HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD 16-10
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 .