 04/10 Loblaws Rezoning Attachments: image001.jpg From: Starr, Robert Sent:. May-18-10 12:18 PM To: Yeung, Mila Subject: A 04/10 Lowblaws Rezoning As a condition of this rezoning the applicant should be required to provide a cash 'in, lieu payment or provide a security, for the placement of a sidewalk on the south side of the entrance from Liverpool Road. We have provided an estimated cost to construct of $20,000.00. ,.j other concerns. Robert Starr Manager, Development Control City of Pickering Planning & Development Department T: 905.420.4660. ext. 2072 TTY. 905.420.1739 Toll Free 1.866.683.2760 F: 905.420.7648 rstarr ,cityofpickering.com www.cityofpickering.com Please consider your environmental responsibility - think before you print! www.sustainablepickering.com 1 i cialoo Report to Planning & Development PICKERING Committee Report Number: PD 19-10 - Date: June 7, 2010 17 2 From: Neil Carroll Director, Planning & Development Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 2/10 City Initiated Application '1167 and 1199 Kingston Road South Part of Lot 24, Concession 1 City of Pickering Recommendation: 1. That Report PD 19-10 of the Director, Planning-& Development be received; 2. That Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 2/10 submitted by the City of Pickering, to amend the zoning on lands being South Part of Lot 24, Concession 1 to permit additional commercial uses be approved; and, 3. Further, that the draft by-law to implement Zoning By-law amendment application A 2/10, to permit additional commercial uses as set out in Appendix I to Report PD 19-10, be forwarded to Council for enactment. Executive Summary: In December 2008, City Council adopted Zoning By-law 6920/08 for the Brookdale Centre Inc. (Brookdale) property located at 1105 Kingston Road. This City-initiated zoning by-law amendment shifted the future road alignment on the Brookdale property to indicate 10.0 metres of the road on Brookdale's land, with the remaining land for the road coming in the future from the abutting property owned by Pentans Development Limited (Pentans). By-law 6920/08 was appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) by Pentans and Minutes of Settlement were entered into through an agreement between Brookdale, Pentans and the City of Pickering. As a result the by-law, as modified by the OMB in accordance with the Minutes of Settlement, was approved. The Minutes of Settlement required the City to initiate a zoning by-law amendment for the Pentans lands to permit additional commercial uses on the property. Existing uses on the property primarily consists of automotive related uses. Restaurant and financial institutional uses are also currently permitted but are restricted to a maximum gross floor area of 15 percent of the total floor area. Report PD 19-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: City Initiated Application (A2/10) Page 2 - 173 The zoning amendment application is to permit additional selective commercial uses and to allow all non-automotive related uses to comprise 25 percent of the total floor area. It is recommended that the application be approved and that the draft by-law be forwarded to Council for enactment. Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the proposed recommendation. Sustainability Implications: Staffs review of the zoning amendment application is- that it does not achieve Level 1 of the City's Sustainable Development Guidelines. Due to the nature of the proposal of adding additional commercial uses within an existing commercial building to increase the usability of the existing building, there are limited opportunities to achieve a Level 1. The development proposal provides opportunities for commercial intensification, efficient use of commercial space, greater diversity of retail/commercial activities and takes advantage of existing infrastructure within the City's urban area. 1.0 Comments Received 1.1 At the April 6, 2010 Information Meeting (see text of Information Report and Meeting Minutes, Attachments #3 & #4) No members of the public spoke in respect to this application. 1.2 Agency Comments Durham Region - proposed amendment is consistent with the Planning Department Region's Official Plan policies to develop higher density development - no matters of provincial plan interest are applicable - municipal water supply and sanitary sewer service are available to the subject property - proposal does not present any significant Durham Region Transit or transportation impacts (see Attachment #5) Toronto and Region - the east building is partially in the floodplain of Conservation Authority Pine Creek (see Attachment #6) - adding additional uses to portions of the site within the floodplain is not allowed under the Provincial Policy Statement - no objections to permit new uses for areas not in the floodplain Report PD 19-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: City Initiated Application (A2/10) Page 3 174 Toronto and Region - a holding designation could be considered for Conservation Authority new uses within the floodplain provided that: a (continued) flood remediation plan for Pine Creek is completed and implemented and the site is removed from the floodplain in its entirety; or a comprehensive redevelopment of the site, including a solution to flood plain management is prepared to TRCA's satisfaction 2.0 Discussion: 2.1 Proposed uses are appropriate for Property and comply with the Official Plan The proposed additional commercial uses make efficient use of existing commercial buildings located along a major transportation corridor, being Kingston Road. The application provides opportunities for commercial intensification and provides greater diversity of retail thus encouraging an enhanced destination area while taking advantage of existing infrastructure within the City's urban area. In the Pickering Official Plan the subject property is designated as "Mixed Use Area - Mixed Corridors" and is currently surrounded by a variety of commercial uses. The proposed uses are in keeping with the Official Plan policies which encourage mixed uses to serve a broader area at a community scale and intensity. Approval of the zoning by-law amendment to permit the requested uses conforms to the City's Official Plan. 2.2 Proposed uses will be compatible with the existing neighbourhood and Kingston Road Corridor Kingston Road is recognized as an intensification corridor and serves as the City's "mainstreet". The City's long term vision for Kingston Road is to transform its current highway operational objectives (a road catering to high vehicular speeds, large setbacks to buildings, lack of sidewalks and other pedestrian amenities) to a road functioning as a gateway into Pickering neighbourhoods (consisting of a high quality urban design, pedestrian friendly public realm and an attractive location for intensification projects). The Kingston Road Corridor Urban Design and Development Guidelines designates the property within the Town Centre West precinct which promotes an area intended for a variety of commercial and residential uses. The precinct recognizes existing automobile oriented uses over the short and medium term on the subject property, but envisions the redevelopment of such uses into a residential/mixed use neighbourhood over time to compliment the surrounding, area. I Report PD 19-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: City Initiated Application (A2/10) Page 4 i The existing zoning by-law for the property (approved in 1977) envisioned Kingston Road as a highway corridor which primarily catered to highway-commercial activity which included automobile service and repair uses with accessory restaurants and financial institutions. Adding additional commercial uses on the property will allow the owner to introduce new uses which will meet the intent of both the Town Centre West and Kingston Road Corridor Urban Design Development Guidelines, while maintaining uses that currently exist. The owner does not intend to expand the building through this application. 2.3 While staff recognize the concern of TRCA respecting this application, the introduction of limited new uses within the existing buildings is supported TRCA staff has determined that the east building is partially within the floodplain. TRCA opposes new development (which includes approving new uses) within a floodplain based on their interpretation of Provincial Policy Statement (PPS). They recommended that any new uses be restricted to areas outside of the floodplain. The Planning & Development Department has considered TRCA's comments respecting this application. However, we are of the position that the introduction of limited new uses within the existing buildings is appropriate given the following circumstances: • negotiated Minutes of Settlement were entered into between Brockdale Centre Inc., Pentans Developments Limited and the City of Pickering in order to resolve an appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) that included amongst other matters Pickering Planning staff supporting the subject rezoning and Pentans conveying a portion. of their lands for a municipal right-of-way • the floor area for all proposed and existing uses on-site (except for a garage) will be limited to a maximum of 25 percent of the combined gross leasable floor area • no new physical development is being proposed on the property, and • the proposed additional uses generally would pose less of an environmental impact than the existing automotive related uses. 2.4 The construction of a sidewalk across the frontage of the property will be considered by the City as part of a comprehensive review The matter of sidewalks was raised by Planning & Development Committee as the April 6, 2010 meeting. i Report PD 19-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: City Initiated Application (A2/10) Page 5176 The City's Development Charges By-law does include sidewalks along the south side of Kingston Road in this location. In order to construct a sidewalk, the project must be approved by Council in the City's capital budget. However, staff have not put this item forward for budget approval yet, since the work needs to be done in conjunction with the Region's urbanization of Kingston Road and requires improvements to the Pine Creek culvert (in order to provide a suitable permanent sidewalk location). The Planning & Development Department fully supports the introduction of sidewalks in front of the subject property as well as the full length of Kingston Road. The timing of the construction of the sidewalk needs to be considered given-the ongoing studies and plans supporting Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) being pursued by the Region of Durham. Funding was provided in the 2010 budget for Engineering Services to investigate opportunity and design for 'early' sidewalk implementation on the south side of Kingston Road, including this location. The Durham Region Long Term Transit Strategy Environmental Assessment is also underway to consider improvements along Kingston Road. 2.5 By-law to implement the Staff Recommended Plan The attached by-law schedule included as Appendix I to this Report, implements Staff's recommendation to approve the implementing zoning by-law. 3.0 Applicant's Comments The property owner is aware of the recommendation of this Report. Appendix: Appendix I Draft Implementing Zoning By-law Requirements and Schedule Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Applicant's Submitted Plan 3. Text of Information Report 4. Meeting Minutes 5. Durham Region Comments 6. Toronto and Region Conservation Authority Comments Report PD 19-10 June 7, 2010 Subject: City Initiated Application (A2/10) Page 6 177 Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: sWey Yearw o Neil Car P, RPP lanner I Director, Planning & Development Ross Pym, MCC, RPP (Acting) Manager, Development Review AY:RP:ld Copy: Chief Administrative Officer Recommended for the consideration of :Pickering City C DU it r F mas J. Q i R., C Chief Adminis rative Officer Appendix I to Report PD 19-1 178 Draft Implementing Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 2110 179 The Corporation of the City of Pickering By-law No. Being a By-law to amend Restricted Area (Zoning) By-law 3036, as amended, to implement the Official Plan of the City of Pickering District Planning Area, Region of Durham in Part of Lot 24, Concession 1, in the City of Pickering (A 02/10). Whereas the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering deems it desirable to permit the development on the subject lands, being Part of Lot 24, Concession 1 in the City of Pickering; And whereas an amendment to By-law 3036, as amended, is therefore deemed necessary; Now therefore the Council of The Corporation of the City of Pickering hereby enacts as follows: 1. Schedule Schedule I attached hereto with notations and references shown thereon is. hereby declared to be part of this By-law. 2. Area Restricted The provisions of this By-law shall apply to those lands in Part of Lot 24, Concession 1, in the City of Pickering, designated'M(S)" oa Schedule attached hereto. 3. General Provisions No building, land or part thereof shall hereafter be used, occupied, erected, moved, or structurally altered except in conformity with the provisions of this By-law. 4. Definitions In this By-law, (1) "Adult Entertainment Parlour" shall mean a building or part of a building in which is provided, in pursurance of a trade, calling, business or occupation, services appealing to or designed to appeal to erotic or sexual appetites or inclinations; i By-law No. xxxx/10 Page 2 180 (2) "Business Office" shall mean a building or part of a building in which the management or direction of a business, a public or private agency, a brokerage or a labour or fraternal organization is carried on which may include a telegraph office, a data processing establishment, a newspaper publishing office, the premises of a real estate or insurance agent, or a radio or television broadcasting station and related studios or theatres; but shall not include a retail store; (3) "Convenience Store" shall mean a retail store in which food, drugs, periodicals or similar items of day-to-day household necessities are kept for retail sale primarily to residents of, or persons employed in, the immediate neighbourhood; (4) "Financial Institution" shall mean a building or part of a building in which money is deposited, kept, lent or exchanged; (5) "Furniture and Major Applicance Store" shall mean an establishment in which furniture, major applicances or a combination thereof are stored, offered and kept for wholesale or retail sale; (6) "Personal Service Shop" shall mean an establishment where a personal service is performed and may include a barber shop, a beauty salon, a shoe repair shop, a tailor or dressmaking shop or a photographic studio, but shall not include a body-rub parlour as defined in The Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. M. 45, as amended from time to time, or any successor thereto; (7) "Professional Office - Non-Medical" shall mean a building or part of a building in which legal or other professional service is performed or consultation given, and which may include the offices of an architect, a chartered accountant, an engineer, or a lawyer, but shall not include the office of a physician or a body-rub parlour as defined in The Municipal Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.M. 45, as amended from time to time, or any successor thereto; (8) "Restaurant Type A" shall mean a building or part of a building where food is prepared. and offered or kept for retail sale to the public for immediate consumption on the premises or off the premises, or both but shall. not include an adult entertainment parlour as defined herein; (9) "Retail Store" shall mean a building or part of a building in which goods, wares, merchandise, substances, articles or things are stored, kept and offered for retail sale to the public; By-law No. xxxx/10 I AFVr7 Page 3 181 (10) (a) "Yard" shall mean an area of land which is appurtenant to and located on the same lot as a building or structure and is open, uncovered, and unoccupied above ground except for such accessory buildings, structures, or other uses as are specifically permitted thereon; (b) "Front Yard" shall mean a yard extending across the full width of a lot between the front lot line of the lot and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (c) "Front Yard Depth" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a front yard of a lot between the front lot line and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (d) "Rear Yard" shall mean a yard extending across the full width of a lot between the rear lot line of the lot, or where there is no rear lot line, the junction point of the side lot lines, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (e) "Rear Yard Depth" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a rear yard of a lot between the rear lot line of the lot, or where there is no rear lot line, the junction point of the side lot lines, and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (f) "Side Yard" shall mean a yard of a lot extending from the front yard to the rear yard, and from the side lot line to the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (g) "Side Yard Width" shall mean the shortest horizontal dimension of a side yard of a lot between the side lot line and the nearest wall of the nearest main building or structure on the lot; (h) "Flankage Side Yard" shall mean a side yard immediately adjoining a street or abutting on a reserve on the opposite side of which is a street; (i) "Interior Side Yard" shall mean a side yard other than a flankage side yard. 5. Provisions (1) (a) Uses Permitted C3(S)" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated ' C3(S)" on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building or structure for any purpose except the following: (i) Business Office By-law No. xxxx/10 Page 4 82 (ii) Convenience Store (iii) Furniture and Major Appliance Store (iv) Financial Institution (v) Garage (except automobile service station & gas bar) (vi) Personal Service Shops (vii) Professional Office (Non-Medical) (viii) Restaurant, Type A (ix) Retail Store (b) Zone Requirements ("C3(S)" Zone) No person shall within the lands designated "C3(S)" on Schedule I attached hereto, use any lot or erect, alter, or use any building except in accordance with the following provisions: (i) Lot Area (minimum): N/A (ii) Lot Frontage (minimum): N/A (iii) Front Yard Depth (minimum)- 15.0 metres (iv) Interior Side Yard Width (minimum)- 10.5 metres (v) Flankage Side Yard Width (minimum): 15.0 metres (vi) Rear Yard Depth (minimum): 10.5 metres (vii) Building Height (maximum): 10.5 metres (viii) Lot Coverage (maximum): 30 percent (ix) Parking Requirements (minimum): 5.5 spaces per 93 square metres of gross leasible floor area (x) Landscaped Open Area (minimum): 12 percent By-law No. xxxx/10 1 _Fr Page 5 183 (x) Special Regulations: A When the property boundary abuts Kingston Road, or a street other than Kingston Road, a strip of land not less than 4.5 metres or 3.0 metres, in width respectively, as the case may be, adjacent to the boundary shall not be used for any purpose other than landscaping buffering, but this shall not prevent the provision of entrances and exits across such landscaped area; B The combined gross leasible floor area for all uses other than a garage use shall not exceed 25 percent. 6. By-law By-law 3036, as amended, is hereby further amended only to the extent necessary to give effect to the provisions of this By-law as it applies to the area set out in Schedule I attached hereto. Definitions and subject matters not specifically dealt with in this By-law shall be governed by relevant provisions of By-law 3036, as amended. 7. Effective Date This By-law shall take effect from the day of passing hereof subject to the approval of the Ontario Municipal Board, if required. By-law read a first, second, and third time and finally passed this day of , 2010. David Ryan, May Debbie Shields, City Clerk i y \ ` 184 - \ 0 6 G \ 2a r^ 9~ 5 Pj vol 9 6~~ S VoP oN 1 9P 1 1, 9 Cl PAS" 2 FtP ~oR ~ PNO N SCHEDULE I TO BY-LA PASSED THIS DAY OF 10 ATTACHMENT - -TO _ 18 5 REPORT# PD 19-16 o z CRESCENT J O w ~ J U RATHMORE c~ SG~N y9 J GR~ '~'GO~E 3 CULROSS AVENUE CRESCENT oo S~ORR\NG OPT I COURT Fz z O z > J OL g O D MEADOW ~ 'Fin 3 w t- CRES. v Z10 SUBJECT k W PROPERTY G ROAD ~ ~O Of CTS m RTO o J06 O~ TED G~ 0 RC 0 O w o H\GO\N P~ 4,01 ,,..e .«+M►"""" STREET w S ANZ~R o DOU V) v~ REST ~ ~ ~ City of Pickering Planning & Development Department PROPERTY DESCRIPTION Concession 1 South Part Lot 24 07\ OWNER Pentans Developments Ltd. DATE Mar. 2, 2010 DRAWN BY JB FILE No. A 02/10 SCALE 1:5000 CHECKED BY AY c oTera et Enterprlaaa Inc. and its uppllero. All 'right. Reserved. Not a plan of PN-13 c 2005 MPAC and Ita a Ilero. All rl hta Raaarved. Not a Ion of 5-y, L ATTACHMENT#70 REPORT# PD 186 Information Compiled from Site Plan A 2/10 City of Pickering on Behalf of Pentans Developments Ltd. O nO i 'r oA r 1 n a~Y I _ _ ti~~z fie. 5.A moo' r ~0LU t oG72, r I r W o m T l o, ~ y sY This map was produced by The City Of Pickering Planning & Development Department, Planning Information Services Division Mapping And Design, Mar. 2, 2010 City ATTACHMENT~..1-TO Information Report 8 7 i REPORTT# PD 9 Report Number: 06-10 For Public Information Meeting of PICKERING Date: April 6, 2010 In Accordance with the Public Meeting Requirements of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, chapter P.13 Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A,2/10 City Initiated Application 1167 and 1199 Kingston Road South Part of Lot 24, Concession 1 City of Pickering 1.0 Background - in December 2008, the City passed Zoning By-law 6920/08 on the Brookdale Centre Inc. (Brookdale) property located at 1105 Kingston Road to implement a City-initiated amendment to the zoning by-law; - this City-initiated zoning by-law amendment shifted the future road alignment on the Brookdale property to indicate only 10.0 metres of the road be illustrated on Brookdale's land with the remaining land for the road coming in the future from the abutting property owned by Pentans Development Limited (Pentans); - Pentans appealed the by-law to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB); - Minutes of Settlement between Brookdale, Pentans and the City of Pickering were entered into in order to resolve the appeal before the OMB; - the OMB issued its decision on February 12, 2010 and ordered that the appeal be allowed, in part, based on the Minutes of Settlement - the Minutes of Settlement included: • that Brookdale be required to construct the realign public road and the majority of the road be located on the Brookdale lands; • a payment schedule for the cost sharing of the new municipal road; • a timing schedule for Pentans to convey land to the City of Pickering for public road allowance; • that the City of Pickering initiate a zoning amendment for the Pentans lands to permit additional commercial uses on the property; 2.0 Property Location and Description - the subject property is located on the south side of Kingston Road east of the intersection of Walnut Lane (see Location Map, Attachment #1); - the subject property has frontage along, and access from Kingston Road (see Applicant's Site Plan, Attachment #2); - the subject property has a lot area of approximately 1.8 hectares; - there are two one storey buildings containing independent tenants used predominantly for the purposes of an automobile service centre and automobile sales; ATTACHMENT#-3-TO Information Report No. 06-10 REPORT# PO Page 2 _ $8 abutting uses surrounding the subject property are: • commercial plazas to the south, west and east, • residential and commercial buildings to the north on the opposite side of Kingston Road. 3.0 Proposed Zoning - one of the requirements of the Minutes of Settlement was that the City initiate an amendment to the existing zoning by-law for the Pentans' property to permit additional commercial uses; - the existing zoning permits a garage, restaurant and financial institution uses and these uses are to continue; - the proposed additional commercial uses being put forward with this application are: • business office; • convenience store; • furniture and major appliance store; • personal service shops; • professional office (non-medical); • service store, and; • retail store; - the proposed zoning includes restrictions that no drive-thru uses will be permitted and the combined total gross leasable floor area for all uses other than a garage use shall not exceed 25 percent. 4.0 Official Plan and Zoning 4.1 Provincial Growth Plan - Places to Grow (the Provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe) requires intensification of land uses within municipalities' built boundaries; - Kingston Road is being considered as an Intensification Corridor within the City of Pickering; - Intensification Corridors will have the potential to provide a focus for high density mixed use development; 4.2 Durham Regional Official Plan - designates the subject lands as "Living Areas"; - areas designated as "Living Areas" are intended to be predominantly used for housing purposes, and may include limited office, retail and personal service uses; - in consideration of development applications in "Living Areas" the intent of the Plan is to achieve a compact urban form, including intensive residential, office, retail and service and mixed uses along arterial roads and in conjunction with present and potential transit facilities; ATTACHMENTS --TO Information Report No. 06-10 REPO" PDT Page 3 1 g9 - Kingston Road where it abuts the subject lands is designated as a "Type B Arterial Road" and as a "Regional Corridor"; - the proposal appears to conform to the Durham Regional Official Plan; 4.3 Pickering Official Plan the Pickering Official Plan designates the subject lands as "Mixed Use Area - Mixed Corridors"; permissible uses within "Mixed Use Area - Mixed Corridors Area" include, amongst others, a variety of uses including residential, retailing of goods and services, offices and restaurants; "Mixed Use Areas" are intended to have the widest variety of uses and highest level of activities in the City when compared to other designations; the subject lands are within the Town Centre Neighbourhood of the Official Plan; - the Pickering Official Plan encourages the highest mix and intensity of uses and activities in the City to be in this neighbourhood; - the subject lands are within a Detailed Review Area and the City has adopted the Town Centre West Development Guidelines (see Section 4.4); - the Plan designates Kingston Road as a "Type B Arterial Road", which are designed to carry. moderate volumes of traffic at moderate speeds and have some access restrictions; - the Plan also recognizes Kingston Road as a transit spine, where a higher level of transit service is to be encouraged within the City's urban area; - the proposal to add additional commercial uses will be assessed against the policies and provisions of the Pickering Official Plan as part of reviewing this application; 4.4 Town Centre West Development Guidelines - the Town Centre West Development Guidelines (TCWDG) envision a mixed-use neighbourhood which is intended to result in a self-sustaining neighbourhood over the long term; - these uses include: residential, office, and retail commercial uses, as well as public and natural open spaces; although the subject property is located within the TCWDG boundaries, the subject property was not part of the original Town Centre West Study Area; 4.5 Zoning By-law 3036 - the subject property is zoned "C3(S)" - Highway Commercial Specific Zone by By-law 652/77; - uses permitted include a garage, restaurant and financial institution; - the combined floor area of any restaurant and financial institution shall not exceed 15 percent of the total gross floor area of all buildings on-site. ATTACHMENT#~TO Information Report No. 0640 REPORT# PD ~9-tea Page 4 190 5.0 Results of Circulation 5.1 Resident Comments - none to date; 5.2 Agency Comments - none to date; 6.0 Discussion as this application is a City initiated application as a result of Minutes of Settlement to an appeal, the Planning & Development Department will conclude its position on the application after it has received and assessed comments from the circulated departments, agencies and public. 7.0 Procedural Information - written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the Planning & Development Department; - oral comments may be made at the Public Information Meeting; - all, comments received will be noted and used as input in a Planning Report prepared by the Planning & Development Department for a subsequent meeting of Council or a Committee of Council; - any member of the public who wishes to reserve the option to appeal Council's decision, you must provide comments to the City before Council adopts any by-law for this proposal; any member of the public who wishes to be notified of Council's decision regarding this proposal, you must request such in writing to the City Clerk. 8.0 Other Information 8.1 Appendix No. I list of neighbourhood residents, community associations, agencies and City Departments that have commented on the applications at the time of writing report; ATTASEIMW# -TO Information Report No. 06-10 REPURT# Pp 19-10 Page 5 191 8.2 Information Received - as this application is a City initiated application as a result of Minutes of Settlement of an OMB appeal no technical reports have been prepared for this application; - the need for additional information and/or technical reports will be determined through the review and circulation of the application; 8.3 Company Principal - the application is a City Initiated Zoning By-law Amendment; - for information purposes, the owner-of the subject property is Pentans Developments Limited which is represented by Adrian Trembling; - David C.K. Tang, of Gowling Lafleur Henderson LLP, is the solicitor representing Pentans Developments Limited. TNAL SIGNED By ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Ashley Yearwood Ross Pym Planner I (Acting) Manager, Development Review AY:RP:ld Attachments Copy: Director, Planning & Development ATTACHMENT#-3~TO REPORT# PD ~9 0 192 Appendix No. I to Information Report No. 06-10 Commenting Residents and Landowners (1) none to date Commenting Agencies (1) none to date Commenting City Departments (1) none to date ATTACHMENT#r TO C_Jtq REPORT#PD 19/0 Planning & Development 1 9 3 9 Committee Meeting Minutes Tuesday, April 6, 2010 7:30 pm - Council Chambers Chair: Councillor Pickles 3. Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 02/10 City Initiated Application 1167 and 1199 Kingston Road South Part of Lot 24, Concession 1 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. Ross Pym, (Acting) Manager, Development Review gave an outline of the requirements for a Statutory Meeting under the Planning Act. He also noted that if a person or public body does not make oral or written submissions to the City before the by-law is passed, that person or public body are not entitled to appeal the decision of City Council to the Ontario Municipal Board, and may not be entitled to be added as a party to the hearing unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do so. Ashley Yearwood, Planner I, gave an overview of zoning amendment application A 02/10. A representative for the owner of the property appeared in support of the application. No members of the public were in attendance at the public information meeting to speak in support or opposition to the application. 1 ATTACHMENT# S TO REPORT# PD 9 4 18 2010 ~`E ~ ° . May R, EC Ashley Yearwood, Planner I lad"AY 2 'I 2010 Planning & Development Department CITY OF pICKERING ..City of Pickering PLANNING DEVELOPMENT One The Esplanade DEPARThrII=iVT Pickering ON UV 6K7 Dear Mr. Yearwood: The Regional Municipality Re: Zoning Amendment Application A02/10 of Durham Applicant: City of Pickering (City Initiated) Planning Department Location: 1199 - 1167 Kingston Road 605 ROSSLAND ROAD E Part Lot 24, Concession 1 4T" FLOOR Municipality: City of Pickering PO BOX 623 WHITBY ON L1N 6A3 The Regional Municipality of Durham (The Region) has reviewed the above CANADA 905-668-7711 noted application and offers the following comments for your consideration. Fax: 905-666-6208 Email- planning@durham.ca The purpose of this application is to amend the zoning on the subject lands to www.durnam.ca permit additional commercial uses. These uses include business and professional offices (non-medical), retail, convenience, furniture and major A.L. Georgieff, MCIP, RPP appliance stores, and personal service shops. The subject lands are currently Commissioner of Planning zoned C3(S) - Highway Commercial Specific Zone. Regional Official Plan The subject lands are currently designated `Living Area' with the `Regional Corridor' overlay in the Durham Regional Official Plan (ROP). The ROP states that Living Areas shall be predominantly used for housing purposes. It also states that Living Areas shall be developed in a compact form through higher densities and by intensifying and redeveloping existing areas, particularly along arterial roads. Regional Corridors shall be planned and developed as mixed-use areas, which include residential, commercial and service areas with higher densities, supporting higher order transit services and pedestrian oriented development. .Amendment No. 128 to the Regional Official Plan was adopted by.Regional Council on June 3rd, 2.009 and forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing for approval. This amendment revises policy 8A.2.9 of the ROP relating to Regional Corridors, and states that: Portions of Regional Corridors with an underlying Living Area designation, which are identified as appropriate for higher density mixed-use development in area municipal official plans, should support an overall, long-term density target of 60 residential units per gross hectare and a floor space index of 2.5. The built form should be a wide variety of building forms, generally mid-rise in height, with some higher buildings, as detailed in area municipal official plans. "$ervice Excellence for 6ju-P-:Gomrnunities" 100% Post Consumer ATTACHMENT# TO REPORT# PD- / 9 - % o Page 2 195 Kingston Road (Regional Road Highway 2) is designated as a Type `B' Arterial' Road and designated as a Transit Spine in the ROP. Development adjacent to Transit Spines shall provide for complementary higher density uses and buildings oriented towards the street. The proposed amendment, which would permit additional commercial uses in an existing structure, is consistent with the Region's policies to develop higher density development. Provincial Policies & Delegated Review Responsibilities There are no matters of provincial plan interest applicable to this application. Regional Services Municipal water supply and sanitary sewer service is available to the subject property. The Regional Works Department will provide. detailed comments on the submitted Site Grading and Servicing Concept Plan to the applicant under separate cover. Additional comments and conditions will be provided through the site plan application process. Durham Region Transit & Transportation The proposal does not present any significant Durham Region Transit or transportation, impacts. Please contact me at 905-668-4113 ext. 2571 should you have any questions or require additional information. Yours truly Vannitha Chantha CIP, RPP Planner Current Planning cc: Regional Works Department - Pete Castellan Durham Region Transit -Neil Killens ATTACHMENT# ~6, y / TO REPORT# PD 9 196 Yearwood, Ashley From: Steve Heuchert [SHeuchert@trca.on.ca] Sent: May 17, 2010 2:43 PM To: Yearwood, Ashley Cc: Pym, Ross Subject: RE: Update on Status of Comments for City Initiated Zoning Amendment A02/10 Attachments: 1167 and 1199 kingston.jpg Ashley Our engineer has looked at the survey and the floodline is indeed where we have mapped it. The site slopes down significantly from west to east so the east building is partially in the floodplain per the attached mapping. Please keep this mapping internal to the City and TRCA. As such, we continue to advise that adding a number of new permitted uses to the portion of the site in the floodplain is not allowed under the PPS. The PPS Policy 3.1.2(d) states that development... shall not be permitted within ...a floodway. Development includes changes in land use. Floodway includes the entire contiguous floodplain. As such I recommend that you only pursue adding new uses to the portion of the site not currently in the floodplain and that the location of said floodplain shall be determined through a site specific study prior to site plan approval. Alternatively there is a potential to add new uses to the entire site but subject the portion of the site in the floodplain to a holding designation. The holding designation will only be lifted once one of the following happen: (a) a flood remediation plan for the Pine Creek is completed and implemented and the site is removed from the floodplain; or (b) a comprehensive redevelopment of the site, including a solution to flood plain management, is prepared to TRCA satisfaction. Regarding (a), the MMM study procured by the City notes that most of this site can be remediated, but not all. The remediation may be difficult due to cost and the fact that there are multiple landowners involved. Regarding (b), this would entail shifting new development out of the floodplain and 10 metre buffer portion of the property (ie. turning it into greenspace and conveying to public ownership). The new development would be free to develop per City standards on the west side of the site. Steven H. Heuchert, MCIP, RPP, MRTPI Manager, Development Planning and Regulation Planning and Development Toronto and Region Conservation 5 Shoreham Drive Toronto, ON M3N 1 S4 tel. 416.661.6600 ext 5311 fax. 416.661.6898 -PLEASE CONSIDER THE ENVIRONMENT WHEN DECIDING TO PRINT THIS MESSAGE* 1