Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutDecember 2, 2019Ciy �h DICKERING Planning & Development Committee Meeting Agenda December 2, 2019 Council Chambers — 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Brenner Page 1. Disclosure of Interest 2. Statutory Public Meetings Statutory Public Meetings are open to the public to receive input and feedback on certain types of planning applications. In accordance with the City's Procedure By-law, anyone wishing to make a delegation before the Committee for an item listed under the Statutory Public Meetings section of the agenda, is not required to register in advance and will be given an opportunity to speak. 2.1 Information Report No. 16-19 Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 08/19 Altona Group Part Lot 23, Concession 1, Now Parts 11-16, Plan 40R-10390 (1294 Kingston Road, 1848 & 1852 Liverpool Road) 3. Delegations 1 In accordance with the City's Procedure By-law, individuals who would like to appear as a delegation for any Items not related to Statutory Public Meetings, must register with the City Clerk by 12:00 noon on the day of the meeting. Please visit www.pickering.ca/delegation to register. 4. Planning & Development Reports 4.1 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 26-19 Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Study Intensification Plan and Draft Urban Design Guidelines Staff/Consultant Delegation Shonda Wang, Project Director, SvN on Report PLN 26-19. Recommendation: 1. That Report PLN 26-19, regarding the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Study, be received for information; 27 For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca Ciy �h DICKERING Planning & Development Committee Meeting Agenda December 2, 2019 Council Chambers — 7:00 pm Chair: Councillor Brenner 2. That Council endorse in principle the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan, dated November 2019, prepared by SvN in consultation with AECOM and 360 Collective, as contained in Appendix I to Report PLN 26-19, and authorize staff to initiate an Official Plan Amendment to implement the vision and Intensification Plan for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node; and, 3. That Council endorse in principle the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Draft Urban Design Guidelines, dated November 2019, prepared by SvN in consultation with AECOM and 360 Collective, as contained in Appendix II to Report PLN 26-19. 4.2 Director, City Development & CBO, Report PLN 25-19 Request for Council's Permission to Develop Lands through Land Severance Marshall Homes Part of Lot 30, Concession 1 South, and Part 1, Plan 40R-10110 (1855 Rosebank Road) Recommendation: That the request made by Marshall Homes, to permit the division of the subject lands being Part of Lot 30, Concession 1 South, and Part 1, Plan 40R-10110 (municipally known as 1855 Rosebank Road) through land severance rather than by draft plan of subdivision, be approved. 5. Other Business 6. Adjournment 271 For information related to accessibility requirements please contact: Committee Coordinator 905.420.4611 clerks@pickering.ca cap �F DICKERING Information Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: 16-19 Date: December 2, 2019 From: Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Subject: Zoning By-law Amendment Application A 08/19 Altona Group Part Lot 23, Concession 1, Now Parts 11-16, Plan 40R-10390 (1294 Kingston Road, 1848 & 1852 Liverpool Road) 1. Purpose of this Report The purpose of this report is to provide preliminary information regarding an application for Zoning By-law Amendment, submitted by Altona Group, to permit a high density mixed-use condominium development. This report contains general information on the applicable Official Plan and other related policies, and identifies matters raised to date. This report is intended to assist members of the public and other interested stakeholders to understand the proposal. Planning & Development Committee will hear public delegations on the application, ask questions of clarification and identify any planning issues. This report is for information and no decision on this application is being made at this time. Staff will bring forward a recommendation report for consideration by the Planning & Development Committee upon completion of a comprehensive evaluation of the proposal. 2. Property Location and Description The subject lands are located at the northwest corner of Kingston Road and Liverpool Road within the City Centre (see Location Map, Attachment #1). The subject lands comprise three properties, municipally known as 1294 Kingston Road, and 1848 and 1852 Liverpool Road. The lands have a combined area of approximately 0.91 of a hectare with approximately 46 metres of frontage along Kingston Road and 155 metres of frontage along Liverpool Road. The subject lands currently supports: the Old Liverpool House which is occupied by a restaurant tenant (Liverpool John's); a single storey multi -tenant commercial building with surface parking at the front and rear; and a residential building occupied by a daycare use at the north portion of the site. The site has two vehicular access points from Liverpool Road. - 1 - Information Report No. 16-19 Page 2 Surrounding land uses include (see Air Photo Map, Attachment #2): North: Immediately north are large lots containing detached dwellings, a veterinary hospital within a residential building, and further north at the southwest corner of Liverpool Road and Glenanna Road is a common element residential development consisting of townhouse units. The City has received applications for Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By-law Amendment for the two lots directly north, municipally known as 1854 and 1858 Liverpool Road, for a 13 storey mixed-use development containing 100 apartment units and commercial uses at grade. South: Across Kingston Road is an automobile service station and car wash, and further south is a commercial plaza. East: Across Liverpool Road are commercial buildings with various uses, including but not limited to a restaurant, grocery store, retail, personal service uses, financial institution and offices. West: Immediately west is an established residential community consisting of detached, semi-detached and townhouse dwellings, and two commercial buildings consisting of a restaurant with a drive-through facility, another restaurant and retail uses. 3. Applicant's Proposal Altona Group has submitted an application for a Zoning By-law Amendment in order to facilitate the construction of a high density mixed-use development (see submitted Conceptual Site Plan, Building Elevations and Perspectives, Attachments #3, #4, and #5). The applicant is proposing the following: • Old Liverpool House is proposed to be moved approximately 10 metres south towards the corner of Kingston Road and Liverpool Road, and restored for commercial use; the restored wrap-around porch will look onto a new open pedestrian plaza with landscaping and opportunities for art installations • a 25 -storey mixed-use building (Building A) consisting of an 8 -storey podium stepping down to 4 -storeys along the north portion of the building, containing 254 apartment units and 430 square metres of retail/ commercial uses at grade • a 12 -storey apartment building (Building B) consisting of a 2 -storey podium with building and 119 apartment units above • a 3 -storey block townhouse containing 7 units "loon l 11111 8a _ Figure 1: Rendering of proposed development ▪ 2 - 11 townhouse units at the base of the Information Report No. 16-19 Page 3 • 458 square metres of at grade outdoor amenity area and 264 square metres of roof top outdoor amenity space • 3 levels of underground vehicular parking containing 481 spaces and 10 parking spaces at grade for commercial use • 2 full -moves vehicular accesses are proposed from the west side of Liverpool Road To facilitate the above -noted proposal the applicant is seeking to increase the maximum building height for Building A, and to permit other features of the proposal such as an increase to podium heights, reduction of building stepbacks and reduction of building separation. Details regarding the specific amendments are further discussed in Section 5.5 of this Report. Additional statistics regarding the proposal are provided in Attachment #6 to this Report. The applicant proposes to utilize the Bonus Zoning provisions of the City's Official Plan to increase the maximum permitted height for one building beyond what is allowed by the current Zoning By-law, from 47 metres (approximately 15 storeys) to 80 metres (approximately 25 storeys), in exchange for the provision of a community benefit under Section 37 of the Planning Act. The community benefit the applicant is proposing is the retention and restoration of the Old Liverpool House. The development will be subject to site plan approval. 4. Old Liverpool House A Heritage Impact Assessment, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., was submitted by the applicant to assess the Cultural Heritage Value and to determine the impact of the proposed new development in relation to the Old Liverpool House. The Old Liverpool House is currently not protected under the Ontario Heritage Act ("the Act"). However, the Heritage Impact Assessment includes recommendations for formal protection under the Act. The Old Liverpool House was constructed circa 1878 within the Village of Liverpool. Robert Secker commissioned a local architect to design a 22 -room hotel in the Italianate style, which was typical of the time. The hotel was built up to the Kingston Road street edge with a full wrap-around porch along the front and sides, with stairs down to the ground along all three sides. Secker was responding to a commercial trend, the construction of inns and taverns along highways between urban centres. These were generally located along railway and stagecoach routes and often at the juncture of two high -order roads. Few taverns along Kingston Road remain. Figure 2: Postcard advertising the Liverpool Arms Inn, date unknown. Estimated to be circa 1920 (Pickering Public Library). - 3 Information Report No. 16-19 Page 4 Over the next century, the hotel was adapted by different owners and took on different names as the corner of Kingston and Liverpool Roads evolved from a stagecoach stop to a highway rest stop for drivers of automobiles. At different points in time, "Liverpool's Corners" included a gas station, a general store, tourist cabins and camping, and a bank. In the 1970s, the owner at the time relocated Old Liverpool House slightly north so that the building could remain while the highway was expanded by the Province of Ontario. Further renovations occurred in the 1980s such as enclosure of the porch and replacement of the windows. ERA Architects Inc. evaluated the property under Ontario Regulation 9/06, Criteria For Determining Cultural Heritage Value or Interest under the Act. The Old Liverpool House was found to have design/physical value, historical/associative value, and contextual value. Meeting any one of these criteria merits Designation by the municipality under Part IV the Act. A Conservation Plan and Heritage Easement Agreement are also proposed by the consultant as part of future approvals in the planning process in order to ensure long-term conservation of the building. 5. Policy Framework 5.1 Durham Regional Official Plan The subject lands are designated Urban Growth Centre in the Regional Official Plan. Urban Growth Centres (UGCs) are focal points for intensive urban development and the main concentrations of institutional, public services, major office, commercial, recreational, residential, entertainment and cultural uses. They also serve as major employment centres and shall accommodate a minimum density target of 200 persons and jobs per gross hectare and a floor space index (FSI) of 3.0. The built form in UGCs should be a mix of predominantly high-rise with some mid -rise development. The subject lands are within a Regional Corridor in the Regional Official Plan. Regional Corridors shall be planned and developed in accordance with the underlying land use designation, as higher density mixed-use areas, supporting higher order transit services and pedestrian oriented design. Regional Corridors are intended to support an overall, long term density target of at least 60 residential units per gross hectare and an FSI of 2.5, with a wide variety of building forms, generally mid -rise in height, with some higher buildings, as detailed in municipal official plans. Kingston Road and Liverpool Road are designated as Type 'B' Arterial Roads and Kingston Road is identified as a Rapid Transit Spine in the Regional Official Plan. Type 'B' Arterial Roads are designed to carry large volumes of traffic at moderate to high speeds, connect with freeways, other arterial roads and collector roads. The right-of-way width requirement for Type B' arterial roads is 36 metres for an ultimate 4 -lane cross section. Rapid Transit Spines are corridors that are planned to provide dedicated transit lanes in most arterial road sections, and intersect with local transit. Development along transit spines shall provide for complementary higher density and mixed uses at an appropriate scale and context, buildings oriented towards the street to reduce walking distances, facilities which support non -auto modes of transportation, and limited surface parking and the potential redevelopment of surface parking. - 4 - Information Report No. 16-19 Page 5 5.2 Pickering Official Plan In July 2014, Council approved Official Plan Amendment 26 (OPA 26), which introduced new designations and policies, and changed existing policies to create a framework for the redevelopment and intensification of the City Centre. OPA 26 was approved with modifications by the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) on March 4, 2015, and has been in full force and effect since then. Subsequent to the approval of the City Centre Zoning By-law, on June 12, 2017 Council approved Official Plan Amendment 29 (OPA 29) to remove the density cap for the City Centre. The removal of the cap will also allow developers within the City Centre greater flexibility to provide a variety of residential unit sizes, while having consideration for matters such as housing affordability, tenure, and market demand. The subject lands are designated "Mixed Use Areas — City Centre" within the Pickering Official Plan. This designation permits high density residential uses, retailing of goods and services, offices and restaurants, hotels, convention centres, community, cultural and recreational uses, community gardens and farmers' markets. The designation has a minimum net residential density of 80 units per hectare and no maximum density; a maximum gross leasable floorspace for the retailing of goods and services of up to and including 300,000 square metres, and a maximum FSI of over 0.75 and up to and including 5.75. The proposal has a density of 429 units per net hectare and a FSI of 3.6. OPA 26 introduced various new policies for the City Centre Neighbourhood with respect to enhancements to the public realm; active uses at grade; performance criteria for tall buildings to minimize adverse impacts with respect to shadowing, sky view and privacy; transition to established low density development; and pedestrian network and mobility. The key policies within the City Centre as it relates to the proposal are summarized in Attachment #7 to this Report. Chapter 8 of the Official Plan identifies a cultural heritage goal for the City which is that City Council shall respect its cultural heritage, and conserve and integrate important cultural heritage resources from all time periods into the community. City Council, in consultation with its heritage committee, where warranted shall implement the provisions of the Ontario Heritage Act, including the designation of heritage sites. In consideration of the use and reuse of heritage resources, City Council shall maintain, if possible, the original use of heritage structures and sites, and if possible, retain the original location and orientation of such structures. 5.3 Bonus Zoning Policies Section 37 of the Planning Act authorizes municipalities with appropriate Official Plan provisions to pass zoning by-laws for increases in height or density beyond what is permitted by the zoning by-law, in return for the provision by the applicant of community benefits. Section 16.17 of the Official Plan permits City Council to pass by-laws that grant an increase in height of a building providing: 5 Information Report No. 16-19 Page 6 • the density or height bonus is given only in return for the provision of specific services, facilities or matters as specified in the by-law, such as but not limited to: additional open space or community facilities, assisted or special needs housing, the preservation of heritage buildings or structures, or the preservation of natural heritage features and functions • when considering an increase in density or height, and allowing the provision of benefits off-site, the positive impacts of the exchange should benefit the social/cultural, environmental and economic health of surrounding areas experiencing the increased height and/or density • the effects of the density or height bonus have been reviewed and determined by Council to be in conformity with the general intent of the Official Plan, by considering matters such as: • the suitability of the site for the proposed increase in density and/or height in terms of parking, landscaping, and other site-specific requirements • the compatibility of any increase in density and/or height with the character of the surrounding neighbourhood, and • as a condition of granting a density or height bonus, the City requires the benefiting landowner(s) to enter into one or more agreements, registered against the title of the lands, dealing with the provision and timing of specific facilities, services or matters to be provided in return for the bonus On May 27, 2019 Council approved a Bonus Zoning Policy to ensure a consistent and transparent approach when identifying eligible developments and community benefits, calculating the value of the applicant's contribution towards a community benefit, and negotiating the required Section 37 agreements. The objective of this policy is to implement the Bonus Zoning provisions of Section 16.17 of the Pickering Official Plan, in accordance with Section 37 of the Planning Act, as amended. The applicant is proposing to use the Bonus Zoning provisions of the City's Official Plan to increase the building height for Building A by an additional 33 metres (10 -storeys), beyond the maximum permitted building height in the City Centre Zoning By-law. The applicant has advised that in return for the additional height, the applicant is proposing to retain the Old Liverpool House, move it 10 metres south, and restore it to reflect its original exterior appearance. The building is currently not protected by the Ontario Heritage Act. The City is currently assessing the appropriateness of the applicant's request to use the density bonus provisions of the Official Plan and the proposed community benefit. 5.4 Pickering City Centre Urban Design Guidelines The City Centre Urban Design Guidelines (UDG) provide design direction for intensification, to guide buildings and private development, as well as investments in public infrastructure in the City Centre. Some of the key guiding principles of the UDG include: • make the City Centre highly walkable, with new streets and pathways, a compact block pattern, traffic calming measures, and visually interesting streetscapes • encourage a mix of land uses to create vitality at all times of the day, by enhancing the range of activities, amenities and uses that will attract and serve all ages for all season - 6 - Information Report No. 16-19 Page 7 • offer distinct living options, urban in format, and in close proximity to shopping, entertainment, culture, and work • create bold entry -points to City Centre through design excellence in architecture, public art and public plazas at key gateway locations and areas of high visibility The key urban design objections with respect to built form, site design, landscaping, building design, and pedestrian connections as it relates to the proposal are summarized in Attachment #8 to this Report. 5.5 City Centre Zoning By-law 7553/17 The subject lands are zoned "City Centre One — CC1" within the City Centre By-law 7443/17, as amended. Uses permitted include a broad range of residential and non-residential uses, such as apartment dwellings, townhouse dwellings, commercial, office, retail, community, recreational and institutional uses. The proposed amendment seeks to: • increase the maximum building height for Building A from 47 metres (approximately 15 -storeys) to 80 metres (approximately 25 -storeys) • increase the maximum height of a podium for Building A from 20 metres (approximately 6 -storeys) to 30 metres (approximately 9 -storeys) • increase the maximum height of a podium for Building B from 20 metres (approximately 6 -storeys) to 25 metres (approximately 8 -storeys) • reduce the separation distance between Building A and Building B from 25 metres to 19 metres, for the portions of the buildings that are between 37.5 metres and 40.0 metres in height • exempt the minimum main wall stepback between the top 6.0 metres and 18 metres for a point tower greater than 73.5 metres 6. Comments Received 6.1 Public comments from public open house and written submissions On October 3, 2019, a Public Open House Meeting was hosted by the City Development Department to inform area residents about the development proposal. Over 150 people attended the meeting. The following is a list of key comments and concerns that were received, in written form or verbally expressed by the area residents at the meeting, and before and after the meeting: 6.1.1 Height, Architecture • disagreed with the zoning by-law amendment to permit the additional height and to facilitate the proposed development • commented that the proposed density and height of the development is inappropriate in relation to the proximity of the low density residential uses • commented that the height should stay at the maximum limit of 15 storeys as currently permitted by the existing Zoning By-law • concerned that the proposed taller buildings will obstruct the skyline for many residents • requested that new buildings be restricted to a maximum building height between 15 and 20 storeys - 7 Information Report No. 16-19 Page 8 • disagree with a proposal of a long wall of glass or brick 6.1.2 Use of property • concerned about the displacement of current commercial tenants on the subject lands • commented that Altona Group should consider developing in conjunction with the commercial property directly to the west of the site 6.1.3 Privacy, Shadows, Noise • concerned about the increased shadows and wind effects as a result from the proposed 25 -storey and 12 -storey buildings • concerned about privacy as a result of potential residents having views over existing homes and backyards • concerned about validity of noise reports and commented that the area is already very noisy • concerned that the noise reports do not address future noise impacts to current residents 6.1.4 Heritage building • commented that it was believed that the Old Liverpool House is already protected (by the Ontario Heritage Act) • questioned whether Old Liverpool House will have public access and what the renovations and restorations would look like • supportive of the retention of the heritage building • concerned about future naming of Old Liverpool House, for example Altona Group House • concerned that the tower will diminish the importance of the Old Liverpool House which should have space around it and should be the focus of attention that residents and visitors should see as they drive by • concerned about moving of Old Liverpool House again 6.1.5 Traffic and Access • commented that the intersection of Kingston Road and Liverpool Road is already congested and busy and that the proposed development would cause further traffic • concerned about noise, dirt, and safety of pedestrians and cyclists during construction • requested improvements to the safety of the entrance/exit to the commercial plaza on the east side of Liverpool • commented that there is an increase in traffic and cars parked on Glendale from the recent townhouse development at the corner of Liverpool Road and Glenanna Road • commented that cars already spill out onto Glendale Road from the commercial property directly west and that the proposed development would negatively contribute to the traffic • commented that it is difficult and dangerous to turn into subject property, and that cars get backed up going north from Kingston Road - 8 - Information Report No. 16-19 Page 9 • concerned that another possible set of lights at the north entrance would cause too many back-ups and that it would make it more difficult to be a pedestrian walking north or south on Liverpool Road 6.1.6 Other comments • commented that current residents enjoy trails, green space, parkland in current neighbourhood • commented that Pickering needs more affordable housing, recreation centres, parks, splashpads, affordable transit, and infrastructure to support new development • concerned about where increased population will go to elementary and secondary schools • comments received from commercial property at 1278 Kingston Road (commercial property on west side of the subject lands): moving Old Liverpool House south will impact exposure that the tenants currently enjoy and depend on • comments received from property owner to the north: concerned that the height of proposed townhouse block will compromise the height of any future proposals from the north property; that consideration be given to providing a shared access for both developments by way of a public road; that both proposals be given consideration at the same time 6.2 City Department Comments 6.2.1 Engineering Services • no objection to the rezoning application • the applicant shall satisfy the City, through the site plan application review stage, respecting the submission of appropriate engineering drawings that detail, among other things, municipal service connection, sidewalks, lot grading, fencing and tree planting, and financially secure such works • cash -in -lieu for tree compensation is not required as the number of proposed trees to be planted on site exceeds requirements • consent required from Region of Durham for proposed planters, unit pavers and site furniture within the right-of-way; applicant to address who will be responsible for maintenance • a public art installation is recommended at the corner of Kingston Road and Liverpool Road • revisions required to Transportation Impact Assessment with regards to road details and current and predicted conditions 6.2.2 Fire Services • turning radius within the fire route shall have a centerline radius of 12 metres • sprinkler siamese connections to be located within 45 metres of a fire hydrant 9 Information Report No. 16-19 Page 10 6.3 Agency Comments 6.3.1 Region of Durham • The proposed rezoning application will facilitate the development of a mix of commercial and residential land uses at densities and heights within the Pickering Urban Grown Centre in an appropriate location where high-density uses and larger/taller buildings are encouraged • The proposed medium -and high-density land uses with setbacks and stepbacks to adjacent land uses will provide transitions to adjacent uses while maintaining a heritage building • The applicant and the Region are currently establishing a Risk Assessment Terms of Reference as a result of the Phase 1 and Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessments • The Region has reviewed the Noise Report, which requires revisions to address noise impacts • Water supply is available for this development from the existing watermains on Kingston Road and Liverpool Road • Future development applications shall include a waste management plan. • Durham Region Transit does not have any objections to the proposed application • The Regional Works Department requires the applicant to convey a road allowance to provide for a 36.0 metre right-of-way across the Liverpool Road frontage. The required conveyance varies in width, from approximately 5.0 metres at the north part of the site and tapering to 0.0 metres at the south part • A minor road widening conveyance is required across the Kingston Road frontage • Transportation Infrastructure and Traffic Engineering and Operations are currently reviewing the Transportation Impact Assessment, including the proposed access locations and configurations that were shown on the conceptual site plan. A final review has not been completed at the time of preparing this report. 6.3.2 Metrolinx Comments • No comments at this time • Metrolinx noted that it will spend the next year advancing the Durham -Scarborough Bus Rapid Transit Project through the Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP). The Project will include Dedicated Bus Lanes along Kingston Road. Property impacts will be identified during the TPAP and affected landowners will be contacted once property requirements are finalized 6.3.3 Durham District School Board • Comments have not be received at the time of writing this report. 6.3.4 Durham Catholic District School Board • No objections to the proposal • Students from this development will attend St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic Elementary School and St. Mary Catholic Secondary School - 10 - Information Report No. 16-19 Page 11 6.3.5 Heritage Pickering Advisory Committee • At a meeting on June 26, 2019, Heritage Pickering recommended that staff pursue listing the Old Liverpool House under Section 27 of the Ontario Heritage Act • At the September 25, 2019, Heritage Pickering received a presentation from the applicant and their heritage consultant, ERA Architects, with the owner of the subject lands in attendance • Staff noted that formal conservation of the property will be pursued as part of the ongoing development approvals • Heritage Pickering offered the following concerns and questions to the owner and applicant: • questioned the proposed use of the Old Liverpool House • questioned whether there were heritage attributes in the interior of the building and whether those would be conserved • questioned whether the Region would be supportive of the proposed landscaping as some of it is in the regional road right-of-way • commented on the use of public art and possibility for heritage commemoration through storytelling (i.e., signage, plaques) • questioned winter design and maintenance, such as where snow would be stored and what the landscaping and plaza would look like in the winter • questioned the applicant on the differences between heritage easements and designation and what would be the best approach 6.3.6 City's Heritage Consultant (Branch Architecture) The City of Pickering has retained Branch Architecture to review the Heritage Impact Assessment (HIA) submitted by the applicant. Branch Architecture has offered the following comments: • Revise the HIA to provide further discussion on the building relocation and proposed placement, the landscape plan, and the new construction. It should specifically evaluate the impact of the height and massing of the adjacent podium and recommend additional mitigation measures • The Old Liverpool House property merits designation under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act, and, as such, should be conserved in compliance with the policy and guidelines identified in the HIA, with specific attention to the Pickering City Centre Urban Design Guidelines • Revise the HIA to include the historical information on the property ownership, building design/architect (if available), hotel proprietor and photographic records provided in this peer review. With respect to the 1902 photo (the earliest available), articulate how this new record informs the conservation scope of work and building restoration plans. • Complete site investigation as required to determine if the rear extension is original to the building and update the HIA accordingly • Revise the DRAFT Statement of Significance to clarify the inclusion of select heritage attributes — porch and stone foundation — and articulate the identified views from Kingston Road, Liverpool Road and the adjacent intersection Information Report No. 16-19 Page 12 7. Planning & Design Section Comments The following is a summary of key concerns/issues or matters of importance raised to date. These matters, and other identified through the circulation and detailed review of the proposal, are required to be addressed by the applicant prior to a final recommendation report to Planning & Development Committee: • ensuring conformity with the City of Pickering Official Plan and the City Centre Urban Design Guidelines • assessing the suitability and appropriateness of the site for the proposed increase in height, and potential shadow and privacy impacts from the proposed 25 and 12 -storey buildings on the existing residential developments to the west • assessing the appropriateness of the request to increase maximum podium heights, and reduce the minimum building separation and stepback requirements • pursing the designation of the Old Liverpool House under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act to ensure the long-term protect of the heritage building • assessing the proposed community benefit (preservation of the heritage building, the Old Liverpool House) for the additional increase in height • ensuring that the siting, size, massing, scale and materials of Building A complements or enhances the heritage attributes of the Old Liverpool House • requiring the applicant to provide additional information regarding the use for the Old Liverpool House • exploring the opportunity for a privately owned publicly accessible plaza around the Old Liverpool House with a public art installation to commemorate the Old Liverpool House • exploring opportunities to protect for future connections (pedestrian and/or vehicular) to ensure abutting lands immediately to the north and any future redevelopment of the lands located at the northeast corner of Kingston Road and Glendale Drive • reviewing the resident and visitor parking standards proposed and ensure that sufficient parking is provided to support the proposal • assessing whether the size and configuration of the proposed private amenity space is appropriate for the proposed development • evaluating the design of the pedestrian connections within the site and to the transit locations to ensure barrier free path of travel • assessing the safety and feasibility of the proposed access points from Liverpool Road and circulation within the site • submission of an appraisal of the land to determine the value of Section 37 contribution • further issues may be identified following receipt and review of comments from the circulated departments, agencies and public The City Development Department will conclude its position on the application after it has received and assessed comments from the circulated department, agencies and public. 8. Information Received Full scale copies of the plans and studies listed below are available for viewing at the offices of the City of Pickering, City Development Department: • Heritage Impact Assessment, prepared by ERA Architects Inc., dated May 16, 2019 - 12 - Information Report No. 16-19 Page 13 • Architectural Drawing Set, prepared by Kirkor Architects + Planners, dated May 16, 2019 (Z1.3 & Z2.3 dated June 19, 2019) • Planning Rationale & Urban Design Brief, prepared by Urban Strategies, dated May 27, 2019 • Transportation Impact Assessment, prepared by LEA Consulting Ltd., dated May 24, 2019 • Noise Feasibility Study, prepared by RWDI, dated May 22, 2019 • Phase One Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by Terrapex Environmental Ltd., dated May 17, 2019 • Phase Two Environmental Site Assessment, prepared by Terrapex Environmental Ltd., dated May 17, 2019 • Geotechnical Report, prepared by Alston Associates, dated May 17, 2019 • Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report, prepared by Stantec Consulting Ltd., dated May 22, 2019 • Hydrogeological Review, prepared by Terrapex Environmental Ltd., dated May 23, 2019 • Landscape Plan & Conceptual Landscape Plan (L -1a), prepared by The MBTW Group, dated May 22, 2019 • Tree Protection Plan (TP -1), prepared by The MBTW Group, dated May 22, 2019 • Tree Protection Details (TP -2), prepared by The MBTW Group, dated May 22, 2019 • Arborist Report, prepared by The MBTW Group, dated May 15, 2019 9. Procedural Information 9.1 General • written comments regarding this proposal should be directed to the City Development Department • oral comments may be made at the Statutory Public Meeting • all comments received will be noted and used as input to a Recommendation Report prepared by the City 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 9.2 Owner/Applicant Information The owner of the properties is Altona Group and is represented by Tatjana Trebic and Melanie Hare, Urban Strategies. - 13 - Information Report No. 16-19 Page 14 Attachments 1. Location Map 2. Air Photo Map 3. Submitted Conceptual Site Plan 4. Submitted Building Elevations 5. Submitted Conceptual Perspectives 6. Site Statistics 7. City Centre Neighbourhood Policies 8. City Centre Urban Design Guideline Summary Prepared By: Original Signed By Elizabeth Martelluzzi Planner II, Heritage Original Signed By Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design EM:NS:Id Date of Report: November 15, 2019 - 14 - Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Attachment #1 to Information Report 16-19 2yo David Farr Park 0 CD 0 0 U 0 N U a.) co Tanta l Glenanna Road m O 0) a • Brands Court 0 0 c0 0 0 N tB 0) 0 0 J Subject Lands 0 Pine Ci Ravine Pickering Parkway C Location Map File: A 08/19 a/ PICKERING City Development Department Applicant: Altona Group Property Description: Pt Lot 23, Con 1, now Parts 11 to 16, 40R-10390 (1294 Kingston Rd, 1848 & 1852 Liverpool Rd) Date: Nov. 11, 2019 © The Corporation of the City of Pmkenneen in Rred(in part) under license from '.© Queens sPrinter. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. NI rights reserved.:© Her Majesty the Queen in Rlght of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.: © Tempel Enterprises Inc. and As suppliers all rights reserved,© MidapPliperty Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.: SCALE: 1:4,000 JlIlNLL THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\A\2019\A 08-19 Altona GroupnA08_19_LocationMa .mxd 1 Attachment #2 to Information Report 16-19 Pickering Parkway C Air Photo Map File: A 08/19 a/ PICKERING City Development Department Applicant: Altona Group Property Description: Pt Lot 23, Con 1, now Parts 11 to 16, 40R-10390 (1294 Kingston Rd, 1848 & 1852 Liverpool Rd) Date: Nov. 11, 2019 0 The Corporation of the City of Pickenng Produced (in part) underllcense from.© Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; ©Teranet Enterprises Inc and Its suppliers all rights reserved.;© Midalparipperty Assessment Corporation and Its suppliers all rights reserved.; SCALE: �:�r000 THIS IS NOTA PLAN OF SURVEY L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\A\201 RA 08-19 Altona Group \A08_19_AirPhoto. mxd — i- — Attachment #3 to Information Report 16-19 Proposed 3 storey townhouses I n/Out Access Proposed 12 storey residential building (Building B) Outdoor Amenity at rade LIVERPOOL ROAD In/Out Proposed 25 storey mixed-use building (Building A) Proposed Landscaping and Open Space Old Liverpool House T PICKERING City Development Department Submitted Conceptual Site Plan File No: A 08/19 Applicant: Altona Group Property Description: Pt Lot 23, Con 1, now Parts 11 to 16, 40R-10390 (1294 Kingston Rd, 1848 & 1852 Liverpool Rd) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Nov 11, 2019 L:\Planning\01-MapFiles\A\2019 - 17 - Attachment #4 to Information Report 16-19 11■1■1■1■1-1■111-1-111 NISI ■IIIII■NIII■I■ 1111■1■1■I_I■111_1-..11 ■1111111■11111■1■111■1■ 1' 1 1 ■1■11111■11111■1■1■1■I■ ■ 111■1■1■1■1_I■111_1_1111 1■■■■_■■_ -1■ I_ 1111111_11111_I■111■I■I■1 11■I■■■_■1■1,_ _III —11_■1■■■ inil ■I■111_II 11_1■ 11 .I■I I 1 [_L ILL _I—LIU—•L quI•iII•LuuiMl 1-11111_11_■■r1■r ±I ._ imilL mil. .N "°m 11 11 11 I.- 1 1 1 I I �I I— 1 I 11 .11 , , ' 1 $.7s.,1 ±. ■1>!I�1_I■1 1 11._ ,a�m 1 1 ILII ■11 I_.L_I RI 1 ■ ' I ■ 1 111 II 11 .11 _ p 1_111=1_h1._ - _ _ . .1. - 1 .1 11 ■_.• 1 11 1 . M;1„,om- I I .I 1., I_111. 11 n _ v.7 :II.„ll II im 1 _. 1■ 1 Ile-, . 1 i1 1I ■ ■ 1 11 1•Irlr_ iiii1 'm -111i 1■1_11111111- .1i_ pe,, 1 111 11 1 1 • ■ 1 1■ 1■11 11 .� ■111_1111_ litr ■ ■ JI■1III —■I■I I■ 1. 11 II 11 I I ■■ i ! LAPlanning a p F i l e s W \2019 - ■ _ - 1,i 1i1111::'i• III111m■-ii.i!.ui --1.01.aII ,i !! iiiiYAM M1�-1 ins I'M al illinilaill 1111112 -°• I[ I Li lin- 1.1 al I ■II• 11..6 IIIII, 1 IDIII1 u 1..-1■1-1 I u.w Nil 111111116, =1 IN IM illatajill ti■I— I11111I1ii _ I■ ;.-.:1• 11E1112E4 -El FT[ 1i11111111I111_I■1 Ali■ '' gl 1 1� ..I I 1• .I-• •••■I I�..._ 1 1 i1111!11_I'r ..�I _4I� -la �- _1 �"..1 I► I! !!illi El. a-, NEM- Iliii• _ .. 11 mamma "i-1-1�!I •UII �m !11—I _I mini11111111.• ■■� 111-�%i 111!1X!!_ i91■Iii1=1 111 111 .: �.I 1 1111 mai mil 1 i !�_g _I "ii -•I iii I I1 . 111111 1 I II"1 1 1 Ii!! !i..' 17 III 11 1 ■` .i 1 ■1181 �I �• Eii _ _. ._ " "' 1111- ::ini Ni � - 1Rj=, _ - 1 111 11 TIL 1 •l1111 °m J1 -.- � 11 Frt 11- ._ i a_ _ 1!!11i11_Ill_l!1 is 1 LJ L. _. =! -1 _i 12 ■.' 111• aI.111ai11a11m111If111 111.1 11 �1 1 - T . ■ 11 m . ■ I.. ISI ^1.'i III " 1.1.1 III " - ' 11 ' 'um ''`�th III I I 1 • .1 f I. -ilii ringston Road Old Building A 4 Building B Townhouse Block Liverpool (25 Storeys) Private (12 Storeys) Private (3 Storeys) House Road Road Submitted Building Elevations, (view looking east from Liverpool Road) C` 4 File No: A 08/19 2 PICKERI NG Applicant: Altona Group Property Description: Pt Lot 23, Con 1, now Parts 11 to 16, 40R-10390 City Development (1294 Kingston Rd, 1848 & 1852 Liverpool Rd) Department FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. w DATE: Nov. 11, 2019 LAPlanning a p F i l e s W \2019 - ■ _ - Attachment #5 to Information Report 16-19 L: \Planning\01-M a p F i l e s W \2019 _` of 0 [IV - IIIJJ 11 1111 - I �1 II 1 -� M 1 1� Ili !ii 11111111111 1lIrJII�I 1! I I I I I ! �� �� 1C . I 1 1 �_ - -'-� C wr_.. �_ �+1•!!II - :I V.! I - _ , . i l : .�� � 1 '� Y �. 1lR�l°�R* Ir!� *•'yYr "IS '10-, . �1,,, J-T,.,-� •.� '• ' "� 1.111 �1IINA1S1! 111 milli 11 11 111 Maul I. Fill till ��11Y�+.J IIIIM.IIY_'llill!III IME 111 •+r■ - r* �*r---r . ' 1I i. rr- r_f- a -r ul111l�11_IY_ 7111/ 1+.Ili i)!(!!!I11 EII1 11 JI jlia1_llly_ll.'1E 11 II! ��_._ _-_�„ _ 11111 U 1. s. �, 'a i' °+��11 °11, _ 1111 11.-.111_.'+'• A. toe° ''' 14 \li I\ IffroirriOinq. /r \ \ 74.14(1k:‘\:.„ ' '� IWVii .\sii k� \� 1 1 .1l011i C / I!—, IIS: �, i I. ` SII... II 1_ �, I /``�I �`I I'. I ,i. 4 11. sF,,, IY 1 j' � 01 III I� i.. i; c iii pI - _1= _ . � 1I 1 I r r 1,,r;"...?..-.- _ yyT`rTr rr Yk 1mFFFr rr Y: rrs r r_l,R ■ 1 _Fsrr rr —1,hAI��eiMEINI 1. I`F r ,,1 vITR.w. r•In—PPP i III -1_!11111 F-,, r.! Il11■ 1111a ! _ 117 1+. 11111 �. - in_ 11111++: LA 111 J1 -Yl-11 1u.1! - _.IISY0... l!11W1:"rAir i+ - -: AEI/ 111■ _ op, r 'I I lir S Submitted Conceptual Perspectives 644 4 File No: A 08/19 PICKERI NG Applicant: Altona Group Property Description: Pt Lot 23, Con 1, now Parts 11 to 16, 40R-10390 City Development (1294 Kingston Rd, 1848 & 1852 Liverpool Rd) Department FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. w w DATE: NOV. 11, 2019 L: \Planning\01-M a p F i l e s W \2019 cell PICKERING City Development Department Submitted Conceptual Perspectives File No: A 08/19 Applicant: Altona Group Property Description: Pt Lot 23, Con 1, now Parts 11 to 16, 40R-10390 (1294 Kingston Rd, 1848 & 1852 Liverpool Rd) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Nov. 11, 2019 LAPlanning a p F i l e s W \2019 Attachment #6 to Information Report 16-19 Site Statistics Total Gross Floor Area Building A (25 -storey tower), Building B (12 -storey building), Townhouses and Old Liverpool House: 33,195 square metres Total Number of Units Residential Units: 391 units Building A: 254 units Building B: 130 units (eleven 2 -storey townhouse units + 119 apartment units) North block townhouses: 7 Density 429 units per net hectare Floor Space Index 3.64 Tower Floor Plate Size Building A: Up to approximately 750 square metres No. of Storeys and Building Heights Building A: 25 storeys (78 metres, 84 metres to the top of mechanical penthouse) Building B: 12 storeys (39 metres, 44 metres to the top of mechanical penthouse) Townhouses: 3 storeys (9.75 metres) Old Liverpool House: 2 storeys Unit Types Buildings A and B — not provided at this time Buildings C, D and E — not provided at this time Commercial Gross Floor Area Building A: 430 square metres Old Liverpool House: 416 square metres Vehicular Parking Resident — 298 spaces (all located within a 3 -level underground parking garage) Resident (Block Townhomes and within Building B) — 32 Retail — 29 spaces Visitor — 58 spaces Bicycle Parking Underground Parking Level 1 — 116 At grade (outdoor) — 40 Ground (indoor) — 98 Amenity Area Indoor — 808 square metres Outdoor (at grade) — 458 square metres Outdoor (Level 9, Building B) — 264 square metres Outdoor (including common areas and balconies of Buildings A and B) — 3,064 square metres -22- Attachment #7 to Information Report 16-19 City Centre Neighbourhood Policies Related to the Proposal • Encourage the highest mix and intensity of uses and activates in the City to be in this neighbourhood. • Encourage development proponents to locate and integrate commercial uses such as cafes and bistros into development adjacent to the public realm to create social gathering places and vibrant street life. • Encourage street -facing fagades to have adequate entrances and windows facing the street. • Encourage publicly accessible outdoor and indoor spaces where people can gather. • Encourage new development to be designed, located and massed in such a way that it limits any shadowing on the public realm, parks and public spaces in order to achieve adequate sunlight and conform in the public realm through all four seasons. • Encourage the transportation of existing strip -commercial development into mixed use development to bring conveniences closer to residents and public transit, and to provide additional housing. • Recognize the intersection Kingston Road and Liverpool Road as a gateway to the City Centre and consider public squares, transit waiting areas and tall buildings to be appropriate uses for lands fronting all four corners of the gateway. • Require active frontages at grade along Kingston Road and Liverpool Road. • Require new development in close proximity to established low density residential areas to be gradually transitioned in height. • Promote the height buildings to locate on sites at key gateways along the Kingston Road and Liverpool Road corridors, in proximity to higher order transit stations. • Consider in review of development applications for buildings taller than 5 -storeys, the following performance criteria: • that buildings be massed in response to the scale of surrounding buildings, nearby streets and public open spaces; • that upper levels of buildings be set back or a podium and point tower form be introduced to help create a human scale at street level; • that shadowing impacts on surrounding development, publicly accessible open spaces and sidewalks be mitigated/minimized to the extent feasible; • that sufficient spacing be provided between the building face of building towers to provide views, privacy for residents and to minimize any shadowing and wind tunnel impacts on surrounding development, streets and public spaces; • that buildings be oriented to optimize sunlight and amenity for dwellings, private open spaces, adjoining open spaces and sidewalks; • that living areas, windows and private open spaces be located to minimize the potential for overshadowing adjoining residential properties; • that informal or passive surveillance of streets and other public open spaces be maximized by providing windows to overlook street and public spaces and using level changes, floor and balcony spaces elevated above the street level to allow views from residential units into adjacent public spaces whilst controlling views into these units; and • that protection be provided for pedestrians in public and private spaces from wind down drafts. -23- • Select transit junctions and related pedestrian connections as priority areas for design excellence and capital improvements including landscaping, public seating, weather protection and public art. • Require new development adjacent to the transit junction to be designed to frame the junctions with active uses at grade and entrances oriented towards them. -24- Attachment #8 to Information Report 16-19 City Centre Urban Design Guidelines The guidelines identify the corner of Kingston Road and Liverpool Road as a Gateway, which are areas to help enhance orientation, signal key points of entry into the core of the community as a special character area, and provide key opportunities where the coordinating of the design of landscapes, signage, public art and buildings can create a sense of entry and orientation. Site Design • Buildings shall be aligned to contribute to a consistent street wall with minimal gaps or courts between buildings, except to allow for pedestrian access to internal lanes, walkways. • Buildings on Major Streets shall have a minimum of 40 percent of transparent windows at street level, with clearly marked building entrances connected to the public sidewalks in order to create visual interest for pedestrians. The ground floor shall be occupied by a mix of active uses such as restaurants, retail, personal service and other similar uses to animate the street edge. • Building setbacks could be increased to create public accessible open spaces such as court yards or plazas along a streetline. Setback areas with retail or commercial uses at grade should be designed to accommodate patios, seating, and other at grade animating uses over time. Where buildings are setback more than 1.0 metre, the area between the buildings and front property line may feature hard and soft landscaping, lighting, signage and seating that enhance the sense of place, amenity and way -finding to the building and within the City Centre. • For buildings 8 storeys in height or greater, a minimum building separation of 18.0 metres, but it may be reduced if there are no primary windows in the wall facing an abutting building. • Tower portions of a building (those over 12 storeys) are subject to a minimum tower separation distance of 24.0 metres, to provide outlook, daylight access and privacy for residents. • In order to encourage public activity at street level along Major Streets (Kingston Road and Liverpool Road) with required active frontages at grade, building entrances should be provided generally at a minimum of every 18.0 to 20.0 metres. • The design of pedestrian walkways on-site shall seek direct connectivity to adjacent public spaces, transit stops and amenities • Pedestrian walkways between building entrances and the street shall have a minimum width of 1.8 metres, be barrier -free and provide curb ramps at grade changes with minimum cross gradient. Building Design • New development adjacent to low density residential neighbourhoods will be limited by a 45 degree angular plane measured at a minimum 7.5 metre setback from the property line at a height of 10.5 metres. • The shadow impacts of buildings on public open spaces and private amenity areas shall be minimized. • The design of tall buildings shall incorporate vertical articulation in the form of distinctive base, middle and top sections. • The floor plate for a residential tower, the portion of the building above the podium, shall generally not exceed 850 square metres. • Within the middle component of a building, balconies should be recessed and/or integrated into the building fagade. -25- • The top of towers should be attractively designed using setbacks, articulation and other means to contribute positively to the skyline. This can be accomplished through the use of a small setback on the last 2 to 6 storeys, and distinctive and varied rooflines to contribute towards the built form character and unique appearance of the building. • Roof tops are encouraged to include green roof spaces for environmental sustainability, amenity space for residents or urban agriculture. • All buildings should be built with high-quality, enduring materials such as brick, stone, and glass. Materials that do not age well, such as stucco, vinyl, and highly reflective glass will be discouraged. • Large expanses of blank walls should be avoided by facade articulation (i.e., recessions or projections), fenestrations, cornices, vertical pillars, and prominent entrances that respond to the massing and architectural style of the building. • Low rise buildings (such as townhouses) should be oriented parallel to the street and provide continuous frontage along their primary facade. • Mid -rise buildings should be sited to align parallel to the street, and to form usable interior courtyard spaces internal to the block. • Where tall buildings take the form of point tower above a podium, the proportion of the point towers must be designed to cast fewer and smaller offending shadows, open sky views to streets from neighbouring apartment buildings and to be easily absorbed in the skyline. • Point towers should be setback a minimum of 3.0 metres from the street wall of the podium of a building. Signature Buildings • Signature Buildings, those with significant heights and massing, should be located at key gateways to, and intersections within, the City Centre. Signature buildings shall include architectural features that signify the importance of the corner. This can be attained by bold and expressive building design through the use of high quality building materials, highly articulated building facades and unique massing details. • Efforts shall be made to retain or integrate the Liverpool House, located at the northwest corner of Kingston Road and Liverpool Road with surrounding development. Adjacent landscaping and urban design treatments shall reinforce the building's significance and role as a historical reference point. Intensification of the site in the form of building alterations or additional development shall ensure the siting, size, massing, scale and materials of the new development complement or enhance the heritage attributes of this property. Mobility • The four corners at Kingston Road and Liverpool Road are identified as a "Transit Junction". • Transit Junctions facilitate easy transfers and comfortable pedestrian experiences through an enhanced public realm including: high quality landscaping, street furniture, bus shelters, public art, cycling parking facilities and additional street trees to provide shade. Public Realm • Design features at corners should include signature buildings and/or enhanced landscaping such as signage, art, lighting, historic markers, special pacing, open space/square, or seating as well as coordinated fencing to frame the entry into the neighbourhood. • The primary entrances to buildings at gateway locations should be located at the street corner and contain architectural features that would enhance and activate the street corner. -26- 646/ DICKERING Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: PLN 26-19 Date: December 2, 2019 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Study Intensification Plan and Draft Urban Design Guidelines Recommendation: 1. That Report PLN 26-19, regarding the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Study, be received for information; 2. That Council endorse in principle the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan, dated November 2019, prepared by SvN in consultation with AECOM and 360 Collective, as contained in Appendix I to Report PLN 26-19, and authorize staff to initiate an Official Plan Amendment to implement the vision and Intensification Plan for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node; and 3. That Council endorse in principle the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Draft Urban Design Guidelines, dated November 2019, prepared by SvN in consultation with AECOM and 360 Collective, as contained in Appendix II to Report PLN 26-19. Executive Summary: The purpose of this Report is to present the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan (Intensification Plan), and the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Draft Urban Design Guidelines (UDGs), prepared by SvN in consultation with AECOM and 360 Collective. A map of the Study Area is provided as Attachment #1. The Intensification Plan and UDGs are contained in Appendices I and 11 respectively to Report PLN 26-19, and available online at https://www.kingstonroadstudy.com/. The Intensification Plan and UDGs are a result of two years of study and comprehensive public engagement by SvN and City staff. The Intensification Plan contains a comprehensive framework for redevelopment and intensification along the Corridor and within the Retailing Node to 2041 and beyond. The UDGs articulate the vision set by the Intensification Plan and serve as a user-friendly toolkit for all parties in development projects. The public engagement process consisted of three focus group sessions, a community workshop and two community open houses, various one on one meetings with individual land owners/developers, and meetings with key agencies at key intervals to solicit input and feedback regarding the development of a new vision, a recommended intensification scenario, an Intensification Plan with policy recommendations, and Draft UDGs. -27- PLN 26-19 December 2, 2019 Subject: Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Page 2 Staff is recommending that Council endorse in principle the Intensification Plan and the Draft Urban Design Guidelines, and authorize staff to initiate an Official Plan Amendment to implement the vision and Intensification Plan for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. A City -initiated zoning by-law amendment will follow. Financial Implications: In October 2017, Council approved the project funding of $223,399.00 and the financing as 27 percent from property taxes and 73 percent from Development Charges. Funds to complete the Study were carried over in the 2019 Council approved Current Budget for the City Development Department, Consulting and Professional (Account 2611.2392.0000). 1. Background 1.1 In October 2017, City Council approved the proposal submitted by SvN Architects + Planners Inc., in association with AECOM and 360 Collective, to undertake an Intensification Study for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node (see Map of Study Area, Attachment #1). The study was undertaken over a period of approximately two years through a highly collaborative process involving City staff, public agencies, key stakeholders and members of the public, and has been concluded by the preparation of an Intensification Plan and Draft Urban Design Guidelines (UDGs). 1.2 Public and Agency Engagement and Key Deliverables The following is a summary of the public and agency engagement process and key study deliverables: Phase 1: • February and March 2018: three Focus Group Sessions were held with the public (including major landowners, developers and local residents), and a meeting was held with key public agencies, to share an analysis of existing conditions within the study area, and to seek feedback regarding existing conditions and a future vision for the Corridor and Node. The first focus group session targeted major landowners, business owners and developers within the study area, and groups two and three focused on residents and the public at large. The comments/inputs from these engagement sessions were captured in the Background Report, and helped with formulating a proposed vision for the Corridor and Node. • August 30, 2018: the consultant released the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Study Background Report, dated July 31, 2018. Members of Council and the Chief Administrative Officer received an update on the study via a staff memorandum on August 30, 2018, which included an executive summary of the Background Report as well as a hyperlink to where it has been posted on the project website. The Background Report concluded the first phase of the study, and provided an overview of existing conditions, an analysis of issues and opportunities within four distinct precincts in the study area, and a proposed vision for the Corridor and Node. -28- PLN 26-19 December 2, 2019 Subject: Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Page 3 Phase 2: • September 19, 2018: a community workshop was held to develop alternative intensification scenarios for the study area, and to obtain final comments on the proposed vision for the Corridor and Node. The workshop drew 15 participants, and included a presentation from the consultant regarding the proposed vision for the Corridor and Node, the approach to develop alternative intensification scenarios, and roundtable discussions where participants provided comments and suggestions on different ways to improve connectivity, placemaking and land use/built form within the 4 precincts of the study area. • November 16, 2018: based on the input from the community workshop, the consultants evaluated the alternative intensification scenarios and shared their results with key public agencies, including staff from the City's Engineering Services Department. Comments received from the key public agencies were used to further refine the alternative intensification scenarios and to develop a preferred intensification scenario. • December 6, 2018: a community open house was held to share the consultant's recommendations regarding a recommended vision and a preferred intensification scenario for the study area. The open house drew 23 participants and included a presentation from the consultant, followed by a roundtable discussion where participants provided comments regarding the preferred intensification scenario. In addition to the open house, there were a number of individual meetings with representatives from various major land owners within the study area to consider challenges, opportunities and design concepts that could potentially enhance the future development of their lands. Staff also hosted a meeting with key agencies to leverage inputs regarding the preferred intensification scenario. • March to May 2019: following the completion of the Phase 2 consultation, the consultant prepared a Recommended Intensification Scenario Report. The Recommended Intensification Scenario Report addressed the study purpose and process, the refinement of the vision, the development and evaluation of the alternative intensification scenarios, the recommended intensification scenario, and the associated public engagement processes. The Recommended Intensification Scenario Report was presented to the Planning & Development Committee (P&DC) of Council on May 6, 2019 via Planning Report PLN 08-19. A number of representatives from various major land owners within the study area submitted comments on the Recommended Intensification Scenario Report at the P&DC meeting. Following the incorporation of certain minor revisions to the Recommended Intensification Scenario Report (pertaining to notional building heights), Council endorsed the document on May 27, 2019, and authorized staff to proceed with Phase 3 of the study. Phase 3: • July to September 2019: using the Council endorsed Recommended Intensification Scenario as a basis, the consultant prepared a Draft Intensification Plan and Draft UDGs and solicited inputs from key public agencies. -29- PLN 26-19 December 2, 2019 Subject: Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Page 4 • September 26, 2019: following a review of public agency comments, a community open house was held where the consultant presented the Draft Intensification Plan and Draft UDGs for discussion and comments. These documents were also posted online a week prior to the date of the community open house. The open house drew 28 participants and included a presentation by the consultant, followed by a question and answer period. Comments received at and after the community open house were reviewed by staff and the consultant, and informed further revisions to the Draft Intensification Plan and Draft UDGs. For more information regarding concerns and key comments received and staff's response, please see Section 4 of this report and Attachment #2. The final Intensification Plan and Draft UDGs are included as Appendices I and II respectively to Report PLN 26-19, and have been posted online at https://www.kingstonroadstudy.com/. 2. The Intensification Plan The Intensification Plan provides a framework for the redevelopment and intensification of the lands within the Kingston Road Corridor and the Specialty Retailing Node. It is a refinement of the Council endorsed Recommended Intensification Scenario for the Corridor and Node, and provides direction regarding a proposed land use policy framework, urban design guidelines and zoning by-law regulations, focusing on the key elements of land use and built form, placemaking and connectivity. The Intensification Plan consists of the following sections: • Section 1 provides the contextual background on the Plan, including a summary of the study purpose, study process, study area, local and regional context, and the planning context; • Section 2 restates Council's endorsed vision, goals and objectives for the Corridor and Node, and describes the Recommended Intensification Scenario that formed the basis for the preparation of the Intensification Plan and the UDGs; • Section 3 provides the framework for intensification, including proposed policy recommendations for the study area in relation to land use, built form, placemaking, connectivity and servicing; • Section 4 describes each of the four precincts in terms of character and anticipated densities, including key priorities and considerations that have been identified for each precinct; and • Section 5 identifies implementation strategies, future studies and strategic capital projects that should be considered through the development of Official Plan policies and zoning regulations for the Corridor and Node. 3. The Urban Design Guidelines The UDGs articulate the design vision for the Intensification Plan, and provide a practical reference manual for all parties involved in development projects. -30- PLN 26-19 December 2, 2019 Subject: Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Page 5 The UDGs consist of the following sections: • Section 1 — Introduction: describing the study area, the vision and objectives for the Corridor and Node, and a summary of the Intensification Plan; • Section 2 — Built Form: providing a toolkit of built -form guidelines, addressing matters such as building placement and orientation, building separation and transitions, access, parking, landscaping, loading, signage and lighting, materials and facade treatment, building types, and sustainable design; • Section 3 — Placemaking: providing a toolkit of place -making guidelines in relation to the natural heritage network, proposed public and privately owned parks and open spaces, public art, and identified heritage buildings in the study area; • Section 4 — Connectivity: providing a toolkit of connectivity guidelines to guide the creation of a robust, multi -modal transportation system, focusing on pedestrians and walkability, cycling, transit, as well as the creation of refined network of proposed new public and private roads and laneways that are integrated with existing public roads in the study area; and • Section 5 — Illustrative Blocks: containing illustrative block plans and massing, reflecting a possible block design applying the UDGs. The final UDGs will be brought back with the Official Plan Amendment for Council approval. 4. Response to key comments and concerns Comments received from the public, major land owners and development groups during and after the last community open house on September 26, 2019 covered various matters in the Draft Intensification Plan and Draft UDGs, including the following key concerns: • The application of a 45 degrees angular plane for mid -rise buildings adjacent to established low density properties is deficient in addressing privacy, enjoyment of backyards and aesthetic impacts; • The Intensification Plan states that opportunities for the greatest heights and densities exist at gateway locations and along Highway 401, as opposed to the proposed policy recommendations and the mapping that do not reflect such opportunities; • The identification of preferred office locations within the Brock, Dunbarton/Liverpool, and Whites Precincts, and setting certain minimum targets for office development have no basis and have not been substantiated through a market study; • The proposed policy recommendation that 25 percent of new residential units within new construction must be affordable to households of low or moderate incomes, can be misinterpreted as a goal to be met on a site specific basis instead of a City-wide basis; • The proposed minimum percentages for active ground floor uses along Primary and Secondary Retail Frontage Areas identified in the Plan are unrealistic and the associated mapping is too prescriptive; - 31 - PLN 26-19 December 2, 2019 Subject: Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Page 6 • The proposed minimum building separation distances for Low-rise and Mid -rise buildings are called into question and should be reduced; • The ownership of future streets on the SmartCentres lands in the Brock Precinct (private vs public); • The necessity of proposed Primary Public Streets vs Secondary Streets (private streets); • The ownership of new parks and open spaces on the SmartCentres lands in the Brock Precinct (private vs public); • The implementation of the Intensification Plan could have a detrimental impact on existing businesses and attaining complete communities; • The preservation of the Post Manor, the only designated heritage structure in the study area, needs more emphasis, and language should be included to clarify that the City would not be supportive of moving or removing buildings of heritage significance without first studying the properties for their significance; • The Intensification Plan figures and 3-D model demonstrations and the angular plane diagrams in the UDGs appear too prescriptive, offering little or no flexibility; • The language used in the Intensification Plan and UDGs is too prescriptive, and there should be a degree of flexibility in its interpretation; • The Intensification Plan lacks direction regarding the maintenance of existing land use permissions and to permit modest expansion; • There may be water and sanitary service capacity constraints to accommodate future growth and intensification within the Corridor and Node; and • The Intensification Plan should provide direction regarding the need for cost sharing associated with services and new roads that will be shared, and the sequencing of development. The comments in relation to the above listed key concerns and staff's response thereto, are contained in Attachment #2 to Report PLN 26-19. Staff, in their review of the submitted comments, noted that various points relate to aspects that can be more appropriately addressed through the official plan amendment process, and or the zoning by-law amendment process. Accordingly, such comments will be revisited when staff prepare the draft official plan amendment and zoning by-law to implement the new vision and plan for the Corridor and Node. 5. Conclusion The completion of Phase 3 of the study concludes the study and sets the stage for the preparation of a City -initiated Official Plan Amendment. Subsequently, a City -initiated zoning by-law amendment will be prepared. The Urban Design Guidelines will be fine-tuned based on the official plan amendment and brought back to Council for endorsement. -32- PLN 26-19 December 2, 2019 Subject: Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Page 7 Staff recommend that Council endorse in principle the Intensification Plan and the Draft Urban Design Guidelines, as set out respectively in Appendices I and !Ito this report, and that staff be authorized to initiate an Official Plan Amendment to implement the new vision and Plan for the Kingston Road Corridor and the Specialty Retailing Node. Appendices Appendix I Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan (November 2019) Appendix II Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Draft Urban Design Guidelines (November 2019) Attachments 1 Map of Study Area 2 Key Comments/Concerns and Staff's Response Prepared By: Original Signed By Dean Jacobs, MCIP, RPP Manager, Policy & Geomatics DJ:Id Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Original Signed By Kyle Bentley, P.Eng. Director, City Development & CBO Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Tony Prevedel, P.Eng. Chief Administrative Officer -33- Appendix I to Report PLN 26-19 Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan November 2019 -34- • • Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node City of Pickering Intensification Plan November 2019 -35- -36- Acknowledgments The Plan has been developed through a collaborative process that included landowners, developers, City and Regional staff and community members, together with other relevant stakeholders. The City and consultant team would like to thank all those involved in the process for their commitment to making this document a practical and useful tool to guide the implementation of the Kingston Road Intensification vision. City of Pickering Participating Stakeholders Landowners The Public Agencies • The Province of Ontario Ministry of Transportation • Region of Durham • Parks Canada • City of Toronto • Town of Ajax • Durham District School Board • Toronto Region and Conservation Authority Consultants SvN, AECOM and 360 Collective commenced this document in May 2019. The final Intensification Plan will be presented to the Planning and Development Committee (PDC) at the end of 2019. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan -37- Table of Contents 0.0 Intent & Structure of 3.0 Framework Document 1.0 Background and Context 1.1 Study Purpose 1.2 Study Process 1.3 Study Area 1.4 Local and Regional Context 1.5 Planning Context 2.0 The Vision 2.1 Vision Statement 2.2 Goals and Objectives 2.3 Recommended Intensification Scenario 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Land Use 3.2.1 Mix Use A 3.2.2 Mix Use B 3.2.3 Mix Use C 3.2.4 Residential 3.2.5 Transition of Use Over Time 3.3 Built Form 3.3.1 Tall Buildings 3.3.2 Mid -Rise Buildings 3.3.3 Low -Rise Buildings 3.3.4 Gateways 3.3.5 Setbacks 3.3.6 Active Frontage Network 3.3.7 Streetwall 3.3.8 Heritage Buildings 3.4 Place Making 3.4.1 Climate Response and Sustainable Development 3.4.2 Natural Heritage Network 3.4.3 Heritage Path -38- 3.4.4 Public Parks 3.4.5 Public Green Spaces 3.4.6 Public Lookouts 3.4.7 Gateway Plazas 3.4.8 Privately Owned Publicly Accessible Spaces (POPS) 3.4.9 Community Facilities 3.5 Connectivity 3.5.1 Pedestrian Paths 3.5.2 Controlled Intersections 3.5.3 Cycling Network 3.5.4 Transit 3.5.5 Existing Streets 3.5.6 New Public Streets 3.5.7 New Private Streets 3.5.8 New Service Lanes 3.5.9 Parking 3.6 Infrastructure Services 3.6.1 Water 3.6.2 Wastewater 3.6.3 Stormwater 3.6.4 Other 4.0 Precincts 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Rougemount 4.3 Whites 4.4 Dunbarton/Liverpool 4.5 Brock 5.0 Implementation 5.1 Implementation 5.2 Future Studies 5.3 Strategic Capital Projects Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan -39- 0.0 Intent & Structure of Document The Intensification Plan provides the vision and framework for intensification and redevelopment within the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. It is a further refinement of the Recommended Intensification Scenario and provides direction regarding the proposed policy framework, urban design guidelines and zoning by-law regulations. The intent of the document is to inform Official Plan policies, the Urban Design Guidelines, the Zoning By- law amendment, and associated municipal strategies. The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan is organized into the following sections: Section 1 gives contextual background information on the plan, including a summary of the study purpose, study process, study area, local and regional context, and planning context. YOU ARE HERE Section 2 outlines the overarching vision, goals and objectives for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. It also describes the Recommended Intensification Scenario that formed the basis for the preparation of the Intensification Plan. Section 3 provides the framework for intensification, detailing planning recommendations for the study area as they relate to land use, built form, place -making, connectivity and servicing. Section 4 highlights each of the four identified precincts, including a detailed description of precinct character. Key priorities and considerations for each are also identified. Section 5 wraps up the document by identifying implementation strategies, future studies and relevant strategic capital projects. 1 2.0 The Vision • Context Understanding of the site and Understanding of vision and process and policy background. objectives. 3 O Framework Review of key features necessary for intensification Structure of the Intensification Plan -40- Annotated Elements in 3.0 Framework The Framework section provides greater detail on key features identified in the Intensification Plan, with accompanying discussion and policy recommendations for each. The following example graphic shall guide the reader in identifying the layout and common elements for each feature. 3.2.1 Mixed UseA� Mixed Use A (Residential / Retail / Office) features combination of residential. retail and office uses in mixed use buildings, or in separate buildings on mixed use sites. Targeted for significant development, Mixed Use Aareas will have the greatest dens., and represent. highesNntensity uses within the Corridor and Node. Ofnce uses are encouraged to be located in Mixed Use A areas, with Preferred Office Locations at major intersections or gateways where access to existing and Manned transportation Infrastructure N greatest, including higher order transit facilities with /Noe potential M be identified as Major Transit station Areas. This will allow development to capaalize on the vailabiliry of frequent transit cervices and maximize opportunities to create high-density employment zones that enable grea[�e-work opportunities In the City of Pickering, with 1 and residences located In close Proximity. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Mad Use p areas I belocaled according to the Figure 12. Arlscape Daniels fauncbped. Tornio 4.0 Precincts Precinct character, densities and key considerations. • The main header V identifies the feature. The symbology used to represent the feature on maps is identified in the top left-hand corner. The policy recommendations text box provides relevant policy guidelines relating to the feature. The discussion text introduces the feature, including details on typical locations and functional role within the greater intensification framework. 5.0 The accompanying image highlights relevant precedents to show real-life best practice examples of the feature. Implementation Understanding next steps, future studies and strategic capital projects Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 41 - -42- Background and Context 1.1 Study Purpose 1.2 Study Process 1.3 Study Area 1.4 Local and Regional Context 1.5 Planning Context Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan -43- 1.1 Study ruro• Study Purpose The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Study represents a further phase of the South Pickering Intensification Study, itself an offshoot of the broader city-wide Growth Strategy Program. The purpose of this overall Program is to implement the strategic growth area objectives of the Provincial Growth Plan and the corridor objectives of the Durham Regional Official Plan within the South Pickering urban area. The first phase of the Growth Strategy Program focused on the City Centre. Upon the conclusion of that phase, the Program switched focus to examine intensification opportunities on the remaining lands in South Pickering. A number of factors led to the identification of the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node as an area for further study of intensification potential. From a policy perspective, Kingston Road is designated as a Regional Corridor in the Durham Regional Official Plan and as a Mixed Use Area — Mixed Corridor in the Pickering Official Plan. The Specialty Retailing Node also has a Mixed Use Area designation in the Pickering Official Plan. Together these designations identify Kingston Road and the Specialty Retailing Node as a priority location for intensification. From a transit investment perspective, Durham Region is currently implementing transit priority measures along Kingston Road through curbside bus -only lanes that can accommodate Bus Rapid Transit (BRT). Further study will be undertaken by the region to explore a dedicated median transit right-of-way. There is therefore an opportunity to plan for redevelopment with a mix of uses and at densities that would be supportive of this rapid transit investment. From a community input perspective, participants in the South Pickering Intensification Study engagement process identified the importance of intensification and higher density development along corridors such as Kingston Road, maintaining the character of established neighbourhoods, encouraging the use of active transportation, and creating vibrant, mixed-use, well designed, transit -supportive communities. Together, these community aspirations lend themselves to a renewed vision for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node that aligns with new policy direction and transit investment initiatives. Through the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Study, opportunities for intensification will be identified, urban design guidelines will be created, and recommendations developed that will be used to update the in -force planning framework, including Official Plan policies and zoning specific to the Corridor and Node. -44- 1.2 Study Process Phase 1 Develop a Vision Nov. 2017 - Sept. 2018 Review of Existing Conditions Develop Vision, Goals and Objectives Phase 2 Develop a Preferred Scenario Oct. 2018 - Mar. 2019 Phase 3 Preferred Design Apr. 2019 - Nov. 2019 Develop Planning and Design Guidelines Prepare Intensification Plan and Criteria Prepare Urban Design Guidelines Prepare and Assess Alternative Scenarios Select Preferred Scenario Study Process The Study was undertaken in a three-phase process over a two-year period from November 2017 to November 2019. The three phases of the Study include Phase 1: Develop a Vision, Phase 2: Develop a Recommended Scenario, and Phase 3: Recommended Design. Phase 1 of the Study involved undertaking a review of existing conditions, an analysis of issues and opportunities, and the development of a vision and associated goals and objectives. The vision, goals and objectives were used as the basis for developing alternative intensification scenarios in Phase 2 and the recommended design in Phase 3. Phase 1 concluded with the release of a background report in August 2018, which summarized the results of Phase 1 of the Study. Phase 2 of the Study focused on developing a set of Alternative Intensification Scenarios with different arrangements of open space, street networks, land use and built form. Each scenario was tested against a set of evaluation criteria based on the Study vision, goals and objectives. The Recommended Intensification Scenario was endorsed by Council on May 27, 2019, which set the basis for the preparation of the Intensification Plan and Urban Design Guidelines developed in Phase 3. Phase 3 consisted of further analysis and refinement of the Recommended Intensification Scenario to produce the final Intensification Plan and Urban Design Guidelines. The Plan provides a comprehensive planning framework and specific policy recommendations for updating Official Plan policies and Zoning By-law permissions within the Study Area. The Design Guidelines set out clear direction on appropriate and context -sensitive built form, mobility and streetscape design, publicly -accessible open space, and integration and responsiveness to natural heritage. Each phase of the Study involved robust public and stakeholder consultation with meetings specifically tailored to solicit the involvement of and input from local residents, landowners, public agencies and key stakeholders. This feedback informed key decision points over the course of the Study. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan -45- 1.3 Study Area The approximately 152 -hectare Study Area is centred on Kingston Road, which spans the entire width of the City of Pickering, paralleling Highway 401. The Study Area generally includes properties that front on to the north and south sides of Kingston Road, between Rouge National Urban Park in the west and Pine Creek in the east. The Study Area also includes a number of properties that front on to the north side of Kingston Road west and east of the intersection of Brock Road, as well as all properties that fall within the Specialty Retailing Node to the southeast of the intersection of Kingston Road and Brock Road (see Figure 1). There are two areas along Kingston Road that are excluded from the Study Area. These include flood prone areas to the north and east of the Specialty Retailing Node and the City Centre, where a detailed planning study has already been undertaken result in Council - approved area -specific Official Plan policies, zoning, and urban design guidelines. For the purposes of the study, the Study Area has been divided into the following four precincts: Rougemount Precinct — extending from the Rouge Valley in the west to Rosebank Road in the east Whites Precinct— extending from Rosebank Road in the west to Fairport Road in the east Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct — extending from Fairport Road in the west to Pine Creek in the east Brock Precinct — incorporating the portions of the Study Area around the intersection of Kingston Road and Brock Road and the entirety of the Specialty Retailing Node located south of Kingston Road, east of Brock Road, and north of Highway 401 Traffic Zone A Traffic Zone B Traffic Zone C Zone D Traffic Zone E r—•� i 05 k vl:•' is •i i.l Rougemount Precinct Whites Precinct Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Figure 1. Study Area Legend —•—• Study Area Boundary Parks 1 open Space TEO Rail Corridor Speciality Retailing Node -46- 1.20 km Brock Precinct • 1.4 Local and Regional Context Kingston Road continues to serve a regional role, providing connections between Pickering, Toronto, Ajax, Whitby and Oshawa. It also serves as a connector between a number of regionally significant natural heritage features, including the Highland Creek and Rouge River in Toronto, the Petticoat Creek and Duffins Creeks in Pickering, and the Caruthers Creek in Ajax. This regional major link/connection is shown in Figure 2. The Specialty Retailing Node also serves a regional role, providing specialty retailing to a broad regional market with access provided by the Highway 401 interchange at Brock Road. At the city scale, Kingston Road is a major east -west spine with branch connections to important growth areas such as the Seaton Urban Area. It also connects to recreational amenities such as the Pickering Waterfront and Rouge National Urban Park, including Glen Rouge Campground and its associated trails which are to be expanded significantly over the coming years. These city scale north -south major links/connections are shown conceptually in Figure 3. At the neighbourhood scale, Kingston Road serves as a spine for key north -south connections across Highway 401, connecting neighbourhoods in the South Pickering Urban Area to one another at Rougemount Drive, Whites Road, Liverpool Road, and Brock Road (see conceptual major links/connections in Figure 4). Likewise, the Specialty Retailing Node plays a city/neighbourhood scale role, providing destination retail and local retail within its boundaries, serving customers from within the City of Pickering and the immediate areas that surround it. The role the corridor plays at multiple scales necessitates that the ultimate vision for intensification contemplate and seek a balance between these varied functions, through new connections, new open spaces, public realm improvements, new uses, and new, denser development. R4[h 11,11 rouffvllle a r Markham ■ 1-� i 1 .+ Figure 2. Regional Context 00.... The Region Figure 3. City-wide Context The`Neighbourhood Legend Major Links and Connections (at varying scales) Natural Features 44 Kingston Road Figure 4. Neighbourhood Context Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan -47- 1.5 Planning Context Intensification of the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node is supported by existing planning policy, ranging from broad direction at the provincial level to specific guidance at the local level. The Provincial Policy Statement and the Growth Plan provide strong direction for increased intensification and planning for complete communities across the Greater Golden Horseshoe Region. These policies support the close integration of transportation and land use planning through planning for transit -supportive development in proximity to frequent transit. They also support planning practices which facilitate active transportation and provide for a range and mix of uses and activities. The Regional Official Plan identifies Kingston Road as a Regional Corridor, which is an area towards which intensification is to be directed. These areas are to be planned and developed as higher -density mixed use areas that support higher order transit priorities and pedestrian -oriented development, and should reach an overall, long-term density target of at least 60 residential units per gross hectare and a floor space index of 2.5. In regards to regional policy, the Region's Municipal Comprehensive Review (Envision Durham) is currently underway and will be brought into conformity with the Provincial Plans approved in 2017 and with Amendment 1 to the Growth Plan. Envision Durham may provide more direction regarding densities and built form objectives along the Corridor. The City of Pickering Official Plan identifies both Kingston Road and the Specialty Retailing Node as Mixed Use Areas where a broad variety of uses are permitted at a higher density and within buildings that feature a high quality of design (see Figure 5). Slappard Mom I.r.S, Brock Precinct Legend Study Area Boundary Rail Corridor Flood Plain Special Policy Areas Figure 5. Official Plan Land Use Pickering Official Plan Land Use Structure Mixed Use Areas Open Space System Urban Residential Areas -48- Employment Areas Freeways and Utilities The Rougemount, Whites and Dunbarton/Liverpool Precincts are designated as Mixed Corridors, and the Brock Precinct Is designated as a Mixed Corridor along Kingston Road and a Specialty Retailing Node south of Kingston Road and east of Brock Road. Despite this policy direction for mixed use, the existing land use within the Study Area are defined by retail uses, with half of all land area occupied by this use (see Figure 6). Other commercial uses including offices, auto dealerships and service uses combined with the retail uses compose nearly two-thirds of all lands within the Study Area. There are relatively large portions of vacant lands and educational uses, each comprising almost 10% of the lands in the study area. There are few lands with medium and high density residential uses, including single detached residential dwellings. In terms of the transportation role of Kingston Road, it is identified as a Rapid Transit Corridor in the City of Pickering's Transportation Master Plan Update. Kingston Road, Whites Road and Brock Road are all identified as Transit Spines in the Regional Official Plan; the role of these is to facilitate inter -regional and inter -municipal services along arterial roads and intersect with local transit services. These existing uses combined with the transportation role of Kingston Road play a strong role in defining the public realm, streetscape character and lot fabric within the Study Area. There is some variation within the corridor in terms of these urban design elements, with some sections exhibiting the physical and functional characteristics of a major traffic route that connects neighbourhoods, and other sections exhibiting those of a main street or "heart" of the community. The Specialty Retailing Node has a somewhat different character than the remainder of the corridor given its orientation to Kingston Road and the predominance of big box retail uses within its boundaries. Currently, Development Guidelines designed in the late 1990s provide high-level guidance on the desired urban design for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. Retail Open Space - 9.2% Education - 8.4% Vacant - 7.5% Auto - 7.2% Residential - 6.2% Other Services - 8.4% Pfsce of Worship - 3.9% Offices , 2.3% Figure 6. Existing Land Use Composition Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan -49- 49.9% -50- 2.0 The Vision 2.1 Vision Statement 2.2 Goals and Objectives 2.3 Recommended Intensification Scenario Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanGM - 51 - 2.1 Vision Statement During Phases 1 and 2 of the Study, a renewed Vision for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node was developed. This renewed Vision built upon the existing vision for the Corridor and Node as expressed in the City of Pickering Official Plan, the Kingston Road Corridor Development Guidelines, and the Specialty Retailing Node Guidelines. The renewed Vision was also informed by the updated planning framework, specifically the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe's increased emphasis on planning for complete communities and integrating transportation and land use planning through transit -supportive development. Lastly, the renewed Vision was developed in light of the review of existing conditions, analysis of issues and opportunities and consultation with Focus Groups and the Public Agency Advisory Committee. Based on all of the above, the following was endorsed by Council as a new Vision for the Corridor and Node: By 2041, the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node will be... • A sustainable place that embraces its significant natural heritage assets, connecting to the valleys and creeks that the corridor crosses, mitigating greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to climate change, and building communities centred on new public open spaces in both the Corridor and Node • A walkable place in all four precincts, with safe, comfortable and green sidewalks and pedestrian connections on both sides of Kingston Road, and within larger parcels that are likely to redevelop with an internal street network, particularly within the node • An urban, livable, transit -supportive community, with a higher density mix of uses, located in buildings that are pedestrian oriented, and that transition in height and mass to the scale of adjacent established neighborhoods, particularly to the north of the corridor and to the east of the node • A place that continues to serve as both a destination for shopping and a place of employment, with retail, commercial services and offices within mixed use buildings or on mixed use sites, and generally fronting directly onto Kingston Road, Whites Road and onto new internal streets on larger parcels, to provide active uses at grade that encourage pedestrian traffic • A regional and local multi -modal connector, with regional gateways at Altona Road and Brock Road, and with gateways to the neighborhoods north and south of the corridor at Rougemount Drive, Whites Road and Fairport Road. -52- 2.2 Goals and Objectives In addition to the above new Vision, a series of guiding goals and objectives for the corridor and node were prepared to guide the development of the Recommended Intensification Scenario and Intensification Plan. These goals and objectives are as follows: 1. Advance the concept of place -making and create complete communities 1.1 Create a distinct character for the Corridor and Node as a whole while also providing for variation based on the unique conditions and adjacencies within each precinct 1.2 Create a strong sense of community, a context for healthy lifestyles and a high quality of life 1.3 Plan for a full range of housing types and tenures in a variety of building forms 1.4 Provide for and ensure the accessibility of a full range of services and amenities for all walks of life 2. Promote sustainability in the design and full life- cycle of the streetscape, open spaces and buildings 2.1 Ensure that the ultimate streetscape, open space and redevelopment concepts have capacity to support growth beyond the horizon of the plan 2.2 Ensure that sustainability principles and green infrastructure are incorporated as a foundational element of all streetscape, open space and built form concepts 3. Stimulate economic growth and vitality 3.1 Maintain space for various sizes of retail uses and encourage the expansion of office and commercial service uses 4. Promote mixed used development with an emphasis on higher density residential and employment uses integrated within a building or site 4.1 Plan for existing single use sites to transition over time to a mix of uses, either through full scale redevelopment or infill on underutilized portions of a site 4.2 Plan for higher density forms of employment including office uses, within close proximity to higher order transit stops 4.3 Plan for the greatest mix of uses and highest densities within close proximity to higher order transit stops 5. Design all public roads and private connections to be complete streets and emphasize transit and pedestrian oriented development 5.1 Ensure that all users of public roads and private connections have distinct and delineated spaces to separate modes of travel moving at different speeds 5.2 Ensure that buildings are located in close proximity to and are oriented towards the public realm and provide active edges to create an environment that encourages walking 6. Improve access management and connectivity for all transportation modes 6.1 Plan for the consolidation of driveways with access to and from Kingston Road 6.2 Plan for the creation or enhancement of internal street networks on larger parcels to provide alternative routes and new frontages for development Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan -53- 7. Encourage the optimization of infrastructure 7.1 Establish a density target for areas or sites within proximity to higher order transit stops to optimize transit ridership 7.2 Ensure that intensification can be supported by existing infrastructure capacity and that additional infrastructure is phased in step with development 8. Enhance and restore natural heritage features and functions 8.1 Provide physical and visual connections between the corridor and the natural heritage features that it intersects 8.2 Restore natural heritage corridors, ensure no incremental loss of natural heritage and consider stormwater management on an area wide basis 9. Support implementation by considering phasing, flexibility and intermediate interventions 9.1 Ensure that the overall arrangement of streets, blocks, open spaces and buildings can be achieved in multiple ways and that sites are designed in a manner that anticipates change over time -54- 2.3 Recommended Intensification Scenario The Recommended Intensification Scenario was developed through an iterative process whereby a set of Alternative Intensification Scenarios with different arrangements of open space, street networks, land use and built form were developed and tested against a set of evaluation criteria. The evaluation and assessment was informed by four inputs. The first input was consideration of the defined vision, goals and objectives for the Study Area, which was used to create a framework for modelling change and growth within the four precincts. The second input was a series of key assumptions that were held consistent across all of the Alternative Intensification Scenarios, including assumptions around overall growth, natural environment, transportation, and land use. The third input was the identification of sites with redevelopment potential. Finally, the fourth was feedback from key public agencies and members of the public through a workshop and open house and a number of one-on-one meetings with major landowners/ developers; this allowed the community to provide input into the challenges and opportunities for how connectivity, place making, and land use / built form could be improved within all four precincts. Following the assessment of the Alternative Intensification Scenarios, these findings were used as a base to develop a Preferred Intensification Scenario that was further refined into a Recommended Intensification Scenario for the overall Corridor and Node. This Recommended Intensification Scenario included modelling the potential mix of land uses and densities for potential redevelopment sites in each precinct to estimate the level of intensification that could be achieved in terms of people and jobs. Within the Rougemount Precinct, the potential mix of uses and densities would result in a total of 1,991 residents and 236 jobs on potential redevelopment sites, for a combined 101 people and jobs per hectare and 45 residential units per hectare. Within the Whites Precinct, the potential mix of uses and densities would result in a total of 7,622 residents and 2,536 jobs on potential redevelopment sites, for a combined 199 people and jobs per hectare and 75 residential units per hectare. Within the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct, the potential mix of uses and densities would result in a total of 6,036 residents and 1,274 jobs on potential redevelopment sites, for a combined 203 people and jobs per hectare and 84 residential units per hectare. Within the Brock Precinct, the potential mix of uses and densities would result in a total of 6,208 residents and 3,580 jobs on potential redevelopment sites, for a combined 218 people and jobs per hectare and 69 residential units per hectare. The Recommended Intensification Scenario was endorsed by Council on May 27, 2019. For additional information see the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Study: Recommended Intensification Scenario Report from March 20, 2019. The report and endorsement has set a conceptual framework in place to be refined into an Intensification Plan. Although it has been endorsed by Council, certain concerns have been expressed from stakeholders, particularly with regard to building heights, parkland provision, infrastructure capacity, and road networks. These were further reviewed and considered through the development of the Intensification Plan (see Figure 7). Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM -55- -56- 3.0 Framework 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Land Use 3.3 Built Form 3.4 Placemaking 3.5 Connectivity 3.6 Infrastructure Services Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM -57- 3.1 Introduction Building upon the new Vision and the Recommended Intensification Scenario, this Intensification Plan provides a comprehensive framework for future development of the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. This document sets out a detailed plan for desired land use mix, built form, and area character. It establishes place -making priorities relating to natural heritage, public realm and open space. It specifies improvements to the street, transit, cycling and pedestrian network to increase connectivity to adjacent areas. It also addresses infrastructure services relating to water, wastewater, stormwater and information technology. LEGEND Study Area Boundary Valleylands and Stream Corridors Regional Stormwater Flood Plain ▪ Existing Park ▪ Buildings To Remain • Properties of Heritage Significance LAND USE / BUILT FORM • Gateway _ Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office 0 Preferred Office Location Mixed Use 13 - Residential/ Retail Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail ELIF Residential 1__J Primary Frontage LJ Secondary Frontage Existing Development Application Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm) 4,i ii„0 The following legend for the Intensification Plan outlines the key features of the Plan. It is followed by an overall Intensification Plan (Figure 7) and Intensification Plans (Figures 8 to 11) subdivided by precinct. Existing Main Road Existing Road / Laneways Existing Cycling Network Planned Cycling Network GO Railway Future & Planned Connection Subject to EA PLACE MAKING 0 co 0 Gateway Plaza Public Green Space Public Park POPS Public Lookout Heritage Path Potential Community Facility -58- I4 0 • Lot Lines Developable Lots Lot identifier Area Subject to Further Assessment Existing Controlled Intersection Bus Stops CONNECTIVITY --- j Pedestrian Path Multi -Use Path CI Proposed Public Streets 1 Proposed Private Streets Proposed Cycling Facility Potential Controlled intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Location Subject to Further Review • Indicative Enhanced Boulevard - P Right -in , Right -out Access This page has been Intentionally left blank. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM -59- Tra ' is Zone A Tra ' is Zone B Tra ' is Zone B Altana Forest Sheppard Ave aunbarion Creek Ravine LEGEND Study Area Boundary Valleylands and Stream Corridors Regional Stormwater Flood Plain Existing Park Buildings To Remain Properties of Heritage Significance Figure 7. Intensification Plan Existing Main Road Existing Road / Laneways Existing Cycling Network — – Planned Cycling Network GO Railway 4 Lot Lines Developable Lots s -x Lot Identifier Area Subject to Further Assessmei O Existing Controlled Intersection Future & Planned Connection • Bus Stops Subject to EA -60- Tra ' is Zone C Valley Farm Rd f• l Beech lawn Park iman's Bay Precinct LAND USE / BUILT FORM Gateway Pickering GO Station • BnyIySt_ Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office Preferred Office Location Mixed Use B - Residential/ Retail Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail Residential Primary Frontage Secondary Frontage Existing Development Application Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm) PLACE MAKING 0 8 0 Sandy Beach Rd Gateway Plaza Public Green Space Public Park POPS Public Lookout Heritage Path Potential Community Facility v0 100 m 300 m 500 m Broc Precinct CONNECTIVITY C - 61 - Pedestrian Path Multi -Use Path Proposed Public Streets Proposed Private Streets Proposed Cycling Facility Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Location Subject to Further Review Indicative Enhanced Boulevard Right -In , Right -out Access Rouge Motional Urban Pack Area Subject Er witonmental:•:•:•:•:-:-•:•::::: Flood Revie*::•:•:•:•:•:•: .•:•:•.•.• • East 1 woodlands / Park ........ `sal Figure 8. Rougemount Precinct Intensification Plan E.N.I.1 L. Snood Park • Planned gi'cting fiIky type and location to be determined through future EA study s OP recommends piping the creek here we.• .::•:•:•:•:N•••••••• • • • !••=, --!-r • if, us' ,x4Sois. ... Figure 9. Whites Precinct Intensification Plan - 62 - 100m - - / Frenchman's B. Figure 10. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Intensification Plan • T..... --- 11u `•F@@ . a l0 1109 'arq" .;,MI 1 111 111LA. 11.1 "IQ,* * tra H le 14 - Diana Princess Wake Park Figure 11. Brock Precinct Intensification Plan maw aae hamar awe arak 1 afitai o lt Subject LO rota Play .� • AmerWmenl and ERarnnmen[a, Assessnaenr Study outcome ection un review under re Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan -63- 3.2 Land Use Key Objectives • Promote mixed-use development with an emphasis on higher density residential and employment uses integrated within a building or site • Create high-density employment hubs through the concentration of office uses near higher -order transit • Build complete communities with opportunities for live -work within close proximity Introduction This section introduces the land use permissions that will apply to the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. They are intended to support an integrated mix of residential, retail and office uses. Redevelopment shall seek to accomodate these uses in a form and scale which is complementary to the vision of the mixed-use Corridor and Node. Land uses can be allocated in a number of different ways. A mix of uses can be accommodated within a single building; for example, a building with retail co - located on the ground floor with residential uses above. A mix of uses can also be accommodated within any single use buildings on the same site; for example, a standalone retail store or office building located on Kingston Road with residential townhomes located on the same property but off of the main street. During each stage of the planning process, land use compatibility must be considered so as to avoid instances of adverse effect when competing uses are in close proximity. The location of commercial establishments with busy evening hours adjacent to residential homes is an example of where this type of conflict may arise. This Plan recommends four land use categories for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node: Mixed Use A, Mixed Use B, Mixed Use C, and Residential. Subsequent pages discuss the following features, shown in the Intensification Plan and identified in the legend with the corresponding symbology. -64- Mixed Use A - Residentiall Retail/ Office Preferred Office Location Mixed Use B - Residential/ Retail Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail Residential 3.2.1 Mixed Use A Mixed Use A (Residential / Retail / Office) features a combination of residential, retail and office uses in mixed use buildings, or in separate buildings on mixed use sites. Targeted for significant development, Mixed Use A areas will have the greatest density and represent the highest -intensity uses within the Corridor and Node. Office uses are encouraged to be located in Mixed Use A areas, with Preferred Office Locations at major intersections or gateways where access to existing and planned transportation infrastructure is greatest, including higher order transit facilities with future potential to be identified as Major Transit Station Areas. This will allow development to capitalize on the availability of frequent transit services and maximize opportunities to create high-density employment zones that enable greater live -work opportunities in the City of Pickering, with jobs and residences located in close proximity. Identified on Drawings as: _ Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office 0 Preferred Office Location POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Mixed Use A areas should be located according to the Intensification Plan shown in Fig. 7-11. b. Major office development is encouraged to occur in Mixed Use A areas. Office uses should be located at Preferred Office Locations according to the Intensification Plan shown in Fig. 7-11. c. Although the Rougemount Precinct does not show land uses identified as Mixed Use A, office uses are encouraged to be located in this Precinct. d. Redevelopment within Mixed Use A areas should seek to accommodate a minimum amount of office space as part of the total floor area of buildings on site. The City of Pickering is encouraged to undertake an office demand study to determine the requirements necessary as the area intensifies. An office demand study may also be requested in coordination with a development application at key locations. e. The intent of establishing minimum office space requirements is to preserve the potential for future office space at key transit nodes. As current demand for office space may not match future potential, provisions for office space can be met through demonstrating phasing and/or including building types that can be easily altered or appropriated for office uses over time (see Section 5.0). f. The City shall promote the creation of residential units in conjunction with retail, office, service commercial and institutional uses in support of developing complete communities. Figure 12. Artscape Daniels Launchpad, Toronto Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan48M -65- 3.2.2 Mixed Use B Mixed Use B (Residential / Retail) features a combination of residential and retail uses in mixed use buildings, or in separate buildings on mixed use sites. Mixed Use B areas will contain a significant proportion of at -grade retail, most of which will be small- to medium - scale neighbourhood -oriented businesses to satisfy local needs. They are primarily located close to gateways or internal local streets. These areas will combine street -level retail and commercial services with medium and high-rise residential to support higher -density development, local employment, and an animated public realm. Identified on Drawings as: ® Mixed Use 13 - Residential/ Retail POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Mixed Use B areas should be located according to the Intensification Plan shown in Fig. 7-11. b. Retail and commercial -service uses should be primarily located on the ground floor. Second floor retail and commercial -service uses are encouraged. c. Office uses should be permitted but secondary to residential, retail and service -commercial uses. d. The City shall promote the creation of residential units in conjunction with retail, office, service commercial and institutional uses in support of developing complete communities. Figure 13. Ideal Lofts, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Wikimedia) -66- 3.2.3 Mixed Use C Mixed Use C (Residential / Retail) also features a combination of residential and retail uses, with a greater proportion of residential, and a lower proportion of retail than Mixed Use B. These represent the least -intensive mixed use zones within the Kingston Road Corridor. Mixed Use C areas will include occasional smaller -scale retail and service uses which are complimentary to residential uses, reflecting their community -oriented role. They are primarily located at intersections along Kingston Road that are not identified as gateways. Mixed Use C lands are also often located adjacent to existing or proposed green spaces or community and institutional facilities. Identified on Drawings as: Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Mixed Use C areas should be located according to the Intensification Plan shown in Fig. 7-11. b. Retail and commercial -service uses should be primarily located on the ground floor. c. Office uses should be permitted but secondary to residential, retail and service -commercial uses. d. The City shall promote the creation of residential units in conjunction with retail, office, service commercial and institutional uses in support of developing complete communities. Figure 14. 270 Rushton, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Josie Stern Team) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM -67- 3.2.4 Residential Residential features primarily residential uses, generally in areas that otherwise are intended to have a high degree of mixed use and where a mix of uses on a specific site may not be desirable or achievable. They are located throughout the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node, typically adjacent to existing low-rise residential neighbourhoods. New residential housing development will support the achievement of municipal and regional housing goals, including diversity in housing type, tenure and affordability. Identified on Drawings as: Residential POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Residential areas should be located according to the Intensification Plan shown in Fig. 7-11. b. The following residential building types should be permitted: apartment dwellings of various heights, townhouses and live -work units. c. Office and retail uses should be permitted but limited to live -work units on the ground -floor of residential buildings. d. Residential areas are encouraged to achieve a broad diversity of housing by form, location, size, tenure, and cost to meet the housing needs of existing and future residents as they evolve over time, including affordable, rental, assisted and special needs housing. e. A minimum 25 percent of new residential construction is encouraged to be of forms that would be affordable to households of low or moderate income. Figure 15.Regent Park townhouses, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: SvN) -68- 3.2.5 Transition of Use Over Time As the area undergoes intensification and redevelopment, uses that are not compatible with the vision for Kingston Road Corridor and Speciality Retailing Node will be encouraged to locate elsewhere within the City of Pickering. Land uses that detract from walkability and a vibrant public realm are not considered compatible. These include gas stations, auto parts repairs, service shops, car washes, car dealerships, commercial surface parking, drive through establishments, bottle depots, car storage, self -storage, warehouses, distribution facilities, and storage facilities, and any other businesses requiring extensive parking or outside storage. The transition of these areas into compatible uses is encouraged and should be supported, where possible, through adjacent redevelopment. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Uses that are incompatible with the vision for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node should be encouraged to relocate. These include new auto -oriented development and low-density industrial uses. b. The expansion of existing uses that require open air storage should be discouraged and/or encouraged to provide indoor storage located at the rear of the site. c. Redevelopment adjacent to incompatible uses should balance the mitigation of impacts with the integration and future redevelopment of such sites through building, site and streetscape design strategies. d. Larger redevelopment sites should submit a phasing plan as part of their development application demonstrating the full build out of the site, including but not limited to: i. Ultimate street and block network, including potential connections to adjacent properties; ii. Ultimate parks and open space network, including potential connections to adjacent properties; iii. Integration of office uses; and iv. Redevelopment of surface parking lots. Figure 16. Archimatika's design for a modern office, Kiev, Ukraine (photo credits: Archimatika) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan4IESM -69- 3.3 Built Form Key Objectives • Promote higher -density mixed-use development while respecting the character and scale of established neighbourhoods through proper transitioning, and careful building design and placement • Introduce an animated public realm through encouraging active uses at grade and an enjoyable pedestrian experience • Retain and emphasize the distinct character of local streetscapes and precincts, including heritage protection Introduction This section introduces built form policies and guidelines to promote high-quality urban environments within the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. The Intensification Plan identifies a more urban condition, with higher heights and greater densities, than what currently exists in the area. Heights and densities are pronounced near transit stops and intersection gateways as a response to a higher convergence of pedestrians, cyclists and transit users. Additionally, priority is given to respecting the character and scale of adjacent established residential neighbourhoods. The Built Form policy recommendations aim to ensure that new buildings enforce a coherent, harmonious and well-designed streetscape, enhancing the experience of users in terms of visibility, animation, comfort, safety, and accessibility. The Built Form chapter will address heights, gateways, streetwalls, setbacks, active frontage, heritage buildings and precinct character. Subsequent pages discuss the following features, shown in the Intensification Plan and identified in the legend with the corresponding symbology. Gateway LJ Primary Frontage 1 J Secondary Frontage -70- Existing Development Application Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm) Properties of Heritage Significance 3.3.1 Tall Buildings Tall buildings are generally defined as buildings that are 13 storeys or greater. As intensification occurs within the Corridor and Node, the number of tall buildings is expected to increase. Their design and placement should positively contribute to the public realm and respond to the surrounding context. The impact of taller built forms on parks and the pedestrian realm, in terms of sunlight, shadow and wind tunnel impacts, should also be considered. Tall buildings should appropriately transition in height to minimize adverse impacts and create a more human - scaled pedestrian environment, particularly where high- rise development is directly adjacent to existing low-rise neighbourhoods. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Tall buildings should generally be located within gateways and at the intersection of transit spines and major arterials, along the highway, and proximate to highway access. Tall buildings consist of buildings 13 storeys or higher. b. Tall building towers should be separated from one another by a minimum distance of 25 metres and should have a maximum tower floor plate of 750m2. c. Tall buildings should be located to minimize shadow impacts and wind tunnel effects on proximate parks, open spaces, primary frontage sidewalks and existing low-rise residential areas. d. The general maximum height of tall buildings should be no more than 45 storeys. At gateway locations in the Rougemount Precinct and Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct and along the highway in the Rougemount Precinct, the maximum building height should be 25 storeys to reflect the precinct character. e. If the general intent of the Intensification Plan is met, flexibility with massing and height may be considered on a site specific basis. Figure 17. Paintbox Condominium, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Lisa Logan) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM - 71 - 3.3.2 Mid -Rise Buildings Mid -rise buildings are generally defined as buildings which are between 5 to 12 storeys in height. The design and placement of mid -rise buildings should maintain access to sunlight and extend the length of time for which the sun will hit the sidewalk throughout the day. It should also ensure a similar built form and height on both sides of the road to create a coherent and cohesive public realm. In Rougemount and Dunbarton/Liverpool, the design of mid -rise buildings should prioritize preserving the historic neighbourhoods and local natural heritage. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Mid -rise buildings are encouraged to be located throughout the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. Mid -rise buildings consist of buildings 5 to 12 storeys in height. b. For mid -rise buildings up to 8 storeys, a minimum separation distance of 11 metres shall be maintained. For mid -rise buildings between 8 and 12 storeys, a minimum separation distance of 18 metres shall be maintained. This may be reduced if there are no primary windows on the wall facing an abutting building. c. On Kingston Road and Brock Road built form should conform to an angular plane extended at a 45 degree angle from the front property line, beginning at a height 80 percent the width of the adjacent right-of- way. Figure 18. Cross Roads, Vancouver, Canada (photo credits: PCI Developments) - 72 - d. This angular plane requirement applies everywhere with the exception of Kingston Road in Rougemount Precinct, and Kingston Road between Dunbarton Creek and Pine Creek in the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct. In these areas, built form should conform to an angular plane extended at a 45 degree angle from the front property line or R.O.W., beginning at a height 30 percent the width of the adjacent right-of-way. e. For buildings along existing north -south public roads intersecting Kingston Road and buildings along Pickering Parkway, the front angular plane that applies to Kingston Road frontage will also apply to the secondary street frontage. f. The transition for properties abutting low-rise residential will include a minimum setback of 7.5 metres from the property line (or edge of development) and a 45 -degree angular plane from a height of 10.5 metres g. h. above the 7.5 metre setback line. This provides a lower building and a gradual transition. Where there is a grade difference between the front and rear of the property, the rear angular plane should always be taken from the lowest grade elevation along the shared property line. This ensures that properties to the rear are not subject to additional shadow impacts resulting from changes in grade. Where shallow redevelopment lots are immediately adjacent to designated established low-density residential properties, the City may also consider the implementation of other regulations to ensure built form compatibility in addition to the application of the angular plane. Figure 19. Cross Roads, Vancouver, Canada (photo credits: Ledcor) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan -73- 3.3.3 Low -Rise Buildings Low -rise buildings are generally defined as buildings which are 4 storeys or lower in height. The majority of low-rise buildings within the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node are expected to be residential buildings. Low-rise buildings must provide an appropriate transition to existing low-density residential areas and act as a suitable intermediary between these neighbourhoods and more intensified areas featuring mid -rise and tall buildings. They should ensure adequate building setbacks to provide a suitable transition from the public realm to the private realm, which allows low- rise buildings to be part of attractive and cohesive streetscapes while also minimizing negative impacts regarding issues with privacy and overlook. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Low-rise buildings are typically located adjacent to low-rise residential areas and along streets without active frontages. Low-rise buildings consist of buildings 4 storeys or lower in height. b. Low-rise buildings up to 4 storeys should maintain a minimum separation distance of 11 metres between facing buildings. Low-rise buildings should maintain a 8 metre separation distance between the face of a building containing primary living space, such as bedrooms and living rooms, and the side of another building. c. The City of Pickering is encouraged to develop dedicated comprehensive low-rise residential design guidelines to support development of townhomes and low-rise apartment buildings. Figure 20. Regent Park townhouses, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: SvN) -74- 3.3.4 Gateways Gateways are entry points into particular locations, areas or neighbourhoods, often signified by a distinctive public realm or built form interventions. They are introduced by enhanced site and building design, such as greater setbacks and open space, or taller heights. Gateways are located at major intersections along the Corridor and Node. They are identified at locations of significance to frame street corners, enhance local character, create landmarks along the Corridor and within the Node, and act as the principal vehicular and pedestrian arrival points into individual precincts. Identified on Drawings as: Gateway POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Gateways should be located according to the Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11. b. Tall buildings should generally be located within gateways. c. The diameter of the extent of gateways in each precinct is as follows: i. 250 metres in Rougemount Precinct; ii. 800 metres in Whites Precinct; iii. 500 metres in Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct; and iv. 500 metres in Brock Precinct. The extent of gateways is measured from the center of the intersection. d. Building articulation, including vertical projections, recessions, design treatments and other architectural details, is encouraged at gateway locations to create an enhanced visual interest and a human -scaled environment. Figure 21. Marine Gateway, Vancouver, Canada (photo credits: Perkins+Will Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 75 - 3.3.5 Setbacks Setbacks refer to the distance between the property line and the front, side or rear of a building. Building setbacks help define and transition between the public and private realm by requiring minimum distances between the public right-of-way and residential or commercial uses. Setbacks contribute to the animation of the streets by drawing commercial activities out onto the sidewalk and improving the pedestrian experience. Along Kingston Road, setbacks are introduced in anticipation of the fact that the existing right-of-way does not have enough landscaping or a generous enough sidewalk to support the expected increase in pedestrian traffic associated with intensification. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. All buildings fronting Kingston Road in the Rougemount Precinct should be setback 3 metres from the front property line. b. c. d. e. f. g. In all other precincts, all buildings fronting Kingston Road, Brock Road and Pickering Parkway should be setback 5 metres from the front property line. Buildings fronting existing public roads intersecting Kingston Road should be setback 5 metres from the property line in the Whites and Brock Precincts and 3m in the Rougemount and Dunbarton/Liverpool Precincts, or match the setback of adjacent buildings. In all precincts, all buildings should be setback a minimum of 2 metres from new public and private streets that are internal to the development block. In all precincts, all buildings should be setback a minimum of 3 metres from parks and open spaces. Setback areas should be used to accommodate spill -out uses from commercial activity (i.e. patios, displays, waiting areas), public landscape elements (i.e. benches, planters, other amenities), or landscape elements that provide screening / privacy for grade - related residential units as appropriate. All new buildings and additions should aim to keep front yard setbacks to a minimum so that an urban streetwall condition can be achieved along all streets. On larger development sites, phasing plans may show how infill development can be accommodated over time to achieve this condition (see Section 5.0). Figure 22. University Village outdoor shopping mall, Seattle, USA (photo credits: Google) -76- 3.3.6 Active Frontage Network To help achieve a lively streetscape which generates continuous pedestrian flows, certain streets are required to have active uses at grade, with visual engagement between the street and the ground floors of buildings. The Plan identifies both Primary Frontages and Secondary Frontages. Primary Frontages contain a greater consistency and greater number of fine grain active uses at grade, such as retail units with glazing oriented to the street. They are identified as areas where the highest levels of retail activity are desired. Secondary Frontages consist of a less continuous presence of publicly -accessible spaces, or more private spaces that still have a strong street -related presence. They maintain high levels of public realm animation and pedestrian activity, but are less prioritized for retail activity. Identified on Drawings as: LJ Primary Frontage LJ Secondary Frontage i _ _i Existing Development Application POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Primary Frontages shall have a minimum of 60% of the lot frontage of retail uses, commercial -service uses or consolidated office and residential entrances. b. Secondary Frontages are encouraged to have a minimum of 30% of the lot frontage of retail uses, commercial -service uses or consolidated office and residential entrances. c. Development applications which are already underway along Kingston Road and other major intersections are encouraged to have active frontages. Figure 23. Creekside Community Centre, Vancouver, Canada (photo credits: Paul Krueger) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 77 - 3.3.7 Streetwall Streetwall refers to the front facade of buildings. To create and reinforce a sense of coherency and enclosure along blocks, streetwalls should be continuous with uniform heights and building ground floor heights. This helps create a cohesive and welcoming public realm, particularly for pedestrians, and contributes to a sense of place in local areas. Regular breaks in the streetwall will contribute to variety and variation in the streetwall, provide permeability through development blocks for pedestrians, and provide opportunities to establish view corridors through development blocks. Upper building facades, when stepped back, have less impact on the streetwall. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. The minimum streetwall height along all public and private roads should be 3 storeys, with a minimum ground floor height of 4.5 metres. b. The podium portion of tall buildings should have a minimum height of 3 storeys and a maximum height of 6 storeys. c. Variety and variation in the streetwall will be provided through encouraging a fine-grain pattern of retail units / residential entrances, and the establishment of facade articulation and rhythm through building projections / recesses and the use of different facade materials. d. Generally, buildings shall have a podium of at least 3 storeys before any building stepbacks are introduced. The first stepback for any building shall not occur higher than the sixth floor of a building. e. Building stepbacks should be a minimum of 2.5 metres. Figure 24.Gerrison Woods, Calgary, Canada (Image Credits: Canada Lands Company) -78- 3.3.8 Heritage Buildings There is one heritage designated building and four buildings of heritage interest within the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. The Post Manor located at the north west corner of Brock Road and Kingston Road is a designated historical site which was built by mill owner and lumber merchant Jordan Post in 1841. Sites of heritage interest include 301 Kingston Road, 401 Kingston Road, 1 Evelyn Avenue and 882 Kingston Road. 882 Kingston Road is St. Paul's on -the -Hill Anglican Church, a brick church structure; the other three are historical residences currently used by local businesses. Heritage buildings are significant for their role in preserving local character, celebrating collective history, building community identity and having educational and cultural value. Identified on Drawings as: Properties of Heritage Significance POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. The identified Properties of Heritage Significance as identified on Fig. 7 should be studied for heritage merit and potential designation or listing as appropriate. b. Buildings of heritage significance should be preserved, through methods that are appropriate to the specific building and surrounding context. c. Preservation may include keeping buildings in their existing location, moving buildings to a more appropriate location on the same site to incorporate with new development, or replacing buildings with an urban landscaped feature speaking to its significance and history (i.e. landscaped area with historical signage or plaque). d. A Heritage Impact Assessment is required for development activity on or adjacent to heritage properties, as governed by the Ontario Heritage Act. e. Any redevelopment on or adjacent to heritage properties should be completed in accordance with the Urban Design Guidelines. Figure 25. John H. Daniels Faculty of Architecture, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: NADAAA) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan -79- 3.4 Place -making Key Objectives Key objectives relating to place -making include: • Advance the concept of place -making and create complete communities • Enhance and restore natural heritage features to strengthen their relation to adjacent uses • Promote sustainability in the design and full life -cycle of the streetscape, open spaces and buildings Introduction Place -making is all about providing and strengthening the connections between people and the places they share. Successful place -making involves incorporating publicly and privately -owned and accessible features into an interconnected network of open and inviting spaces where users can gather, linger and have an enjoyable experience. Publicly -owned public spaces include public parks, green spaces, gateway plazas and lookouts, which play a fundamental role in creating a vibrant community. In addition, privately -owned public space (POPS), which can take the form of linear parks and urban squares, provide opportunities for private developments to enhance the public realm. Natural heritage networks provide residents and visitors opportunities for rest, recreation and places to connect. Strengthening the linkages along the Kingston Road Corridor is a priority to ensure accessibility to the wide range of creeks, trails, parks, and other natural heritage features in close proximity to the Corridor. Sustainability is critical to ensuring the long-term livability of the Kingston Road Corridor and is addressed through both natural heritage protection and climate response measures. The Place -making chapter discusses the following features, shown in the Intensification Plan and identified in the legend with the corresponding symbology. There is also additional discussion on sustainable development and the natural heritage network. Q 0 A _80 - Heritage Path Public Park Public Green Space Public Lookout Gateway Plaza POPS Potential Community Facility 3.4.1 Climate Response and Sustainable Development Climate response measures can help mitigate more frequent and severe weather events, including flooding, heat waves, and other phenomena which have an impact on the health and safety of communities. Additionally, they create a more enjoyable and comfortable pedestrian environment. Major improvement of micro -climate conditions can be achieved through the strategic use of massing. Built forms should build resiliency into development sites through building design and the selection of appropriate building materials. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Development should incorporate building and landscape design which maximizes sunlight access and minimizes shadow on sidewalks, parks, open spaces and other intensively used areas as necessary to preserve their utility. Development will adequately limit net -new shadow as measured from March 21st to September 21st from 10:18 a.m. — 4:18 p.m. on parks and open spaces. b. Development should incorporate building and landscape design which protects and buffers the pedestrian realm from prevailing winds, especially during winter. c. Sustainable and Low Impact Development (LID) measures are encouraged for all development in order to minimize energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions and water consumption. d. Through the development or redevelopment of lands adjacent to in close proximity to creeks, consideration should be given to the impact more frequent and/or severe storm events may have on stormwater systems. Figure 26. Bioswale system within a median, Detroit, USA (photo credits: Aaron Volkening via Flickr) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 81 - 3.4.2 Natural Heritage Network The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node benefits from proximity and access to an extensive existing waterway system and natural heritage network. The area intersects with a range of significant natural heritage features, including Petticoat Creek, Amberlea Creek, Dunbarton Creek, Pine Creek, Duffins Creek, and Rouge National Urban Park. Access points to open space provide direct links between existing and planned trail systems. Lookout Points are introduced at natural vantage points typically present in close proximity to the creeks and valleylands. Public Parks and Green Spaces, buffer and `link' development areas and natural heritage features along the corridor, preserving their ecosystem functions and ensuring their sustainability for future generations. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Natural heritage areas that bisect or intersect the Corridor and Node are to be managed as a connected and integrated natural system, recognizing the functional inter -relationships between them. Their continuity, exclusive of roads, railways and utilities, should be maintained and enhanced. b. The restoration and rehabilitation of creeks and the implementation of erosion control and stormwater best practices through redevelopment of adjacent lands will be encouraged. c. The extent of the development at areas identified in Fig. 7-11 as "Area Subject to Environmental Flood Review" will require additional studies. d. Efforts should be made to facilitate greater connections to the Petticoat Creek. Connections from the Heritage Trail to Rouge National Urban Park should be explored pending further studies. Figure 27. Petticoat Creek, Pickering, Canada (photo credits: City of Pickering) -82- 3.4.3 Heritage Path The Intensification Plan identifies a new Heritage Path running through Rougemount Precinct along Kingston Road, providing an enhanced connection between Rouge National Urban Park at the edge of the study area on the western side, the retail along Kingston Road and the community center and library on the eastern side of the precinct. By enhancing parts of Kingston Road and taking advantage of the precincts existing Heritage Buildings and creeks the Heritage Path will strengthen the area's historical and cultural memory while connecting cyclists and pedestrians with Rouge National Urban Park. Identified on Drawings as: Heritage Path POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. The City will work with the Region to implement a Heritage Path within portions of the new Kingston Road streetscape. b. It is recommended that the trail does not stop at the end of the study area to the west and that it continues to Rouge National Urban Park, in a manner coordinated with Parks Canada Trail planning, to strengthen the connection between the entrance to the park and the Rougemount Precinct. c. The Heritage Path is encouraged to include heritage plaques, directional signage, enhanced planting enhanced paving materials and moments to pause and rest. Figure 28. Indianapolis Cultural Trail, Indianapolis, USA (photo credits: Indianapolis cultural trail website) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan -83- 3.4.4 Public Parks Public parks play a fundamental role in enhancing the public realm and the physical environments in which we live. They provide valuable outdoor gathering and activity space which can be programmed and enjoyed by all members of the community. The Intensification Plan identifies several new Public Parks, which provide open spaces and nature views for enjoyment and opportunities for tree planting to grow the urban forest. The proposed Public Parks are strategically located to leverage and interact with existing green spaces to form a cohesive corridor -wide green network which includes parks, squares, trails, lookouts, natural heritage features and more. Where particularly intensified clusters supporting future residential and employment density have been planned, parks have been integrated in nearby areas to ensure ease of access. Identified on Drawings as: Q Public Park POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Public Parks will be provided through redevelopment in the Whites, Dunbarton/Liverpool and Brock Precincts as shown conceptually through the Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11. b. The precise location of the Public Parks within the development blocks where they are conceptually identified will be determined through the implementing zoning by-law. Their exact size, location and design will also be addressed through detailed block planning. c. Public Parks are intended to serve a community function and will be designed to accommodate diverse programming throughout all seasons. The dimensions and configuration of these parks (as determined by municipal staff) will support this objective. d. Through the redevelopment of lands, the design and development of any public parkland should be completed in accordance with the Urban Design Guidelines. Figure 29. Mekel Park at Delft University of Technology Campus, Delft, Netherlands (photo credits: Mecanoo) -84- 3.4.5 Public Green Spaces The Intensification Plan identifies a collection of Public Green Spaces adjacent to the Natural Heritage Network. Like Public Parks, Public Green Spaces provide areas of respite, lookouts, and opportunities for outdoor recreation. However, they are specifically located with the intention to buffer and interact with natural heritage features throughout the Corridor and Node. These spaces should be protected and preserved to allow the Natural Heritage Network to thrive. Public Green Spaces are distributed throughout the precincts, adjacent to creeks and other sensitive environmental areas, and help to create trails and a more naturalized environment. Identified on Drawings as: Public Green Space POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Public Green Spaces will be provided through redevelopment as shown conceptually through the Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11. b. The precise location of the Public Green Spaces within the development blocks where they are conceptually identified will be determined through the implementing zoning by-law. Their exact size, location and design will also be addressed through detailed block planning. c. Public Green Spaces are intended to serve a community function will be designed to accommodate programming, where possible and where they do not interfere with sensitive environmental areas. d. Through the redevelopment of lands, the design and development of any public green space should be completed in accordance with the Urban Design Guidelines. Figure 30. Riverwalk, Stratford, Canada (photo credits: Riverwalk B&B) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM -85- 3.4.6 Public Lookouts Public Lookouts highlight important views within the urban structure of streets, parks and open spaces. These are located at natural vantage points typically present in close proximity to the creeks and valleylands. Complemented by other placemaking features such as trails and green spaces, they support a walkable and connected pedestrian environment. Identified on Drawings as: Public Lookout POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Public Lookouts will be provided as shown conceptually through the Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11. `��41I4lI1Llllll I�1 il4lllllliii'�11II1�I�':�. Figure 31. The Chemin-Qui-Marche Lookout, Montreal, Canada (photo credits: Lemey) -86- 3.4.7 Gateway Plazas Gateway Plazas highlight important entry points for vehicles and are located at intersections where there is either existing public land that can be used to provide additional amenity spaces for pedestrians or private land that can be developed as POPS (see 3.4.8) or a combination of both. The Gateway Plazas should include amenity for pedestrians such as seating areas, cycling rings, planters and include larger public features such as art work, fountains or feature benches. Identified on Drawings as: A Gateway Plaza POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Gateway Plazas will be provided as shown conceptually through the Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11. Figure 32. Berczy Park, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Jeremy Gilbert via Flickr) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM -87- 3.4.8 Privately Owned Publicly - Accessible Spaces (POPS) Beyond publicly -owned parks, green spaces, plazas and lookouts, privately owned publicly -accessible spaces (POPS) form a key part of the public realm network, providing valuable amenity space through development. POPS are owned and maintained by private landowners, but open to the general public to enjoy. The Intensification Plan identifies privately -owned features which may include Parks, Linear Parks and Urban Squares. These are part of an overall hierarchy of connected open spaces throughout each precinct. POPS are meant to be fully publicly accessible with easy identification and navigation for all user groups. Identified on Drawings as: tri POPS POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. All at -grade POPS should be publicly accessible unless they are for single-family residential units. b. The locations of POPS will be identified in the implementing zoning by-law and their exact size, location and design will be addressed through detailed block planning, also to include matters such as connectivity and cost sharing between multiple landowners. c. Private landowners should provide public easements as necessary over Privately Owned Publicly - Accessible Spaces to provide access to the general public. These can include, for condominium developments, public easements in common element areas. d. Private landowners should be responsible for ongoing maintenance to ensure that publicly accessible spaces remain in a state of good repair. Figure 33. Artwork at Daniel's High Park Condos, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Urban Toronto) -88- 3.4.9 Community Facilities Community services and facilities play a critical role in providing for complete communities by enabling a high quality of life for residents, helping grow community capacity and strengthen social networks. The Intensification Plan identifies two potential Community Facilities, with the exact uses to be determined according to local needs. The proposed facility in Rougemount Precinct is located adjacent to the existing community library and the facility in Brock Precinct is located adjacent to the area's largest green space; in both cases, they are strategically positioned to create community hubs by maximizing the site and coordinating the delivery of services and amenities. Identified on Drawings as: HI Potential Community Facility POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Two Potential Community Facilities will be provided as shown conceptually through the Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11. b. Community Facilities will be provided through in- kind contributions through development, municipal partnership, land acquisition or Section 37 benefits. c. The delivery of on-site Community Facilities is encouraged to be integrated into multi-storey, mixed- use developments (i.e. forming part of the podium of a residential tower). d. Community Facilities should be delivered in a timely manner to support and be concurrent with growth. Need for these facilities should be studied and evaluated according to the City's established service planning processes. Figure 34. North Toronto Collegiate Institute with community facilities along the street and integrated residential development by CS&P Architects, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Google) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM 89 - 3.5 Connectivity Key Objectives • Design all public roads and private connections to be complete streets and emphasize transit and pedestrian oriented development • Improve access management and connectivity for all transportation modes • Encourage the optimization of infrastructure Introduction Connectivity is all about providing and improving the number and quality of mobility options available to a wide range of users. Connections include new public streets, private streets, pedestrian paths, controlled intersections, bicycle lands and cycling tracks, and multi- use paths, which make up the integrated pedestrian, cycling, transit and street network of an area. New or improved connections are used to provide alternate travel routes, break up larger blocks into smaller and more walkable blocks, allow for smooth vehicular and servicing access, and provide access to parks, open spaces and natural heritage features. Improvements to existing infrastructure help make streets safer and more comfortable for everyone, particularly pedestrians and cyclists. The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node is envisioned as a pedestrian and cyclist -friendly space where users are able to walk and ride freely between destinations in a comfortable, safe, well- connected and visually interesting environment. The Intensification Plan identifies a pedestrian and cycling network that is integrated with the wider public realm, including parks and open spaces, community facilities, and natural heritage destinations. However, the Intensification Plan also recognizes the importance of Kingston Road, Brock Road and Whites Road as major carriers of local and longer -distance vehicular traffic. The Plan is also supportive of phased implementation of higher -order transit on Kingston Road (i.e. dedicated curbside lane in the short -to -medium term and transition to a dedicated median right-of-way in the long term). The Connectivity chapter will make reference to the following items identified on the Intensification Plan. Each item is also identified on the top left of the section in which it is addressed. < > 4 - Pedestrian Path Multi -Use Path Proposed Public Streets Proposed Private Streets Proposed Cycling Facility Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Location Subject to Further Review ▪ Indicative Enhanced Boulevard - Right -In , Right -out Access -90- 3.5.1 Pedestrian Paths The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing node is envisioned as a comfortable, safe, and well- connected area with a coordinated and continuous pedestrian network. Each precinct has Proposed Pedestrian Paths, which provide additional routes of circulation within blocks and to destinations. These connections help link Kingston Road to existing and proposed green spaces and community destinations, enhancing their accessibility. For example, the two pedestrian paths in the Whites Precinct help connect Ernie L. Stroud Park and the existing school to the north to Kingston Road. The pedestrian connections identified are only some among many, with a wide range of potential future connections dependent on future development patterns and uses. Identified on Drawings as: (•••� Pedestrian Path POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Proposed Pedestrian Paths will be provided through redevelopment within each precinct and will be located as shown conceptually through the Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11. Figure 35. Requalification of Mermoz Avenue, Lyon, France (Image Credits: Gautier Conquet) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM - 91 - 3.5.2 Controlled Intersections To improve pedestrian safety, there are a number of identified Potential Controlled Intersection locations. These are located at sites where conflicting traffic flows are anticipated, featuring traffic signals, pedestrian cross -overs, stop signs or roundabouts, and intended to provide for safer pedestrian, cyclist and vehicular movement. For example, the Potential Controlled Intersection proposed in the Rougemount Precinct is located at Evelyn Avenue and Kingston Road, offering a convenient crossing location for pedestrians walking north along Evelyn Avenue. The controls chosen for each intersection may take the form of stop lights or stop signs, and will be determined based on further technical review. Identified on Drawings as: Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Location Subject to Further Review POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Subject to further review, there are five Potential Controlled Intersections identified in the Plan. These should be located as shown conceptually through the Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11. b. The exact location and design of the Potential Controlled Intersections will be established in collaboration with the Region of Durham. c. On private sites where there are new road connections and blocks established, pedestrians should be accommodated and given priority through appropriate traffic control methods. Figure 36. Finch and Don Mills Intersection, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Nataliya Pekar - City of Toronto Website) _92_ 3.5.3 Cycling Network Along the corridor there is an extensive existing and planned cycling network which plays a key role in enabling multi -modal mobility choices for users. The Intensification Plan identifies several new Proposed Cycling Facilities, which would take the form of on -street bike lanes or in -boulevard cycle tracks. It also identifies segments that are more appropriate as Multi -Use Paths. These connect other cycling routes and adjacent neighbourhoods to the intensification sites, such as the connection proposed south of Kingston Road on Rougemount drive to connect the neighbourhoods near Kingston Road to those south of Highway 401. The type and specifications of new cycling facilities are to be determined through further Environmental Assessment or similar studies. Identified on Drawings as: Multi -Ilse Path Proposed Cycling Facility Beyond cycling facilities on major roads, opportunities to create multi -modal internal roads which include cycle facilities are identified in both the Dunbarton/Liverpool and Brock precincts. This will draw cycling traffic to these internal roads, both of which feature retail frontages. The proposed cycling network on both sides of Pickering Parkway will also connect to the Pickering GO station further west, supporting the uptake of transit. Kingston Road, Altona Road, Rougemount Drive, Whites Road, Liverpool Road, Brock Road and Pickering Parkway (from Liverpool Road to Brock Road) are all part of the Regional Cycling Plan, and all upgrades to the municipal cycling network should be completed with consideration of existing and planned regional infrastructure. Furthermore, the cycling network should be integrated with Parks Canada efforts to identify new cycling routes from Rouge National Urban Park. Figure 37. SvN Landscape Six Points Interchange, Toronto, Canada (Image Credits: SvN) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan -93- POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Proposed Cycling Facilities and Multi -Use Paths are identified in the Plan. These should be located as shown conceptually through the Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11. b. Cycling facilities are encouraged within developments and new public and private streets. They may take the form of multi -use paths or cycling facilities, including bicycle lanes and cycle tracks. The former are more appropriate in residential areas or as a link between neighbourhoods, while the latter are more appropriate along busy retail -oriented streets. c. Cycling paths should be raised and vertically separated from the street at an intermediate or sidewalk level, to create a safe and comfortable riding environment and adequate buffer between cyclists and other road users. Where appropriate, they may also incorporate barrier features. d. Cycling facilities are encouraged to connect with crossrides and bike boxes to support the safety of cyclists at intersection locations. tip a P.O.W. 2.00 2.00 3.60 2.50 4.00 Sidewalk Landscape Road Figure 38. Streetscape Cross Section with Multi -Use Path -94- Two-Way Multi -use Pelh Letwdsg:in 3.5.4 Transit Kingston Road holds an important role as a transit corridor with both existing and planned transit routes, including an active bus rapid transit (BRT) route. Existing bus stops are identified within the Intensification Plan. There are two key transit intersections, one at the intersection of Whites Road and Kingston Road and one at the intersection of Brock Road and Kingston Road, with the potential to develop into future Major Transit Station Areas (MTSA). These intersections occupy prime locations along a higher -order transit corridor. Though transit -oriented development is expected to occur throughout the entire area, these locations warrant additional consideration as ideal sites for higher -intensity uses. In particular, employment hubs are recommended to leverage their location as key transit nodes. Through the Durham -Scarborough BRT TPAP EA study, transit stops are being reviewed. Through the review, it Identified on Drawings as: Bus Stops POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Council should seek to coordinate the location and design of proposed future open spaces fronting Kingston Road and Brock Road, with transit stops. b. Transit stops should have safe access via sidewalks and appropriate street crossings, including controlled intersections where possible. c. Shelters at transit stops should be designed to maximize user comfort, including features to minimize extreme weather conditions. d. Additional pedestrian and cycling amenities, such as benches and bicycle storage racks, should be incorporated into the design of transit stops. e. The exploration of energy efficient technologies to provide light and heat at shelters is encouraged. is likely that there will be fewer stops than current DRT PULSE stops. As the existing number of stops is limited and located at major intersections, it is recommended that additional stops are introduced in areas where new intersections are proposed, such as Rougemount and Whites. Figure 39. Durham Transit, Hamilton, Canada (photo credits: Hamilton Spectator) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan -95- 3.5.5 Existing Streets As the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node intensifies, there are some planned or existing roadways that require alterations and/or additions to better reflect the vision of the corridor. The main recommendation for Kingston Road is to enhance the public experience through enhanced planting and safe and comfortable walking and cycling facilities. Some portions of Kingston Road have been implemented as shown in Fig. 40, but Kingston Road is currently part of a Metrolinx-led planning, design and engineering study for a proposed BRT route between Scarborough Town Center and Downtown Oshawa. As part of the Durham -Scarborough BRT TPAP, the feasibility of cycling lanes moving off road are being studied along with the median transit construction. It is recommended that a 2m cycle track and treed and landscaped planting area be implemented on both sides of Kingston Road. In the Rougemount Precinct, the Intensification Plan recommends that a Heritage Path is introduced along Kingston Road to highlight the district's historical and natural heritage features (see Section 3.4.3). At Brock Road in the Brock Precinct, additional street trees should be incorporated within the existing 0.9 BLVD 1.8 SIDEWALK I I� STREE LIGHT/HP — 2.2 0.6 BLVD BUFFER 1.50m THRU CYCLING LANE LANE 3.35 45.00 Identified on Drawings as: Existing Main Road Existing Road 1 Laneways 4'114 Future & Planned Connection Subject to EA POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. The City will work with the Region and Metrolinx to recommend a 2 metre wide raised cycle track with an enhanced treed and landscaped planting area on both sides of Kingston Road. b. Additional street trees should be incorporated within the existing streetscape on the east side of Brock Road to provide shade and comfort for pedestrians walking along Brock Road. c. Walnut Lane should have an Multi -Use Path trail on one side to connect to Liverpool Road and provide cycling access on this more pleasant route to Kingston Road. d. The incorporation of a 2 metre cycle track or an MUP with a minimum landscaped zone of 2 metres should be encouraged on Pickering Parkway. streetscape on the east side of Brock Road to provide shade and comfort for pedestrians walking from Brock Road and Kingston Road south to the Specialty Retailing Node. Fig. 41 shows the current condition. The recommendation for Walnut Lane and its expansion as part of an EA study in the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct should include a comfortable pedestrian sidewalk and cycling facility, which can take the form 34.00 Pavement Distance 8.20 8.20 1.55 ISLAND I 3.35 3.15 THRU LANE LEFT TURN LANE 3.50 3.50 7 00 TRANSITWAY SHY DISTANCE 0.50 I 4.20 3.35 3.35 PLATFORM THRU THRU LANE LANE 0.6 BUFFER 2.2 BLVD 0.9 1.8 BLVD SIDEWALK/ 11 I 1.50m CYCLING LANE STREETLIGHT MA HP Figure 40. Kingston Road Cross section - this is only an approximation, the cross-section will be determined through the Durham -Scarborough BRT TPAP study (photo credits: Region of Durham) -96- Figure 41. Existing Streetscape along Brock Road (photo credits: Google Maps) of a multi -use path to connect the new development to Liverpool Road. As development on Kingston Road is located on one side only within this Precinct and runs parallel to the highway, it is recommended that Walnut Lane be improved as a key pedestrian route. Fig. 42 shows the current condition along Walnut Lane. Within the Brock Precinct, enhanced active transportation infrastructure is recommended for Pickering Parkway. This could occur through raised cycle tracks introduced on both sides of the road, along with a landscape and furniture zone. These enhancements could incorporate a single lane MUP facility on both sides or a two way MUP on one side. Fig. 43 shows the current condition along Pickering Parkway while Fig. 44 shows the proposed cross section through the eastern part of Pickering Parkway as part of the Notion Road / Highway 401 Overpass EA. Figure 42. Existing Streetscape along Walnut Lane (photo credits: Google Maps) Figure 43. Existing Streetscape along Pickering Parkway (photo credits: Google Maps) HOUSESETBACK 5 ] m OFFSET EXISTING R.O.W PICKERING PARKWAY CROSS SECTION STATION A -A: 10+200 PICKERING PARKWAY '..,^' ., 26 0 VARIES ,,.... 3.50 .0 1 VARIES =BOULEVARDARD I WESTABNOUNDL1 f TURN ANE EASTE BOUND NE 1 BOULEVARD ,-`, WALK Dam OFFSET 1D 2% -= "-CONCRETE CURB EXISTING ROA. CONCRETE CURB NORTH PICKERING PARKWAY CROSS SECTION STATION B -B: 10+330 PICKERING PARKWAY 26.50 SOOT 0 350 SIDE BOULEVARD WALK 0 5.00 WESTBOUND LANE 0.0� 3.00 LEFT TURN g LA LANE 3.50 3.50 .0 EASTBOUND BOULEVARD SIDE LANE WALK CONCRETE CURB NORTH PICKERING PARKWAY CROSS SECTION STATION C -C: 10+380 Q PICKERING PARKWAY 26.54 �.0Q 3.00 EASTBOUND 3.50 BOULEV3.50 .0 LEFT ARD SIDE "' o l TURN LANE WALK L I LANE .0 3.50 5.00 SIDE BOULEVARD I WESTBOUND WALK LANE CONCRETE CURB CONCRETE CURB SOUT CONCRETE CURB Figure 44.Notion Road /Highway 401 Overpass EA - eastern part of Pickering Parkway Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan -97- 3.5.6 New Public Streets The Intensification Plan proposes a series of new public streets. These roads provide new connections and consolidate access on Kingston Road, as well as provide alternative access off Kingston Road. The Intensification Plan also distinguishes opportunities to provide permeability within larger sites through new intersections, mid -block connections and rear laneways or service roads. The proposed roads provide greater circulation throughout the precincts and create new development frontages. The location of new public streets is key in encouraging intensification as it not only strengthens vehicular and pedestrian connectivity, but also establishes the overall block pattern which guides site redevelopment. A successful urban environment is one where pedestrians and motorists will all be able to move safely and quickly throughout the site. The Intensification Plan thus recommends that new public streets prioritize the pedestrian experience, as well as keeping future roadway expansion possibilities in mind. The following illustrative diagrams show new recommended public streets throughout the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. Identified on Drawings as: L_ nl Proposed Public Streets POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Development sites will identify lands to be conveyed as public roads in identified locations as shown conceptually through the Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11. b. The location of new public streets is flexible provided the overall block pattern is achieved, the achievement of minimum and maximum block sizes on the development site and adjacent sites is not compromised, and appropriate intersection spacing is maintained. c. Strong public amenities should be provided, including sidewalks, enhanced paving in busy pedestrian areas, cycle paths or multi -use paths, and landscape and furniture zones. d. A landscape and furniture zone is encouraged on both sides of the street to create a comfortable public realm. e. The landscape and furniture zone should be able to accommodate a street tree; typically the minimum width to achieve this is 2 metres. Proposed P.O.W. (170-19.Om) L 1 Ift 2.00 2.00 2.00 700 Sidewalk Landscape Bike Lana Road 2.00 2.00 2.00 Bike Lana Landscape Sidewalk Figure 45. Whites Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New East-West Public Streets _98- Private . roperty Proposed R.O.W. (17.0 -19.Om) I� 2.00 2.00 2.00 7.00 , 2,00 , 2.00 , 2.00 1 Sidewalk Landscape Bike Lane Road Bike Lane Landscape Sidewalk 'resale Proem ty Figure 46. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New East-West Public Street Pd vat^ rop„I, �. 2.00 2,00 2.00 Proposed R.O.W. (17.0-19.0m) 1 t A. i 7.00 Sidewalk Landscape Bike Lane Road Proposed Park and Green Space 2.00 , 2.00 , 2.00 Bike Lane Landscape Sidewalk Figure 47. Brock Precinct Streetscape Precinct Cross Section - New Public Street Linking the North and South Development Parcels Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan _99- 3.5.7 New Private Streets As with new public streets, the location of new private streets is key in developing a successful Intensification Plan as it is related not only to the feature of access, both vehicular and pedestrian, but establishes the overall block pattern, which in turn guides development. Private streets are designed to similar municipal standards as public streets, but remain in private ownership. Private streets must provide the same high- quality public realm and streetscape experience as public streets, are expected to adopt similar treatments and aesthetics to ensure that a uniform streetscape character is maintained across the precinct. The following illustrative diagrams show new recommended private streets throughout the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. Identified on Drawings as: 1 Proposed Private Streets a. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS b. Development sites will identify new private streets, generally as shown in the Intensification Plan in Fig. 7-11. c. The location of these roads is flexible as the overall block pattern is achieved, the achievement of minimum and maximum block sizes on the development site and adjacent sites is not compromised, and appropriate intersection spacing is maintained d. Strong public amenities should be provided, including sidewalks, cycle paths or multi -use paths, and landscape and furniture zones. e. A landscape and furniture zone is encouraged on both sides of the street to create a comfortable public realm. f. The landscape and furniture zone should be able to accommodate a street tree, typically a width of 2 metres. It is encouraged that off street parking and cycling infrastructure be provided within private properties to facilitate connectivity. h. Private landowners should be responsible for ongoing maintenance to ensure that private streets remain in a state of good repair. g. Proposal RAW. (15.5 - 17.5m) 2.00 2.00 7.00 2.00 4.00 Slims& Lraissp. Lstivpa 7NoMey Multi -use Psdr Figure 48. Whites Precinct, Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct and Brock Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New Private Streets - 100 - Private Property Proposed R.O.W. [24.0m) l .61111— a Proposed Park i and Green Spec 2.00 2.00 , 2.00 2.50 Sidewalk Landscape Bike Lane Layhy Peking 7.00 2.50 2.00 2.00 2.00 Layby Parking Bike Lane Landscape Sidewalk Figure 49. Brock Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New Private Street from Brock Road to Beechlawn Park or other New Private Streets Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 101 - 3.5.8 New Service Streets Service routes support the movement of people and goods. Vehicular access for loading and servicing are critical considerations for well-functioning streetscapes, especially those that host high-density office and retail uses. They should be designed to minimize adverse impact on the public realm. The Intensification Plan recommends that vehicular access points should be located along streets with low levels of traffic, preferably on local streets. They should avoid interface with major public and open spaces such as parks, public squares, and primary frontage. Identified on Drawings as: 1 Proposed Private Streets POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Service routes should have a 2 metre sidewalk on one side of the street. b. Vehicular access points should be consolidated to minimize the interruption of sidewalks. Where possible, shared driveways, parking ramps and servicing areas between two properties are encouraged to maximize building frontages and minimize the number of required curb cuts. c. The two Private Streets identified in the Rougemount Precinct can be Service Streets and should follow the location shown in the Intensification Plan Fig. 8. In addition since the street only services the north side, only one sidewalk can be provided on the north side. d. Private landowners should be responsible for ongoing maintenance to ensure that publicly accessible spaces remain in a state of good repair. -.now nom, 11111011101ir Figure 50. Lower River Street in the West Donlands, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Google Maps) - 102 - 3.5.9 Parking As intensification increases, bringing in greater numbers of residents and jobs to the area, new arrangements and strategies will be required to effectively meet parking demand throughout the corridor. New development will provide an adequate supply of parking and loading to meet site requirements while balancing broader mobility objectives to decrease reliance on private vehicle use. Reduced minimum parking standards will reflect the area's compact, high- density urban form and shift towards a pedestrian and transit -oriented environment. Parking spaces must be strategically located to minimally impact the public realm, refrain from interfering with active street frontages, and reduce pedestrian/ vehicular conflicts. Shared parking will be encouraged and implemented in order to reduce the total number of spaces required. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Off-street parking is encouraged to create a urban block structure, animate the streets, and facilitate connectivity. b. It is encouraged that off street parking and cycling infrastructure be provided within structured or underground parking within private properties to facilitate connectivity and minimize the heat island effect created by large surface parking. c. Reduced minimum parking standards are encouraged to reflect the area's compact, high-density urban form and shift towards a pedestrian and transit -oriented environment. d. Shared parking will be encouraged and implemented in order to reduce the total number of parking spaces required. This includes combining off-street on-site parking between landowners, including consideration of shared use by different user groups at different times of the day. e. Underground parking beneath the City of Pickering's municipal roads and parks may be considered, provided that property owners enter into an agreement subject to terms and conditions acceptable to the City. In the case of parks, they should be located in a manner which does not jeopardize the growth of mature trees or disturb the function of the park. Figure 51. Honfleur Normandy Outlet, Honfleur, France (photo credits: Le Compagnie du Paysage). Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 103 - 3.6 Infrastructure Services Key Objectives • Ensure planned investment and expansion of water and wastewater servicing infrastructure is concurrent with growth • Implement strategies for energy and water conservation and water demand management • Ensure minimal negative impact on the natural and built environment • Design a coordinated and context -sensitive approach to infrastructure services planning Introduction Municipal servicing infrastructure includes the water distribution system, sanitary sewers and storm sewers. New development must be accompanied by upgrades and improvements to servicing infrastructure, where required, to provide adequate capacity. The following sections identify an approach and consideration to the planning, design and implementation of infrastructure needs for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. It includes assessments of existing municipal servicing infrastructure, and where appropriate identifies improvements required in order to support the growth envisioned by the land use strategy of the Intensification Plan. 3.6.1 Water The Study Area is serviced by Pressure Zones 1 and 2. Pressure Zone 1 services the portions east of Rosebank Road and Pressure Zone 2 services the lands west of Rosebank Road. The Study Area west of the railway overpass on Kingston Road, including the Rougemount and Whites Precincts, are serviced by feedermains. The primary function of the feedermain is conveyance, with service connections generally not permitted by the Region. As such, new local 300mm watermain systems may be required along Kingston Road west of the railway overpass to service future growth. Separate 300mm local watermains will be required to service Pressure Zones 1 and 2, implemented by physically connecting watermain pipes through a valve that remains closed. The Study Area east of the railway overpass on Kingston Road, including the Dunbarton / Liverpool and Brock Precincts, is serviced by 300mm local watermains. The existing local 300mm watermains may be sufficient to service the area, subject to an adequate supply being POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. The preparation of an Infrastructure Master Plan will be required to ensure a coordinated and integrated approach to providing water servicing solutions is implemented, and to guide and inform the preparation of the future Functional Servicing Reports in support of individual development applications. It is recommended that this Plan be collectively prepared by landowners in the area. b. Private developers should be responsible for early pre -consultation with the City and Region to ensure infrastructure needs for the planned development can be properly planned, coordinated and integrated with planned infrastructure improvements and other development applications. available and that sufficient looping exists or will be implemented where opportunities to do so are identified through the development approval process. There are two planned watermain projects in close proximity, as shown in Fig. 52. This includes an expansion of the Ajax Water Supply Plant (Study Item 100) and a planned Zone 1 feedermain on Bayly Street (Study Item 102). Kings -WE Road Carr do ti-gnclri tonPIal • r_ •} Figure 52. Planned Regional Watermain Improvements Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 105 - 3.6.2 Wastewater The Study Area is currently serviced by a combination trunk sanitary sewers and local sanitary sewers. Sewers less than 375mm in diameter are considered local sanitary sewers and sanitary sewers equal to or greater than 375mm in diameter are considered trunk sanitary sewers (TSS). Generally, the Region prefers that new service connections not be made directly to a TSS. New development located on the frontage of existing TSS's should either connect to an existing maintenance hole on the TSS or a new local collection sewer be designed to service multiple properties fronting onto the TSS with a single connection to an existing maintenance hole on the TSS. There are several planned sanitary improvements in close proximity, as shown in Fig. 53. This includes a planned sanitary pumping station and forcemain located between the Dunbarton / Liverpool Precinct and the Brock Precinct (Study Item 102), and a planned POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. The preparation of an Infrastructure Master Plan will be required to ensure a coordinated and integrated approach to providing wastewater servicing solutions is implemented, and to guide and inform the preparation of the future Functional Servicing Reports in support of individual development applications. It is recommended that this Plan be collectively prepared by landowners in the area. b. Private developers should be responsible for early pre -consultation with the City and Region to ensure infrastructure needs for the planned development can be properly planned, coordinated and integrated with planned infrastructure improvements and other development applications. twinning of the York Durham Sewage System on the west side of the Brock Precinct (Study Item 104). Future Functional Servicing Reports should address the need for flow monitoring data to assess future estimated spare capacity. Study Area: Kingston Road Corridor - Figure 53.Planned Regional Sanitary Improvements - 106 - 3.6.3 Stormwater The Study Area is serviced by seven watersheds. The implementation of the Intensification Plan will require stormwater management measures to mitigate the impacts of development. Impacts include increased water levels and velocities that can cause flooding and erosion, and increased water quality degradation at receiving watercourses. Previous technical analysis initiated by the Region of Durham indicates that there is limited opportunity to implement above -ground stormwater management facilities as mitigating measures, given the proposed higher -density land uses and land costs for above- ground facilities. As such, in ground in line storage for quality control is the preferred approach to mitigating drainage impacts for future development. However, LIDs and other emerging methods of stormwater mitigation should be explored where possible to minimize the retention needs of underground facilities. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. The preparation of an Infrastructure Master Plan will be required to ensure a coordinated and integrated approach to providing stormwater management servicing solutions is implemented, and to guide and inform the preparation of the future Functional Servicing Reports in support of individual development applications. It is recommended that this Master Plan be collectively prepared by landowners in the area. b. The Infrastructure Master Plan should investigate opportunities to correct existing flood conditions along the Petticoat Creek crossing of Rougemount Drive located in the Rougemount Precinct. The need for the investigation is driven by the opportunity to protect and enhance the development potential of the precinct and to accommodate for climate change impacts. c. The Infrastructure Master Plan should investigate opportunities to correct existing flooding conditions along the Pine Creek crossing of Kingston Road located in the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct. The need for investigation is driven by the opportunity to protect and enhance the development potential of the precinct and to accommodate for climate change impacts. Figure 54. Street parking with landscaped buffer, Los Angeles, USA (photo credits: Environmental Protection Agency) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan4E= - 107 - 3.6.4 Other The provision of energy and communication service capacity to support planned growth will require significant coordination and early planning to ensure schedule expectations for implementation are understood and managed. POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS a. Landowners should coordinate their efforts and use Regional/Municipal Utility Coordinating Group meetings as a forum to present development plans, service demands and schedule information early in the implementation of the Intensification Plan to provide sufficient opportunity for energy and communication service providers to allocate funding for needed infrastructure expansion, identify access needs, procure rights of access and address all regulatory / agency approvals necessary to facilitate implementation. Figure 55. Fibre optic expansion in residential neighbourhood, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Toronto Star) - 108 - This page has been Intentionally left blank. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanCM - 109 - - 110 - 4.0 Precincts 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Rougemount 4.3 Whites 4.4 Dunbarton/Liverpool 4.5 Brock Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification PlanfiriM 4.1 Introduction Four distinct precincts have been identified within the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node, based on their relative consistency in existing land uses, built form typologies and streetscape character. The delivery of vibrant, mixed-use neighbourhoods shall rely on establishing clear priorities that respond to the unique context and vision for each of the precincts. The following chapters provide a detailed description of the character and expected density of each precinct, as well as identifying priorities and key considerations for implementation. Individual summaries of the precinct Framework, including direction on Land Use/Built Form, Placemaking and Connectivity, are included. Photographs of relevant precedents are used to highlight what each precinct may look like following redevelopment and intensification. The framework descriptions are supported by a series of illustrations and diagrams, which show overall massing, recommended built forms, streetscape cross-sections, and prominent views. The four precincts and their corresponding extents are identified below: • Rougemount Precinct — extending from the Rouge Valley in the west to Rosebank Road in the east (Figure 60) • Whites Precinct — extending from Rosebank Road in the west to Fairport Road in the east (Figure 66) • Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct — extending from Fairport Road in the west to Pine Creek in the east (Figure 72) • Brock Precinct — incorporating the portions of the Study Area around the intersection of Kingston Road and Brock Road and the entirety of the Specialty Retailing Node (Figure 78) - 112 - 4.2 Rougemount Character Rougemount is envisaged to carry the feel of a `main street' on Kingston Road, embodying energetic vibrancy while also retaining its urban village character. The precinct will be a well-connected, human -scaled space that provides an attractive setting for residential and commercial development. Figures 56 to 59 give a general sense of the scale and character of the precinct. Priorities for the Area The top priority for Rougemount is supporting the creation of a vibrant 'main street character'. Key Considerations for the Area There are both opportunities and limitations for redevelopment, specifically retail commercial development. The relatively smaller and shallower lots may impact the types of businesses that choose to locate here. To offset potentially weak target markets, a strong brand and development strategy is recommended to be put in place. rioting 56_ StrPPtscape with spill -out uses/ Figure 58. Village -like shopping street Figure 57. Buildings with primary orientation to the street Figure 59. Streetscape with spill -out usesl Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 113 - Rouge Nellonal Urban Park 'Area Su bject td:: Environmental:•;• Flood Revie*:• Figure 60. Rougemount Precinct Intensification Plan EXISTING 11.1 Study Area Boundary Valleylands and Stream Corridors Regional Stormwater Flood Plain Existing Park Buildings To Remain Properties of Heritage Significance PROPOSED LAND USE / BUILT FORM Ste. i Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office Gateway Preferred Office Location Mixed Use B - Residential/ Retail Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail Residential Primary Frontage l Secondary Frontage I _ _ i Existing Development Application III Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm) Existing Main Road Existing Road / Laneways Existing Cycling Network – — – Planned Cycling Network GO Railway ' Future & Planned Connection Subject to EA PLACE MAKING 0 Gateway Plaza Public Green Space Public Park POPS Public Lookout Heritage Path Potential Community Facility - 114 - Lot Lines Developable Lots I -I Lot Identifier Area Subject to Further Assessment Q Existing Controlled intersection • Bus Stops CONNECTIVITY <•••> Pedestrian Path • Multi -Use Path I 1 Proposed Public Streets Proposed Private Streets Proposed Cycling Facility • Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Location Subject to Further Review Indicative Enhanced Boulevard Right -In , Right -out Access Precinct Framework Land Use and Built Form The Plan concentrates a greater mix of uses around the intersections of Kingston Road and Rougemount Drive and Kingston Road and Altona Road, with Mixed Use B - residential with retail on the ground level - proposed on those parcels in closest proximity to the two gateway intersections and the Rouge National Urban Park. This will maintain and reinforce the main street character of this stretch of Kingston Road and encourage movement between Rouge National Urban Park and the Rougemount Precinct. Visitor -related businesses would be encouraged to locate here to take advantage of proximity to the park. The greatest levels of density are located to the south of Kingston Road, away from the stable residential neighborhoods to the north of the Study Area. The potential mix of uses and densities would result in a total of 1,991 residents and 236 jobs on potential redevelopment sites within this precinct, for a combined 101 people and jobs per hectare and 45 residential units per hectare. Placemaking The Plan features potential gateway plazas on the northeast corner at the intersections of Kingston Road and Altona Road and Kingston Road and Rougemount Drive, establishing public spaces for social gathering and activity in what is likely to be the busiest pockets of the Rougemount Precinct. Also, a proposed green space fronts the east side of Rougemount Drive to the north of Kingston Road, to provide a stronger "green" linkage between the natural heritage area west of Rougemount Drive and natural heritage area associated with the Petticoat Creek to the east. The encouragement of primary frontages across nearly the full length of Kingston Road between Altona Road and the Petticoat Creek adds to an animated public realm. To reinforce the precinct's natural heritage assets, including the proximity to the Rouge National Urban Park, a Heritage Path is proposed along Kingston Road. Connecting to existing and planned trails in the park, the route can include heritage plaques, enhanced landscaping, and directional signage, encouraging moments to pause and rest. Connectivity To better align with the planned 45 metre right of way and the ultimate provision of centre -running Bus Rapid Transit service along Kingston Road, and to make Rougemount truly pedestrian and cyclist -friendly, the Intensification Framework is seeking to minimize and consolidate the multiple accesses off Kingston Road and to increase the permeability of the precinct by the introduction of two rear private service streets/laneways on properties south of Kingston Road. The first of these service streets runs from the southern end of Altona Road, east across the southern limit of properties with frontage on Kingston Road, and then turns back up to Kingston Road two properties west of Rougemount Drive. The second commences at Evelyn Avenue, running west to reconnect with Kingston Road closer to Rougemount Drive. To improve connectivity between the properties south and north of Kingston Road, east of Rougemount Drive, and to create a better pedestrian connection between the existing Library and Petticoat Creek to the "main street" retail, it is recommended that provision of a controlled intersection be explored at Evelyn Avenue. In addition, since Rougemount Drive is one of the key roads crossing the highway and thus connecting the southern neighborhoods, a new cycling connection is proposed south of Kingston Road on Rougemount Drive. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 115 - . ; - '.EigemoUnt ' - ncttiVe r.' Sing; �n _ '•' - •- f ? r i ;c This page has been Intentionally left blank. - 118 - 4.3 Whites Character Anchored by the major gateway intersection of Kingston Road and Whites Road, this precinct is envisioned as a 'high street' that functions as a busy employment and retail hub. A mix of uses and a variety of activities will be supported in the Whites Precinct, enabling a high concentration of opportunities for residents to live -work - play in close proximity. Figures 62 to 65 give a general sense of the scale and character of the precinct. Priorities for the Area The top priority for Whites is developing an attractive concentration of vibrant primary and secondary frontages in close proximity to Kingston Road and Whites Road. Key Considerations for the Area To maximize the precinct's potential as a secondary higher density node, pedestrian -oriented public realm improvements should be prioritized. Opportunities to introduce streetscape interventions to enhance the visual experience along comparatively less pedestrian - friendly frontages (i.e. offices, auto dealerships) should be considered, along with opportunities for re -configuring sidewalks and enhanced boulevards to support spill-over uses from retail storefronts attracting significant foot traffic. Figure 62. Opportunities for office within a podium Figure 64. Public realm extending from a shopping area Figure 63. Active podium Figure 65. Green public spaces for a variety of users Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 119 - )]e H • Planned cycling facility type and location to be determined through future EA study OP recommends piping the creek here tppm Figure 66. Whrfoc DYcr.inct Intensification Plan EXISTING ----• Study Area Boundary Valleylands and Stream Corridors Regional Stormwater Flood Plain Existing Park Buildings To Remain Properties of Heritage Significance PROPOSED LAND USE / BUILT FORM Gateway Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office Preferred Office Location Mixed Use B - Residential/ Retail Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail Residential Primary Frontage Secondary Frontage Existing Development Application Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm) Existing Main Road Existing Road / Laneways Existing Cycling Network – — – Planned Cycling Network GO Railway �rrnrr� Future & Planned Connection Subject to EA Lot Lines Developable Lots e -e Lot Identifier Area Subject to Further Assessment Existing Controlled Intersection • Bus Stops PLACE MAKING CONNECTIVITY 0 iN Gateway Plaza Public Green Space Public Park POPS Public Lookout Heritage Path Potential Community Facility - 120 - (•••> Pedestrian Path • Multi -Use Path I 1 Proposed Public Streets Proposed Private Streets Proposed Cycling Facility Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Location Subject to Further Review • Indicative Enhanced Boulevard -se Right -In , Right -out Access Precinct Framework Land Use and Built Form The distribution of higher densities and higher intensities of uses in the Intensification Framework are intertwined in the Whites Precinct. The greatest densities as proposed are clustered in close proximity to the intersection of Kingston Road and Whites Road, with additional concentrations within the southern portions of the parcels to the south of Kingston Road, extending east and west of the central cluster at Kingston Road and Whites Road. Similarly, the greatest mix of uses are located within proximity of this major intersection, with provisions for higher density employment uses in the form of Mixed Use A areas (a combination of residential, retail and office uses in mixed use buildings, or in separate buildings on mixed use sites) and office/ retail uses. The identification of office uses at this major intersection stems from the convergence of two rapid transit corridors, creating greater opportunities for local jobs and a stronger live -work balance. Placemaking The combination of relatively larger parcels and the intersection of two planned Transit Spines (as per the City of Pickering Official Plan) on Kingston Road and Whites Road set the framework for accommodating a generally higher density of mixed uses within the Whites Precinct. To support the future residential and employment population that would result from this higher density, and to provide moments of respite within this intensified cluster, the Intensification Framework proposes a distribution of public spaces that vary in size and function to ensure ease of access. In addition, a linear POPS is provided from the existing school site to the north of the Whites Precinct and Kingston Road to provide a safe pedestrian link to the existing controlled intersection at Steeple Hill Road and Kingston Road, and to future developments south of Kingston Road. In terms of primary and secondary street frontages, the Whites Precinct generally concentrates primary frontages within close proximity to the major intersection at Kingston Road and Whites Road, with secondary frontages on Kingston Road at the western and eastern limits of the precinct. This recommendation allows for a more compact concentration of activity in an area that is likely to feature higher foot traffic as a result of the proposed uses and densities. Connectivity The Whites Precinct is typified by relatively larger parcels with greater depths. As a result, a number of opportunities for new connections within and through these larger parcels are proposed, featuring strategies to provide consolidated access, internal routes of circulation, and additional frontage opportunities through new connections. The Plan features a private mid -block road connection south of Kingston Road with access points off Kingston Road at the eastern edge of Petticoat Creek and the intersection of Kingston Road and Steeple Hill Road. It also features a potential private road connection on the south side of Kingston Road, east of Whites Road with the access aligning with Delta Boulevard. This configuration would reduce the number of individual access points from Kingston Road while improving connectivity and additional access points within the block. Lastly, rear private service streets/laneways are proposed on the north side of Kingston Road, west and east of Whites Road, with connections to Steeple Hill Road and Delta Boulevard respectively, meeting Kingston Road at existing controlled intersections. These configurations improve connectivity between the properties on the north -side of Kingston Road, and reduces the number of individual access points on Kingston Road. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 121 - Itit • . 7 - - _� ' !4VVhites}Precinct Overall Massing '�' This page has been Intentionally left blank. - 124 - 4.4 Dunbarton/Liverpool Character Dunbarton/Liverpool is envisioned to develop into a local community and shopping destination, primarily dominated by a range of mixed-use buildings at varying commercial intensities. Storefronts will primarily face onto a proposed new internal street with enhanced boulevards, and a collection of internal courtyards and green spaces will add to the feel of a neighbourhood - oriented retail strip. Figures 68 to 71 give a general sense of the scale and character of the precinct. Priorities for the Area The top priority for Dunbarton/Liverpool is supporting the connectivity and animation of neighbourhood -oriented green spaces and squares. Key Considerations for the Area The network of open spaces, distributed along the proposed internal east -west road parallel to Kingston Road, is key to realizing the vision of this precinct. Varying in size and function, these spaces have the potential to compliment ground -level retail frontages along the internal road. They will act as multi -use spaces for community events or weekend farmers markets and draw in both locals and visitors alike as a destination point. Careful consideration should be given as to how engagement with local stakeholders can support a sustained programme of events year-round. Figure 68. Pedestrian -friendly streets Figure 70. Multi-purpose open sl Figure 69. Opportunities for mixed-use with office Figure 71. Pedestrian -friendly retail Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 125 - Forme. VI Rage cf Dunbarton d'• keGsroN we' Figure 72. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Intensification Plan EXISTING ' Area Subject to Environmental Flood Review ty1111111111Tf}7TUU ----• Study Area Boundary Existing Main Road Lot Lines ::: Valleylands and Stream Corridors Existing Road / Laneways Developable Lots Regional Stormwater Flood Plain Existing Cycling Network !'-s Lot Identifier Existing Park – — – Planned Cycling Network Area Subject to Further Assessment • Buildings To Remain 11311111 GO Railway fl Existing Controlled intersection Properties of Heritage Significance 4iumi' Future & Planned Connection • Bus Stops Subject to EA PROPOSED LAND 115E / BUILT FORM PLACE MAKING CONNECTIVITY IM Gateway o Gateway Plaza <•••) Pedestrian Path ▪ Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office o Public Green Space ii Multi Ilse Path CI Preferred Office Location Q Public Park ! Proposed Public Streets Mixed Use B Residential/ Retail a POPS 1 Proposed Private Streets Mixed Use C -Residential/ Retail C, Public Lookout �-I. Proposed Cycling Facility Residential — Heritage Path Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Potential Community Location Subject to Further Facility Review U Existing Development Application Primary Frontage Secondary Frontage Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm) - 126 - • Indicative Enhanced Boulevard zr Right -In , Right -out Access 100m Precinct Framework Land Use and Built Form The greatest heights and densities are proposed in close proximity to the intersection of Kingston Road and Dixie Road along the Highway 401 edge, with additional concentrations between Merritton Road and Dunbarton Creek. Mid -rise buildings are located on the southern portions of Kingston Road between Dixie Road and Walnut Lane, creating a gradual transition between the established residential neighborhoods to the north and the southern portions of the precinct. The greatest mix of uses are located within proximity of the potential gateway at the Kingston Road and Dixie Road intersection, including higher density employment uses in the form of Mixed Use A (residential/retail/office) uses. Placemaking The combination of relatively larger parcels, that are not closely located to existing residential development, set the framework for accommodating a generally higher density of mixed uses south of Kingston Road and east of Dixie Road. To support the future residential and employment population in the Dumbarton/Liverpool Precinct, the Intensification Framework contemplates a collection of open spaces that vary in size and function. They are distributed along the proposed internal road running east -west parallel to Kingston Road, and at the gateway of Kingston Road and Dixie Road. The open spaces internal to the precinct are seen as having the potential to act as multi -use spaces for events or weekend farmers markets. In terms of primary frontages, the Intensification Framework focuses these along the new east -west internal road and the planned extension of Walnut Lane, creating opportunity for more active uses at grade that would contribute to a more vibrant public realm within the centre of the precinct. Connectivity The Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct is typified by relatively large parcels with even greater depths than those found in the Whites Precinct. As a result, opportunities for new road connections within and through these larger parcels are proposed, featuring a strategy to provide consolidated access, internal multi- modal routes of circulation and additional frontage opportunities through new connections. In addition, a new internal road running parallel to Kingston Road is introduced to connect Walnut Lane to Dixie Road. It is intended to create a more pedestrian friendly east -west connection and opportunities for potential redevelopment with active frontages through the core of the precinct. The Intensification Framework also incorporates the planned extension of Walnut Lane across Pine Creek, of which the exact alignment is to be determined through a municipal class environmental assessment. All proposed roads within the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct are encouraged to be multi -modal. A pedestrian and cycling connection is proposed by re -using the existing rail bridge and underpass over the highway to connect the neighbourhood to the south, with an eventual connection to the waterfront trail. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 127 - • ,t1p \-0-* Figure 7�; tnbbn%LLiverq"oof Precinct Overall Ma This page has been Intentionally left blank. - 130 - 4.5 Brock Character With a large concentration of residential buildings, two proposed employment hubs, large areas of open space, and easy access to the Pickering GO Station, Brock is envisioned a complete community with transit -supportive densities. The plan emphasizes the strategic location and function of the Specialty Retailing Node while also enhancing the liveability of the area. Figures 74 to 77 give a general sense of the scale and character of the precinct. Priorities for the Area The priority for Brock is to improve multi -modal connectivity to strengthen access points, break up large parcels, create more routes of circulation off Brock Road and Pickering Parkway, and open up additional street frontage. As the area becomes a complete community a new public park will be key for the comfort, vibrancy and character of the area. Key Considerations for the Area Intensification must consider the interface of retail and office with residential uses. Care must be given to ensure that competing uses do not cause any adverse impacts. Transitions between buildings and appropriate transitions in height, mass and scale must be established in response to stable residential neighborhoods to the north and east. -,3lElut%., ;!qil Figure 74. Multi -modal streets Figure 75. Open spaces for public enjoyment Figure 76. Opportunities for a variety of retailers Figure 77. Neighbourhood -oriented retail Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 131 - 77, • beet [v oMrcial Plan .n.T..,-.e Amendment and Enirtannimrtai Acsassnrenl Study otttcorn D iana Prinaeu Of Walns Perk Figure 78. Brock Precinct Intensification Plan EXISTING EEM Study Area Boundary Valleylands and Stream Corridors Regional Stormwater Flood Plain (♦ Existing Park ▪ Buildings To Remain Properties of Heritage Significance PROPOSED LAND USE / BUILT FORM Gateway _ Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office Preferred Office Location Mixed Use B - Residential/ Retail Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail Residential l Primary Frontage L__) Secondary Frontage Existing Development Application • Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm) Existing Main Road Existing Road / Laneways Existing Cycling Network Planned Cycling Network GO Railway 4rr4 Future & Planned Connection Subject to EA PLACE MAKING 0 0 ra 0 Gateway Plaza Public Green Space Public Park POPS Public Lookout Heritage Path Potential Community Facility - 132 - Lot Lines Developable Lots d•a Lot Identifier Area Subject to Further Assessment Q Existing Controlled intersection • Bus Stops CONNECTIVITY (...> a 94.1 Pedestrian Path Multi -Use Path Proposed Public Streets Proposed Private Streets Proposed Cycling Facility Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Location Subject to Further Review Indicative Enhanced Boulevard zr Right -In Right -out Access wm Precinct Framework Land Use and Built Form The greatest heights and densities are clustered in close proximity to the intersection of Brock Road and Pickering Parkway, with additional concentrations within the southern portions near Highway 401. The greatest mix of uses are located within proximity of the Kingston Road and Brock Road intersection, encouraging the development of office uses in proximity to higher order transit. A secondary office hub is located near the Brock Road and Pickering Parkway intersection, to take advantage of the easy access from/to Highway 401 and Pickering GO Station and to create greater opportunities for local jobs and a stronger live -work balance. Placemaking To support the future residential and employment population that would result from the higher density proposed in the Intensification Framework, and to provide moments of respite, larger areas of open space are contemplated to ensure a sufficient amount of open space for the increased resident population. In addition, a series of linear open spaces, acting as connectors between larger open spaces, are envisioned. One such connection includes a linear POPS which links pedestrians from Brock Street to a new internal public park and to Beechlawn Park, located immediately east of the node. Furthermore, a potential community facility is envisioned in close proximity to this chain of open spaces. South of Pickering Parkway open spaces are organized along the main public road as places of respite from the retail activity, and to further the vision for a more sustainable "greener" community. In terms of primary and secondary frontages, Brock Precinct includes two distinct areas, with the first concentrating primary frontages within close proximity to Kingston Road, and the second concentrating primary frontages immediately south of the intersection of Pickering Parkway and the new internal public road. Brock Precinct features two gateways: one is located at Kingston Road and Brock Road, serving as an eastern gateway to the Kingston Corridor, while the other is located at Brock Road and Pickering Parkway, taking on the role of a localized gateway into the precinct and its related hubs. Post Manor, the only designated heritage building in the corridor and node, is located in the Brock Precinct. Redevelopment of the lands on the northwest corner of Kingston Road and Brock Road shall seek the preservation of and incorporation of the Post Manor, a designated heritage building governed by the Ontario Heritage Act. Connectivity The Brock Precinct is typified by a mixture in size of parcels along Kingston Road and very large parcels off Pickering Parkway and Brock Road. There are three main landowners within the Specialty Retailing Node Area, and as a result, a number of opportunities for new connections and public roads within and through these very large parcels are encouraged. These feature strategies to provide better access, more internal routes of circulation and multi- modal routes, and additional street frontage and activity hub opportunities through new connections. The Intensification Framework features a public road passing through the existing mid -block intersection east of the Brock Road on Pickering Parkway. The proposed public road would become a "precinct collector", forming the back -bone of a more strongly defined internal road network and improving walkability through the node. It is recommended to explore needs and justification for provision of a new controlled intersection where the private road meets Pickering Parkway at the eastern edge of the Brock Precinct. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 133 - J - 134 - 4 • - 136 - 5.0 Implementation 5.1 Implementation 5.2 Future Studies 5.3 Strategic Capital Projects Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 137 - 5.1 Implementation Development Phasing and Infrastructure Provision Development within the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing node should be sequenced to ensure that appropriate transportation, municipal servicing and community infrastructure are available. The expansion of the street network into a finer grid of streets and connections should occur incrementally with development, with new public streets being secured through the development application process and/or through financial contributions towards the acquisition of land and construction of transportation infrastructure off-site. Where appropriate and necessitated by timing considerations, financial front-end loading agreements should be considered to expedite infrastructure delivery. Agreements for cost-sharing should also be considered and implemented where appropriate to facilitate the provision of infrastructure and allocate the related costs of development amongst local landowners. Context Plans Development applications for large sites should provide a context plan to demonstrate the full build out of new streets and blocks within the site, potential connections to adjacent sites, redevelopment within all future blocks, and the provision of supporting open spaces and community infrastructure as required. These context plans should be accompanied by supporting Transportation Impact Studies, Functional Servicing Reports and other technical studies that provide a level of information sufficient to assess the ultimate infrastructure and other requirements of full build out. These context plans will also permit the City to assess development applications in the short to medium term that may contemplate improvements to existing uses and/or partial site build outs rather than full scale redevelopment. This will provide for flexibility over time, ensuring that all development will proceed in a manner that does not conflict with achieving the long term vision for intensification within the Corridor and Node. Monitoring Program The City should consider implementing a monitoring program that can be developed and undertaken with landowners to monitor development levels and travel patterns as the transportation network and associated improvements are implemented with redevelopment. This monitoring program can be used to inform Transportation Impact Studies submitted with development applications, to ensure there is sufficient transportation network capacity to support redevelopment over the long term. Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Zoning By -Law To implement the vision and policy recommendations contained within the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Framework and Urban Design Guidelines, an area -specific Zoning By -Law should be created. This Zoning By -Law should place particular emphasis on performance-based standards that articulate a built form and public realm that will create pedestrian -focused, human -scaled development at a density and with a mix of uses that support higher order transit. This Zoning By -Law should be framed in terms of delivering design excellence and permit a broad range of uses consistent with the Framework, built form standards that focus on the ground level of buildings and pedestrian experience (e.g. minimum and maximum setbacks, minimum and maximum streetwall heights, minimum and maximum stepbacks). The Zoning By -Law should also include provisions for implementation and release of Holding Symbols on certain lands where development within the context of the Framework is considered premature, subject to the provision of required transportation, municipal servicing and/or community infrastructure. - 138 - 5.2 Future Studies Parking Strategy It is recommended that the City undertake a Parking Strategy Study to help aid in the transition from a predominance of surface parking to a balance of structured, underground and on -street parking. This Strategy should also contemplate balancing the need for convenience and access to support the retail customer base of the many businesses that exist today and will continue to form a strong part of the Corridor and Node. By examining existing and future utilization rates (potentially informed by development applications), the Study can provide a series of broad recommendations including but not limited to: • Reducing and / or consolidating parking, potentially through a municipal parking provider and/or through public / private partnerships to provide centralized, structured parking; • Providing for Low Impact Development measures within surface parking lots to reduce their environmental impact; • Cash -in -lieu of parking to help finance consolidated parking structures; • Reductions in minimum parking standards (or the imposition of a maximum parking standard); and • Need and justification for a municipal parking authority to provide and manage public parking at certain locations. Business Engagement Program It is recommended that the City initiate a program to engage local businesses along the corridor and within the node to consider matters such as business retention and expansion needs in a changing retail environment. Figure 80. Six -Points Intersection, Toronto (Image Credits: SvN Architects + Planners) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 139 - 5.3 Strategic Capital Projects There are three ongoing transportation network Environmental Assessments (EA) whose outcomes will play a fundamental role in providing improved connectivity across the Corridor and alternate routes of travel within the Precincts. These studies include the Durham -Scarborough BRT Transit Project Assessment Process (TPAP), the Walnut Lane Extension Municipal Class EA, and the Notion Road / Squires Beach Road Municipal Class EA. The Durham -Scarborough BRT TPAP is examining dedicated centre median transit lanes for the exclusive use of busses across the entire length of Kingston Road within Pickering. In addition to providing higher order transit that will help unlock intensification within the Corridor and Node, boulevard improvements along Kingston Road provided in concert with new transit will provide an opportunity to improve the public realm and pedestrian experience. The Walnut Lane Extension Municipal Class EA is examining options for a new connection south of Kingston Road across the Dunbarton Creek to Pickering City Centre. This new connection will provide an alternate route of travel and is envisioned as leading to a key retail spine within the Dunbarton / Liverpool Precinct within the Framework. The Notion Road / Squires Beach Road Municipal Class EA is examining options for a new north -south crossing over Highway 401 and the rail corridor. This will provide a key alternate travel route to balance demand on Brock Road, and provide further travel options for future residents and businesses within the Brock Precinct, helping support the significant intensification envisioned in this area. As implementing documents are prepared for the Kingston Road Corridor and Speciality Retailing Node, the results of these studies should be used to further inform the policies and standards that will be developed to secure the Framework's vision. - 140 - This page has been Intentionally left blank. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Intensification Plan - 141 - Appendix II to Report PLN 26-19 Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Draft Urban Design Guidelines November 2019 - 142 - Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node City of Pickering Draft Urban Design Guidelines - 144 - Acknowledgments These Draft Urban Design Guidelines have been developed through a collaborative process that included landowners, developers, City and Regional staff and community members, together with other relevant stakeholders. The City and consultant team would like to thank all those involved in the process for their commitment to making this document a practical and useful tool to guide the implementation of the Kingston Road Intensification vision. City of Pickering Participating Stakeholders Landowners The Public Agencies • The Province of Ontario Ministry of Transportation • Region of Durham • Parks Canada • City of Toronto • Town of Ajax • Durham District School Board • Toronto Region and Conservation Authority Consultants SvN, AECOM and 360 Collective commenced this document in May 2019. The Draft Urban Design Guidelines will be presented to the Planning and Development Committee (PDC) at the end of 2019. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 145 - Table of Contents 0.0 Intent & Structure of Document 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Study Area 1.2 Local and Regional Context 1.3 Vision Statement 1.4 Goals and Objectives 1.5 Intensification Plan 2.0 Built Form 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Block Structure 2.3 Building Placement and Orientation 2.3.1 Building Entrances 2.3.2 Building Separation Distances 2.3.3 Building Setbacks 2.4 Grading and Access 2.5 Parking 2.5.1 On -Street Parking 2.5.2 Structured Parking 2.5.3 Surface Parking 2.6 Loading, Services and Utilities 2.7 Landscape Design 2.8 Sustainable Design 2.9 Signage and Lighting 2.10 Transition and Massing 2.11 Materials and Facade Treatment 2.12 Streetwall 2.13 Active Frontage Network 2.14 Gateways 2.15 Building Types 2.15.1 Tall Buildings 2.15.2 Mid -Rise Buildings 2.15.3 Low -Rise Buildings - 146 - 3.0 Place -making 3.1 Introduction 4.4 Transit 3.2 Natural Heritage Network 4.5 Street Types 3.3 Heritage Path 4.5.1 Primary Streets 3.4 Public Green Spaces 4.5.2 Secondary Streets 3.5 Public Parks 4.5.3 Service Streets and Laneways 3.6 Gateway Plazas 4.5.4 New Public Streets 3.7 Public Lookouts 4.5.5 New Private Streets 3.8 Privately Owned Publicly -Accessible Spaces (POPS) 4.5.6 Existing Streets 3.9 Public Art 3.10 Heritage Buildings 4.0 Connectivity 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Pedestrians 4.2.1 Sidewalks 4.2.2 Pedestrian Paths 4.2.3 Pedestrian Crossings 4.3 Cycling 4.3.1 Multi -Use Paths 4.3.2 Bicycle Lanes and Cycle Tracks 4.3.3 Shared Facilities 5.0 Illustrative Blocks 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Mid -Block Sites 5.3 Intersection Sites Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 147 - 0.0 Intent & Structure of Document This document provides a toolkit to guide new development within the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node, with an emphasis on place - making and sustainability on a study area -wide scale. This document further articulates the vision set by the Intensification Plan and aims to serve as a practical and user-friendly reference manual for all parties engaged in development projects. The intent of the document is to guide readers from the high-level principles set out in the Intensification Plan to specific design considerations for elements of progressive scale: neighbourhood, block, site and building. Based on best practice standards, this document has been structured through a principle - based approach to site-specific design, while providing a degree of flexibility, creativity and adaptability for future development. YOU ARE HERE 1 -o Introduction Understanding of the site and the vision and objectives. Introduction to the Intensification Plan. The Urban Design Guidelines will provide direction and guide the City's review of site-specific applications within the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node, and must be read in concert with the Pickering Official Plan and Zoning By-law regulations. The Urban Design Guidelines are one of the tools to implement the Intensification Plan. The document is divided into 5 sections: Introduction, Built Form, Place -making, Connectivity and Illustrative Blocks. Chapter 5 combines the guidelines found throughout the document and provides a series of Illustrative block plans and massing showing a possible design utilizing the guidelines. The colour attributed to each section is consistent throughout the document, and all colour-coded annotations shall guide the reader to the corresponding section being referred to. Although the Urban Design Guidelines express the City's design objectives, they do no preclude alternative options. As guidelines, they offer flexibility in their application, provided that the overall intent of the Urban Design Guidelines is being met. 2.0 Built -Form Toolkit of built -form guidelines for intensification. im 3.0 Place -making Toolkit of place -making guidelines for intensification. Structure of the Urban Design Guidelines - 148 - Annotated Elements Annotations over images identify best practices illustrated by the precedent. Annotated letters on diagrams within Section 5.0 Illustrative Blocks refer to the corresponding guideline. 4.0 Connectivity Toolkit of connectivity guidelines for intensification. a Im X 5n Illustrative • Blocks Illustrative block plans utilizing the toolkit guidelines. This callout type directs the reader to the related section and/or subsection. see see see . • see Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 149 - - 150 - Introduction 1.1 Study Area 1.2 Local and Regional Context 1.3 Vision Statement 1.4 Goals and Objectives 1.5 Intensification Plan Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 151 - 1.1 Study Area The approximately 152 -hectare Study Area is centred on Kingston Road, which spans the entire width of the City of Pickering, paralleling Highway 401. The Study Area generally includes properties that front onto the north and south sides of Kingston Road, between Rouge National Urban Park in the west and Pine Creek in the east. The Study Area also includes a number of properties that front on to the north side of Kingston Road west and east of the intersection of Brock Road, as well as all properties that fall within the Specialty Retailing Node to the southeast of the intersection of Kingston Road and Brock Road (see Figure 1). There are two areas along Kingston Road that are excluded from the Study Area. These include flood prone areas to the north and east of the Specialty Retailing Node and the City Centre, where a detailed planning study has already been undertaken result in Council - approved area -specific Official Plan policies, zoning, and urban design guidelines. For the purposes of the study, the Study Area has been divided into the following four precincts: Rougemount Precinct — extending from the Rouge Valley in the west to Rosebank Road in the east White Precinct — extending from Rosebank Road in the west to Fairport Road in the east Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct — extending from Fairport Road in the west to Pine Creek in the east Brock Precinct — incorporating the portions of the Study Area around the intersection of Kingston Road and Brock Road and the entirety of the Specialty Retailing Node located south of Kingston Road, east of Brock Road, and north of Highway 401 Traffic Zone A Traffic Zone B Traffic Zone C • Zone D Traffic Zone E 10.85 km 169 km Rougemount Precinct Whites Precinct Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Figure 1. Study Area Legend —• Study Area Boundary Parks / Open Space Speciality Retailing Node Rail Corridor - 152 - Brock Precinct 1.2 Local and Regional Context Kingston Road is a key connection route at the regional, city and neighbourhood scale, linking together various local destinations, neighbourhoods, and municipalities. Kingston Road serves a significant regional role, providing connections between Pickering, Toronto, Ajax, Whitby and Oshawa. It also serves as a connector between a number of regionally significant natural heritage features, including the Highland Creek and Rouge River in Toronto, the Petticoat Creek and Duffins Creeks in Pickering, and the Caruthers Creek in Ajax. This major regional link/connection is shown in Figure 2. The Specialty Retailing Node also serves a regional role, providing specialty retailing to a broad regional market with access provided by the Highway 401 interchange at Brock Road. At the city scale, Kingston Road is a major east -west spine with branch connections to important growth areas such as the Seaton Urban Area. It also connects to recreational amenities such as the Pickering Waterfront and Rouge National Urban Park, including Glen Rouge Campground and its associated trails which are to be expanded significantly over the coming years. These city -scale north -south links/connections are shown conceptually in Figure 2. At the neighbourhood scale, Kingston Road serves as a spine for key north -south connections across Highway 401, connecting neighbourhoods in the South Pickering Urban Area to one another at Rougemount Drive, Whites Road, Liverpool Road, and Brock Road (see conceptual major links/connections in Figure 2). Likewise, the Specialty Retailing Node plays a city/neighbourhood- scale role, providing destination retail and local retail within its boundaries, serving customers from within the City of Pickering and the immediate areas that surround it. The role the corridor plays at multiple scales necessitates that the ultimate vision for intensification contemplate and seek a balance between these varied functions, through new connections, new open spaces, public realm improvements, new uses, and new, denser development. Legend Major Links and Connections (at varying scales) Natural Features F4 Kingston Road Figure 2. Regional, City-wide and Neighbourhood Context Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 153 - 1.3 Vision Statement Throughout the course of this study, a renewed Vision was developed for the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. This Vision built upon the existing vision for the corridor and node as expressed in the City of Pickering Official Plan, the Kingston Road Corridor Development Guidelines, and the Specialty Retailing Node Guidelines. The renewed Vision was also informed by the updated planning framework, specifically the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe's increased emphasis on planning for complete communities and integrating transportation and land use planning through transit -supportive development. Lastly, the renewed Vision was developed in light of the review of existing conditions, analysis of issues and opportunities and consultation with Focus Groups and the Public Agency Advisory Committee. Based on all of the above, the following was endorsed by Council as a new Vision for the corridor and node: By 2041, the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node will be... • A sustainable place that embraces its significant natural heritage assets, connecting to the valleys and creeks that the corridor crosses, mitigating greenhouse gas emissions and adapting to climate change, and building communities centred on new public open spaces in both the corridor and node • A walkable place in all four precincts, with safe, comfortable and green sidewalks and pedestrian connections on both sides of Kingston Road, and within larger parcels that are likely to redevelop with an internal street network, particularly within the node • An urban, livable, transit -supportive community, with a higher density mix of uses, located in buildings that are pedestrian oriented, and that transition in height and mass to the scale of adjacent established neighborhoods, particularly to the north of the corridor and to the east of the node • A place that continues to serve as both a destination for shopping and a place of employment, with retail, commercial services and offices within mixed use buildings or on mixed use sites, and generally fronting directly onto Kingston Road, Whites Road and onto new internal streets on larger parcels, to provide active uses at grade that encourage pedestrian traffic • A regional and local multi -modal connector, with regional gateways at Altona Road and Brock Road, and with gateways to the neighborhoods north and south of the corridor at Rougemount Drive, Whites Road, Fairport Road, Brock Road and Pickering Parkway. - 154 - 1.4 Goals and Objectives In addition to the new Vision, a series of guiding goals and objectives for the corridor and node were prepared to guide the development of the Intensification Plan. These goals and objectives are as follows: 1. Advance the concept of place -making and create complete communities 1.1 Create a distinct character for the corridor and node as a whole while also providing for variation based on the unique conditions and adjacencies within each precinct 1.2 Create a strong sense of community, a context for healthy lifestyles and a high quality of life 1.3 Plan for a full range of housing types and tenures in a variety of building forms 1.4 Provide for and ensure the accessibility of a full range of services and amenities for all walks of life 2. Promote sustainability in the design and full life- cycle of the streetscape, open spaces and buildings 2.1 Ensure that the ultimate streetscape, open space and redevelopment concepts have capacity to support growth beyond the horizon of the plan 2.2 Ensure that sustainability principles and green infrastructure are incorporated as a foundational element of all streetscape, open space and built form concepts 3. Stimulate economic growth and vitality 3.1 Maintain space for various sizes of retail uses and encourage the expansion of office and commercial service uses 4. Promote mixed used development with an emphasis on higher density residential and employment uses integrated within a building or site 4.1 Plan for existing single use sites to transition over time to a mix of uses, either through full scale redevelopment or infill on underutilized portions of a site 4.2 Plan for higher density forms of employment including office uses, within close proximity to higher order transit stops 4.3 Plan for the greatest mix of uses and highest densities within close proximity to higher order transit stops 5. Design all public roads and private connections to be complete streets and emphasize transit and pedestrian oriented development 5.1 Ensure that all users of public roads and private connections have distinct and delineated spaces to separate modes of travel moving at different speeds 5.2 Ensure that buildings are located in close proximity to and are oriented towards the public realm and provide active edges to create an environment that encourages walking 6. Improve access management and connectivity for all transportation modes 6.1 Plan for the consolidation of driveways with access to and from Kingston Road 6.2 Plan for the creation or enhancement of internal street networks on larger parcels to provide alternative routes and new frontages for development Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 155 - 7. Encourage the optimization of infrastructure 7.1 Establish a density target for areas or sites within proximity to higher order transit stops to optimize transit ridership 7.2 Ensure that intensification can be supported by existing infrastructure capacity and that additional infrastructure is phased in step with development 8. Enhance and restore natural heritage features and functions 8.1 Provide physical and visual connections between the corridor and the natural heritage features that it intersects 8.2 Restore natural heritage corridors, ensure no incremental loss of natural heritage and consider stormwater management on an area wide basis 9. Support implementation by considering phasing, flexibility and intermediate interventions 9.1 Ensure that the overall arrangement of streets, blocks, open spaces and buildings can be achieved in multiple ways and that sites are designed in a manner that anticipates change over time - 156 - 1.5 Intensification Plan The Intensification Plan provides a comprehensive framework for future development of the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. It sets out a detailed land use strategy to support higher - density mixed-use development, identifies place - making opportunities for an improved public realm, and proposes improvements to the street, transit, cycling and pedestrian network to increase connectivity. For ease of reference and to aid understanding of the overall context, the Intensification Plan (Figure 3) of the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node is presented on the following page. This is followed by precinct -specific figures, showing each precinct at a larger scale and with a greater amount of detail. Intensification Plans are accompanied by Illustrative Urban Design Plans for each of the Rougemount (Figures 4-5), Whites (Figures 6-7), Dunbarton/Liverpool (Figures 8-9) and Brock (Figures 10-11) Precincts. LEGEND Study Area Boundary Valleylands and Stream Corridors Regional Stormwater Flood Plain Existing Park 4 P 0 Existing Controlled Intersection i Bus Stops These Illustrative Urban Design Plans are used as an underlay for all maps produced for this document, and include existing natural heritage features, transportation infrastructure, and lot boundaries, along with potential placement and orientation of buildings and potential location of landscape features in a manner which is consistent with the Urban Design Guidelines. It is important to note that the diagrams are illustrative in nature, and that they represent only one of many possible built form configurations. The following legend outlines the features shown on the Illustrative Urban Design Plans. Existing Main Road Existing Street/ Laneways GO Railway Future & Planned Connection Subject to EA Buildings To Remain II Properties of Heritage Significance s -x Lot Lines Developable Lots Lot Identifier 1 Proposed Streets lir Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm) ¶ Landscape - Illustrative Only Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 157 - Tra ' is Zone A Tra ' is Zone B Tra ' is Zone B ❑unbarion Creek Ravine Altana Forest LEGEND Study Area Boundary Valleylands and Stream Corridors Regional Stormwater Floocf Plain Existing Park Buildings To Remain Properties of Heritage Significance Figure 3. Intensification Plan Existing Main Road Existing Road / Laneways Existing Cycling Network Planned Cycling Network GO Railway Future & Planned Connection Subject to EA - 158 - /0-1 Lot Lines Developable Lots Lot Identifier Area Subject to Further Assessme Existing Controlled intersection • Bus Stops Tra ' is Zone C Q Valley Farm Rd Park- Beech Iawn Park A • 10346 iman's Bay Precinct LAND USE / BUILT FORM Gateway Mixed Use A - Residential/ Retail/ Office Preferred Office Location Mixed Use B - Residential/ Retail Mixed Use C - Residential/ Retail Residential l__1 Primary Retail Frontage ILJ Secondary Frontage 1__; Existing Development Application ET i Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm) Pickering GO Station PLACE MAKING 0 Sandy Beach Rd Gateway Plaza Public Green Space Public Park POPS Public Lookout Heritage Path Potential Community Facility v0 100 m 300 m 500 m Broc Precinct CONNECTIVITY ( Pedestrian Path Multi -Use Path ® Proposed Public Streets 1 Proposed Private Streets Proposed Cycling Facility - 159 - Potential Cantralled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Location Subject to Further Review Indicative Enhanced Boulevard aP Right -In , Right -out Access • Park Entrance Rouge National Urba n Park L a . • . . . • ‘.•:,. East ' • • • • • sa:•.. Woodlands i. 's,..... Park . 4 'Area Subjectio Environmental . .. - .ibrao Flood Review ,.(1,,, Cdnuno-dry i754170--'–'–'' "I c' 44. 14 r 4 [ • :• • ;„...s. • ......... Figure 4. Rougemount Precinct Intensification Plan Park Entrance Rouge National Urban Park Woodlands East / Park / • r 1-13 1-34 vie .1" 10 0 m s Figure 5. Rougemount Precinct Illustrative Urban Design Plan - 160 - 1:We :•:': — • - • r': : • • • 1 0 Ore et • Planned cycling facility type and location to be determined through future EA study OP recommends piping the [reek here fl._.Iml Figure 6. Whites Precinct Intensification Plan Figure 7. Whites Precinct Illustrative Urban Design Plan Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 161 - `-area subject to ioomental Review Former Village of Denbartan I(ING�ON$Gr: l r icy � J ,♦ Figure 8. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Intensification Plan f - Former Village of Frenchmen's Bey Frenchman's Ray Figure 9. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Illustrative Urban Design Plan - 162 - ................... ................. ................. • Sulajec1 to others l Ran Amendment and En+nrdnmental. Assessnnenl Study onicome T' Diana Princess of Walos Perk Figure 10. Brock Precinct Intensification Plan •CAnnenion under mvleW Figure 11. Brock Precinct Illustrative Urban Design Plan Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering Urban Design Guidelines - 163 - 1 - 164 - 2.0 Built Form 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Block Structure 2.3 Building Placement and Orientation 2.4 Grading and Access 2.5 Parking 2.6 Loading, Services and Utilities 2.7 Landscape Design 2.8 Sustainable Design 2.9 Signage and Lighting 2.10 Transition and Massing 2.11 Materials and Facade Treatment 2.12 Streetwall 2.13 Active Frontage Network 2.14 Gateways 2.15 Building Types Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design GuidelinesCM - 165 - 2.1 Introduction Built form is critical in realizing a high-quality urban environment that successfully integrates a wide range of uses and promotes a vibrant streetscape. These Guidelines will facilitate attractive, efficient and responsive urban design within the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node, helping to support a diversity of land uses, articulate a clear relationship and interface between building components and streets, and enhance the experience of users in terms of visibility, animation, comfort, safety, and accessibility. Block, site and building design will determine the overall expression of both individual buildings and of each neighbourhood as a whole. Guidelines relating to block structure, building placement and orientation, parking facilities, site grading and access, servicing, sustainable and landscape design, signage and lighting, streetwall, active frontage, gateways and building types are outlined in this chapter. Key Objectives • Promote higher -density mixed-use development while respecting the character and scale of established neighbourhoods through proper transitioning, and careful building design and placement. • Introduce an animated public realm through encouraging active uses at grade and an enjoyable pedestrian experience. • Retain and emphasize the distinct character of local streetscapes and precincts, including heritage protection. The section begins with a description and diagramatic illustration of the Built Form Plan for each precinct, followed by design guidelines. Figure 12. Marine Gateway, Vancouver (Image Credits: Perkins+Will) - 166 - This page has been Intentionally left blank. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design GuidelinesCM - 167 - Rougemount There are two gateways in the Rougemount precinct, located at the intersections of Kingston Road and Altona Road and Kingston Road and Rougemount Drive. Due to small lot sizes and the existing scale of the area, the Rougemount Precinct is characterized by predominantly mid -rise buildings with some additional height at gateways and near Highway 401. These moderate heights help reinforce the 'main street' character of this stretch of Kingston Road. Greater heights and densities are located on the south side of Kingston Road, away from the stable residential neighbourhoods to the north. The south side is made up of mid -rise and tall buildings while the north side includes mostly low-rise buildings, which are massed BUILT FORM LJ LJ __J Gateway Primary Frontage Secondary Frontage Existing Development Application Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative Only (March 21st at 1:O0 pm) Landscape - Illustrative Only and scaled to provide a gradual transition to the lower - scale residential areas. Primary frontages are proposed across nearly the full length of Kingston Road between Altona Road and the Petticoat Creek. This provides the opportunity for more street -oriented development that supports a high level of pedestrian activity. It also creates an attractive and vibrant route which connects key destinations within and adjacent to the precinct, from Rouge National Urban Park in the west to the library and community centre in the east. Secondary frontages are located along north -south streets and along sections of Kingston Road just west of Rosebank Road. Ease Woodlands I Park Roupa National Urban Park Figure 13. Rougemount Precinct Built Form Plan - 168 - 16 Whites The gateway intersection of Kingston Road and Whites Road is the focal point for the Whites Precinct. The greatest heights and densities are clustered in close proximity to the gateway, with additional tall buildings extending east and west of the intersection at Kingston Road and Whites Road within the southern portions of the parcels to the south of Kingston Road. Low-rise buildings are located along the northern edge of the White Precinct, including along the northern portion of Whites Road close to existing community facilities and east -west along Kingston Road close to the Amberlea creeklands. This transition in height responds to the existing low-density residential neighbourhoods to the north. BUILT FORM Gateway LJ Primary Frontage 1_1 Secondary Frontage Existing Development Application Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative Only (March 21st at 1:O0 pm) Landscape - Illustrative Only H sk The Whites Precinct is typified by relatively larger parcels with greater lengths and depths than those found in the Rougemount Precinct. Primary frontage is concentrated along both the northern and southern sides of Kingston Road, centered on the gateway at the intersection of Kingston Road and Whites Road. Coupled with increased heights and densities, this will help to create an vibrant commercial district which attracts a significant amount of pedestrian foot traffic. Secondary frontages are located along Kingston Road on either side of the gateway, as well as along the public road connection south of Kingston Road with access points at the eastern edge of Petticoat Creek and the intersection of Kingston Road and Steeple Hill Road. Figure 15. Whites Precinct Built Form Plan - 170 - 0 • . `3. in rr__ ,s ., . TT/M, assing , e _r .,' : Dunbarton/Liverpool Due to the relatively large size of parcels and their location away from existing residential development, the built form of the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct is characterized by moderate to significant heights and densities throughout. A gateway is identified at the intersection of Kingston Road and Dixie Road, where it is surrounded by mostly mid -rise buildings. East of Dunbarton Creek, mid -rise buildings are proposed along of Kingston Road in recognition of the low-density residential neighbourhoods to the north. These mid -rise buildings create a gradual transition between the established residential areas and the denser southern portions of the precinct, and help to achieve a more balanced and responsive streetscape. BUILT FORM 7 LJ Primary Frontage L-1 Secondary Frontage Gateway Existing Development Application LBuildings and Shadows - Illustrative Only (March 21st at 1:0O pm) Landscape - Illustrative Only The greatest heights and densities are located internal to the precinct along the new east -west street running parallel to Kingston Road. The street is flanked by primary frontage on both sides, allowing for the creation of a double -sided main street running through the center of the precinct. Additional concentrations of height are located along the Highway 401 edge. Additionally, a pocket of mid -rise and tall buildings is located west of Dunbarton Creek on Merritton Road. Additional height is proposed here in response to the railway tracks to the north, which create separation between the intensification area and the residential neighbourhoods to the north. This creates somewhat of stand-alone community that is removed from the rest of the precinct to the east of the creek. However, it remains within walking distance to the new internal main street. KINGSTOs1BA-' Figure 17. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Built Form Plan IFrenthnun's B. - 172 - , +.. rtOn/Liverpool Ptecif*t Overall' Mb _sem Brock Within the Brock Precinct, the greatest concentration of height and density is found at gateway locations along Brock Road. The first gateway is situated at the intersection of Brock Road and Pickering Parkway, where it takes on a role of a more `localized' gateway to provide access into the precinct and its related hubs. The second is located at the intersection of Brock Road and Kingston Road, serving as an eastern gateway providing access into the wider Kingston Road corridor. Additional concentrations of tall buildings exist within the southern portions of the precinct near Highway 401. Responding to the adjacent low-rise residential neighbourhoods, low-rise buildings are located along the length of the eastern edge of the precinct. This built BUILT FORM Gateway 1__J Primary Frontage l_1 Secondary Frontage __ i Existing Development Application LI' Buildings and Shadows - Illustrative Only (March 21st at 1:00 pm) Landscape - Illustrative Only Diana Princess n£ kik Peak form reflects an appropriate transition to the established neighbourhoods, and also takes into account proximity to Beechlawn Park, a large park located eastwards of the precinct area. Primary frontages within Brock Precinct are distributed along a series of internal roads, particularly along the new north -south roads which cross Pickering Parkway. The most active streetwalls will be within the centre of the precinct, drawing activity inwards. Secondary frontages are concentrated at gateway intersections, along the western portion of Pickering Parkway, and within blocks that front onto public open spaces. nw,ir,ri.:. f Figure 19. Brock Precinct Built Form Plan - 174 - 'Connection under review I11111.4.1 • - - *17*' 41*$._ (101 • 4 2.2 Block Structure Block structure plays a critical role in structuring neighbourhoods and shaping how users experience the urban environment. Blocks dictate the efficiency of mobility connections, the expression of neighbourhood character and the look and feel of the public realm. Design Guidelines i. Block lengths should generally range between 100 and 150 metres to promote permeability within the streetscape, support walkability and increase the v. ease of pedestrian and cyclist movement (Fig. 21). iii. A mix of lot sizes, configurations and orientations should be provided to accommodate a variety of uses and enhance visual interest along the streetscape. iv. Generally, a standard rectilinear lot is preferred to maximize design and siting options. The traditional lot shape may be varied to account for irregular slopes or property boundaries. Corner lots may require greater widths to account for increased building setbacks from both the front and side yards. vi. Block layouts should be designed to maximize views and vistas through development blocks and towards gateways and natural heritage features. ii. Where a block is longer than 150 metres and shorter alternatives are not feasible, mid -block connections shall be introduced through pedestrian paths or linear parks. Pedestrian -scale lighting should be implemented along these paths to increase comfort and safety. Figure 21. West Donlands, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Google Maps) - 176 - 2.3 Building Placement and Orientation Sensitive building placement helps ensure integration into the surrounding context and limits negative impact on adjacent streets and open spaces. To achieve this, attention should be given to building entrances, building separation distances, and building setbacks. 2.3.1 Building Entrances Design Guidelines i. Entrances should be highly visible, front onto the public street, and connect to pedestrian walkways or sidewalks. Entrances should promote visibility and views between interior and exterior spaces (Fig. 22). ii. Entrances should be emphasized as focal points in the building facade and be complementary to the building's overall articulation and material palette. iii. Entrances should be well lit. Natural lighting is encouraged through the use of sidelights, fanlights or door glazing. Wall -mounted down -cast lighting is also appropriate adjacent to building entrances. iv. Patios associated with building entrances should be consistent and proportionate in scale with the architectural style and massing of the building. v. Weather protection features such as canopies, awnings, overhangs and recessed entrances should be incorporated, where possible, to provide users shelter from wind, rain, snow and other harsh elements. Figure 22. Paintbox Condominium, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Lisa Logan) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines4112M - 177 - 2.3.2 Building Separation 2.3.3 Building Setbacks Distances Design Guidelines i. For low-rise buildings up to 4 storeys, a minimum separation distance of 11 metres shall be maintained between facing buildings. ii. For low-rise buildings up to 4 storeys, a minimum 8 metre separation distance shall be maintained between the face of a building containing primary living space, such as bedrooms and living rooms, and the side of another building. iii. For mid -rise buildings up to 8 storeys in height, a minimum separation distance of 11 metres shall be maintained. This may be reduced if there are no primary windows on the wall facing an abutting building. iv. For mid -rise buildings between 8 and 12 storeys in height, a minimum separation distance of 18 metres shall be maintained. This may be reduced if there are no primary windows on the wall facing an abutting building. v. For tall buildings over 13 storeys in height, a minimum separation distance of 25 metres shall be maintained between towers. vi. A minimum separation distance of 15 metres shall be provided between facing buildings on sites with multiple buildings. On multi -building sites, it is encouraged that buildings are offset or angled away from each other to maintain privacy between facing units. vii. A minimum separation distance of 15 metres should be provided between adjacent buildings where windows are proposed within a podium. No side - yard separation is necessary where a continuous streetwall is desirable. Design Guidelines i. Buildings fronting Kingston Road in the Rougemount Precinct shall be setback 3 metres from the front property line. ii. In all other precincts, buildings fronting Kingston Road, Brock Road and Pickering Parkway shall be setback 5 metres from the front property line. iii. Buildings fronting existing public roads intersecting Kingston Road shall be setback 5 metres from the property line in the Whites and Brock Precincts and 3 metres in the Rougemount and Dunbarton/ Liverpool Precincts, or match the setback of adjacent buildings. In the case that the two adjacent buildings have differing setbacks, the new building setback shall match whichever is closer to the street. iv. In all precincts, buildings shall be setback a minimum of 2 metres from new public and private streets that are internal to the development block. v. In all precincts, buildings shall be setback a minimum of 3 metres from parks and other open spaces. vi. Where retail and commercial uses are located, setback areas should accommodate spill -out uses from commercial activity (i.e. patios, displays, waiting areas) to improve the pedestrian experience. These areas should be primarily hardscaped to act as an extension of the sidewalk and accommodate for higher levels of foot traffic. vii. Where residential uses are located, softscape elements such as plantings should be used in setback areas to provide screening and maintain privacy for grade -related residential units. These areas may also include some public amenities (i.e. benches, bicycle racks). - 178 - 2.4 Grading and Access Site grading is critical to ensuring access within and between lots. In conjunction with building and landscape design, it supports the provision of convenient, safe and integrated development. Design Guidelines taken to make the transition walkable for pedestrians and accessible for cars. iv. Site grading shall consider facilities designed to provide access for persons with disabilities, including the provision of ramp access. i. Grading between adjacent sites shall be considered v. during site design. Accesses between sites should be provided in the form of internal roadway connections or pedestrian walkways (Fig. 23). ii. To minimize access off Kingston Road, consolidated private rear accesses should be provided. These should be developed with a coordinated approach across landowners to ensure that clear accessways are maintained, no properties are landlocked and all lots have a viable connection back to a public road. iii. Any redevelopment should seek to remove or minimize grade differences between its adjacent lots, including Kingston Road. Where this is not possible due to site topography, measures should be Entrances and access points should be integrated with at -grade design. Informational signage, pavement markings and soft landscaping can help to orient users, enhance safety and minimize confusion. vi. Where possible, vehicular entrances and access points shall be located within the centre of the block and below grade with access from local streets/ lanes. Vehicular access from main streets shall be limited. vii. Vehicular entrances and access points should have minimal impact on walkways and the pedestrian realm and where possible should be intergrated with building design. .'ili la I►r.lUrlrlulrr111lxlly N� rmr TTI!*' j lI.II!I!,IIIIIIIII! Figure 23. Ulus Savoy Housing by DS Landscape, Istanbul, Turkey (photo credits: Cemal Emden) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design GuidelinesCM - 179 - 2.5 Parking As intensification occurs throughout the corridor and node, changes in parking demand are likely to occur. This demand can be supported through a range of parking facilities, including street parking, surface parking and structured parking. 2.5.1 On -Street Parking Design Guidelines i. To achieve a vibrant district and to minimize the need for parking lots that have greater impacts on the pedestrian realm, on -street parking is encouraged on public and private roads in strategic locations. This includes destinations such as community facilities, large open spaces, parks, and grade -related retail streets. ii. Where possible, street parking should be separated from the sidewalk by a landscape buffer to allow for safe loading in and out of cars without impeding on clear paths for pedestrian movement along the sidewalk. Landscape buffers shall also 'green' the streetscape and improve stormwater infiltration (Fig. 24). iii. On -street parking on arterial roads should be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. iv. The design of each precinct shall accommodate sufficient parking capacity to support a dense and vibrant district. 2.5.2 Structured Parking Design Guidelines i. Surface parking is discouraged for main street retail, and high-density residential, office and mixed-use developments. In these areas, parking shall be provided underground, behind or inside a structure on upper floors with appropriate screening, or inside a building. Figure 24. On -street parking with landscape, Portland, USA (photo credits: PortlandOregon.gov) - 180 - ii. Above -grade parking structures shall be encouraged to be designed with active uses on all sides (Fig. 25). iii. The sides and rear of multi-storey above -grade parking structures facing adjacent developments shall be screened as to not create blank facades around the building. They are encouraged to incorporate glazing, cladding, landscaping, or exterior finishes to complement the surrounding streetscape. iv. At -grade parking structures shall be designed with active uses fronting the public street and other pedestrian uses, such as retail or amenity areas. These should incorporate visually -appealing architectural and landscape treatments. v. Access points to parking structures should be located at the rear or side of buildings, and away from main streets and intersection corners. vi. Ground floor frontages may need to be set back adjacent to structured parking ingress/egress ramps to provide visibility at the exit. vii. Structured underground parking is preferred over surface parking or above -grade structured parking to reduce the urban heat island effect and minimize blank walls. viii. Consideration should be given to charging stations for electric vehicles and secure indoor bicycle storage space in the design of parking structures. ix. Parking structure design is encouraged to consider flexible designs, including designs which allow for future conversions into other uses (Fig. 26). Figure 25. Denver Museum Residence, a `Texas Doughnut' featuring buildings wrapped around interior parking structure, Denver, USA (photo credits: Google Earth) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 181 - 2.5.3 Surface Parking Design Guidelines i. New developments are encouraged to reduce or minimize surface parking on site, in order to reduce the urban heat island effect and promote more compact development. ii. Parking shall be located at the side or rear of the site where it is neither visible from the street nor blocking pedestrian access. iii. In the design of surface parking areas that are visible from the highway and streets, edges along parking areas shall be defined and softened through tree planting, landscape berms, pergolas, and other similar features (Fig. 27). iv. Surface parking is discouraged adjacent to at -grade residential areas. A vegetated buffer should be provided between surface parking and residential areas. v. A strong integration of vegetation and soil volume solutions (i.e. large trenches, soil cells) that allow for large trees to grow should be used in landscape islands within surface parking lots to provide proper shade for cars and to increase stormwater infiltration. vi. Permeable pavement and/or pavement with good solar reflective index is encouraged. A combination of hardscape and softscape elements should be used to reduce the urban heat island effect (Fig. 26). Bioswales are highly encouraged as a means of mitigating automotive pollution impacts on water and reducing stormwater runoff loads on the sewage system. vii. Designs that include urban furniture and decorative pavements are encouraged to support a flexible use of the area and allow for other temporary uses, such as social and sport events, where suitable. Figure 26. Saint Roche Parking Structure built to accommodate future office and residential uses, Montpellier, France (photo credits: Adria Goula). - 182 - viii. The parking lot and walkways to parking lot areas should be visible from the main entrance of the building on the site, where practical. ix. Pedestrian walkways should be developed between parking lots and the street. These walkways should be landscaped, barrier -free and lighted to encourage convenient, safe, and frequent public use. x. Exclusive pedestrian routes inside parking lots should also be provided, be clearly marked and be integrated with landscaping to break up otherwise large pavement expanses. xi. When designing rear parking sites, Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles should be applied to the site, where good lighting and natural surveillance from adjacent buildings may act as safety measures. xii. Consideration should be given to charging stations for electric vehicles and short-term bicycle storage space in the design of surface parking lots. Figure 27. Honfleur Normandy Outlet, Honfleur, France (photo credits: Le Compagnie du Paysage). Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 183 - 2.6 Loading, Services and Utilities Loading areas, servicing areas, and utility equipment supports the essential functions of any development site. Their location and access requires strategic consideration. Design Guidelines i. Where possible, on-site loading and servicing areas shall be located internal to the development and below grade with access from local streets and lanes. Access points shall be coordinated to minimize impacts on the pedestrian realm, including minimizing the interruption of sidewalks. ii. Servicing lanes should be designed to welcome pedestrians with sidewalks on both sides of the lane, where practical, to accommodate safe pedestrian movement (Fig. 28). iii. Service and loading facilities shall be contained within building envelopes and consolidated for each block, when possible. Below -grade loading facilities are encouraged for higher -density, larger -format development. Garbage storage rooms shall be centralized indoors, below grade, and at the rear of buildings. iv. Vehicular routes shall support goods movement by designing right-of-ways and lanes to safely accommodate truck traffic and turning movement. v. Utilities and service equipment shall be located within buildings or internal to building sites, where practical, to reduce their visual impact on the streetscape and public view. In outdoor areas, their presence can be minimized through screening, fencing, strategically -positioned landscaping and integration with public art. vi. In the location and design of loading facilities, consideration should be given to implementation measures to mitigate potential impacts of noise and vibration on residents on the site or in adjacent developments. Figure 28. Lower Donlands, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Google Earth) - 184 - 2.7 Landscape Design Landscape design assists in defining building and site character while contributing to a greener and more sustainable streetscape. Design Guidelines i. Landscape shall be an integral piece of the site design and be developed to unify and enhance the overall architectural project. High-quality, durable and diverse landscape elements shall be encouraged. ii. A minimum of 10% of each lot shall be landscaped, with a significant proportion of that being soft landscaping. iii. Landscaping shall support and define a consistent and attractive street edge. The selection and spacing of all plantings should relate to the street type and adjacent land use and site conditions. iv. Within sites, landscaping shall define pedestrian routes and enhance visual imagery of the site. Large v. tree canopies are encouraged along pedestrian routes to provide shade and comfort (Fig. 29). Every effort should be made to retain existing trees and other mature vegetation during redevelopment. Where possible, these should be integrated into the site layout and landscape design for new developments. vi. Landscape buffers shall be encouraged along surface parking lots adjacent to public streets to soften and screen parking lot edges. They shall also be encouraged on lots abutting low-density residential uses to provide a privacy buffer. These should have a minimum width of 3 to 3.5 metres. vii. Within parking lots, curbed landscaped islands with a minimum width of 2.5 metres shall be encouraged to define major vehicle and pedestrian routes and break-up the expanse of paved areas. Figure 29. Yorkville Village Park, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Google Images) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 185 - 2.8 Sustainable Design Development should incorporate sustainability principles to support the positive integration of the natural environment into the built form. Design Guidelines i. Sustainable and Low Impact Development (LID) measures are encouraged for all development in order to reduce stormwater run-off and optimize water infiltration potential. This includes the use of bio -retention areas, rain gardens, grass swales, permeable pavement, and vegetated filter strips. ii. Development should prioritize plantings of native species that support ecological functions, are drought -tolerant, require minimal maintenance and increase biodiversity in the landscape. iii. The use of softscapes should be encouraged on flat roofs of all buildings, including residential, commercial and mixed-use buildings. Softscape features can include trees, grass, shrubs, flowers, and soil. The green roofs are encouraged to act as public amenity spaces (Fig. 30). iv. Development is encouraged to seek current Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) building design certification, or equivalent. v. The incorporation of alternative or renewable energy resources (i.e. solar panels) in building design is encouraged. The design and orientation of buildings should seek the maximization of solar gain. vi. The use of bird -friendly glazing on mid -rise and tall buildings is encouraged. Figure 30. ESRI Canada Garden in the Sky, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Forrec Ltd.) - 186 - 2.9 Signage and Lighting Effective signage and lighting, particularly along streets v. and in the public realm, work to enhance the safety, attractiveness and usability of an area. Design Guidelines i. Signs should be clear, visible, and easy to understand. Signs should be properly lit to ensure safety on the road and walkways at night (Fig. 31). ii. Cohesive signage should be implemented within each precinct to improve neighbourhood character while providing valuable wayfinding information (Fig. 31). iii. The size, design and placement of signs shall be considered in accordance with the City's Sign By-law and through Site Plan Control. iv. The placement of signage shall not compromise pedestrian movement and vehicular safety. The use of illuminated sign boxes and channelized sign boxes are discouraged. Signage should be integrated with building design, and should be consistent with the overall streetwall and associated building facades (Fig. 31). vi. A dark -sky policy shall be promoted along Kingston Road with downward -directed lighting. All external light fixtures shall be full cut-off and dark -sky friendly to minimize sky glow effects and light pollution. vii. Pedestrian -scaled lighting shall be used for active public spaces, including inner -block walkways, parks, and courtyards (Fig. 31). The use of outdoor LED lighting systems is encouraged for energy efficiency. viii. Outdoor light shall be aimed and shielded to illuminate areas on site and adjacent sidewalk areas, including inner patios, but shall not illuminate the street or adjacent residential uses (Fig. 31). ix. Where there are architectural, landscape, and decorative features on a building, lighting may be directed upward to illuminate prominent details. 0.11_ 4:11 r signage in coordination with building materials, colour palette and character of adjacent buildings well -illuminated open spaces and walkways signage integrated with overall building design ■ . lighting integrated into landscape to illuminate prominent features a f -r - accessible location identifiers to assist with wayfinding Figure 31. Marine Gateway, Vancouver, Canada (photo credits: Perkins+Will) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 187 - 2.10 Transition and Massing Building massing should implement appropriate transitions in the built form to create an attractive human -scaled environment, respect existing scale and character, and appropriately respond to local context. Transitions are provided to new and existing parks and open spaces, as well as lower -scale residential areas. Design Guidelines i. New buildings should be massed and scaled to establish compatible heights to adjacent streets and open spaces, while retaining a comfortable pedestrian scale. ii. Where mid and high-rise buildings are adjacent to low-rise buildings, increased setbacks or building setbacks should be employed, in consideration of an appropriate transition. iii. In cases where buildings have a height of 8 storeys or more proposed adjacent to the streetline, the upper storeys of the building should be sited on • ws 30 s torey5 20 storeys T2 storeys 8 storeys 6 storeys EXISTING RESIDENTIAL Setback to low -residential (hel9hl 10-5)9 45° 3m ryp. podium setback podium height Imin. 3 storeys •max.6 storeys} with 4.5m high ground floor podiums having a minimum height of 3 storeys and a maximum height of 6 storeys. iv. Development shall incorporate building and landscape design which minimizes the extent and duration of shadows and maximizes access to sunlight for adjacent low-rise developments, parks, open space, primary frontages, and other intensively used areas of the public realm. The shadow impact of buildings on adjacent residential buildings, public parks and privately owned publicly -accessible spaces shall be assessed through a shadow impact study, where appropriate, and minimized to the extent possible. vi. Development shall incorporate building and landscape design which protects and buffers the pedestrian realm from prevailing winds. vii. The development of large mass buildings within areas that are characterized by a distinct architectural theme should reflect similar v. 45m ILo.w,, KINGSTON RD. 40 storeys 30 Storeys 20 stotey5 12 ,storeys 8storey5 0 storeys HIGHWAY Figure 32. Illustrative cross-section in the Rougemount Precinct, for cross-section location see Figure 13. - 188 - architectural features, where practical, to blend in with the character of the particular area. • To limit shadow and overlook impacts in low-rise residential areas, an angular plane shall be applied through the following: viii. From the front yard of low-rise residential (i.e. where development is across the street from stable low-rise neighbourhoods), built form shall conform to a 45 degree angular plane measured from a height of 10.5 metres, set back 5 metres from the front property line. ix. From the rear yard of low-rise residential (i.e. where development backs directly on to stable low-rise neighbourhoods), built form shall conform to a 45 degree angular plane measured from a height of 10.5 metres, set back 7.5 metres from the rear property line. GATEWAY (8 W m DIAMETER) ?I i EXISTING RESIDENTIAL 111._L, Setback W Iow-resIdentlal (helghl 1O.5m) 65 • To help create a human -scaled environment along public streets, an angular plane shall be applied through the following: x. On Kingston Road, Brock Road, Pickering Parkway and existing north -south public roads intersecting Kingston Road, built form shall conform to an angular plane extended at a 45 degree angle from the front property line, beginning at a height 80 percent the width of the adjacent right-of-way. xi. As an exception, on Kingston Road in the Rougemount Precinct and on Kingston Road between Dunbarton Creek and Pine Creek in the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct, built form shall conform to a 45 degree angular plane from the front property line, beginning at a height 30 percent the width of the adjacent right-of-way. Figures 32 to 37 illustrate the application of built form principles along key streets within each precinct. I .I is SO storeys 20 storeys 2storeys 6 storeys 6 storeys HIGHWAY 16m aaw. 3m typ. podium setback / 45m 14m podium height (min- 3 storeys -max- 6 storeys) with 45m high ground Floc a KINGSTON RD. i g Figure 33. Illustrative cross-section in the Whites Precinct, for cross-section location see Figure 15. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 189 - I [_ I i 2:11 1.T.1 cc Setback to (height /0-Sm>i z • • • 45. / • 15m SLOW. g 4 t 4 I 2 GATEWAY (500m DA METER I 45m KINGSTON RD. • 5 - 3rn typ. podium setback podium height imIn. 3 storeys 'max. 6 storeys) with 9.Sm high ground floor 19m ROM,. E 19.7 - ; 1.6 • :!40 Steneys! I F• I I 130 storeys!, ; I I I 1.0 • I ; I ; 20 storeys; I I . I :112 storeys! ; 1 StOreySi • 6 stOreys. 1 ! 7.5rn 19m ROW. 16 o Q g a Figure 34. Illustrative cross-section in the Liverpool/Dunbarton Precinct, for cross-section location see Figure 17. GATEWAY 1500rn DIAMETER) 40 storeys 3t) storeys 20 StOtey5 12 storeys 8 storeys 6 storeys 45m ROA. KINGSTON R. Figure 35. Illustrative cross-section in the Brock Precinct, for cross-section location see Figure 19. - 190- 12 s1orerr r 8 slwuy1 91wyys 1 GATEWAY I SoSrn DIAMETER! rcI aeerascnm.c Som Row. CaEu swift RQNL PICKERING PKWY Figure 36. Illustrative cross-section in the Brock Precinct, for cross-section location see Figure 19. GATEWAY (Warn DIAMETER] D I 4! 0▪ I PI 1 1 1 1 1 M!d-191P R' 6uII mmrpnr taoa RP ROW. Wrdrh} 40 storeys,/ • 45'• _ •_ 30torey_s 80 storeys 12 storeys 8 storeys 6 Storeys 4 10 storeys 40 storeys 30 Storey_ Setback to • 1pw-re91den119I • (Neigh/ 10.5m) • srxrys Ill ]NEPA Amin Marrs 6 stamp nuacn.dac R0.W. nr 9n1[F 20 storey; • • 43' 12 slo'Ays S storeys • 6 'POMP. • 1 li • 4 • is • 1z ix 45m R.O.W. RROCK RD. tan PA.W. 3ro typ. podium setback podium height Orrin. 3 storeys -max. 6 storeys8 with45r# high ground 0001 Figure 37. Illustrative cross-section in the Brock Precinct, for cross-section location see Figure 19. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 191 - 2.11 Materials and Facade Treatment Development should reinforce a coherent, attractive and animated streetscape through the use of high-quality materials and articulated facades. Design Guidelines i. Main wall cladding materials should be high- quality, aesthetically pleasing, and durable (Fig. 38). Materials such as brick, stone and glass are encouraged. ii. Building materials that are discouraged include: stucco, vinyl, concrete block, metal siding, highly reflective glass and mirror finishes for glazing. iii. Materials should be complementary to the character of the precinct. For example, the use of brick may help reinforce the `urban village' character of Rougemount Precinct, while glass may be more appropriate to support the commercial gateway features of the Whites Precinct. iv. A variety of building materials, colours, and plane variations should be used to create visual interest along the streetscape and to avoid repetitive or monotonous streetscapes (Fig. 38). Building materials for higher floors may differ from base materials, but compatibility, transition and building proportions should be considered (Fig. 38). Higher buildings should have a lighter appearance in general to reduce perceived height, weight and bulk. vi. Facade articulation, including projections, recessions, design treatments and architectural details (i.e. decorative mouldings, fenestration, masonry banding) are encouraged to create enhanced visual interest and a human -scaled environment (Fig. 38). v. vii. Original architectural details and features should be restored where appropriate. facade articulation ,•*. highlighting contrast between - building levels --3 high quality and durable , materials variety within material colour palette to create visual interest I� L 1 I glazing at grade with fine line detail for design and functionality Figure 38. 60 Richmond Housing Cooperation, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Teeple Architects) - 192 - 2.12 Streetwall Streetwall v. A consistent streetwall helps create a welcoming public realm, particularly for pedestrians, and cultivate a vibrant sense of place in local areas. Design Guidelines i. A consistent streetwall should be maintained along Kingston Road and all Primary Frontages. ii. The minimum streetwall height along all streets shall be 3 storeys, with a minimum ground floor height of 4.5 metres to accommodate for retail uses. iii. The podium portion of tall buildings shall have a minimum height of 3 storeys and a maximum height of 6 storeys. iv. All street -related uses should have primary entrances fronting onto the public street and feature transparent windows and doors to provide outlook and animation onto the street edge (Fig. 39). Generally, buildings shall have a podium of at least 3 storeys before any building stepbacks are introduced. The first stepback for any building, shall not occur higher than the sixth floor of a building. vi. Building stepbacks should be a minimum of 2.5 metres. vii. A fine-grain pattern of retail units and/or residential entrances is encouraged to provide variety and variation in the streetwall. Variation in frontage width is encouraged to flexibly accommodate a range of street -related uses, including multiple internal formats and layouts for commercial/retail units. viii. To introduce further variety and visual distinction within the streetwall, the establishment of facade articulation, differentiation and rhythm through building projections, recessions, and the use of distinct building materials is encouraged. till t11t iti 0 e�11;0 1►' 111 4►1111 1111111 X11 1111111 4111;1 1 00 424100i11'111 i 1111 't.. i11t171: 111 ,. 41.1:. aX 11111 ,: Ligoio IlW ligoti is t i11. w.1t�1t1,XptiIA ' Iill 144fh414 f:l C. . Figure 39. Paintbox Condominiums, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Lisa Logan) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design GuidelinesCM - 193 - 2.13 Active Frontage Network To help achieve a lively streetscape which encourages pedestrian activity, certain streets are required to have active uses at grade, with visual engagement between the street and the ground floors of buildings. Design Guidelines i. Primary Frontages shall contain predominantly street -related active retail or commercial service uses at grade, with primary entrances oriented towards the street to encourage a vibrant public realm. Other street -related active uses, including community and institutional uses, are also permitted. ii. Secondary Frontages should contain street -related active retail or other commercial service uses at grade, with primary entrances oriented towards the street to encourage a vibrant public realm. Other street -related active uses, such as community and institutional uses, are also encouraged. iii. Development applications which are already underway along Kingston Road and other major intersections are encouraged to develop active frontages. iv. Elevated main front entrances and large concentrations of steps along frontages should generally be avoided. Entrances should be ground - related and provide barrier -free access. v. A reasonable proportion of frontages shall have transparent windows at street level. Clear glass is preferred for all glazing in order to promote a high level of visibility (Fig. 40). vi. Large format retail development may negatively impact the pedestrian realm due to the scale of the uses. To fit into the surrounding urban character, large format retail shall be developed in a compact and integrated form. Location within a multi-storey building or in the podium portion of a mixed-use building is strongly encouraged. Figure 40. Richardson Apartments by David Baker + Partners, San Francisco, USA (photo credits: Bruce Damonte) - 194 - 2.14 Gateways Gateways are entry points into significant streetscapes, areas or neighbourhoods, often signified by a distinctive public realm or built form and enhanced through site and building design. Design Guidelines i. Buildings with significant heights and massing should be located at gateway locations, including both mid -rise and tall buildings. Building and landscape design should aim to create a sense of arrival. ii. Gateways should incorporate public gathering spaces, such as plazas and urban squares. iii. Buildings at gateways are encouraged to include recessed corners to enlarge the public realm at key intersections to support additional spill-over space for active commercial uses. Dtfi View Approaching Rougemount Gateway looking North View Approaching the Altona Gateway looking South iv. Primary building entrances should be located at gateways. Building articulation, including vertical projections, recessions, design treatments and other architectural details, is encouraged at gateway locations to create enhanced visual interest and a distinct sense of place. vi. Heights, massing and articulation of buildings at gateways shall consider the aesthetics and orientation of view corridors approaching gateways to ensure a cohesive and prominent streetscape. vii. Careful consideration should be given to views of the gateway as traffic approaches from the north and south crossing the highway, with an aim to create a balance between the east and west sides and provide a sense of arrival (Fig. 41). v. View Approaching the Whites Gateway looking North Figure 41. Building Massing at Rougemount Precinct and Whites Precinct gateway locations Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design GuidelinesCM - 195 - 2.15 Building Types 2.15.1 Tall Buildings Tall buildings are generally defined as buildings that are 13 storeys or greater. They typically contain active uses at -grade with apartment, condominium, or office uses above. Tall buildings are defined by a podium base, tower middle, and building top. Design Guidelines i. Tall buildings should generally be located within gateways, including at the intersection of transit spines, major arterials, along the highway and proximate to highway access (Fig. 42). ii. Podiums shall have a minimum height of 3 storeys and a maximum height of 6 storeys to create a comfortable public realm. Towers should be stepped back a minimum of 3 metres from the podium wall. iii. Tall buildings should appropriately transition in height, particularly where high-rise development is directly adjacent to existing low-rise neighbourhoods, parks and open spaces, and POPS. iv. Tall buildings should be designed and sited to minimize shadows, maximize sky views, and reduce negative micro -climate impacts, particularly where high-rise development is directly adjacent to low-rise neighbourhoods, parks and open spaces. Building towers shall be subject to a minimum 25 metre separation distance, measured between the exterior edge of the building face. Buildings shall have a maximum tower floor plate of 750m2. vi. Upper floors should terminate the tower with distinctive crowning features and accent materials compatible with the overall building design. vii. Building tops should incorporate screening for rooftop mechanical equipment to minimize their visual impact. v. Figure 42. Marine Gateway, Vancouver, Canada (photo credits: Perkins+Will) - 196 - 2.15.2 Mid -Rise Buildings Mid -rise buildings are generally 5 to 12 storeys, and can include residential apartments, condominium buildings, office towers, and mixed-use buildings that feature a mix of residential, commercial and office uses. Design Guidelines i. Mid -rise buildings are encouraged to be located throughout the corridor and node, including along primary and secondary streets. ii. The base of a mid -rise building should be at least 3 storeys. Above three storeys, mid -rise buildings should be stepped back a minimum of 3 metres from the streetwall. iii. Mid -rise buildings should appropriately transition in height where they are directly adjacent to existing low-rise neighbourhoods, parks and open spaces, and POPS. iv. Mid -rise buildings up to 8 storeys shall maintain a minimum separation distance of 11 metres. v. Mid -rise buildings between 8 and 12 storeys shall maintain a minimum separation distance of 18 metres. vi. Access points to parking and servicing areas should be consolidated where possible to limit curb cuts and opportunities for conflict between pedestrians and vehicles. vii. Building height and massing should be accentuated at street corners and intersections, and away from low-rise residential areas and internal roads. Public amenities and retail uses are also encouraged to be located at corners and intersections (Fig. 43). Figure 43. Paintbox Condominium, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Lisa Logan) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design GuidelinesCM - 197 - 2.15.3 Low -Rise Buildings Low-rise buildings are generally 3 to 4 storeys, and can include block townhouses, back-to-back townhouses, stacked townhouses and low-rise apartment buildings. Design Guidelines i. Low-rise buildings are typically located adjacent to low-rise residential areas and along streets without active frontages. ii. Low-rise buildings up to 4 storeys shall maintain a minimum separation distance of 11 metres between facing buildings. iii. Low-rise buildings shall maintain a 8 metre separation distance between the face of a building containing primary living spaces, such as bedrooms and living rooms, and the side of another building. iv. Buildings with residential units at -grade should have a primary entrance accessing the public street from the sidewalk, via a walkway (Fig. 44). v. Building entrances are encouraged to be enhanced through features such as stoops, porches, landings, canopies, decorative railings, and front yard landscaping. They are encouraged to clearly delineate the boundary between the public and private realm through increased setbacks. vi. Low-rise buildings are encouraged to incorporate private outdoor amenity space, where possible. This can include raised or below -grade terraces, rooftop terraces, and balconies. Figure 44. Regent Park townhouses, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: SvN) - 198 - This page has been Intentionally left blank. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design GuidelinesCM - 199 - - 200 - 3.0 Place -making 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Natural Heritage Network 3.3 Heritage Path 3.4 Public Green Spaces 3.5 Public Parks 3.6 Gateway Plazas 3.7 Public Lookouts 3.8 Privately Owned Publicly -Accessible Spaces (POPS) 3.9 Public Art 3.10 Heritage Buildings Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 201 - 3.1 Introduction Placemaking involves the deliberate design of spaces to foster public interactions that bring cities to life. These Guidelines will facilitate the design of the public realm, reflecting a high standard of quality and responding to the surrounding context, built form and land uses to create spaces that facilitate social interaction. The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node contains a variety of publicly and privately -owned and accessible spaces that significantly contribute to defining the structure, identity and character of the overall area and individual precincts. It features a system of public parks and green spaces, plazas, urban squares, Privately Owned Publicly -Accessible Spaces (POPS), and lookouts. The public realm also includes a prominent natural heritage network, culturally - significant heritage buildings and public art features. The Guidelines will support the creation of a more vibrant, inclusive, and sustainable public realm for residents and visitors alike. Key Objectives • Enhance and restore natural heritage features to strengthen their relation to adjacent uses • Promote sustainability in the design and full life -cycle of the streetscape, open spaces and buildings • Create a unique sense of place and distinct feeling of arrival for each precinct and throughout the overall corridor and node • Include high-quality urban environments with a diversity of public spaces and community amenities • Contribute to overall placemaking goals in support of creating complete communities The section begins with a description and diagramatic illustration of the Placemaking Plan for each precinct, followed by design guidelines. Figure 45. Chemin-Qui-Marche, Montreal, Canada (Image Credits: Alexis Nollet) - 202 - Rougemount A range of placemaking features are located within the Rougemount Precinct. These include a Public Green Space, Public Lookout, POPS, Community Facility, Gateway Plaza and Heritage Path. A Gateway Plaza is proposed on the north side of Kingston Road, at the intersection of Kingston Road and Altona Road. This gateway feature provides an entrance to the precinct from the west side, and should incorporate notable public art, site furniture and enhanced landscaping. An additional Gateway Plaza is located at the intersection of Kingston Road and Rougemount Drive as a gateway feature for those arriving from the south. Park Entrance A Community Facility is located adjacent to the existing library and community center, and in close proximity to East Woodlands Park, to create a concentrated cluster of community amenities. A proposed Public Green Space fronts the east side of Rougemount Drive to the north of Kingston Road. This space helps link and extend the natural heritage area around Petticoat Creek. The proposed Public Lookout is oriented north to offer views of the creek and surrounding natural heritage features. To strengthen access to Rouge National Urban Park, a Heritage Path is proposed along Kingston Road. It provides an enhanced connection between the park to the west, the retail along Kingston Road and the community center and library to the east. East Tr" Woodlands Park Rouge National Urban Park • titiL PLACE MAKING Gateway Plaza Public Green Space Public Park V Hi9rtla Figure 46. Rougemount Precinct Placemaking Plan 0 POPS Public Lookout Heritage Path Potential Community Facility Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines -203- Whites The Intensification Plan identifies a well -spaced distribution of public realm features across the Whites Precinct. These spaces vary in size and function to ensure ease of access, and include Public Parks, Public Green Spaces, POPS, Public Gateway Plazas, and Public Lookouts. Two Public Gateway Plazas are located on the south side of the intersection of Kingston Road and Whites Road, a major gateway. These Public Gateway plazas will act as prominent locations for public gathering and activity, and are expected to receive heavy pedestrian foot traffic as a key hub of commercial and retail activity. They should be designed together with similar theming, _..............._She�Pard Ave_. ra z-� including larger pieces of public art that may "play" off each other. A number of POPS are provided within development blocks on the north and south side of Kingston, which will allow private development to contribute to the construction of open space for public enjoyment. Due to the scale and character of the precinct, these are recommended to take the form of hardscaped urban squares which are able to host active programming. Another noteworthy feature is the Public Lookout identified off of Kingston Road, south of Ernie L. Stroud Park. This lookout is oriented north and allows users to stop along the sidewalk for a view of the park. Figure 47. Whites Precinct Placemaking Plan -204- PLACE MAKING 0 Gateway Plaza Public Green Space Public Park POPS Public Lookout Heritage Path 1i Potential Community Facility 100m Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct In the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct, placemaking features are concentrated along both Kingston Road and the proposed east -west internal road running parallel to Kingston Road. Two Public Gateway Plazas are located on the southwest and south east corners of Kingston Road and Dixie Road, providing much-needed public space to meet the needs of several high-density mixed-use developments proposed in this area. They should be designed together with similar theming, with uniform public realm treatments that invoke the sense of a large, contiguous space. A Public Park, located on the south side of the proposed internal road, is imagined as a community hub. It is seen as having the potential to act as a multi -use space for lively community events, such as weekend farmers markets. Several POPS can be found throughout the precinct. One POPS, which is recommended to take the form of an urban square, is proposed at the northeast intersection of Fairport Road and Kingston Road, as a result of the limited redevelopment potential of the property due to underground utilities running east -west across its southern portion. Additional smaller POPS should be provided central to the development blocks. A proposed Public Green Space is identified where the Kingston Road Corridor intersects with Dunbarton Creek and its associated creeklands. This will provide opportunities for recreation and relaxation while also acting as a buffer for sensitive environmental areas. Former Village of Dunbarton �m"e a"dae .,,,1,ean>�n�ik': KINGSTGN$D Figure 48. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Placemaking Plan Frenchman's Bay PLACE MAKING A Gateway Plaza Public Green Space Public Park POPS ® Public lookout Heritage Path Potential Community Facility Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines -205- 100m Brock Precinct A number of publicly -accessible spaces of various shapes and sizes are proposed for the Brock Precinct to ensure a sufficient amount of open space for the increased resident population. This includes Public Parks, POPS and Gateway Plazas. A series of linear parks, developed and maintained as POPS, are proposed as connectors between larger open spaces. One such linear park connects pedestrians from Brock Street to the central internal Public Park and to Beechlawn Park, located immediately east of the precinct. This central Public Park is intended to act as a community amenity for neighbouring residents; its location directly adjacent to Beechlawn Park opens up opportunities for park programming shared between the two spaces. A potential Community Facility is envisioned in close proximity. The specific function and services of the facility will depend on local needs and preferences. An additional Public Park is located in the southern end of the precinct. This park should be sized and programmed to service the residents south of Pickering Parkway. It should include features such as children's play structures, seating areas, unprogrammed open green space and a multi -use court, if possible. South of Pickering Parkway, POPS are organized within blocks of mixed-use and residential development. They provide places of respite from retail activity, and contribute to complete communities offering residents places to live, work and play. Fly PLACE MAKING 0 fl 0 Gateway Plaza Public Green Space Public Park POPS Public Lookout Heritage Path Potential Community Facility Diana P.in of Wales Park Figure 49. Brock Precinct Placemaking Plan o k. SCO - 206 - • 1 �r •.i `Coa, v underekiew 100 3__ Naturae The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node benefits from proximity and access to an extensive existing waterway system and natural heritage network. These areas should be conserved, managed and celebrated as a connected and integrated natural system. Design Guidelines i. Natural heritage assets should be connected and made accessible through sidewalks and trails, and integrated with the surrounding landscape and urban community without compromising their function and integrity (Fig. 50). ii. Natural heritage features should be buffered from intensification areas, through setbacks and appropriate building transitions, to ensure that natural heritage is protected and that important environmental ecosystems are not negatively disturbed. iii. Efforts should be made to facilitate greater connections to the Rouge National Urban Park and Petticoat Creek, subject to future study. Opportunities to connect trails and walkways providing access to these features should be explored, pending further transportation and environmental assessment. iv. Through redevelopment and streetscape design opportunities shall be sought to incorporate gateways and lookouts to maximize opportunities for views of natural heritage features. Streets and blocks should be configured to provide exposure to natural features, to amplify their significance and functions. Figure 50. Arninge-Ullna Riparian Forest Park, Stockholm, Sweden (photo credits: Topia landskapsarkitekter) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines -207- 3.3 Heritage Path The Heritage Path provides an enhanced route along Kingston Road in the Rougemount Precinct for cyclists, leisure walkers and joggers while strengthening the area's connection to Rouge National Urban Park. Design Guidelines i. The Heritage Path shall be located along Kingston Road, running from the western boundary of the Rougemount Precinct to Rosebank Road on the north side of Kingston Road and from Altona Road to Evelyn Avenue on the south side of Kingston Road. ii. The Heritage Path should be designed to support an extension beyond the western boundary of the Rougemount Precinct to Rouge National Urban Park, in a manner coordinated with Parks Canada trail planning. The extension should create a link between the Precinct and park entrance. iii. The Heritage Path should feature an enhanced public realm, including heritage markers and informational plaques highlighting the history of the area and significance of surrounding natural heritage features. It should also include street planting, enhanced paving materials, directional signage and street furniture such as benches to enable a comfortable pedestrian experience (Fig. 51). Figure 51. Indianapolis Cultural Trail, Indianapolis, USA (photo credits: Indianapolis Cultural Trail Website) - 208 - 3.4 Public Green Space Public Green Spaces are located adjacent to creeks and other sensitive environmental features throughout the Corridor and Node. They act as a buffer between development blocks and natural heritage features, provide areas of rest and respite in a more naturalized environment, and offer opportunities for active and passive recreation. Design Guidelines i. Public Green Spaces adjacent to natural heritage features shall be designed to help buffer and preserve the integrity of sensitive environmental areas. ii. Public Green Spaces shall front onto public streets where possible, and be of a shape, topography and size that reflects their intended use. Green Space design should incorporate a measure of flexibility to enable the potential for multi -use spaces. iii. Entrances to Public Entrances should be highly visible, aesthetically -pleasing and accessible for users with physical disabilities, and incorporate signage that assists in wayfinding and orientation. Where possible, efforts should be made to incorporate multiple access points. iv. Public Green Spaces are encouraged to have public or private street frontages, where possible. v. Developments adjacent to a Public Green Space will be setback a minimum of 3 metres and will provide an appropriate interface between public and private lands. Developments will avoid locating loading and service areas adjacent to green spaces. vi. Public Green Spaces shall serve a community function and incorporate an appropriate range and variety of active and passive recreational uses, subject to the size and shape of the green space and its proximity to sensitive environmental features (Fig. 52). vii. Green Spaces shall incorporate opportunities to educate the public about environmental conservation Figure 52. Riverwalk Stratford, Stratford, Canada (photo credits: Riverwalk B&B) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 209 - and the immediate natural heritage network, where appropriate, through features such as illustrated informational signs. viii. Amenity areas within Green Spaces should be located and oriented to maximize sunlight and be sheltered from the noise and traffic of adjacent streets and uses to increase user comfort. ix. Development should seek to adequately limit shadows on green spaces as necessary to preserve their utility. Development should adequately limit net -new shadow as measured from March 21st to September 21st from 10:18 a.m. — 4:18 p.m. on green spaces. x. Where Public Green Spaces are located adjacent to school sites or community facilities, the design of both entities should be coordinated in order to capitalize on opportunities for shared facilities and amenities. xi. On -street parking on streets adjacent to Public Green Spaces should be situated on the same side of the street as the park, in order to facilitate convenient, direct and safe access. xii. Plantings should comprise of species which are tolerant of urban conditions, emphasizing native and non-invasive species. Accent planting should be focused at entrances, around seating areas and in play areas (Fig. 53). Figure 53. Westhaven Promenade, Auckland, New Zealand (photo credits: LandLAB ) -210- 3.5 Public Parks Public Parks play a fundamental role in enhancing the public realm and the natural environment. They provide valuable outdoor activity space for communities to gather, socialize and engage in an active lifestyle. In order to achieve the Recreation and Parks Master Plan's parkland service targets, significant new park space is required throughout the Kingston Road corridor and node. Design Guidelines i. Public Parks shall front onto public streets, be accessible from adjacent public streets where possible, and be of a shape, topography and size that reflects their intended use. Park design should incorporate a measure of flexibility to enable the potential for multi -use spaces throughout all seasons. ii. Public parks should be a minimum of 0.3 hectares in size, although larger parks are preferred. The siting and sizing of new Public Parks should take into account planned residential and employment intensification to ensure adequate provision. iii. Public Parks should contain multiple access points (Fig. 54). Entrances should be highly visible, aesthetically -pleasing, accessible for users with physical disabilities, and incorporate signage that assists in wayfinding and orientation. iv. Public Parks should be physically and visually connected to the public street. New buildings should be positioned to define the shape and function of the public park and to create the impression of a cohesive public realm. Public Parks should have a minimum of one public street frontage and one private street frontage, although greater street frontages are encouraged. v. vi. Developments adjacent to a Public Park will be setback a minimum of 3 metres and will provide an Figure 54. Mekel Park - Delft University of Technology Campus, Delft, Netherlands, (photo credits: Mecanoo) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 211 - appropriate interface between public and private lands, promote animated uses at grade and avoid locating loading and service areas adjacent to parks. vii. Public Parks shall serve a community function and incorporate an appropriate range and variety of active and passive recreational uses, subject to the size and shape of the park (Fig. 55). viii. Public Parks which are 0.3 ha or larger in size should include a playground with junior and senior children's play equipment, seating areas, pathways, open unprogrammed turf areas and tree canopy. Larger parks should accommodate water play features, multi -use courts or one-on-one basketball facilities. ix. Public Parks also should incorporate pedestrian - scaled lighting, bicycle racks, appropriate signage and public art, where appropriate. x. Amenity areas within Public Parks should be located and oriented to maximize sunlight and be sheltered from the noise and traffic of adjacent streets and uses to increase user comfort. xi. Development should seek to adequately limit shadows on parks as necessary to preserve their utility. Development should adequately limit net -new shadow as measured from March 21st to September 21st from 10:18 a.m. — 4:18 p.m. on parks. xii. Where Public Parks are located adjacent to school sites or community facilities, the design of both entities should be coordinated in order to capitalize on opportunities for shared facilities and amenities. xiii. On -street parking on streets adjacent to Public Parks should be situated on the same side of the street as the park to facilitate convenient, direct and safe access. xiv. Public Parks and Green Spaces should connect to neighbouring natural heritage features through enhanced boulevards to contribute to a green, interconnected pedestrian network. Figure 55. David H. Koch Plaza, New York, USA (photo credits: Olin Studio) -212- 3.6 Gateway Plazas Gateway Plazas are prominent publicly accessible spaces in high -traffic areas that provide places to gather and socialize, while adding aesthetic value to the built environment. to the highest architectural standard. They should respond to the form and function of the site and surrounding uses. iv. Commercial and mixed-use buildings adjacent to plazas should provide active frontages with direct views and access. Patios are encouraged to be located adjacent to these locations. Gateways Plazas should contribute to a cohesive streetscape through the consistent use of colour, texture and building materials to the surrounding the built form. Design Guidelines i. Gateway Plazas shall function as central gathering spaces which can be programmed for public or community events, and as pedestrian gateways v. and connections which complement the existing streetscape. The dimension, design and furnishing of these spaces should offer comfort and allow for a range of activities accommodating diverse user groups. ii. Gateway Plazas shall be physically and visually connected to the public street and well-designed to relate to surrounding buildings and create the impression of a cohesive public realm. iii. Gateway Plazas should be framed by adjacent streets, landscape and buildings which are designed vi. To create an enjoyable pedestrian environment, Gateway Plazas should incorporate appropriate lighting, signage, water features, and public art, where appropriate (Fig. 56). High quality paving treatments, in combination with landscaped elements including coordinated plantings and street furniture, should also be used. Figure 56. Berczy Park, Toronto (photo credits: Jeremy Gilbert via I-l!ckr) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines -213- 3.7 Public Lookouts Public Lookouts highlight important views within the urban structure of streets, parks and open spaces. These are located at natural vantage points typically present in close proximity to the creeks and valleylands. Design Guidelines i. Lookouts should be physically and visually integrated with the public street. They should be easily accessible and useable, with clear signage to indicate public use and connections to accessible paths. ii. New developments on sites adjacent to lookouts should preserve the existing views for public enjoyment. The location and massing of new developments should complement these views. iii. Lookouts should incorporate comfortable seating, appropriate lighting and public art, where appropriate. The design and placement of these amenity features should facilitate, rather than hinder, the movement and congregation of individuals and groups (Fig. 57). iv. Lookouts are encouraged to include informational plaques, maps, heritage markers and interpretive signage, where appropriate, to provide contextual information about the landscape, region and identifiable features in the view corridor. Figure 57. The Chemin-Qui-Marche Lookout, Montreal Canada (photo credits: Lemey) -214- 3.8 Privately Owned Publiclv- Accessible Spaces (POPS) Privately Owned Publicly -accessible Spaces (POPS) form a key part of the public realm network, providing valuable amenity space through development. POPS are owned and maintained by private landowners, but open to the general public to enjoy. They can take a variety of forms, including parks, linear parks and urban squares. Design Guidelines i. POPS shall be publicly accessible, with signage to properly identify the space and indicate access for public use. ii. The locations of POPS will be identified in the implementing zoning by-law and their exact size, location and design shall be addressed through detailed block planning, to include matters such as connectivity and cost sharing between multiple landowners. iii. The size, shape and configuration of POPS will vary based on the existing and planned context and specific characteristics of the site and the building program. iv. POPS shall provide public easements as necessary over privately -owned open spaces to provide access to the general public. Private landowners shall be responsible for ongoing maintenance to ensure that POPS remain in a state of good repair through all seasons. v. vi. The location and design of POPS should seek to physically and visually connect to the public street. vii. POPS should be framed by and relate to surrounding buildings; at -grade active uses shall support the programming of the open space and offer a surveillance element to promote safety (Fig. 58). viii. All POPS should incorporate soft landscape and planting; trees shall have sufficient soil volumes to enable large mature growth and a significant tree canopy. Figure 58. Artwork at Daniel's High Park Condos, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Urban Toronto) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines -215- ix. POPS should maximize sun exposure and strive to achieve 5 consecutive hours of sun as measured on March 21 and September 21. x. POPS should provide amenities including seating areas, pedestrian -scale lighting, bicycle racks, garbage cans, and public art to create a positive walking and cycling environment. Amenities should compliment the character of the surrounding public realm and active ground floor uses. • POPS designed as Parks should: xi. Be located to provide areas of open green space where intensified development is expected or planned to occur. xii. Have a dimension of a minimum of 0.2 ha, with larger spaces preferred. xiii. Include seating areas, walkways, a playground with junior children's play equipment, an open turf area, and tree canopy. • POPS designed as Linear Parks should: xiv. Be located where they are able to link several larger green spaces in close proximity, for example to connect Brock Road and Beechlawn Park to the newly proposed internal park on the development block east of Brock Road. xv. Have a dimension which is based on local site conditions; however, generally the minimum width should be 6.5 metres or greater to provide adequate spacing for the park to act as a movement corridor as well as a landscaped activity space. xvi. Provide a clear pathway with high-quality, durable paving materials. • POPS designed as Urban Squares should: xvii. Be located in commercial and areas and be designed to accommodate relatively higher levels of pedestrian foot traffic, with more hardscaped areas relative to softscape xviii. Incorporate high-quality paving treatments, with distinct paving materials used to delineate between separated activity zones within larger squares. xix. Have a dimension which is based on local site conditions; they could be as small as 100m' but should be large enough to allow for active programming and public events. xx. Provide seating areas in the form of benches or seat walls, plant material (preferably in raised planters) and higher branching trees for shade. If located near dining establishments, tables with seats may be appropriate. -216- 3.9 Public Art Public art is an important part of the public realm, incorporating culture, beauty and vibrancy to streetscapes. They enhance neighborhoods by making communities more attractive, and help enliven areas with distinct character and identity. Design Guidelines i. Public art should be located in or with close proximity to community -oriented spaces, such as parks, open spaces, public squares, plazas, and gateways, to maximize visibility. It should be exhibited along streets and laneways that support a continuous flow of high pedestrian volumes. ii. Public art should be durable and low -maintenance. iii. Public art should explore opportunities to celebrate local history and culture, including notable events and figures (Fig. 59). iv. Opportunities to incorporate public art into building design as an architectural element are encouraged. Public art installations may be publicly or privately owned, and private developers are strongly encouraged to incorporate public art elements within their developments. v. Figure 59. Dan Bergeon Public Art, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Marcus Mitanis) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines -217- 3.10 Heritage Buildings There is one designated heritage building and four buildings of heritage interest within the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. Heritage resources play a valuable role in celebrating local history and preserving cultural identity. Design Guidelines i. Heritage buildings and historic elements should be integrated into the wider public realm, and connected to the surrounding public open space network when possible. ii. Built heritage features on focal sites should be accentuated to create a sense of place and enhance cultural identity. iii. Through the review of development proposals, the historical significance of designated heritage buildings and buildings with heritage merits shall be assessed to determine how the building or elements can be protected, enhanced or integrated into new development. iv. Distinct historical eras in the history of Kingston Road in the City of Pickering should be celebrated through public realm treatments on lands with specific ties to those activities, and incorporated into the landscape, lighting, signage, interpretation and v. art. New development should recognize heritage buildings and historic elements by facilitating opportunities for building and site design to reflect the scale, building materials, architectural style and other attributes of adjacent cultural heritage resources (Fig. 60). Figure 60. Casey House, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Marcus Mitanis) -218- This page has been Intentionally left blank. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines -219- - 220 - Connectivity 4.1 Introduction 4.2 Pedestrians 4.3 Cycling 4.4 Transit 4.5 Street Types Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 221 - 4.1 Introduction Connectivity involves creating a robust, multi -modal transportation system that supports the freedom of movement for all users in the urban environment. These guidelines will inform the creation of an integrated mobility network that takes into account the needs of pedestrians, cyclists, transit riders and drivers. To facilitate this network, proposed connections include pedestrian paths, pedestrian crossings, multi -use paths, bicycle lanes and cycle tracks, and new and improved public and private streets. New or improved connections are used to provide alternate travel routes, break up larger blocks into smaller and more walkable blocks, allow for smooth vehicular and servicing access, and provide access to parks, open spaces and natural heritage features. The network will provide a range of safe, accessible and inviting transportation choices and support public and environmental health by encouraging the uptake of active modes. Key Objectives Design all public roads and private connections to be complete streets and emphasize transit and pedestrian -oriented development. Improve access management and connectivity for all transportation modes. Ensure that all users of have distinct and delineated spaces to separate modes of travel moving at different speeds. • Support current and future transit services through building and site design and public streetscape treatments. Encourage the optimization of existing and planned infrastructure, including transit facilities. The section begins with a description and diagramatic illustration of the overall Connectivity Plan for each precinct. Following this, within each subsection, the Pedestrian Connectivity Plan, Cycling Connectivity Plan, and Street Types Plan are detailed, along with accompanying design guidelines. - 222 - Rougemount To better align with the planned 45 metre right of way and the ultimate provision of centre -running Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) service along Kingston Road, and to make this precinct truly pedestrian and cyclist -friendly, the Intensification Plan minimizes and consolidates multiple accesses off Kingston Road and increases the permeability of the precinct by the introduction of two rear service streets on properties south of Kingston Road. The first of these potential service roads runs from the southern end of Altona Road, east across the southern limit of properties with frontage on Kingston Road, and then turns back up to Kingston Road two properties west of Rougemount Drive. The second commences at LEGEND • New Streets Potential Controlled intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Locatio Subject to Further Review indicative Enhanced Boulevard -0 Right -In , Pig ht -out Access Multi -Use Path Proposed Cycling Facility Existing Cycling Network Planned Cycling Network Pedestrian Path Bus Stops Future& Planned Connection Subject to EA Evelyn Avenue, running west to reconnect with Kingston Road closer to Rougemount Drive. To improve connectivity between the properties south and north of Kingston Road, east of Rougemount Drive, and to create a better pedestrian connection between the existing Library and Petticoat Creek to the "Main Street" retail, it is recommended that provision of a controlled intersection be explored at Evelyn Avenue. In addition, since Rougemount Drive is one of the key roads crossing the highway and thus connecting the southern neighbourhoods, a new cycling connection is proposed south of Kingston Road on Rougemount Drive. Rouge National Urban Park Figure 61. Rougemount Precinct Connectivity Plan Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 223 - 100m Whites The Whites Precinct is typified by relatively larger parcels with greater depths. As a result, a number of opportunities for new connections within and through these larger parcels are proposed, featuring strategies to provide consolidated access, internal routes of circulation, and additional frontage opportunities through new connections. The Intensification Plan features a mid -block public road connection south of Kingston Road with access points off Kingston Road at the eastern edge of Petticoat Creek and the intersection of Kingston Road and Steeple Hill Road. It also features a potential public road connection LEGEND New Streets Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Location Subject to Further Review • Indicative Enhanced Boulevard t• Right -In Right -out - Access Multi-IJse Path Proposed Cycling Facility Existing Cycling Network Planned Cycling Network < } Pedestrian Path i Bus Stops 41,0. 0 Future & Planned Connection Subject to EA Ernie L SIn d M.k N • Planned eycliv facility type and lodatron to be determined through future EA study on the south side of Kingston Road, east of Whites Road with the access aligning with Delta Boulevard. This would connect to a private secondary loop street. The configuration would reduce the number of individual access points from Kingston Road while improving connectivity and providing additional access points within the block. Lastly, rear private service streets are proposed on the north side of Kingston Road, west and east of Whites Road, with connections to Steeple Hill Road and Delta Boulevard respectively, connecting with Kingston Road at existing controlled intersections. These are aimed at improving connectivity between the properties on the north -side of Kingston Road, and reducing the number of individual access points. 471. �-i+• .: r� 11.3 u _ + t. i4 Figure 62. Whites Precinct Connectivity Plan - 224 - klern Dunbarton/Liverpool The Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct is typified by relatively large parcels with even greater depths than those found in the Whites Precinct. As a result, opportunities for new road connections within and through these larger parcels are proposed, featuring a strategy to provide consolidated access, internal multi- modal routes of circulation and additional frontage opportunities through new connections. In addition, a new internal public street is introduced running parallel to Kingston Road, connecting Walnut Lane to Dixie Road. It is intended to create a more pedestrian friendly east -west connection, and opportunities for potential redevelopment with active frontages through the core of the Precinct. LEGEND New Streets Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Location Subject to Further Review • Indicative Enhanced Boulevard Right -In Right -out Access Multi -Lisa Path Proposed Cycling Facility Existing Cycling Network Planned Cycling Network E--•] Pedestrian Path 11 Bus Stops .+*m.r Future & Planned Connection Subject to EA The Intensification Plan also incorporates the planned extension of Walnut Lane across Pine Creek, of which the exact alignment is to be determined through a municipal class environmental assessment. All proposed roads within the Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct are encouraged to be multi -modal. A pedestrian and cycling connection is proposed by re -using the existing rail bridge and underpass over the highway to connect the neighbourhood to the south, with an eventual connection to the waterfront trail. French ma Bay 100m Figure 63. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Connectivity Plan Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 225 - Brock The Brock Precinct is typified by a mixture in size of parcels along Kingston Road and very large parcels off Pickering Parkway and Brock Road. There are three main landowners within the Specialty Retailing Node Area within the Brock Precinct, and as a result, a number of opportunities for new connections and public roads within and through these very large parcels are encouraged. These feature strategies to provide better access, more internal routes of circulation and multi- modal routes, and additional street frontage and activity hub opportunities through new connections. LEGEND • -Le • 1 £ The Intensification Plan features a new public road passing through the existing mid -block intersection east of the Brock Road on Pickering Parkway. The new proposed public street would become a "precinct collector", forming the back -bone of a more strongly defined internal road network and improving walkability through the node. A series of private east -west streets are proposed to intersect it to form a more fine-grained street pattern. Three new controlled intersections are proposed, including one along Pickering Parkway and two along the proposed public street, to improve traffic access and safety. New Streets Potentia! Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Location Subject to Further Review Indicative Enhanced Boulevard Right -In , Right -out Access Multi-UPeth Proposed Cycling Facility Existing Cycling Network Planned Cycling Network Pedestrian Path Bus Stops Future 6 Planned Connection Subject to EA Denrnar Park i mftrl 14671 *.ty "1611^+ (— Diana r Oia a Princess of Wales Park Figure 64. Brock Precinct Connectivity Plan - 226 - -r • • loom 4.2 Pedestrians A well-designed pedestrian network is critical to creating a comfortable and vibrant urban environment. The Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node is envisioned as a place where pedestrians are encouraged to walk between destinations, where pedestrians feel safe interacting with other road users, and where the pedestrian network supports broader place -making goals. Sidewalks, multi -use paths, pedestrian paths, and controlled intersections are proposed as part of the Pedestrian Connectivity Plan, illustrated in Figures 66 to 69. Figure 65. Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus, Buffalo, USA (photo credits: Scape Studio website) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines -227- CONNECTIVITY - PEDESTRIAN Sidewalks • • - - - Multi -Use Path <••• Pedestrian Path Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Locat]on Subject to Further Review Bus Stops Rouge Nae lunaI Urban Park Ent ]-fid•-� N Figure 66. Rougemount Precinct Pedestrian Connectivity Plan CONNECTIVITY - PEDESTRIAN Sidewalks Multi -Use Path <••• Pedestrian Path •1 Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Locatlon Subject to Further Review • Bus Stops Err& L. sty Park Figure 67. Whites Precinct Pedestrian Connectivity Plan - 228 - 100m CONNECTIVITY - PEDESTRIAN Sidewalks Multi -Use Path <•••> Pedestrian Path 1 Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Locatlon Subject to Further Review • Bus Stops ...... • - • ... ... ..... - Form. v;Ilagaof Dunbarton FfBnChn'ArriBay Figure 68. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Pedestrian Connectivity Plan CONNECTIVITY - PEDESTRIAN Sidewalks Multi -Use Path <•••> destrian Path 1 Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Locatlon Subject to Further Review • Bus Stops .•:•:-: .• • Diana Arince,..c of Wales F.a rk -""1- -• Figure 69. Brock Precinct Pedestrian Connectivity Plan 'Conneclion under mowiew Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 229 - 100m 100M 4.2.1 Sidewalks Sidewalks are a critical component to creating a safe, v. coordinated and continuous pedestrian network. Design Guidelines i. Sidewalks should provide a network of accessible and inter -connected pedestrian routes which relate directly to surrounding buildings and destinations. ii. Sidewalks should provide a clear, unobstructed pathway and be a minimum width of 2 metres to ensure a comfortable walking environment (Fig. 70). iii. Sidewalks should be designed to serve all users, including children, older people, parents with strollers, the visually impaired, and those using wheelchairs and other assistive devices. Barrier -free surfaces should be in compliance with Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act (AODA) standards. iv. Sunlight exposure along sidewalks should be achieved and protected to maintain an inviting pedestrian realm, particularly at retail spill -out zones. Where appropriate, curb extensions/bump-outs may be incorporated at the street intersections or mid -block locations to expand the pedestrian path, provide additional queuing space, shorten roadway crossings and calm motorized traffic. Where on -road facilities exist, the bump -outs should not disrupt a continuous bike lane through the intersection. vi. Adequate space should be provided within the public right-of-way to allow for landscape and furniture zones adjacent to sidewalks. vii. Street furniture may include benches, tables, fountains, and newspaper boxes. These should be placed in high -traffic areas, particularly where public amenities or active frontages exist. viii. Where appropriate, street trees which provide significant canopy shading should be planted to soften the built form, reduce the heat island effect and maximize the urban tree canopy. Trees should be incorporated at intervals of 6 to 9 metres. Figure 70. Yannan Avenue Highway Adaptation, Chongqing, China (photo credits: WallaceLiu) - 230 - 4.2.2 Pedestrian Paths Pedestrian paths provide enjoyable, human -scaled connections in the urban environment. They create inviting spaces to walk or run, providing short-cuts between blocks and encouraging exercise and leisure opportunities. Design Guidelines i. Pedestrian paths are reserved for the exclusive use of pedestrians, and should be implemented to provide additional connections and routes of circulation within blocks and to open spaces and destinations (Fig. 71). ii. Pedestrian paths should be designed with a minimum width of 2.5 metres to provide for a comfortable walking environment. iii. Pedestrian paths should be well-designed and inviting to users, with features such as soft landscaping, plantings, public art, wayfinding signage and pedestrian -scaled lighting implemented where appropriate. Where possible, a generous urban tree canopy is encouraged. iv. The placement of street furniture should ensure that pedestrian routes are free of obstruction and enable proper circulation and sight lines. v. Pedestrian paths should utilize high-quality and durable paving material. The paving treatment is encouraged to have a distinctive colour, texture or pattern to assist with wayfinding. Permeable paving materials should be used for pedestrian paths in areas intersecting with green space or natural heritage features. vi. Pedestrian paths should be designed to encourage strolling and gathering of people, and include spill - out spaces and other elements to keep the public realm active. Figure 71. Requalification of Mermoz Avenue, Lyon, France (photo credits: Gautier Conquet Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 231 - 4.2.3 Pedestrian Crossings Pedestrian crossings contribute to an improved walking experience by providing designated locations where pedestrians can cross safely across the flow of vehicular traffic. Design Guidelines i. Pedestrian crossings should provide clear, unobstructed paths and be connected to adjacent sidewalks to allow ease of access for all users. ii. Crossings should be clearly designed for safety, with appropriate traffic control devices, surface markings or variation in construction material, lighting and signage (Fig. 72). iii. Examples of controlled pedestrian crossings are pedestrian crossover (PXO), intersection pedestrian signal (IPS) and mid -block pedestrian signal (MPS). iv. Signalized crossings should be located at all major intersections and areas of high pedestrian traffic v. such as gateways, parks, schools, libraries and major retail areas. Signalized crossings should be considered at these locations, where appropriate and warranted. Signalization should be prioritized for pedestrian crossings over traffic. The pedestrian network, including sidewalks and pedestrian paths, should be designed to bring pedestrians to safe, controlled crossing locations and discourage crossings at uncontrolled mid -block locations. vi. Accessible pedestrian signals with push -buttons and count -down signals should be provided at all signalized intersections. vii. On private sites where new road connections and blocks are established, pedestrians should be accommodated and given priority through stop signs or other signalization methods.. Figure 72. Requalification of Mermoz Avenue, Lyon, France (photo credits: Gautier Conquet) - 232 - 4.3 Cycling A high-quality, well-connected cycling network is critical to successfully providing residents with a sustainable active transportation alternative. To complement existing and planned cycling facilities, the Intensification Plan identifies additions and upgrades to improve access and fill in gaps to the existing network. Proposed Cycling Facilities could take the form of on -street bike lanes or in -boulevard cycle tracks. The cycling network is also supplemented by proposed Multi -use Paths, which are accessible to both cyclists and pedestrians. These should be integrated into the wider active transportation network of sidewalks, trails, pedestrian connections and crossings, linear parks and cycling facilities to contribute to the establishment of walkable and cyclist -friendly neighbourhoods. The Cycling Connectivity Plan is illustrated in Figures 74 to 77. Figure 73. Group of People on a Cycle Track (photo credits: People for Bikes ) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines -233- CONNECTIVITY - CYCLING Nide-Use Path 4--4• Proposed Cycling Facility Existing Cycling Network Planned Cycling Network Park Entrance Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Location Subject to Further Review ' • - . .•_• • T.,- 5_ Rouge National Urban Park Eaat Woodlands Pk / az? e.wun rill. 17;571 • • °X I e'd"' : • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . • .. Figure 74. Rougemount Precinct Cycling Connectivity Plan CONNECTIVITY - CYCLING Wilt -Use Path Proposed Cycling Facility Existing Cycling Network - - Planned Cycling Network Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crosslng - Location Subject to Further Review Praia L. Ward Park 4 :44 ti 1 : 10Ont Striperl Ma. :3 • '' ..... . uur Th - al Figure 75. Whites Precinct Cycling Connectivity Plan •eder ar, ••• ON ‘441‘14 a - 234 - 1.DOm CONNECTIVITY - CYCLING Multi -Use Path f --t Proposed Cycling Faddy Existing Cycling Network — - Planned Cycling Network Potential Controlled Inters -action and Pedestrian Crossing - Locatlon Subject to Further Review FOrmof Vl11ag0 Of Dunnarlhn ls5 unm tits KINGSTON SD, � ,. I tiY Ffonttman's Bay Figure 76. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Cycling Connectivity Plan CONNECTIVITY - CYCLING Mt11tl-Use Path +--+ Proposed Cycling Facllity Existing Cycling Network - Planned Cycling Network 0 Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Locatlon Subject to Further Review Den r P.ka r. Diana P.in of Wales Park Figure 77. Brock Precinct Cycling Connectivity Plan .Conry under ekitw Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines -235- 4.3.1 Multi -Use Paths Multi -use paths (MUP) are off-road pathways shared by cyclists and pedestrians, separated from vehicle traffic and located within the boulevard. Design Guidelines i. MUPs are encouraged as connectors between neighbouring communities, transit corridors and nodes. ii. Where space or other considerations do not permit provision of desired separate facilities for cyclists from pedestrians, MUP can be used in areas that are less travelled by pedestrians and cyclists. They should be implemented on key connector streets with lower vehicle traffic volume (Fig. 78). iii. To ensure adequate space for all users, the minimum width of an in -boulevard MUP is 3 metres, with a desired width of 4 metres. iv. MUP should be separated from vehicle traffic and located within the boulevard, with a 1 metre wide splash strip. v. Within MUP, segregation of cyclists and pedestrians should be avoided where possible. Instead, a directional dividing line may be marked on the pathway. vi. When appropriate, multiple access points should be provided to all MUP, with connections to a variety of transportation options including public transit routes, other separate cycling facilities and MUP, sidewalks and parking areas. vii. MUP should include adequate amenities, such as seating, waste receptacles, lighting, signage, wayfinding features, and educational and historic information. These features should be located at accessible key points along path routes. viii. Roadside infrastructure should have a smooth surface and a minimum 0.6 metre lateral clearance from the MUP. Figure 78. Requalification of Mermoz Avenue, Lyon (Image Credits: Gautier Conquet) - 236 - 4.3.2 Bicycle Lanes and Cycle Tracks Bicycle lanes and cycle tracks provide dedicated space for cyclists on the road. They are differentiated by their degree of separation from motor vehicles. Design Guidelines i. Cycle tracks are exclusive cycling facilities which are physically separated from vehicular traffic (Fig. 79). Cycle tracks should be designed with a minimum width of 2 metres. They should be raised or vertically separated from the street at an intermediate or sidewalk level to create a safety buffer between cyclists and other road users. Where appropriate, they may also incorporate barrier features. ii. Bicycle lanes are cycling facilities which are located at -grade, alongside vehicular traffic. Bicycle lanes should have a minimum width of 1.5 metres plus 0.5 metres of buffer, with a desired width of 1.8 metres plus 1.2 metres of buffer. iii. Cycle tracks are preferred over bicycle lanes due to the safety and security that they provide for cyclists. iv. Bicycle lanes and cycle tracks should include clear pavement markings. Signs should be placed at intersections and access points, and are required to be appropriately spaced. Cycle tracks should connect through bike boxes and crossrides to increase cyclist safety at intersections. vi. Bicycle lanes on streets with on -street parking are recommended to be located between the parking lane and adjacent live traffic lane and with sufficient space to mitigate conflicts between cyclist and opening car doors. vii. From a traffic safety standpoint, and as the introduction of two-way cycling facilities leads to greater conflict with turning motor vehicles at intersections and driveways, one-way facilities are generally preferred over two-way facilities. viii. Bicycle lanes should be designed with consideration of landscape and furniture zone buffers which separate cycling lanes from sidewalks. v. Figure 79. Mermoz Avenue, Lyon, France (photo credits: Gautier Conquet) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 237 - 4.3.3 Shared Facilities Shared facilities provide opportunities for motorists and cyclists to share road space, and is an alternative to specialized segregated cycling infrastructure. Design Guidelines i. Shared facilities include shared roadways and signed bicycle routes (i.e. shared facilities between cyclists and motorized vehicles). Shared facilities are typically implemented on low-volume traffic streets with lower speed limits, such as the smaller east -west streets abuting Brock Road in the Brock Precinct. Generally, shared facilities are well-suited for the Brock and Dunbarton/Liverpool Precincts due to the presence of internal streets and residential blocks in these areas. ii. The minimum width for a shared facility is 4 metres, with a desired width of 4.5 metres, to ensure adequate space for both motorists and cyclists. Implementation of the additional desired width shall offer a more comfortable riding experience for cyclists. iii. Clear lane markings will indicate to motorists and cyclists the appropriate line of travel for cyclists (Fig. 80). iv. Appropriate signage, including route markers, should be installed along designated shared facilities. Figure 80. Shared Cycling Facility on Brighton Ave, Boston, USA (photo credits: Boston Globe) - 238 - 4.4 "Trans Kingston Road is a vital transit corridor within the City of Pickering, with a number of existing and planned transit routes. The Region of Durham and Durham Region Transit have identified preferred bus rapid stations along the Kingston Road corridor in the City of Pickering as part of Metrolinx's Preliminary Design Business Case and Transit Project Assessment Process for the Durham Scarborough Bus Rapid Transit project. Preferred stop locations were investigated based on future development and planning horizons, connectivity, ridership, right of way limitations, and stop proximity and placement. • Altona Road • Rosebank Road • Whites Road • Fairport Road • Dixie Road • Liverpool Road • Glenanna Road • Valley Farm Road • Brock Road • Notion Road The preferred BRT transit stops are subject to change throughout the Metrolinx Design and TPAP EA process. Current stops not listed will be investigated further as they serve a significant purpose by providing access to key destinations and services and support the local transit network. Whites Road and Brock Road are identified as Regional Corridors and are both part of the High Frequency Network within the Durham Regional Official Plan. The High Frequency Network will consist of buses in planned High Occupancy Behicle (HOV) lanes, or buses in mixed traffic, with transit signal priority at major intersections with peak period service headways between 5 and 10 minutes. Additionally, these corridors are also targeted within Metrolinx's Regional Transportation Plan and are encouraged to have Bus Priority Measures (BPM) which include all door boarding, limited stops, reserved lanes, transit signal priority, queue jump lanes, queue jump signals, curb side alignment, and high-quality stops. Therefore, stop locations along these corridors should be protected in terms of right of way requirements for spacing of high-quality transit stops and future BPM infrastructure, especially at Brock and Whites intersections where they will be intersecting with the Durham -Scarborough BRT. This would greatly enhance the quality of the transit network by improving service integration, efficiency and providing a more seamless customer journey. Transit must be well -integrated with the surrounding streetscape and wider mobility network to help enablie greater uptake through access and convenience. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 239 - Design Guidelines i. Transit stops should be clearly marked and highly visible. ii. Transit shelters which maximize user comfort and extreme weather protection should be provided where possible, prioritizing areas with higher transit ridership (Fig. 81). Transit shelters should include comfortable seating, pedestrian -scaled lighting, route information and directional signage. iii. Direct and barrier -free connections should be established between transit shelters and adjacent sidewalks. Sidewalks and boulevard multi -use paths should pass behind transit shelters. iv. Transit stops shall have safe access via appropriate street crossings, including controlled intersections x. where possible. vi. Where bicycle lanes and cycle tracks pass a transit stop, on -road interaction between cyclists and buses, as well as passengers boarding or waiting for transit, should be minimized to avoid conflict. vii. Secure bicycle parking and storage spaces should be provided at transit stops to increase multi -modal options and encourage active transportation. viii. The exploration of energy efficient technologies to provide light and heat at transit shelters is encouraged. ix. Transit stops can have a role in supporting overall placemaking objectives. Enhanced design and sensitive placement of transit stops should be used to provide key entrances to major destinations. Transit stop placement should be considered and implemented in coordination with roadway construction to streamline transit infrastructure inclusion. v. Transit shelters should be located to avoid impeding pedestrian movement on adjacent sidewalks. Figure 81. Heated bus shelter, Fort McMurray, Canada (photo credits: National Post) - 240 - 4.5 Street Types A well-functioning street network is integral to ensuring the speedy and safe movement of people and goods thorough the corridor and node. The proposed street network of the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node provides for safe, accessible and convenient movement of pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles and transit users throughout the area. A number of new public and private streets are proposed, each with different functions and characteristics. Upgrades to existing public streets are also recommended. The planned street network is comprised of three hierarchical categories: Primary Streets, Secondary Streets and Service Streets (laneways). The Street Types Plan is illustrated in Figures 83 to 86. This is followed by design guidelines for each of the three categories, key streetscape cross-sections for public and private streets, and recommendations for upgrades to existing streets. Figure 82. Multi -modal street in Brooklyn, New York City, USA (photo credits: New York City Department of Transportation) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 241 - CONNECTIVITY - STREETS - Primanl Streets CPublie) - Primary Streets (Private) - Secondary Streets - Service Streets Potential Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Location Subject to Further Review • Indicative Enhanced Boulevard zP Bight -In • Right -out Access Future & Planned Connectlen Subject to EA Rouge National Urban Park East Woodlends Palk r. --A Figure 83. Rougemount Precinct Street Types Plan CONNECTIVITY - STREETS Mini Primary Streets (Public) - Primary Streets (Private) - Secondary Streets - Service Streets 0 Potent Ial Controlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - Location Subject to Further Review ar Indicative Enhanced Boulevard zP Right -In Right -out Recess Future & Planned Connection Subject to EA Erni 1. Stteud Pork Shavers! Asa. 100m Figure 84. Whites Precinct Street Types Plan rtya`i N� - 242 - room CONNECTIVITY -STREETS IMIN Primary Streets CPublicS - Primary Streets (Private) alma Secondary Streets - Service Streets Potential Cantrnlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - location Sub}ect to Further Review • Indicative Enhanced Boulevard zl' Right -In ,Right -out • Access 4.. a+ Future & Planned Connection Subject to EA Former Village of Dunbarton FronchmarY Say JL Figure 85. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Street Types Plan CONNECTIVITY - STREETS R Primary Streets (Public) - Primary Streets (Private) - Secondary Streets - Service Streets Potential Cantmlled Intersection and Pedestrian Crossing - LOcatIon Sub}ect to Further Review ar Indicative Enhanced Boulevard if Right -In ,Right -out • Access 4..0- - Future & Planned Connection Subject to EA Diana Rio*** of W.I.s Pule. Figure 86. Brock Precinct Street Types Plan •Connection under review Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines -243- 4.5.1 Primary Streets Primary streets are higher -order streets which help facilitate safe and efficient vehicular, cyclist, transit and pedestrian movement. Primary streets consist of primary streets that are proposed to be both publicly -owned and primary streets that are proposed to be privately owned. Design Guidelines i. Primary streets have a distinctively urban character, and should be designed as complete streets with consideration given to the needs, safety and comfort of pedestrians, cyclists, transit users and drivers (Fig. 87). ii. Travel lanes should be designed with a minimum width of 3.5 metres and should be provided in both directions of travel. iii. Primary streets should be designed to prioritize public transit facilities, such as stops, shelters and dedicated lanes. iv. Sidewalks should be provided on both sides of the road. They should be designed to accommodate all v. user groups and be a minimum width of 2 metres. Where appropriate, dedicated raised cycle tracks should be provided on primary streets. vi. Landscaping and street furniture zones should be provided on both sides of the street to provide a comfortable public realm. They should be wide enough to accommodate a continuous row of street trees, typically a width of 2 metres. vii. On -street lay-by parking lanes should be provided, where practical, having a minimum width of 2.5 metres. They may be provided on one or both sides of the road. viii. Individual access driveways to multiple properties should be discouraged in favour of shared driveways. ix. Where appropriate, road and right-of-way widths should be reduced in favour of providing active transportation connections, improved transit, and wider boulevards. Figure 87. Requalification of Mermoz Avenue, Lyon, France (photo credits: Gautier Conquet) -244- 4.5.2 Secondary Streets Secondary streets help facilitate vehicular, cyclist and pedestrian movement in areas with lower traffic volumes, while ensuring a positive streetscape experience. Design Guidelines i. Secondary streets are medium or low -capacity roads that act as local connectors, taking on a more neighbourhood -oriented scale and character while creating links between local destinations and surrounding neighbourhood areas (Fig. 88). ii. Travel lanes should be designed with a minimum width of 3.5 metres and may be provided in one or both directions of travel. iii. Where appropriate, dedicated bicycle lanes or shared cycling facilities should be provided on secondary streets. iv. Where appropriate, landscaping and street furniture zones should be provided on secondary streets. They should be wide enough to accommodate a continuous row of street trees, typically a width of 2 metres. v. Sidewalks should be provided on both sides of the road on secondary streets. They should be designed to accommodate all user groups and be a minimum width of 2 metres. vi. On -street lay-by parking lanes should be provided on one side of the road, where practical, having a minimum width of 2.5 metres. vii. Traffic calming measures, including road width reductions and bump -outs, may be considered where appropriate. viii. Where appropriate, road and right-of-way widths should be reduced in favour of providing active transportation connections and wider boulevards. Figure 88. Market Street, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: DTAH) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines -245- 4.5.3 Service Streets and Laneways Design Guidelines v. i. Service streets and laneways should be considered in key areas where a street -oriented built form with continuous active frontages is desired, to allow for buildings to be placed closer to the street edge so that servicing functions can be allocated at the rear of properties. ii. Travel lanes should be designed with a minimum width of 3.5 metres and should be provided in one or both directions of travel. iii. A sidewalk should be provided on one side of a service street or laneway. iv. The use of permeable surface materials is encouraged within service streets and laneways. Service streets and laneways should be considered as pedestrian corridors, and should be designed with the pedestrian experience in mind. Where appropriate, the rear facade of buildings should be similar in quality (i.e. materials, articulation) to the front facade. vi. Where possible, soft landscaping should be incorporated into the design of service streets and laneways. Planters, shrubs and vegetation strips are encouraged (Fig. 89). "Milne With Gll�llll �� Figure 89. Lower River Street in the West Donlands, Toronto, Canada (photo credits: Google Maps) - 246 - 4.5.4 New Public Streets A number of new public streets are proposed within the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. All new proposed public streets are primary streets. These will provide greater circulation throughout the precincts by developing new connections, forming new block patterns, consolidating access on Kingston Road, providing alternative access off Kingston Road, providing permeability within larger sites, and creating new development frontages. Development sites will identify lands to be conveyed as public streets in identified locations as shown conceptually through the Intensification Plan. The location of new public streets is flexible provided the overall block pattern is achieved, the achievement of minimum and maximum block sizes on the development site and adjacent sites is not compromised, and appropriate intersection spacing is maintained. In line with existing public streets, these new streets should provide strong public amenities and opportunities for active transportation. This includes the provision of sidewalks, cycle paths or bicycle lanes, landscape and furniture zones, and enhanced boulevards. The following illustrative diagrams (Figures 90-92) show streetscape cross-sections for new public streets in the Whites, Dunbarton/Liverpool and Brock Precincts. Proposed P.O.W. (17.0 -19.0m) 2.00 2.00 2.00 7.00 Sidewalk Landscape Bike Lane Road ttt 2.00 2.00 2.00 Bike Lane Landscape Sidewalk Note: The right-of-way configuration may be revised to provide lay-by parking. Figure 90. Whites Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New East-West Public Streets Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 247 - Proposed P.O.W. (17.0. 19.0m} f A t*1 2.00 2.00 2.00 7.00 2.00 I 2.00 2.00 Sidewalk Landscape Bike Lane Road Bike Lane Le ndscape Sidewalk Note: The right-of-way configuration may be revised to provide lay-by parking. Figure 91. Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New East-West Public Street 3L ? Proposed R.O.W. (17.0 -19.0m) 2.00 2.00 2.00 7.00 2.00 I 2.00 Sidewalk Landscape Bike Lane Road 2.00 Bike Lane Landscape Sidewalk Note: The right-of-way configuration may be revised to provide lay-by parking. Figure 92. Brock Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New Public Street Linking the North and South Development Parcels - 248 - 4.5.5 New Private Streets As with new public streets, the development of new private streets is key to enabling higher -density intensification and increasing multi -modal access for pedestrians, cyclists, transit users and drivers. New proposed private streets include both primary, secondary and service streets. They are identified on the Street Type Plans as 'Primary Streets (Private)', 'Secondary Streets', and 'Service Streets'. Private streets are designed to similar municipal standards as public streets, but remain in private ownership. Private streets must provide the same high-quality public realm and streetscape experience as public streets, are expected to adopt similar treatments and aesthetics to ensure that a uniform streetscape character is maintained across the precinct. This includes soft landscaping, street furniture, active transportation infrastructure, and other public amenities. Development sites will provide lands for the development of private roads. The location of these roads is flexible as the overall block pattern is achieved, the achievement of minimum and maximum block sizes on the development site and adjacent sites is not compromised, and appropriate intersection spacing is maintained. Private landowners shall be responsible for ongoing maintenance to ensure that publicly accessible spaces remain in a state of good repair. The following illustrative diagrams (Figures 93-94) show streetscape cross-sections for new private streets throughout the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node. Proposal R.O.W. 015,5 - 175m) 2.00 2.00 Sidewalk Landscape 7.00 2.00 4.00 Landscape Two.W y Multi -ma Path Note: The right-of-way configuration may be revised to provide lay-by parking. Figure 93. Whites Precinct, Dunbarton/Liverpool Precinct and Brock Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New Private Streets Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 249 - lir.rr'. Proposed R.O.W. (24.0m) 1 2.00 2.00 2.00 . 2.50 7.00 2.50 2.00 2.00 2.00 Sidewalk Landscape Bike Lane Leahy Perking Layby Parking Bike Lane Landscape Sidewalk Note: The right-of-way configuration may be revised to provide lay-by parking. Figure 94. Brock Precinct Streetscape Cross Section - New Private Street from Brock Road to Beechlawn Park or other New Private Streets - 250 - 4.5.6 Existing Streets As the corridor intensifies, there are a number of planned or existing roadways that require alterations and/or additions to better reflect the vision of the corridor. These include: Kingston Road, Brock Road, Walnut Lane and Pickering Parkway. Kingston Road To bolster its character as a distinct urban avenue and enhance connectivity for pedestrians and cyclists, Kingston Road is recommended to adopt enhanced landscaping treatments and introduce additional active transportation facilities. The street is currently part of a Metrolinx-led planning, design and engineering study in anticipation of a proposed BRT route running between Scarborough Town center and Downtown Oshawa. The proposed streetscape cross-section for Kingston Road is shown in Figure 95. The cross-section features four travel lanes, one left -turn lane, and a 7 -metre bi- directional transit way with 4.2 metre median platform. There are also cycling lanes, sidewalks and landscape zones on either side. It is recommended that a 2m cycle track and treed and landscaped planting area be implemented on both 0.9 2.2 0.6 3LVD BLVD BUFFER 1.8 SIDEWALK { 1.50m CYCLING TREE LIGHT/HP — LANE 3.35 _ I 3.35 THRU THRU LANE LANE 8.20 45.00 sides of Kingston Road through road widening via redevelopment. This landscaped area is recommended to include street trees, street furniture, and planting strips. Brock Road Brock Road is a significant street which carries pedestrian, cyclist and vehicular traffic. The streetscape is recommended to be improved to create a more enjoyable experience for users travelling south from Kingston Road towards the Specialty Retailing Node. Additional street trees should be incorporated on the east side of Brock Road to provide shade and comfort for pedestrians. Figure 96 shows the current condition along Brock Road. Walnut Lane Subject to an Environmental Assessment, it is recommended that Walnut Lane be expanded eastwards to connect to Liverpool Street. This will create an improved connection between Walnut Lane and the eastern portion of the precinct, taking advantage of a connection with the new internal public road. 34.00 Pavement Distance 8.20 1 55 ISLAND 3.15 LEFT TURN LANE 3.50 3.50 7.00 TRANSITWAY 4 SHY DISTANCE 0.50 4.20 3.35 PLATFORM THRU THRU LANE LANE 0.6 BUFFER Ir 1.50m CYCLING LANE 2.2 BLVD 0.9 1.8 BLVD SIDEWALK/ STREETLIGHT HP Figure 95. Kingston Road Cross Section - this is only an approximation, the cross-section will be determined through the Durham -Scarborough BRT TPAP study (photo credits: Region of Durham) Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 251 - Figure 96. Existing Streetscape along Brock Road (photo credits: Google Maps) Furthermore, Walnut Lane should be improved as a key pedestrian and cyclist route. It is proposed to incorporate a multi -use path on one side of the road, with space for a generous landscaping zone to further improve the aesthetics of the street. Figure 97 shows the current condition along Walnut Lane. Pickering Parkway Within the Brock Precinct, enhanced active transportation infrastructure is recommended for Pickering Parkway. This can be implemented through three proposed options. The first option is a raised cycle tracks and a landscape and furniture zone on both sides of the road, the second option is a single -lane MUP facility on both sides of the road, and the third option is a two-way MUP on one side. Figure 98 shows the current condition along Pickering Parkway. Figure 99 shows a cross-section of the planned reconfiguration of Pickering Parkway as part of the Notion Road / Highway 401 Overpass EA, which features streetscape enhancements similar to the first proposed option. Figure 97. Existing Streetscape along Walnut Lane (photo credits: Google Maps) I. _ Figure 98. Existing Streetscape along Pickering Parkway (photo credits: Google Maps) HOUSE SETBACK NORTH PICKERING PARKWAY CROSS SECTION STATION A -A 10+200 PICKERING PARKWAY 26. 0 SOUTH 6.25 WESTBOUND LANE VARIES VARIES 3.50 .0 (LEFT I EASTBOUND I BOULEVARD WALK PANE LANE 0.8 m OF SET EXISTING R.O.W. CONCRETE CURB CONCRETE CURB Figure 99. Notion Road / Highway 401 Overpass EA - eastern part of Pickering Parkway -252- This page has been Intentionally left blank. Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines -253- -254- 5.0 Illustrative Blocks 5.1 Introduction 5.2 Mid -Block Sites 5.3 Intersection Sites Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines -255- 5.1 Introduction The Urban Design Guidelines aim to support the implementation of the Kingston Road Corridor and Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Plan by providing design recommendations to support the creation of successful neighbourhoods consistent with the Vision outlined in Section 1.3. To support these recommendations and guide policymakers in the implementation process, demonstration plans have been developed showing illustrative diagrams for mid -block and intersection sites. These illustrative plans show how discrete design guidelines can be applied comprehensively to support the overall function of the block, and particularly the interface between private development and the public realm. It encourages a `kit -of -parts' approach which allows for greater flexibility in certain elements of the built form, while ensuring qualty design consistent with the objectives of the Intensification Plan. The plan diagrams on the left-hand pages illustrate street and block configurations, as well as accesses and connections between sites. The massing diagrams on the right-hand pages demonstrate a built form scenario including the placement and orientation of a mix of building types. Both diagrams reference specific design principles outlined in Sections 2 to 4 in this document, which are referenced with colour-coded call -outs. All block plans are illustrative in nature. These demonstrations should not be interpreted as the only feasible scenario for each block. - 256 - The following legend items are used in the demonstration plans in Figures 100 to 103. Pedestrian Connection 4 Enhanced Existing Public Realm 1 A 1 Vehicular Access illi II1I1 POPS err Streetwall 4, 4, 4, Spill -out Spaces v /A Commercial Frontage Required (Primary Frontage) Commercial Frontage Recommended (Secondary Frontage) 5 • Preferred Location for Servicing • References to Sections 2.0 Built Form, 3.0 Place -Making and 4.0 Connectivity in this report Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 257 - 5.2 Mid -Block Sites Mid -Block sites are found throughout the corridor along Kingston Road, Brock Road, Pickering Parkway and within larger lots on new proposed public streets. The following example is in the Whites Precinct, on the south side of Kingston Road and to the east of Whites Road. 41110 Primary Frontage is encouraged along certain streetscapes (i.e. in this block, along the south side of Kingston Road). In these areas, a high proportion of retail uses with a strong street -related presence is desired. 0 POPS are encouraged between buildings to break up streetwall homogeneity and add variety and/or variation to the block. These POPS should incorporate a diverse range of active programming, and can include spill -out uses from adjacent developments. They should be highly accessible from pedestrian connections and usable by residents. Kingston Road Pedestrian access is encouraged to be provided through mid -block sites via pedestrian walkways and POPS. These access routes facilitate connectivity from one end of the site to another (i.e. in this block, access is provided from the southern portion of the site near Highway 401 to Kingston Road and the open space in the northeast end of the site. Landscaped setbacks may assist in creating more visible entrances to buildings and gathering spaces in areas where the pedestrian boulevard is limited. Natural heritage features are encouraged to be buffered by open spaces with compatible uses that encourage a naturalized environment. These areas should incorporate significant landscaping. On -street parking with landscaped treatments on the boulevards is encouraged. Large surface parking lots are discouraged, with main parking preferred below ground or in parking structures. Access points off Kingston Road should be minimized, where possible, with consolidated rear accesses provided through private service streets. �tali�ri �tigm.m._.•1ms ms Ums ms •I s..mg�',�� MI� ti 2.13 ,.. ,. -... ..A,MF .,. 25in offset from Kingston Road me.{fian _ ._ ._ __ ._ ._ ._ ._ ._ ._ ._ _ ._ ._ private boulevard _ _ _ .figVer RHNr.. ea - . ;0XF 3.8 al a �3 4,x-4 4 4 4 4 ervice street : S ; TOWER 14m offset from Highway Figure 100. Plan diagram illustrating design principles at a mid -block site - 258 - 46. Site Objectives Mid -Block Sites should maintain the streetwall of the neighbourhood by breaking up the facade in relation to the scale of the neighbourhood. For example, such breaks will be more frequent in Rougemount to maintain a small-town main street feel, whereas they will be less frequent in the Whites Precinct where the overall neighbourhood scale is much larger. In addition, within the Whites Precinct where the streetwall has considerable length, the buildings should be pulled apart to create POPS to serve as mid block connections and to add spill out spaces closely integrated with the public realm of Kingston Road. • • 'i Regular breaks seetwall contribute variety and van streetwall and in« 2.12 permeability wifhi Conne '.n an n.. al heritag • `1�_= �.� Primary Frontage to accommodate -large format retail uses including departme stores, furniture stores, etc. De\\elopment'`F enco`` ur,aged to seek sustainable practic such as green roofi Second have ac sensitivi needs a •P__, ra d ny and rela ing to surrounding•. ilfiings, to s pport open space pro framing ankl promote �. �. safety 1 I 1 cessibility to Frontage to ve frontage with „.• to residential•'" d comfort Secondary Street for medium or low-c4pacity transportation. Primary " -et to be designed with consider. . , to needs, safety and comfo = pedestrians, cyclists, tr. - s and drivers Sidewalks t6 be de to provide a clear pa h to users • s to loading arrdjserviefhg thin the blockfioin local inimize imbact on n realm .. \ ., CID \\ ,, ,.; Street parking strategically designed to minimize the need for parking lots 1Ve . bui d ngglo be itive to adjacent strets and open spaces Figure 101. Massing diagram illustrating design principles at a mid -block site Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 259 - 5.3 Intersection Sites Intersection sites are found throughout the Intensification Plan at the crossings of major roads, minor roads and new internal roads. The below example is located in the Brock Precinct. It is a large site that has been divided into multiple blocks and contains a variety of intersection sites, including one related to a gateway. • • • Primary Frontage is encouraged to provide a fine grain of active uses at grade, including retail and other public uses. POPS, including parks and urban squares, are encouraged to provide valuable amenity space internally within development blocks. Dependent on location, they are may be surrounded or enclosed by buildings on multiple sides. Gateway plazas are located at key high -traffic intersections. Open space should be highly accessible from pedestrian connections. O Pedestrian access should be provided through pedestrian paths and sidewalks with enhanced boulevards with ample landscape and street furniture. O Planned cycling facilities should connect to existing cycling routes in order to increase multi -modal mobility choices for residents and visitors. ® Additional trees are recommended to be incorporated within the existing streetscape to provide shaded access for pedestrians and users travelling to specialty retailing locations south of Pickering Parkway. O Tall buildings are recommended to be located at gateway locations. Gateways should incorporate enhanced site and building design to reinforce their prominent locations. 0 Block sizes should be designed to accomodate for permeability within the neighbourhood and increase ease of movement for pedestrians and cyclists. 4I 11111111// 11 11 11 11 T 1 Figure 102. Plan diagram illustrating design principles at an intersection site - 260 - Site Objectives Intersection sites are prominent sites seen from multiple vantage points, and as such require enhanced design attention based on their location within the precinct. For example, if they are at a main intersection identified as a gateway, the building articulation should create a sense of arrival into the neighbourhood with more refined bases and towers that guide your eye up, or artwork and landscapes that can be seen from a distance. At more internal locations, the built form of the towers can be more subtle and modest and artwork should be more geared towards the pedestrian experience due to less of a need to be prominent from a distance. Secondary Frontage with sensitivity to residential eeds and comfort rindary Frontage providi focal hub in the Corrid through-cpncentratiop o pedestrian��ctivity retail facilities and`commu menit s • ay Plaza to be ally and vi ually ted to public str ycling network critical to 77providing residents and users with multi modal 7 7 mobility options Pr ry a Stre a distinctive' character de prioritize publi itie 7.7 Gateways and gateway �' / buildings should create —y7 a sense of arrival, contributing to the image and identity of the area. POPS for public and/or community gatherings to have easy physical and visual access Design opportunities to reduce the carbon footprint such as green roofs and solar panels are recommended Figure 103. Massing diagram illustrating design principles at an intersection site Kingston Road Corridor for City of Pickering 1 Urban Design Guidelines - 261 - Attachment #1 to Report #PLN 26-19 J ALTONA ROAD 1❑ %ID o t Ca FINCH_ AVENUE a1 I 5{ IJ �qIFD0gal �� �,I��I�—L1I D� � � a0 pi. - I,�fir,1 �o �� ' ' i ❑ i1! — �� n LL SGP° --. a `' i w Cl- I I = w ' _ _,2 ,,,, rdi , 11 10 , /11.61 JLJJ� ME1 i\-.( Y 4 HW1 1 I r iltb,D \Gill flaJ� BAYLY S, TREET 1 I 1 ,,,,,,,-.. 9 - ii ,.,_--„-IY , . i 4 -7 i), •.t,, El j - I LI—) --_ ' 4,0 ► ..J -� ..-,G -R ,�___L-1 =a❑o FRENCHMAN'S aa- / /�� 'CT , BAY a - ,r !!i\ 111 jj -a �= (L LAKE ONTARIO Kingston Corridor & Specialty Retailing Node Intensification Study Areas Scale: 1:28,000 Key Comments/Concerns and Staff's Response Attachment #2 to Report #PLN 26-19 Key Comments/Concerns Staff's Response The application of a 45 degrees angular plane for Although it is standard practice to apply an angular plane of 45 percent mid -rise buildings adjacent to established low (measured from a point 7.5 metres from the rear property line from a height density properties is deficient in addressing privacy, enjoyment of backyards and aesthetic impacts. of 10.5 metres above the 7.5 metres setback line), it was recognized that this tool would only address potential shadow impacts, but not the concerns about potential privacy and aesthetic impacts. Accordingly, an additional policy recommendations has been included in the policy recommendations related to Mid -Rise Buildings (from 5 to 12 storeys in height) stating that "where shallow redevelopment lots are immediately adjacent to designated established low-density residential properties, the City may also consider the implementation of other regulations to ensure built form compatibility in addition to the application of the angular plane." This recommendation speaks to a more context sensitive approach, recognizing that a one model fits all approach cannot apply to all locations within the Corridor and Node. The Intensification Plan states that opportunities for To address this concern and to provide greater clarity, two policy the greatest heights and densities exist at gateway recommendations were added under Section 3.3.1 (Tall Buildings). The first locations and along Highway 401, as opposed to recommendation states that the general maximum height of tall buildings the proposed policy recommendations and the should not be more than 45 storeys, and at gateway locations and along mapping that do not reflect such opportunities. Highway 401within the Dunbarton/Liverpool and Rougemount precincts the maximum height should be 25 storeys to reflect the precinct character, followed by the following: "If the general intent of the Intensification Plan is met, flexibility with massing and height may be considered on a site specific basis". The Intensification Plan therefore recognizes that one model does not fit all, and that through further detailed assessment and contextual planning possible higher heights could be considered at gateway locations and along Highway 401 within the precincts, provided that the intent of the Intensification Plan is met. Furthermore, the angular plane diagrams that were initially contained in the Draft Intensification Plan, have been removed and will only serve as illustrations in the Urban Design Guidelines on how the angular planes should be used in block planning and review. - 263 - Page 1 Key Comments/Concerns Staff's Response The identification of preferred office locations within the Brock, Dunbarton/Liverpool, and Whites Precincts, and setting certain minimum targets for office development have no basis and have not been substantiated through a market. The preferred office locations shown within the three precincts were selected based on their close proximity to gateways where public transit stops are within easy walking distance. Also, the use of the word "preferred" clearly indicates that other locations are not precluded. Even though the setting of minimum targets for office uses within these precincts was based on a high level analysis of what each precinct may require to function as a "complete community", it is acknowledged that the setting of minimum targets in the Intensification Plan in the absence of a detailed market analysis, may not be appropriate. Accordingly, the minimum office targets were removed from the Draft Intensification Plan. In recognition of the importance of creating local job opportunities in concert with residential intensification and developing complete communities over time, revised language has been included in Section 3.2.1 of the Draft Intensification Plan that: "encourages" major office development to occur at preferred locations; "promotes" the development of office uses within the redevelopment of Mixed Use areas; and "encourages" the City to undertake an office demand study or that the City may also request an office demand study as part of development applications at key locations. The proposed policy recommendation that 25% of new residential units within new construction must be affordable to households of low or moderate income, in keeping with municipal goals, can be misinterpreted as a goal to be met on a site specific basis instead of a City-wide basis. To address this concern the language in Section 3.2.4 (Residential) of the Draft Intensification Plan has been revised to read as follows; "a minimum of 25% of new residential construction is encouraged to be of forms that would be affordable to households of low or moderate income. The revised wording is consistent with policy 6.4 (a) in the Pickering Official Plan, and clarifies that the percentage applies city-wide and not to each site. Concern that the requirement in the Intensification Plan that Primary Retail Frontage Areas (shown in the Intensification Plan Maps) should consist of 75% active ground floor uses and 55% in Secondary Retail Frontage Areas, and the mapping of the Primary and Secondary Retail Frontages are unrealistic and the associated mapping is too prescriptive. To address this concern a number of revisions were included in the Draft Intensification Plan. Firstly, the word "Retail" has been removed from these terms so that they read "Primary Frontages and Secondary Frontages", thereby acknowledging the fact that a retail use may not always be feasible and that other non -retail uses, such as clinics and gyms, may also be appropriate on the ground floor, provided the ground floor of the building is designed to interact with the public realm through elements such as transparent glazing, access doors facing the street, etc. -264- Page 2 Key Comments/Concerns Staff's Response Note: "Primary Frontages" contain a greater consistency and greater number of fine grain active uses at grade, such as retail units with glazing oriented to the street. They are identified as areas where the highest levels of retail activity are desired, whereas "Secondary Frontages" consist of a less continuous presence of publicly -accessible spaces, or more private spaces that still have a strong street -related presence. Secondly, the requirement for active ground floor uses (including service, community and institutional uses, and consolidated office and residential entrances) within Primary Frontage Areas have been reduced from 75% to 60%, and within Secondary Frontages from 55% to 30%, and are no longer "required" but "encouraged", providing greater flexibility. Thirdly, a number of minor revisions were made to the Intensification Plan map by reducing the length of certain Primary and Secondary Frontage areas in locations where it may be more challenging to be attained. The proposed minimum building separation distances for Low-rise and Mid -rise buildings are called into question and should be reduced. Following further review of the comments and best practices, the proposed recommendations in the Intensification Plan and the guidelines in the Draft UDGs regarding minimum building separations as it relates to Low-rise buildings and Mid -rise buildings were further revised, and language added to provide greater clarity. Also, a new policy recommendation has been added under Section 3.3.3 (Low Rise Buildings) encouraging the City to develop comprehensive low-rise residential design guidelines in support of the development of townhouses and low-rise apartment buildings. The position is taken that all streets on the SmartCentres lands within the Brock Precinct will be privately owned and publicly accessible whereas the Intensification Plan identifies certain streets to be public streets. Although the ultimate street pattern, road configurations and road ownership will only be finalized through a more detailed review of the subject lands (which could be at the time of the City -initiated Official Plan Amendment or when a development application is submitted), the position that is being maintained in the Intensification Plan and the Draft Urban Design Guidelines is that certain future key road connections, which forms the backbone for traffic circulation for multiple transportation modes, accesses to multiple high density, mixed use developments, parks and amenities, and conduits for underground municipal services, should be in public ownership to provide and maintain a sustained level of service to the future population in the precinct. The public ownership and maintenance of these roads will ensure that they are developed and maintained to City standards. - 265 - Page 3 Key Comments/Concerns Staff's Response The Draft UDGs have been further revised (under Section 4.5.4 New Public Streets), to clarify that the location of new public streets is flexible provided the overall block pattern is achieved, the achievement of minimum block sizes on the development sites and adjacent sites is not compromised, and appropriate intersection spacing is maintained. It is felt that certain new roads in the Intensification Plan should be identified as Primary Public Streets instead of Secondary Streets (private streets). This response must be read in conjunction with the previous point. The purpose of the proposed Public Streets in the Intensification Plan is to provide a new and improved road network for multiple modes of transportation, providing access to multiple development blocks, and serving as right of ways (conduits) for underground municipal infrastructure, integrated with a secondary network of private roads and laneways. Although the Intensification Plan reflects a logical hierarchy and network of roads, the Plan does not preclude alternative options from being considered. Furthermore, staff is aware of the fact the right of way width of a public road is typically wider than that of a private road, which validates the concern that developable lands would be lost through redevelopments. To offset the loss of land due to proposed future public roads, the City may, in addition to stratified parking arrangements, also consider increasing the permissible floor space index and density within development blocks without netting out the future public road areas, and/or by reducing building setbacks, where viable. The opinion is expressed that the provision of publicly accessible privately owned open spaces should be considered an appropriate replacement for the required provision of public parkland on the SmartCentres lands, whereas the Intensification Plan identifies two new public parks on the subject lands. The opinion is also expressed that the open spaces should be open to strata arrangements to accommodate private underground parking and subsurface structures. The proposed public parks shown on the SmartCentres lands in the Brock Precinct, will not only service immediately adjacent developments, but a broader public consisting of residents from within and outside the precinct, employees and business customers. The broader purpose and size of the proposed public parks, which allows for various programming and events, is more befitting to public ownership, maintenance and programming, and eliminate concerns regarding long-term maintenance costs, year-round accessibility, and the complications associated with service and access cross easements to serve multiple development blocks. -266- Page 4 Key Comments/Concerns Staff's Response To offset the loss of lands for public park purposes, a policy recommendation was added under Section 3.5.9 (Parking) of the Intensification Plan stating that underground parking beneath the City's roads and parks may be considered, provided property owners enter into an agreement subject to terms and conditions acceptable to the City. This is similar to a policy that was adopted for City Centre redevelopments. The implementation of the Intensification Plan could have a detrimental impact on existing businesses and the planning for complete communities. Consideration should be given to reserving a certain percentage of the land base for employment opportunities and to optimize intensification rather than maximizing intensification. The nature of retail and shopping is changing, and staff have noticed that more recent redevelopment concepts along the corridor and within the node consist mainly of medium and/or high density residential proposals with limited or no non-residential or commercial components. Although the City cannot dictate or control the market conditions for local retail and businesses, it can create a revised land use policy framework, coupled with a zoning by-law that could facilitate and promote mixed use development and the development of a complete community. The City may also consider other tools, such as community improvement plans, tax and development charges rebates to incentivize the development of certain uses. Accordingly, the following policy recommendations have been included in the Intensification Plan: "Redevelopment shall seek to accommodate residential, retail and or other non-residential uses in a form and scale that are complimentary to the vision of the mixed-use corridor and node", and under Section 5.2 (Future Studies) it is recommended that "the City initiate a program to engage local businesses along the corridor and in the node to consider matters such as business retention and expansion needs in a changing retail environment." The preservation of the Post Manor (located at the corner of Brock and Kingston Roads), the only designated heritage structure in the study area, needs more emphasis, and language should be included to clarify that the City would not be supportive of moving or removing buildings of heritage significance without first studying the properties for their significance. Language has been incorporated in the Intensification Plan speaking to the significance of the Post Manor, and the proposed policy recommendation under Section 3.3.8 (Heritage Buildings) was revised to confirm the importance of studies for heritage merit and potential designation or listing, and to clarify that the use of other avenues to address buildings with heritage significance, e.g. moving them to other locations or removing and replacing them with a plaque describing their heritage significance, are last resort options and not suggestions. - 267 - Page 5 Key Comments/Concerns Staff's Response The Intensification Plan figures and 3-D model demonstrations, and the angular plane diagrams in the UDGs are being interpreted as too prescriptive, offering little or no flexibility. The maps and 3-D illustrations of each precincts in the Intensification Plan illustrate and articulate the vision and objectives for the study area. They are visual demonstrations of one manner in which the Corridor and Node could potentially built out over time, and do not preclude alternative built form and height arrangements, provided that the alternative proposals are generally consistent with the vision and key objectives for the Corridor and Node. Various revisions have been made to figure labels and text to clarify that the figures, angular plane diagrams, and 3-D model diagrams are illustrative and not prescriptive. Also to be noted, with regard to the angular plane diagrams, is that each one is based on a specific cross section location in each precinct (as shown in figures 13, 15, 17 and 19 in the Draft UDGs) and does not reflect a condition that can be homogeneously applied across a precinct. The language used in the Intensification Plan and UDGs is too prescriptive, and there should be a degree of flexibility in its interpretation. Read together with the previous comment point, the language in various proposed policy recommendations and draft urban design guidelines were softened from "shall" to "should"; and by using words such as "shown conceptually" in the text and "illustrative ..." in figure labels to clarify that the maps and figures are for demonstrative purposes and do not preclude other options, provided the general intent of the Plan and the UDGs is met. Through the preparation of the Official Plan Amendment, staff will consider the use of more prescriptive policy language, where it is warranted and appropriate. The Intensification Plan lacks direction regarding the maintenance of existing land use permissions and to permit modest expansion. The Intensification Plan recognizes that the redevelopment of the corridor and node may take a long time. Section 3.2.5 "Transition of Use Over Time" was intentionally included to address this issue. It does not include permissions per se and does not provide direction on the extent of minor expansions to "legal non -conforming" uses that may be permitted, because these matters are typically addressed through Official Plan policies or zoning by-law regulations. - 268 - Page 6 Key Comments/Concerns Staff's Response Furthermore, there are certain uses within the Corridor and Node that do not complement the long-term vision and objectives for the Corridor and Node, for example car sale lots, warehouses and scrapyards. The Intensification Plan encourages these uses to locate elsewhere in the City, and discourage the expansion of these uses, because an expansion would further entrench uses that are incompatible with the vision for intensification and more compact development forms. Discouraging these types of uses to continue or expand does not prevent them from continuing as "legal non -conforming" uses. The Region indicated that, given the scale and Firstly, it is important to point at that the Intensification Plan is a visionary density of recent development proposals, there may document, that needs to be implemented through various planning tools be water and sanitary service capacity constraints e.g. Official Plan policies and zoning regulations, and other initiatives such to accommodate future growth and intensification as infrastructure projects and development charges. within the Corridor and Node. One of the goals and objectives approved as part of the new Vision for the Corridor and Node, is to encourage the optimization of infrastructure and to ensure that intensification can be supported by existing infrastructure capacity and that additional infrastructure is phased in step with development. To plan and phase additional infrastructure in step with development can be challenging, because the level of service required is influenced by the anticipated level of demand, which is partially driven by development applications and market forces. Although it is difficult the predict the overall capacity of services required, the population and employment estimates that were calculated for each precinct through the development of the Recommended Intensification Scenario would be a good starting point to initiate the planning, design and phasing of infrastructure expansion and upgrading in support of the redevelopment and intensification along the Corridor and in the Node. The Intensification Plan does not provide all the answers to infrastructure service available and constraints, but do provide policy recommendations under Sections 3.6.1 — Water, 3.6.2 — Wastewater, and 3.6.3 — Stormwater that speaks to the preparation of Infrastructure Master Plans to ensure a coordinated and integrated approach to providing water, wastewater and stormwater management solutions, and to guide and inform the preparation -269- Page 7 Key Comments/Concerns Staff's Response of future Functional Servicing Reports in support of individual development applications. Furthermore, the Intensification Plan also contains a policy recommendation that private developers should consult early with the City and the Region to ensure infrastructure needs for the planned development can be properly planned, coordinated and integrated with planned infrastructure improvements and development applications. The Intensification Plan should provide direction Section 5.1(Implementation) of the Intensification Plan provides direction regarding the need for cost sharing associated with regarding development phasing, cost sharing and the preparation of context services and new roads that will be shared, and the plans to address the sequencing of development. The Official Plan sequencing of development. Amendment process may further review the introduction of policies specific to cost sharing and the sequencing of development. Note: Since the Draft Urban Design Guidelines goes hand in hand with the Draft Intensification Plan, final revisions made to the Draft Intensification Plan also included corresponding revisions to the Draft Urban Design Guidelines, where applicable. - 270 - Page 8 646/ DICKERING Report to Planning & Development Committee Report Number: PLN 25-19 Date: December 2, 2019 From: Kyle Bentley Director, City Development & CBO Subject: Request for Council's Permission to Develop Lands through Land Severance Marshall Homes Part of Lot 30, Concession 1 South, and Part 1, Plan 40R-10110 (1855 Rosebank Road) Recommendation: 1. That the request made by Marshall Homes, to permit the division of the subject lands being Part of Lot 30, Concession 1 South, and Part 1, Plan 40R-10110 (municipally known as 1855 Rosebank Road) through land severance rather than by draft plan of subdivision, be approved. Executive Summary: Marshall Homes is proposing to develop the subject property located on the east side of Rosebank Road, south of Charnwood Court, municipally known as 1855 Rosebank Road, for a total of 13 lots for detached dwellings (see Location Map and Submitted Conceptual Plan, Attachments #1 and #3). Marshall Homes is requesting authorization from Council to create a total of 13 lots through the land severance process, whereas the Pickering Official Plan limits the number of new lots that can be created by land severance to a maximum of 3. The Pickering Official Plan requires that a property capable of being divided into more than 3 additional lots to be developed by a plan of subdivision, unless Council is satisfied that a subdivision plan is neither appropriate or necessary. On November 1, 2019 a notice was mailed to area residents within 65 metres of the subject property informing them of the proposal, and details of when Council will be considering Marshall Homes request to permit the division of the property through land division. Staff has reviewed the request and has concluded that a draft plan of subdivision is not required. The proposed lots would front existing public roads (Rosebank Road and Dencourt Drive) and all City technical requirements can be secured through conditions of approval for the land severance applications. It is recommended that Council authorize the request to create the lots through the land severance process. Financial Implications: No direct costs to the City are anticipated as a result of the recommendation of this report. - 271 - PLN 25-19 December 2, 2019 Subject: Marshall Homes — 1855 Rosebank Road Page 2 1. Discussion 1.1 Property Description The subject property is located on the east side of Rosebank Road, south of Charnwood Court within the Amberlea Neighbourhood (see Location Map, Attachment #1). The property has an area of approximately 7,800 square metres with approximately 103 metres of frontage along Rosebank Road and 69 metres of frontage along Dencourt Drive. The property currently supports a detached dwelling and contains a significant amount of mature vegetation. Surrounding the subject property to the north, south and east is an established low density residential subdivision consisting of two-storey detached dwellings. Altona Forest Public School is located to the west across Rosebank Road (see Air Photo Map, Attachment #2). 1.2 Applicant's Proposal Marshall Homes has conditionally purchased the subject property with the intention of redeveloping the lands for a total of 13 lots for detached dwellings. Seven lots are proposed to front onto the east side of Rosebank Road, and 6 lots will front onto the west side of Dencourt Drive (see Submitted Conceptual Plan, Attachment #3). No new roads are being proposed. The lots fronting Rosebank Road will have a minimum lot frontage ranging between 13.7 metres and 15.3 metres, and lots fronting Dencourt Drive will have a minimum lot frontage of 13.5 metres, except for Lots 8 and 9. Given the irregular configuration of Lots 8 and 9, these two lots will have a slightly reduced lot frontage of 11.3 metres, but will have a much larger lot area exceeding zoning by-law requirements. 1.3 The proposal conforms to the density requirements of the Official Plan The subject property is within the Amberlea Neighbourhood and is designated "Urban Residential Areas — Low Density Areas" within the Pickering Official Plan. This designation provides for housing and related uses, and a density of up to and including 30 units per net hectare. The proposal will result in a net residential density of approximately 16.6 units per net hectare, which fall within the permitted density range. Schedule IIIB of the Official Plan identifies the subject property as a "Significant Woodland", due to the substantial amount of mature vegetation currently present on the lands. The existing vegetation is an isolated group of mature trees and is not identified as being part of the Natural Heritage System. The policies of the Official Plan require the submission and approval of an Environmental Report as part of the consideration of a development application or site alteration within 120 metres of a significant woodland. The purpose of the evaluation is to determine the ecological function and significance of the natural feature, and determine whether it warrants any protection. Compensation will be required for the loss of any or all of the woodland. Should Council approve the request to create the lots through the land severance process, Marshall Homes will be required to submit an Environmental Report in support of their applications for Land Division. - 272 - PLN 25-19 December 2, 2019 Subject: Marshall Homes — 1855 Rosebank Road Page 3 1.4 The proposed lots generally comply with the existing "S1" zoning The property is currently zoned "S1" within Zoning By-law 3036, as amended by By-law 1929/84. The "S1" zone permits detached dwellings on lots with a minimum frontage of 13.5 metres and minimum lot area of 400 square metres. In 1984, the subject lands were rezoned to "51" with the intention to be redeveloped in the future for detached dwellings continuing the pattern of development of the surrounding subdivision. All of the proposed lots will maintain or exceed the minimum lot frontage and minimum lot area requirements of the "S1" zone with the exception of two lots. Lots 8 and 9 will have a slightly reduced minimum lot frontage of 11.3 metres due to their irregular 'pie shape' configuration. The applicant will be required to submit Minor Variance Applications requesting to reduce the minimum lot frontage to 11.3 metres Lots 8 and 9. Marshall Homes has indicated that they intend to generally conform to all required building setbacks, lot coverage and maximum building height requirements of the "S1" zone category in the construction of the dwellings. 1.5 Council's approval is required to permit the new lots to be created through land severance The Official Plan states that an ownership of land capable of being divided into more than three additional lots is required to be developed by a plan of subdivision, except where it is demonstrated to Council's satisfaction that a plan of subdivision is neither appropriate nor necessary, in which case Council may authorize the development to proceed by land severance. The subject property is capable of being divided into a total of 13 lots. However, the proposed lots will front onto existing roads. The applicant has also indicated that they will utilize existing service connections that are available along Rosebank Road and Dencourt Drive. Should City Council approve the applicant's request to proceed through land severance, the City will have the opportunity to provide comments and recommend conditions of severance to the Region of Durham Land Division Committee. The following table indicates that all technical matters that the City could impose as conditions of approval through a draft plan of subdivision can be addressed through the land severance process: - 273 - PLN 25-19 Subject: Marshall Homes — 1855 Rosebank Road December 2, 2019 Page 4 Technical Requirements Draft Plan of Subdivision Land Division Application Legal Agreement securing for: • road and boulevard restoration • sidewalks (where required) • servicing connections • boulevard tree planting • driveway locations and entrances • erosion and sediment control • incidental damage to adjacent properties during construction ✓ (Subdivision Agreement) ✓ (Development Agreement) City Review Fees (Engineering & Planning) ✓ ✓ Detailed Grading, Drainage & Servicing Plans ✓ ✓ Geotechnical Report ✓ ✓ Parkland Contribution ✓ ✓ Environmental Report ✓ ✓ Tree Inventory and Tree Removal/Preservation Plan and tree compensation ✓ ✓ Construction Management/Mitigation Measures including: • Temporary Fencing • Worker Parking Areas • Dust Control • Site Access ✓ ✓ Zoning Compliance ✓ ✓ Removal of the existing structures ✓ ✓ Pre -Condition Survey of Adjacent Properties ✓ ✓ Dwelling Addresses ✓ ✓ New Privacy Fencing ✓ ✓ Considering there are no new roads or any other municipal infrastructure required as a result of the proposal and the City can address all technical matters related to the development through the request of Land Division conditions, the City Development Department is satisfied that the proposed development is appropriate to be created through the land severance process. 1.6 Future applications to create the proposed lots On October 29, 2019, Marshall Homes submitted applications for Land Division to the Region of Durham in order to create the proposed lots. The Land Division Committee will consider the applications for severance on December 9, 2019. Public notification will be circulated by the Region notifying area residents of the meeting and the opportunities to provide comments. -274- PLN 25-19 December 2, 2019 Subject: Marshall Homes — 1855 Rosebank Road Page 5 The applicant will also need to submit applications for Minor Variance to the City of Pickering to reduce the minimum lot frontages for Lots 8 and 9. Additional public notification will be provided to area residents when the City's Committee of Adjustment considers the variance applications and an opportunity for area residents to express their comments will be available at that time. Attachments 1. Location Map 2. Air Photo Map 3. Submitted Conceptual Plan Prepared By: Approved/Endorsed By: Original Signed By Cody Morrison Planner II Original Signed by Nilesh Surti, MCIP, RPP Manager, Development Review & Urban Design CM:Id Original Signed By Catherine Rose, MCIP, RPP Chief Planner Original Signed By Kyle Bentley, P. Eng. Director, City Development & CBO Recommended for the consideration of Pickering City Council Original Signed By Tony Prevedel, P. Eng. Chief Administrative Officer - 275 - Attachment #1 to Report #PLN 25-19 • UirallIMMT C3 0 Summerpark Crescent Woodsmere Crescent S.m. Woodsmere Park 0 U 0 0 E 0 0 0 0 0 Subject I Lands Altona Forest Public School St. Elizabeth Seton Catholic School > 0 N Q 00 2 0 0 N 0 N > c N N 0 1 Ashfield Court 1 Strouds Lane • 0 :roadoak Cres Highbush Public School Amberlea Park City/ PICKERING City Development Department Location Map Applicant: Marshall Homes Property Description: Pt Lot 30, Con 1 South, and Pt 1, 40R-10110 (1855 Rosebank Road) Cd The Corporation of the City of Pickenng Produced on part) under license from. O Queens Printer, Ontario Ministry of Natural Resource All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; O Teranet Enterprises Inc. and its suppliers all rights reserved., y Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved Date: Nov. 05, 2019 SCALE: 1:4,000 THIS IS NOTA PLAN OF SURVEY L:\PLANNING\01-MapFiles\LD\2019\LD XX -19 Marshall Homes\LD xx-19_LocationMap. mxd Attachment #2 to Report #PLN 25-19 '42$111MiiilliirA; ri 1f14: , ki: ,c9 LiiWKII.. i COI colale ._ Woodsmere_Crescent Ashfield Court Studs Lane rid 1. C4 Air Photo Map b/ PICKE R1 NG City Development Department Applicant: Marshall Homes Property Description: Pt Lot 30, Con 1 South, and Pt 1, 40R-10110 (1855 Rosebank Road) Date: Nov. 05, 2019 © The Corporation of the City of Pickenng Produced (in part) under license from .©Queens Printer,Ontano Ministry of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.;© Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, Department of Natural Resources. All rights reserved.; ©Teranet Enterprises Inc. and itssuppliers all nghts reserved.; fillpFy Assessment Corporation and its suppliers all rights reserved.; SCALE. �.4r��� THIS IS NOT A PLAN OF SURVEY L:\PLANNING\01-MapF Hes \LD\2019\LD XX -19 Marshall Homes\LD xx-19_AirPhoto.mxd Attachment #3 to Report #PLN 25-19 Rosebank Road 1 533.4 m2 .38.9 c, 2 533.1 m2 38.9 12 525.4 m2 38.9 c)I 3 595.4 m2 38.9 4 595.5 m2 38.9 5 595.5 m2 38.9 6 595.6 m2 38.9 7 595.6 m2 38.9 N UI 11 525.4 m2 38.9 10 525.4 m2 38.9 9 606.9 m2 4'\ 3 01 8 1015.6 m2 17.7 Dencourt Drive 1.9 4.7 5.3 PICKERING City Development Department Submitted Conceptual Plan Applicant: Marshall Homes Property Description: Pt Lot 30, Con 1 South, and Pt 1, 40R-10110 (1855 Rosebank Road) FULL SCALE COPIES OF THIS PLAN ARE AVAILABLE FOR VIEWING AT THE CITY OF PICKERING CITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT. DATE: Oct. 29, 2019 L:\Planning\01-MapFiles\LD\2019 - 278 -