Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout02/21/2017Final Clarington Planning and Development Committee Agenda Date: February 21, 2017 Time: 7:00 PM Place: Council Chambers, 2nd Floor Municipal Administrative Centre 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, Ontario Inquiries & Accommodations: For inquiries about this agenda, or to make arrangements for accessibility accommodations for persons attending, please contact: Michelle Chambers, Committee Coordinator, at 905-623-3379, ext. 2106 or by email at mchambers(o)_clarington.net. Alternate Format: If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator, at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Audio Record: The Municipality of Clarington makes an audio record of General Government Committee meetings. If you make a delegation or presentation at a General Government Committee meeting, the Municipality will be audio recording you and will make the recording public by publishing the recording on the Municipality's website. Cell Phones: Please ensure all cell phones, mobile and other electronic devices are turned off or placed on non -audible mode during the meeting. Copies of Reports are available at www.clarington.net CIarifl#oII Planning and Development Committee Agenda Date: February 21, 2017 Time: 7:00 PM Place: Council Chambers 1 Call to Order 2 New Business — Introduction Members of Committee are encouraged to provide the Clerk's Department, in advance of the meeting, with a copy of any motion the Member is intending to introduce, (preferably electronic) such that staff could have sufficient time to share the motion with all Members prior to the meeting. 3 Adopt the Agenda 4 Declaration of Interest 5 Announcements 6 Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting 6.1 January 30 Minutes of a Regular Meeting of January 30, 2017 Page 5 Minutes 7 Public Meetings 7.1 Lindvest Applications for Proposed Amendments to the Clarington Page 17 Properties Official Plan, Zoning By-law and a Proposed Plan of Public Meeting Subdivision Applicant: Lindvest Properties (Clarington) Limited Report: PSD -012-17 8 Delegations No Delegations 9 Communications - Receive for Information 9.1 St. Marys Minutes of the St. Marys Cement Community Relations Page 19 Minutes Committee dated September 6, 2016 Page 2 CIarifl#oII Planning and Development Committee Agenda Date: February 21, 2017 Time: 7:00 PM Place: Council Chambers 10 Communications — Direction 10.1 Township of John Paul Newman, Director of Corporate Services, Page 27 Scugog Township of Scugog — Greenbelt of Ontario (Motion for Direction) 10.2 Region of Cheryl Bandel, Acting Regional Clerk, Region of Durham, Page 29 Durham Proposed Amendments to the Greenbelt Area Boundary — Environmental Bill of Rights Registry No. 012-9247 (2017 -COW -33) (Motion for Direction) 11 Presentations No Presentations 12 Planning Services Department Reports 12.1 PSD -012-17 Applications by Lindvest Properties (Clarington) Limited Page 41 to Develop a Former School Block as a 50 Lot Subdivision in Newcastle 12.2 PSD -013-17 Use of Holding Symbols in Rezoning Applications Page 50 12.3 PSD -014-17 An Application by Prestonvale Heights Limited to Create Page 73 a Common Elements Plan of Condominium, 25 Meadowglade Road, Courtice Page 3 CIarifl#oII Planning and Development Committee Agenda Date: February 21, 2017 Time: 7:00 PM Place: Council Chambers 13 New Business — Consideration 14 Unfinished Business 14.1 Addendum to Revised applications by 2399263 Ontario Limited Page 83 Report (Matanda Homes) for a 17 - Unit Draft Plan of Subdivision PSD -070-16 on Gordon Vinson Avenue and Frank Wheeler Avenue in Courtice [Referred from the January 9, 2017 Planning and Development Committee Meeting] 15 Confidential Reports No Reports 16 Adjournment Page 4 Clar*wn Planning and Development Committee Minutes January 30, 2017 Minutes of a meeting of the Planning and Development Committee held on Monday, January 30, 2017 at 7:00 PM in the Council Chambers. Present Were: Mayor A. Foster, Councillor S. Cooke, Councillor R. Hooper, Councillor J. Neal, Councillor C. Traill until 10:20 PM, Councillor W. Woo Regrets: Councillor W. Partner Staff Present: C. Clifford, C. Pellarin, F. Langmaid, L. Benson, J. Gallagher, M. Chambers 1 Call to Order Councillor Woo called the meeting to order at 7:01 PM. 2 New Business — Introduction There were no new business items added to the Agenda. 3 Adopt the Agenda Resolution #PD -019-17 Moved by Councillor Cooke, seconded by Councillor Hooper That the Agenda for the Planning and Development Committee meeting of January 30, 2017 be adopted as presented. Carried 4 Declarations of Interest There were no declarations of interest stated at this meeting. 5 Announcements Members of Committee announced upcoming community events and matters of community interest. -1- 5 Clarbgton Planning and Development Committee Minutes January 30, 2017 6 Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting Resolution #PD -020-17 Moved by Councillor Cooke, seconded by Councillor Traill That the minutes of the regular meeting of the Planning and Development Committee, held on January 9, 2017, be approved. Carried 7 Public Meetings 7.1 Application for a Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Applicant: Nathan Thomas Report: PSD -008-17 Robert Russell, Planner, made a verbal an electronic presentation to the Committee regarding the application. No one spoke in opposition to, or in support of, the application. Nathan Thomas, See Path Group, spoke on behalf of the applicant. He made a verbal presentation to accompany an electronic presentation. Mr. Thomas reviewed the existing and proposed zoning and land survey. He continued by explaining the zoning is urban residential and reviewed the civic addressing. Mr. Thomas advised the Committee that an archaeological report was conducted and it confirmed there were no significant issues. He explained that this home was built in 1887 and has had various reconstructions. Mr. Thomas added that a heritage impact assessment was also completed and determined that the existing house could be demolished as it has not retained its heritage value. He reviewed the existing house retention and provided an over view of the application. Mr. Thomas thanked the Committee and offered to answer any questions. Alter the Agenda Resolution #PD -021-17 Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Cooke That the Agenda be altered to consider Report PSD -008-17, Nathan Thomas on behalf of William and Betty Irving - application to amend the Zoning By-law to facilitate the creation of three single detached lots at 6 Mann Street, Bowmanville, at this time. Carried -2- A• Clar*wa Planning and Development Committee Minutes January 30, 2017 12.1 PSD -008-17 Nathan Thomas on behalf of William and Betty Irving - application to amend the Zoning By-law to facilitate the creation of three single detached lots at 6 Mann Street, Bowmanville Resolution #PD -022-17 Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Cooke That Report PSD -008-17 be received; That the application for rezoning ZBA2016-0027 submitted by Nathan Thomas continue to be processed, including the preparation of a subsequent report; and That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -008-17 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Carried 7.2 Applications for Proposed Amendments to the Clarington Official Plan, Courtice Main Street Secondary Plan and Zoning By-law Applicant: High Street Courtice Inc. Report: PSD -009-17 Anne Taylor Scott, Planner, made a verbal an electronic presentation to the Committee regarding the application. Suzanne Reiner, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. She made a verbal presentation to accompany an electronic presentation. Ms. Reiner advised the Committee that she is representing a number of the residents of Darlington Boulevard, Foxhunt Trail and Kingswood Drive. She explained to the Committee that her two main concerns are with the rezoning of 13 and 15 Darlington Boulevard and with the proposed vehicular access to Darlington Boulevard. Ms. Reiner referred to the Clarington Official Plan and noted the goal of the Plan is to celebrate the history and character of Clarington and that any new development is existing neighbourhoods should respect and reinforce the physical character of the neighbourhood. She reviewed a street view photo of Darlington Boulevard and noted her family moved to the area for the character, large lots and the rural feel. Ms. Reiner continued by stating there are very few areas remaining in Courtice that have properties with large lots. She explained that she is concerned with the rezoning and that two lots will result in 24 units. Ms. Reiner does not believe that this development will conform to the existing neighbourhood design. She added that the Courtice Main Street Secondary Plan has set a minimum target of 60 residential units per gross hectare along Highway 2 and this development will allow for 127 units per hectare. Ms. Reiner reviewed the definition of an R1 designation and asked if 13 and 15 Darlington Boulevard were not purchased, would this development still proceed? She added that 13 and 15 Darlington Boulevard are not included in the Courtice Main Street Improvement Plan Improvement Plan corridor and stated that these properties should remain zoned R1. Ms. Reiner explained to the Committee that the existing commercial -3- Clar*wR Planning and Development Committee Minutes January 30, 2017 development has an impact on the traffic in the area and asked that further traffic studies be conducted as she does not agree with the current traffic review. She added that the local business has caused parking issues, increased speeding and traffic congestion. Resolution #PD -023-17 Moved by Councillor Cooke, seconded by Councillor Hooper That the delegation of Suzanne Reiner be extended for an additional two minutes. Carried Ms. Reiner believes that the vehicular access to Darlington Boulevard will increase the traffic issues. She stated that Darlington Boulevard is being used as a short cut to Olive Street and the 401. Mr. Reiner asked for an additional traffic light to be installed on Highway 2 if this development proceed. She noted that this is a large development and it should not be rushed. Ms. Reiner concluded by asking for no access to Darlington Boulevard, a traffic light to be installed on Highway 2 and for zoning of 13 and 15 Darlington Boulevard to remain R1. Wendy Kates, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. She advised the Committee that she lives just north of where the vehicle access will be on Darlington Boulevard. Ms. Kates explained that she chose her home for the lot, location, and charm. She added that any new homes that have been added to this area blend in with the existing homes in the area. Ms. Kates added that she called the municipality to confirm the R1 zoning in this area. She noted that she is surprised by the traffic in the area and believes that it needs to be decreased and not increased. Ms. Kates explained that the LCBO, Tim Hortons and Shoppers all create additional traffic and make this a dangerous intersection. She stated that this development is unfair to the existing residents, will have a detrimental impact to the area and that the remaining homeowners will be forced to sell for further development. Ms. Kates asked if the land to the east will be developed and stated that she believes the developers will continue to try and purchase and develop more high density housing. She added that she is concerned with the construction traffic as the roads are struggling to accommodate the current level of traffic. Ms. Kates concluded by stating that she believes the two entrances on Highway 2 are sufficient and that there is no need for access off of Darlington Boulevard. She asked for the Members of Committee to reconsider the development and the impact it will have on the existing owner. David Brown, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. He advised the Committee that his main concern is the environmental impact of the proposed development. Mr. Brown explained to the Committee that Farewell Creek is the largest subwatershed in Black Farewell Harmony creek systems. He continued by explaining that this area is over 3700 hectares and has been classified by the Ministry of Natural Resources as a cold water system. Mr. Brown advised the Committee that he is concerned with the area between Tooley Mill and Second Marsh. He noted that this development will be approximately 4.26 hectares and the watershed will be maintained by and underground storage system and sewers. Mr. Brown noted the Oil and Grip -4- 0 Clar*wn Planning and Development Committee Minutes January 30, 2017 Separators (OGS) are being installed and he does not believe they are adequate. He continued by explaining that they will miss many pollutants and contaminants. Mr. Brown explained that flushing water continuously in the creek will affect the water temperature. He added wildlife and the adjacent woodlands will be compromised by this development. Mr. Brown referred to a previous develop east of Farewell Creek that resulted in foundation walls being built very close to the creek. He added that there would be major consequence if these walls began to fail. Mr. Brown does not believe anyone is taking responsibility for the creek system and he advised the Committee that some of the residents are willing to help with the cleanup of the area. He concluded by asking for the ecosystem between Tooley Mill and Second Marsh needs to be protected and that development will have a negative impact to this area. Mr. Brown thanked the Committee and offered to answer questions from the Committee. David White, King Courtice Investments Inc., spoke in opposition to the application. He advised the Committee that he is representing the owners of the commercial plaza containing the LCBO, CIBC, and Swiss Chalet. Mr. White explained that this location has several constraints including the slight slope of Highway 2 being between two signalled intersections. He added that this makes turning difficult and increases traffic in the area. Mr. White noted that it is unfortunate that Darlington Boulevard will be used as the main roadway to alleviate traffic for the proposed development. He added that there were concerns when the LCBO was built with Darlington Boulevard being able to sustain the additional traffic. Mr. White explained that accommodations were made at that time to assist with traffic and parking issues and concerns. He stated that he believes there were errors in the traffic study for the current development and specifically referenced the trip generation portion of the study. Mr. White noted that the additional traffic signal between Darlington Boulevard and Centerfield Drive is not ideal, that the customers in the plaza use Darlington Boulevard to exit to Highway 2 and that he does not feel that the "all turns motion" will continue. He concluded by stating that he does support development however he does not feel this is an ideal location for this development. Susan Rodesky, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. She advised the Committee that she had previously sent a letter outlining her concerns. Ms. Rodesky added that she is not opposed to change but does not believe this proposal is acceptable. She stated that the traffic has drastically increased with the opening of the Esso Gas Station and the LCBO and that will increase with this development. Ms. Rodesky continued by stating that Darlington Boulevard is not a major road and that traffic should be kept to a minimum. She added that she is also concerned with the proposed height of the building and the speeding in the area. Ms. Rodesky concluded by advising the Committee that she is opposed to the application as it is being presented and requested that the access at Darlington Boulevard be removed. She asked the Committee to consider the environmental impact and noted that the issues of partying and garbage in the creek needs to be addressed. T -jay King, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. He advised the Committee that he moved to the area for the rural setting. Mr. King added that both traffic and speeding are a concern. He stated that there were 20,000 cars in a 31 day -5- E Clarftwn Planning and Development Committee Minutes January 30, 2017 timeframe and that is not acceptable for the area. Mr. King concluded by advising the Committee that the entrance on Darlington Boulevard will increase these issues. Jeff Dalziel, spoke in opposition to the application. He advised the Committee that he was here with a friend who resides near Darlington Boulevard. Mr. Dalziel explained that he recently moved from Toronto to Coldstream Drive in Oshawa. He continued by explaining that when the road was widened it resulted in more traffic in the area. Mr. Dalziel advised the Committee that he ended up moving further north to avoid added stress. He concluded by advising the Committee that he feels this development will cause added stress and asked for them to consider the wellbeing of the area residents. Jim Kozak, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. He advised the Committee that he bought his home for the country setting. Mr. Kozak noted that he is concerned with the traffic and the additional stress that this development will cause the area residents. Jeff Shemilt, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. He advised the Committee that he opposes the rezoning as it will not keep with the current neighbourhood design. Mr. Shemilt added that he is concerned with the Darlington Boulevard access and that the proposed parking will not be adequate for the development. Stephanie Commanda, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. She stated that the access to Darlington Boulevard will be directly in line with her driveway. Ms. Commanda added that she is concerned with the lights from the cars will be shining directly into her home and those of her neighbours. Gord Hanlon, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. He advised the Committee that the traffic has increased since the LCBO was built. Mr. Hanlon stated that this development does not fit in to the existing neighbourhood design and he is concerned with the access to Darlington Boulevard. Robert Scott, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. He advised the Committee that he shares the same concerns as the previous delegations. Mr. Scott explained that he previously resided on Tooley Road and moved due to the stress of the new development being built in that area. He continued be stating the traffic is a major issue and the current infrastructure cannot support any additional traffic. Mr. Scott noted that he cuts through Darlington Boulevard and Foxhunt Trail as Highway 2 is too congested with traffic. He referred to the rules and regulations of building new developments in Kanata which includes ensuring there are adequate bike and walking trails. Mr. Scott added that the trails and walkways in Clarington are insufficient, which forces cyclists and runners to use the roadways. He concluded by stating this area should be developed with low density, single detached homes. Roman Zydownyk, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. He advised the Committee that he was speaking in addition to correspondence that he previously submitted to the Planning Department. Mr. Zydownyk noted that he is concerned with -6- 10 Clar*wa Planning and Development Committee Minutes January 30, 2017 the increased traffic in the area. He asked for the Municipality to survey the area resident to determine if they would like their properties to have curbs installed. Mr. Zydownyk asked about the possibility of the Darlington Boulevard access to be gated using a transponder to enter. He noted that the access points to the 401 are Harmony Road and Courtice Road and asked for the Committee to consider requesting that the toll charge be removed from the future Highway 418. Mr. Zydownyk concluded by asking for a Courtice Central Park to be developed behind Tooley Mill Park. Jeffrey Norman, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. He explained that he lives directly next to the proposed development. Mr. Norman advised the Committee that he does not feel this development is consistent with the existing area. He added that Darlington Boulevard is not meant for high density traffic. Mr. Norman asked why three high rise buildings are being developed when there is currently nothing like this in Courtice. He concluded by asking for all of the residents' concerns be considered and for Committee to reconsider this development. Benoit Dugas, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. He advised that he moved to the area for the quiet setting and that it was a dead end street. Mr. Dugas added that, since the LCBO and Esso with the Tim Hortons were built, the traffic has increased. He added that he feels the crime has increased in this area and that this development will negatively affect property values. Mr. Dugas concluded by asking for this development to be built closer to the future Highway 418. Jim Boate, Bike Friendly, spoke to the application. He advised the Committee that he is concerned that this development will have an impact on active transportation in Clarington. Mr. Boate asked for a bike lane to be installed on Highway 2 from Townline Road to Courtice Road and for a bike path in Tooley Mill Park. He added that these bike lanes and paths can lead to the future GO Station. Mr. Boate advised the Committee that the residents should be encourage to use active transportation. He concluded by asking Council to work with the Region of Durham to reduce the speed on Highway 2 in Courtice from 60 to 50 kilometres per hour. Connie Tuck, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. She explained to the Committee that she is concerned with the speeding and traffic in the area. Ms. Tuck advised the Committee that, since the LCBO was built, there has been an increase in traffic, speeding and crime and that adding more people in the area will make it worse. She added that decreasing the speed on Highway 2 will cause further problems on Foxhunt Trail. April Dushene, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. She asked the Members of Committee if they had been to Darlington Boulevard. Ms. Dushene noted that there is a charm to this area and the residents are passionate about where they live. She continued by stating that this development will bring chaos, speeding and traffic to the area. Ms. Dushene explained that she lives at the end of Darlington Boulevard and people continuously use her driveway as a turn around. She added that the speeding and traffic has increased since the LCBO was built. Ms. Dushene concluded by advising -7- 11 Clar*wa Planning and Development Committee Minutes January 30, 2017 the Committee that originally she was not concerned with the development but now that she has received more information, she is now opposed to the development. Vito Deligio, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. He explained to the Committee that he felt very fortunate when he purchased his home. Mr. Deligio advised the Committee that he is continuously getting offers to buy his property. He stated that he does not agree with two large lots being sold and divided into 24 lot. Mr. Deligio added that this area should keep its rural feel. Louis Kaye, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. She advised the Committee that her children have never been able to play on the street. Ms. Kaye added that the traffic has increased since the LCBO was built. She noted that currently the largest building in Courtice is the medical building and this proposed development is more than double that size. Sheila Costanzi, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. She noted her main concern is with the traffic. Ms. Costanzi advised the Committee that she is aware of the Places to Grow Act but does not believe this small area of property on Darlington Boulevard needs to be included. She added that this development does not keep with the current neighbourhood design. Melissa Giroux, local resident, spoke in opposition to the application. She noted that this area has changed drastically in recent years. Ms. Giroux advised the Committee she is concerned with health care services in the area. She explained that, if she goes to the Courtice Health Centre, she regularly has to wait two hours to see a doctor and previously it would only have been a 30 minute wait. Ms. Giroux added that she is concerned with increase crime, drinking and driving and does not believe there is a need for high density housing in this area. Sandra Buchan, spoke to the application on behalf of a friend that lives in the area. She explained that her friend often has vehicles blocking her driveway and there have been occasions where the LCBO delivery truck has nearly tipped over in front of her home. Ms. Buchan added the delivery trucks using the laneway behind the LCBO leave tracks in the grass. She concluded by advising the Committee that the lights from the plaza are a concern and the access to Darlington Boulevard will create further problems. Recess Resolution #PD -024-17 Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Hooper That the Committee recess for 10 minutes. Carried The meeting reconvened at 9:40 PM with Councillor Woo in the Chair. 12 Clar*wa Planning and Development Committee Minutes January 30, 2017 Jeff Goldman spoke in support of the application. He explained to the Committee that he is the owner of the commercial property that abuts the subject property. Mr. Goldman added that he was responsible for assembling the majority of the land for the subject property. He explained that he originally purchased these properties and the Farewell and Pointe of View lands were previously approved for high density residential development. Mr. Goldman added that he was involved with the previous rezoning applications, public meetings, and consultations. He continued by explaining that he was involved in the Courtice Main Street Secondary Plan. Mr. Goldman stated that, with the exception of the Darlington Boulevard properties, the application is proposing a lower density development than is previously approved zoning permits. He added that the applicants are looking for more townhomes and fewer high rise buildings. Mr. Goldman noted that the he attended the public meetings in 2009 and the concerns with traffic and speeding are the same. He advised the Committee that he feels that curbs and sidewalks would increase the safety in the area and that some of the streets need to urbanized if this application is approved. Mr. Goldman explained that the term "apartment" refers to the built form not a form of ownership and that the owners are proposing a high end development. He believes the homes backing onto the ravine will reduce the crime because there would be greater visibility from the residents. Mr. Goldman stated that environmental studies will need to be conducted prior to approval and the development will provide mitigation and the run off will be filtered into the creek. He questioned the efficiency of the existing septic systems and suggested that they may need to be updated. Mr. Goldman noted that Tooley Mill Park was developed and funded as part of the original application and the current application requires the valley lands to be given to the municipality as part of the approval. He noted that the purchase of the properties on Darlington Boulevard were on the advice of the municipality and required for secondary access to the development. Mr. Goldman concluded by acknowledging that the discussion of additional traffic lights needs to be discussed further. Ryan Guetter, Weston Consulting, spoke on behalf of the applicant. He thanked the members of the community and noted that there were several principals of High Street Courtice Inc. in attendance. Mr. Guetter advised the Committee that they are committed working with Staff, Council, and members of the community. He explained that the application is for an overall reduced density than the zoning permits. Mr. Guetter added that, as per provincial policy intensification must occur, in this case, in the Secondary Plan area. The Darlington Boulevard properties are not within the Secondary Plan area. However, provincial policy speaks to the intensification of all urban areas and the lands on Darlington Boulevard have the rural characteristics which would be appropriate for some intensification but not the same amount of intensification as the properties on Highway 2. Mr. Guetter addressed the issue of traffic and noted that this is why lower density homes are being proposed on Darlington Boulevard. He added that they are trying to maintain the lot lines and have proposed a transition from the lower density to the high density buildings. Mr. Guetter explained that, in addition to the density being lower than previously approved, they have proposed a reduction in the overall height of the buildings. He reviewed proposed design and streetscape, which illustrated the transition from low to high density buildings. Mr. Guetter noted that many environmental 13 Clar*wa Planning and Development Committee Minutes January 30, 2017 studies have been completed, and that a portion of land will be given back to the municipality and restoration work will be done. He stated that they are open to signal lights. Mr. Guetter advised the Committee that they are have received comments from Municipal Staff and they are expecting to receive comments from the Region of Durham. He added that they are committed to finding adequate solutions for the concerns. Resolution #PD -025-17 Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Neal That the delegation of Ryan Guetter be extended for an additional two minutes. Carried Mr. Guetter advised they have done a review of the parking requirements and recognize the need for active transportation, and noted the slope stability is being reviewed. Mr. Guetter concluded by stating they are committed to maintaining the separation of this development. Mr. Guetter answered questions from the Committee. 8 Delegations No Delegations 9 Communications - Receive for Information There are no Communications to be received for information. 10 Communications— Direction 10.1 Roman Zydownyk — Regarding Report PSD -009-17, Applications by High Street Courtice Inc. to amend the Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By-law to permit a 442 unit residential development along Courtice Main Street Resolution #PD -026-17 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Cooke That Correspondence Item 10.1 from Roman Zydownyk, concerning the Public Meeting (Agenda Item 7.2) regarding Report PSD -009-17, be referred to the Director of Planning Services to be considered as part of the application review process. Carried 11 Presentations No Presentations -10- 14 Clarbgtoa Planning and Development Committee Minutes January 30, 2017 12 Planning Services Department Reports 12.1 PSD -008-17 Nathan Thomas on behalf of William and Betty Irving - application to amend the Zoning By-law to facilitate the creation of three single detached lots at 6 Mann Street, Bowmanville PSD -008-17 was considered earlier in the meeting during the Public Meeting portion of the Agenda. 12.2 PSD -009-17 Applications by High Street Courtice Inc. to amend the Clarington Official Plan and Zoning By-law to permit a 442 unit residential development along Courtice Main Street Resolution #PD -027-17 Moved by Councillor Cooke, seconded by Councillor Traill That Report PSD -009-17 be received; That the applications submitted by High Street Courtice Inc. for a Clarington Official Plan Amendment (COPA2016-0004) and Rezoning (ZBA2016-0024) continue to be processed including the preparation of a subsequent report; and That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -009-17 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Carried 12.3 PSD -011-17 Year End Planning Applications Resolution #PD -028-17 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Cooke That Report PSD -011-17 be received for information. Carried Councillor Traill left the meeting at 10:20 PM. 13 New Business — Consideration There were no New Business Item to be considered under this Section of the Agenda. 14 Unfinished Business None -11- 15 Clarbgtoa 15 Confidential Reports Planning and Development Committee Minutes January 30, 2017 15.1 PSD -010-17 Disposal of 72 1/2 Scugog Street, Bowmanville Resolution #PD -029-17 Moved by Mayor Foster, seconded by Councillor Hooper That Confidential Report PSD -010-17 be received; That the sale of 72 1/2 Scugog Street to Kerry Property Management Ltd. be approved on the terms and conditions set out in the Agreement of Purchase and Sale (Attachment 1 to Report PSD -010-17); That all expenses incurred and paid out of the Rate Stabilization Reserve Fund to clean up the property be reimbursed from the sale proceeds; That the balance of the sale proceeds be deposited into the Municipal Acquisition Reserve minus the proportionate share owed to the Region and School Boards as per the Municipal Act, 2001 s.353; and That all interested parties listed in Confidential Report PSD -010-17 be advised of Council's decision by the Department. Carried 16 Adjournment Resolution #PD -030-17 Moved by Councillor Neal, seconded by Councillor Cooke That the meeting adjourn at 10:25 PM. [a] TIM Carried -12- 16 Deputy Clerk Clarbgtoa Notice of Public Meeting A land use change has been proposed, have your say! The Municipality is seeking public comments before making a decision on an application to amend the Official Plan, Zoning By-law and for a proposed Plan of Subdivision. :2,1101 Lindvest Properties (Clarington) Limited has submitted applications to develop a block previously designated for an elementary school together with 13 approved single dwelling lots for a subdivision containing a total of 50 single detached dwelling lots in the Foster Neighbourhood. 90 Grady Drive, Newcastle - north side of Grady Drive, west of Rickard Neighbourhood Park. IV Future i Development NOp�N c� '3 v. Subject Site _T WHITEHAND DRIVE LU LU \ Rickard f Neighbourhood Park ik Y F; w..1 1 A 1 1 GRAY DRIVE w w - r w ►, uA . T11 _J LU "ERSKINE DRIVE p ., 0 GOMMEAVENUE 0Q. ZBA2017 0001 - COPA 2017-0001 .yf; ' W How to • -Informed Additional information and background reports are available for review at the Planning Services Department and on our website at clarington.net developmentproposals. Questions? Please contact Mitch Morawetz 905-623-3379, extension 2411, or by email at mmorawetz(a)_clarington.net vide How . ProComments Speak at the Public Meeting: Date: Tuesday, February, 21, 2017 Time: 7:00 pm Place: 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, ON L1 C 3A6 Municipal Administrative Centre Council Chambers Or write to the Planning Services Department to the attention of Mitch Morawetz File Numbers: S -C-2017-0001, COPA 2017-00i11pnd ZBA 2017-0001 Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act The personal information you submit will become part of the public record and may be released to the public. Questions about the information we collect can be directed to the Clerk's Department at 905- 623-3379, extension 2102. Accessibility If you have accessibility needs and require alternate formats of this document or other accommodations please contact the Clerk's Department at 905-623-3379, extension 2109. Appeal Requirements If you do not speak at the public meeting or send your comments or concerns to the Municipality of Clarington before the by-law is passed, you will not be entitled to appeal the decision to the Ontario Municipal Board and you will not be able to participate at a hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to do to. 417;tce— David J. Crome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services I:\^Department\LDO NEW FILING SYSTEMWpplication Files\SC Subdivision\S-C-2017\S-C-2017-0001\Public Notice\S-C 5 b) Public Meeting Notice Template Portrait Final.docx St Marys Cement Community Relations Committee Meeting Minutes Tuesday September 6th, 2016 6:00 p.m. — St Marys Cement, Bowmanville Plant Attendees: Amy Burke, Senior Planner, Municipality of Clarington Andres Ortega, People & Management Representative, St Marys Cement Cherisse Diaram, Mining Engineer, St Marys Cement Chris Richards, Environmental Manager, St Marys Cement Ernie Hamilton, Quarry Manager, St Marys Cement David Veenstra, Port Darlington Community Association Glenda Gies, Port Darlington Community Association Jim Grimley, Wilmot Creek Homeowners Association Jim Storey, Operations Manager, St Marys Cement Rick Rossi, Port Darlington Community Association Ruben Plaza, Environmental Manager, St Marys Cement Tanya Pardy, Human Resources Manager, St Marys Cement Willie Woo, Municipality of Clarington Council 1. Agenda for September 7th CRC meeting adopted • moved by Tanya Pardy • seconded by Amy Burke 2. Minutes from June 7th meeting approved • moved by Tanya Pardy • seconded by Glenda Gies 3. Introductions • New member: Andres Ortega • Covering for People & Management Representative who is on maternity leave 4. Outstanding Items • TOR emailed to members 19 S. Review of Community Concerns 3 2016 By Month W Month Wanuary ■ February DMarch ■ April ■ May ■June ■ July ■ August September ■ October November December • In the 3rd quarter we have received 6 complaints. The total number of complaints for 2016 is 22. ➢1 complaint for Plume ➢1 complaint for Dust ➢1 complaint for Noise ➢3 complaints for Blasting • St Marys Comments on Complaints ➢1 blast complaint from resident of Bowmanville 1. 6th complaint from resident, no other complaints from that street 2. Follow up visits from MOECC and Golder Associates 3. Consultant had set up monitor at home for several blasts in response to previous complaints 4. Resident requested that monitoring cease but indicated that he expects to raise issues in the future ➢1 blast complaint claiming damage to foundation/flickering lights 1. Visit scheduled with Golder Associates ➢1 blast complaint claiming damage to windows 1. Visit scheduled with Golder Associates ➢1 complaint due to plume visibility 1. Higher visibility due to greater cooling water requirements during maintenance ➢1 complaint related to backup alarms sounding around dock 1. Investigated and identified that a new truck a contractor had purchased was equipped with original backup alarm 2. This was replaced immediately with white noise "squawker" alarm 20 ➢1 complaint related to mysterious white crystalline substance found on car 1. Over three week period 2. No possible sources identified at plant 6. Environmental Results a) The PM10 monitoring station and dust fall sampler locations were reviewed and are as follows: Sample Station Location Monitor SMC1 OPG PM 10 BAM ,Dust fall Jar A Hutton Transport PM 10 Hi Vol, Dust Fall B Cedar Crest PM 10 Hi Vol Dust Fall C Cedar Crest (MOE location) Dust Fall Jar SMC2 Cove Road PM 10 BAM , Dust Fall Jar b) No exceedances from PM10 or Dust Fall samplers or BAM monitors recorded since last meeting: • Sampler Location A: ➢After consultation with the MOE, this location has been temporarily removed and will be replaced after berm construction and seeding has been completed, likely in the late fall of 2016. 21 PM 10 Program 2016 60 50 - hi fl r> 40 E -A North East Quarry N 30 - B Cedar Crest 2 U E 20 Limit A17 1 14 10 0 c c c c c c c c c c c c e e e e e e e e e 0 SMC 1 and SMC2: 2016 PM 10 BAM Avg 24 hrs. 100 9D SD 7D M E 6D tSMC1 OPG U) —m—SMC 2 Cove Rd. E 5D Limit ca M 40 O V 30 E 20 C 1D 0 mmr�u�m zzzz00000 I� I I I I I I ur,i ,r �lri � iil iii "�7� � IIII • No Dust Fall Exceedences in 2016 22 • Question: Why is dust not monitored further away? ➢At greater distances, the impact of the operation is less and the certainty that the readings are a result of St. Marys operation is less ➢The guidelines require the monitors be located at the fence line c) Emissions • SO2 emissions for 2016 to August 31st are 3,580 tonnes; the total allowance for 2016 is 3,511 tonnes. • NO,, emissions for 2016 to August 31" are 2,044 tonnes; the total allowance for 2016 is 3,192 tonnes. • For SO2 emissions, the allowances from the plant in St Marys, Ontario may be applied and additional allowances may be purchased - this is allowed as it is in the same "airshed" • Emissions are still compliant with legislation for local emissions, allowances are part of a province wide emission reduction program • Allowances may be bought and sold between different producers, however, St Marys is striving to reduce emissions through investment in new processes and equipment and has seen some success in using a new "lime hydrator" technology - the first of its kind in the industry - and is investigating other methods • Industry at large is investigating new ways to control/reduce emissions • Alternative methods will take at minimum 2 years to permit, get capital approval for, and construct 7. Dock Operation Practices • Controls in place to reduce dust generated from dock operations ➢Petcoke piles are covered in tarps and dust suppressant is applied on open faces 23 Dust Fall 2016 8.00 7.00 6.00 — > � s.aa tSMC1 OPC M tSMC2 MOECava Rd C N 4.00 E A North East Quarry Of 3.00 B Cedar Crest C MOE Cedar Cr 2.00 Limit 1.00 0.00 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec • Question: Why is dust not monitored further away? ➢At greater distances, the impact of the operation is less and the certainty that the readings are a result of St. Marys operation is less ➢The guidelines require the monitors be located at the fence line c) Emissions • SO2 emissions for 2016 to August 31st are 3,580 tonnes; the total allowance for 2016 is 3,511 tonnes. • NO,, emissions for 2016 to August 31" are 2,044 tonnes; the total allowance for 2016 is 3,192 tonnes. • For SO2 emissions, the allowances from the plant in St Marys, Ontario may be applied and additional allowances may be purchased - this is allowed as it is in the same "airshed" • Emissions are still compliant with legislation for local emissions, allowances are part of a province wide emission reduction program • Allowances may be bought and sold between different producers, however, St Marys is striving to reduce emissions through investment in new processes and equipment and has seen some success in using a new "lime hydrator" technology - the first of its kind in the industry - and is investigating other methods • Industry at large is investigating new ways to control/reduce emissions • Alternative methods will take at minimum 2 years to permit, get capital approval for, and construct 7. Dock Operation Practices • Controls in place to reduce dust generated from dock operations ➢Petcoke piles are covered in tarps and dust suppressant is applied on open faces 23 ➢Coal piles are not covered in tarps due to the risk of self -ignition; instead, dust suppressant is applied on the piles — most piles are coal piles presently ➢Maximum height of fuel piles is 10m ➢Boat unloading Operations stop when wind speeds exceed 40km/h and are in direction of concern ➢Backup alarms on all equipment consistently on site 8. Quarry Operation • Extracting levels 1,2,5 presently, to return to 1,4 and 5 soon • No ground or air vibration exceedances to date in 2016 • Overburden stripping and stockpiling underway ➢Berm construction happening along east side of property 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Peak Ground Vibration Level (mm/s) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 nO nO nO nO nO nO nO nO nO nO WO WO WO WO WO WO WO WO WO WO W O O W O 0 n W 0 T - T N 0 T n _M W T \ 0 N N o O O O O - + . N " O O O - - .-+ r+ N N to +Golder Peak Component (mm/s) Cedar Crest --*—Golder Peak Component (mm/s) Aggregate Shop —A—Golder Peak Component (mm/s) Baseline —Ground Vibration Limit 24 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 Peak Air Vibration Level (dB) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N W W IDD W W W W W ID n n n n n n n n n n n W W W W W W W W W W W O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O W W W N W W M O\1 m` m` IDD `. `. N`� 7` 0`1 0\1 N n W W 7` M --*--Golder Air Vibration (dBL) Cedar Crest --m--Golder Air Vibration (dBL) Aggregate Shop —Golder Air Vibration (dBL) Baseline —Air Vibration Limit 9. Clay for Port Hope Initiative • Roughly 300,000 tonnes of clay being sent to Port Hope Area Initiatives Projects ➢Port Hope Project Long -Term Waste Management Facility ➢Port Granby Project Long -Term Waste Management Facility ➢Deloro Mine Remediation • Clay is being used as lining material in the construction of disposal facilities • Amendment to license to allow for scale operation granted by Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry 10. Alternate Fuels • Internal approval process to commence initiative on-going; no related activities, including equipment installation, anticipated to occur in 2016. 11. Community Outreach • Donated the building materials and stones for outdoor classroom and sustainable habitat area at Dr. Ross Tilley Public School ➢the project was conceived and designed by the Grade 7 class in 2015 ➢Classes also visited the plant for a tour of the cement operation 25 • The plant will also be contributing to the Highway of Heroes Light Armoured Vehicle (LAV) III Monument Program in the Bowmanville Community http://Iavmonument.ca/en/index.html 12. Other • Exploratory drill holes for the under the lake expansion project are in progress (from dock, not in the lake) • Signs changed by municipality to indicate that D9 is now the primary detour route • Multiple instances of drivers damaging the fence at the foot of Waverly Road • Tree planting day, hosted by TD, at West Side March on September 17th 13. 2016 CRC Meetings • Next meeting December 81h, 2016 14. Outstanding Items • Possible CRC Plant Tour 26 �VFEB03 Pt-1 4`1018`59 cri January 30, 2017 TOWNSHIP OF gog Ms. Anne Greentree, Municipal Clerk Town of Clarington 40 Temperance Street, 2nd Floor Bowmanville, ON L1 C 3A6 Re: Greenbelt of Ontario Dear Ms. Greentree: At the last regular General Purpose and Administration meeting of the Council of the Township of Scugog held January 16, 2017 the above captioned matter was discussed. wish to advise that the following resolution was passed and ratified at the Council meeting on January 23, 2017: "WHEREAS Township of Scugog Council received and endorsed a staff report entitled "Co-ordinated Land Use Planning Review — Township of Scugog Comments", dated October 17, 2016 as the Township's comments in response to the Provincial Land Use Planning Review; and WHEREAS the Staff report recommended, among other matters, that a new financial arrangement is needed for those local municipalities that comprise the Greenbelt such as in the form of provincial grants to compensate local municipalities for the reduced ability to increase their assessment through growth; and WHEREAS the Staff report recommended, among other matters, that a provincial working group be established to examine the financial implications associated with being located in the Greenbelt and identifying appropriate mitigation measures for predominantly rural municipalities such as Scugog; and WHEREAS the Mayor for the Township of Scugog forwarded a letter dated December 5, 2016, to Hazel McCallion, Ex -Officio Advisor to thA Premier on I-qci p -s within the GT -HA, real-lestlno that tkle ( THA Township of Scugog, 181 Perry St., PO Box 780, Port Perry, ON 1-91- 1A7 Telephone: 905-985-7346 Fax: 905-985-9914 wwwjjgog.ca Mayors and Chairs Report on the Provincial Co-ordinated Land Use Planning Review include a provision which indicates that a sustainable funding arrangement (such as redirecting a portion of the carbon tax to Greenbelt municipalities based on their percentage and total land area included in the Greenbelt) is absolutely necessary to support the financial viability of the rural road networks throughout the GTHA's Greenbelt municipalities; and NOW THEREFORE the Township of Scugog recommends initiating a provincial working group, and Councillor Kett be designated as the lead, to examine the financial implications associated with being located in the Greenbelt and identifying appropriate mitigation measures, to take the form of a Greenbelt Sustainability Caucus comprising two representatives from each of the GTHA's Greenbelt Communities; and THAT the resolution be circulated to all Greenbelt municipalities for consideration and endorsement." Should you require anything further in this regard, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Best regards, John Paul Newman Director of Corporate Services/Clerk ST TIC) lI EVIEWED BY original To: \ File 0, Council Direction 0 GG Direction I) Direction L3 Council Information U GG Information U PD Information Copy To: 0 Mayor U Members of 0 Ward Councillors Council ❑ CAO ❑ Clerks O Communications • Community ❑ Corporate 0 Emergency Services Services Services ❑ Engineerin, D Finance 0 Legal Services Services El Operation's Planning Services ❑ Other: i 'Aunicipal Clerk's file r 248 The Regional Municipality of Durham Corporate Services Department - Legislative Services 605 ROSSLAND RD. E. PO BOX 623 WHITBY ON L1 N 6A3 CANADA 905-668-7711 1-800-372-1102 Fax: 905-668-9963 www.durham.ca Matthew L. Gaskell Commissioner of Corporate Services F* i Kn�� r. "Set&,* fiance fog.O.J 'fflffi pities" February 10, 2017 Greenbelt Site Specific Revi w-' Ministry of Municipal rs Central Municipai-Services Office 777 B�St eet, 13th Floor _Tor n�to, ON M5G 2E5 RE: Proposed Amendments to the Greenbelt Area Boundary - Environmental Bill of Rights Registry No. 012-9247 (2017 -COW -33). Our File: L00 Please be advised that Committee of the Whole of Regional Council considered the above matter and at a meeting held on February 8, 2017, Council adopted the following recommendations of the Committee: A) That Report #2017 -COW -33 of the Commissioner of Planning and Economic -Development be endorsed as Durham Region's response to the Environmental Bill of Rights Registry posting (EBR Posting No. b12-9247) regarding Proposed Amendments to the Greenbelt Area boundary, including that: i) The Region has no concerns with the proposed minor Greenbelt Area boundary changes in Pickering, Whitby and Oshawa; and ii) The Region has concerns that the Province has not developed a clearly defined process to consider site specific requests, and did not complete this process in a fully transparent and consultative manner; and B) That a copy of Report #2017 -COW -33 of the Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development be forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Durham's area municipalities. Please find enclosed a copy of Report #2017 -COW -33 for your information. Cheryl Bandel, Dipl. M.A. Acting Regional Clerk. C B/tf c: Please see attached list If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Co-ordinator at 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2009. 29 -2- c: The Honourable Bill Mauro, Minister of Municipal Affairs N. Wellsbury, Clerk, Town of Ajax T. Gettinby, CAO/Clerk, Township of Brock A. Greentree Clerk Municipality of Clarin ton A. Brouwer, Clerk, City of Oshawa D. Shields, Clerk, City. of Pickering J.P. Newman, Clerk, Township of Scugog D. Leroux, Clerk, Township of Uxbridge C. Harris, Clerk, Town of Whitby B. Bridgeman, Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development 30 If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact 1-800-372-1102 ext. 2564 The Regional Municipality of Durham Report To: The Committee of the Whole From: Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development Report: #2017 -COW -33 Date: February 1, 2017 Subject: Proposed Amendments to the Greenbelt Area Boundary — Environmental Bill of Rights Registry No. 012-9247, File: L35-03 Recommendation: THAT the Committee of the Whole recommends to Regional Council that: 1) Report #2017 -COW -33 be endorsed as Durham Region's response to the Environmental Bill of Rights Registry posting (EBR Posting No. 012-9247) regarding Proposed Amendments to the Greenbelt Area boundary, including that: a. The Region has no concerns with the proposed minor Greenbelt Area boundary changes in Pickering, Whitby and Oshawa; and b. The Region has concerns that the Province has not developed a clearly defined process to consider site specific requests, and did not complete this process in a fully transparent and consultative manner. 2) A copy of Report #2017 -COW -33 be forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Durham's area municipalities. Report: 1. Purpose 1.1 On January 11, 2017, the Province released proposed minor boundary changes to the Greenbelt Plan, requesting comments prior to February 27, 2017 (47 -day public 31 Report #2017 -COW -33 review and comment period). Page 2 of 7 1.2 As previously outlined in Commissioner's Report #2016 -COW -34, a component of the Province's Co-ordinated Land Use Planning Review (Co-ordinated Review) included two separate initiatives to: • Review requests for boundary changes to the Greenbelt Plan (Greenbelt Site Specific Review); and • Consider possible expansions to the Greenbelt outside of the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area (Growing the Greenbelt). The Province has not provided a status update on this initiative, and as a result, these matters will be the subject of future reports to Committee. 1.3 This report provides an overview and a Regional response to the proposed boundary changes within Durham (Attachments 1, 2 and 3) and the process followed. Staff have no concerns with the minor changes that have been proposed; however, staff do have concerns with respect to the review process itself. 2. Background 2.1 Since the establishment of the Greenbelt in 2005, and throughout the Co-ordinated Review consultations, the Ministry of Municipal Affairs (the Ministry) received over 700 site-specific requests from landowners and municipalities across the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GGH) to remove sites from the Greenbelt. 2.2 The Ministry reports they have reviewed and assessed all requests, and consulted with the ministries of Natural Resources and Forestry; Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs; Environment and Climate Change; and Transportation on requests relevant to their mandates. 2.3 In undertaking this review, Provincial staff considered the following: • Avoiding boundary changes that would fragment farmland, including prime agricultural lands; • Maintaining the Greenbelt's Natural Heritage System (NHS) that can be supported despite urbanization occurring in proximity to, and downstream of, the Greenbelt; • Respecting the functional connections in the Natural Heritage System; • Valuing the overall objectives of the Greenbelt as a landscape and avoiding a minimalist approach to defining the Natural Heritage System; and • Being responsive to landowner requests to evaluate site-specific situations. 32 Report #2017 -COW -33 Page 3 of 7 2.4 Very few requests to be removed from the Greenbelt have been granted, not only in Durham, but across the GGH. Provincial staff had previously indicated that any adjustments resulting from this technical review would be minor. As a result of the Greenbelt Site Specific Review, approximately 96 hectares of land are proposed to be removed across the entire GGH. 3. Proposed Boundary Changes in Durham 3.1 The small number of proposed minor changes to the Greenbelt boundary within Durham are intended to: • Adjust the Greenbelt Area boundary to reflect the Urban Area Boundary that was already established prior to the creation of the Greenbelt Plan and therefore allowed to continue (i.e. Existing Urban Area Boundaries); and • Adjust the Greenbelt Area boundary in response to landowner concerns about the accuracy of the Greenbelt Area mapping (i.e. Natural Heritage System). 3.2 Of the approximately 96 hectares proposed to be removed from the Greenbelt through minor boundary changes, 44.4 hectares (46%) are located within Durham, as follows: • Pickering — 20.1 hectares on the east side of the Rouge Park (Attachment 1); • Whitby — 20 hectares to the southwest of Winchester Road West and Ashburn Road, including 5200 Ashburn Road, part of 5640 Ashburn Road, and part of 555 Winchester Road West (Attachment 2); and • Oshawa — 4.3 hectares to the northwest of Winchester Road East and Ritson Road North, including part of 2770 and 2830 Ritson Road North (Attachment 3). Proposed Boundary Changes Related to Existing Urban Area Boundaries (i.e. Transition Areas) 3.3 The Greenbelt Act, 2005 and Greenbelt Plan contain transition provisions to reflect applications, matters or proceedings that began before the establishment of the Greenbelt Plan. As part of the proposed 2016 Greenbelt Plan, the Province released detailed maps showing proposed adjustments to reflect matters that were already in a planning process prior to the creation of the Greenbelt Plan and thus allowed to continue. The proposed changes align with municipal official plans and existing urban boundaries. 33 Report #2017 -COW -33 Page 4 of 7 3.4 Within Durham, the Province proposed to amend the Greenbelt Area boundary in Clarington (Bowmanville), were it was mistakenly extended into the existing Urban Area boundary. 3.5 The proposed 2016 amendments did not correct the Greenbelt Area boundary where it was mistakenly extended into the existing Pickering Urban Area Boundary, along the western edge of the City, south of the CPR Rail line. Therefore, Commissioner's Report #2016 -COW -34 recommended that the Province revise its Greenbelt Plan mapping in Pickering to reflect the approved Urban Area Boundary in effect since 1993, to avoid any further confusion. 3.6 As a result of that consultation and further analysis, the Province has proposed boundary changes in Pickering to align with municipal official plans, and more specifically adhering to the boundary identified as the Rouge National Urban Park (refer to Attachment 1). 3.7 Pickering staff have indicated that they are satisfied with the proposed approach, and as a result, the Region has no concerns with the proposed Greenbelt boundary changes in Pickering. Proposed Boundary Changes Related to the Natural Heritage System 3.8 Provincial staff reviewed technical information relating to more than 150 requests across the GGH where the boundary was defined in large part by the NHS. Durham staff have not been privy to these requests. 3.9 Site-specific requests were reviewed against the original methodology and rationale used for mapping the NHS when the Greenbelt was created in 2005. The analysis considered information received from landowners, provincial NHS data, aerial and Land Information Ontario maps, conservation authority data, and municipal official plan and NHS data. 3.10 Based on the technical review, the Province has proposed minor changes to the Greenbelt Area boundary where existing site conditions, guided by the considerations outlined in Section 2.4 (i.e. maintain a robust NHS, avoid fragmenting farmland, etc.) form the logical Greenbelt boundary. 3.11 In Whitby, minor amendments are proposed for three properties within the southwest quadrant of Winchester Road West and Ashburn Road (refer to Attachment 2), including: 34 Report #2017 -COW -33 • 5200 Ashburn Road; • Part of 5640 Ashburn Road; and • Part of 555 Winchester Road West. Page 5 of 7 3.12 Whitby staff, in consultation with the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA), have indicated they have no objections to the proposed minor boundary amendments. Likewise, the Region has no concerns with the proposed Greenbelt boundary changes in Whitby. 3.13 In addition, the Province has proposed minor changes to the Greenbelt Area boundary to recognize situations where existing road infrastructure forms the functional NHS boundary. 3.14 In Oshawa, these minor amendments impact two properties within the northwest quadrant of Winchester Road East and Ritson Road North (refer to Attachment 3), including: • Part of 2770 Ritson Road North; and • Part of 2830 Ritson Road North. 3.15 Oshawa staff, in consultation with CLOCA staff, have indicated they have no objections to the proposed minor boundary amendments. Likewise, the Region has no concerns with the proposed Greenbelt boundary changes in Oshawa. 4. General Comments 4.1 With respect to the proposed amendments to the Greenbelt Area boundary, as identified in EBR Posting No. 012-9247, the Region has no concerns with the Provincially proposed site-specific boundary changes in Pickering, Whitby and Oshawa. However, the Province's approach to responding to site-specific requests is of some concern for the following reasons: • The process is limited in scope to those who participated in consultations, specifically those who proactively made site-specific submissions; • The criteria by which site-specific submissions were reviewed and analysed was not fully transparent to all stakeholders; and • The process by which these site-specific requests have been reviewed was subject to limited public consultation. 35 Report #2017 -COW -33 Page 6 of 7 4.2 Despite previous requests by the Region to clarify and establish a process to consider minor boundary revisions, the Province did not provide a clearly defined and transparent process. In addition, no specific information or rationale has been provided on the remainder of the site-specific requests that were received and subsequently refused by the Province. 5. Conclusion and Next Steps 5.1 In general, there are no concerns with the proposed minor boundary changes in Pickering, Whitby and Oshawa. However, there are concerns with the limited scope of the Provincial Greenbelt Site Specific Review process as noted above. 5.2 Following the public review and comment period, the proposed Greenbelt Area boundary changes are expected to be finalized as part of the completion of the Co- ordinated Review in early 2017. Regional staff will continue to monitor and report back to Committee on the progress of Co-ordinated Review. 5.3 Should the proposed amendments to the Greenbelt Area boundary come into effect, amendments to the ROP may be necessary. Potential amendments will be reviewed as part of the next municipal comprehensive review exercise. 5.4 It is recommended that this report be forwarded to the Minister of Municipal Affairs as the Region's response to EBR Posting No. 012-9247 on the Proposed Amendments to the Greenbelt Area boundary, and that a copy be forwarded to Durham's area municipalities for their information. 6. Attachments Attachment #1: Provincially Proposed Amendments to the Greenbelt Area Boundary (Pickering) Attachment #2: Provincially Proposed Amendments to the Greenbelt Area Boundary (Whitby) Attachment #3: Provincially Proposed Amendments to the Greenbelt Area Boundary (Oshawa) 36 Report #2017 -COW -33 Respectfully submitted, Original signed by B. E. Bridgeman, MCIP, RPP Commissioner of Planning and Economic Development Recommended for Presentation to Committee Original signed by G.H. Cubitt, MSW Chief Administrative Officer 37 Page 7 of 7 N�PPPRO PVE E 5 LEGEND 'r��Ontario Q Greenbelt Area" Protected Countryside 0 Niagara Escarpment Plan Area Oak Ridges Moraine Area Urban River Valley D 0 O i'Z Proposed Changes Lands proposed to be removed from Greenbelt Area Transition lands proposed to be removed from Greenbelt Area Proposed Greenbelt Area boundary (2016) Greenbelt Area boundary (existing) Proposed Urban River Valley (Lands included in previous consultations. Provided for reference only. Urban River Valley policies would not apply to privately owned lands within the URV areas.) An amendment to the Greenbelt Area boundary regulation O. Reg. 59/05 has been proposed to enable the proposed revisions to the Greenbelt Plan. CpP�Ev S� c SECpRp 51 `<?� 2 m 1C� O �ma GREs Am O gR\M`N00O CRS m I- EORS o NGP O W gyp, -leo ,^O m mm G N A� WILCROFT CRT 0 � N N`m �P�gO 5 IPPA IN R\VERS OR 0 sj o m R\cNPROSpN oG GREs EPpRo gC 2 O OG 2p m m °a G r �m 0 D WHITES M LEGENDrr :- �Ontario Q Greenbelt Area" Protected Countryside f 0 Niagara Escarpment Plan Area Oak Ridges Moraine Area 0 Urban River Valley O 0 Q GN�S��R Rp E OJA m e \o�at%0n aP'PrOXX,terS%0 01 N`NV 4� eX \ o 2 D ca Proposed Changes Lands proposed to be removed from Greenbelt Area Transition lands proposed to be removed from Greenbelt Area Proposed Greenbelt Area boundary (2016) Greenbelt Area boundary (existing) Proposed Urban River Valley (Lands included in previous consultations. Provided for reference only. Urban River Valley policies would not apply to privately owned lands within the URV areas.) An amendment to the Greenbelt Area boundary regulation O. Reg. 59/05 has been proposed to enable the proposed revisions to the Greenbelt Plan. de - 110, .Kl�NG LEGENDrr :- �Ontario Q Greenbelt Area" Protected Countryside f 0 Niagara Escarpment Plan Area Oak Ridges Moraine Area 0 Urban River Valley O 0 1 Proposed Changes Lands proposed to be removed from Greenbelt Area Transition lands proposed to be removed from Greenbelt Area Proposed Greenbelt Area boundary (2016) Greenbelt Area boundary (existing) Proposed Urban River Valley (Lands included in previous consultations. Provided for reference only. Urban River Valley policies would not apply to privately owned lands within the URV areas.) An amendment to the Greenbelt Area boundary regulation O. Reg. 59/05 has been proposed to enable the proposed revisions to the Greenbelt Plan. /i !! ,N) ao i Clarftwn Planning Services Public Meeting Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: Planning and Development Committee Date of Meeting: February 21, 2017 Report Number: PSD -012-17 Resolution: File Number: S -C-2017-0001, COPA 2017-0001 and ZBA2017-0001 By-law Number: Report Subject: Applications by Lindvest Properties (Clarington) Limited to develop a former school block as a 50 lot subdivision in Newcastle Recommendations: That Report PSD -012-7 be received; 2. That the applications for proposed draft Plan of Subdivision, to amend the Clarington Official Plan and amend Zoning By-law 84-63, submitted by Lindvest Properties (Clarington) Limited for the development of a 50 lot subdivision continue to be processed and that a subsequent report be prepared; and 3. That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -012-17 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. 41 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -012-17 Page 2 Report Overview The Municipality is seeking the public's input on applications for a proposed draft plan of subdivision, Clarington Official Plan amendment and rezoning, submitted by Lindvest Properties (Clarington) Limited to permit a total of 50 single detached dwelling lots. 1. Application Details 1.1 Owner/Applicant: Lindvest Properties (Clarington) Limited. 1.2 Proposal: To develop a block previously designated and draft approved for an elementary school together with 13 draft approved single detached dwelling lots for a subdivision containing a total of 50 single detached dwelling lots in the Foster Neighbourhood. 1.3 Area: 1.4 Location: 1.5 Roll Number: 1.6 Within Built Boundary: 2. Background 3.05 hectares 90 Grady Drive, Newcastle 181703013016562 No 2.1 On January 5, 2017, Lindvest Properties (Clarington) Limited submitted an application for a proposed draft plan of subdivision, Clarington Official Plan amendment and Zoning By- law amendment to develop a former public elementary school block together with 13 previously draft approved lots as a 50 lot subdivision for single detached dwellings. 2.2 On February 29, 2016, the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board notified Lindvest and the Municipality of its decision to waive their option to retain the subject site for the development of a public elementary school. 2.3 A planning justification report, urban design brief and functional servicing report have been submitted in support of the applications. 3. Land Characteristics and Surrounding Uses 3.1 The subject lands are currently vacant and have been used to stockpile excess soils on a temporary basis. The lands were previously used for agriculture. 3.2 The surrounding uses are as follows: North - Draft approved plan of subdivision: Future detached dwelling development South - Existing single detached dwellings 42 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -012-17 East - Rickard Neighbourhood Park Page 3 West - Draft approved plan of subdivision: Future detached dwelling development Figure 1: Subject site and surrounding area 43 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -012-17 4. Provincial Policy 4.1 Provincial Policy Statement Page 4 The Provincial Policy Statement encourages planning authorities to create healthy, livable and safe communities by accommodating an appropriate range and mix of residential, employment, recreational and open space uses to meet long term needs. New development shall occur adjacent to built-up areas, shall have compact form and a mix of uses and densities that allow for the efficient use of land, infrastructure and public services. 4.2 Provincial Growth Plan The Provincial Growth Plan encourages Municipalities to manage growth by directing population growth to settlement areas, such as the Newcastle Urban Area. Municipalities are encouraged to create complete communities that offer a mix of land uses, employment and housing options, high quality open space, and access to stores and services. 4.3 The development allows for the efficient use of land, infrastructure and public services and is consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement and the Growth Plan. The proposed development is part of a neighbourhood where various housing types are to be accommodated as development progresses. Municipal water and sanitary sewers are available at the site, transit routes are close by and a neighbourhood park is located on Grady Drive immediately next to the site. 5. Official Plans 5.1 Durham Regional Official Plan The Durham Region Official Plan designates the lands as Living Areas. Lands designated as Living Area permit the development of communities incorporating the widest possible variety of housing types, sizes and tenure to provide living accommodations that address various socio-economic factors. The proposed development conforms with the Living Area designation. 5.2 Clarington Official Plan The Clarington Official Plan designates the lands as Urban Residential with a Public Elementary School symbol. The Proposed subdivision falls within the Foster Neighbourhood on lands where a housing density of 10 to 30 units per hectare is to be accommodated. Grady Drive is a collector road with a right-of-way width of 23 metres. MI Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -012-17 5.3 Clarington Official Plan as Amended by Amendment 107 Page 5 On November 1, 2016, Council adopted the Official Plan Amendment 107 to bring the Clarington Official Plan into conformity with the Regional Official Plan and provincial policies. The subject site remains designated Urban Residential however the public elementary school symbol was removed. As Amendment 107 has not been approved by the Region of Durham as of the writing of this report, the school symbol remains in place and therefore a Clarington Official Plan amendment is needed in order for the applications for proposed draft plan subdivision and rezoning to proceed. The predominant form of housing for areas internal to neighbourhoods is to be single and semi-detached dwellings with limited townhouses interspersed. 6. Zoning By-law Zoning By-law 84-63 zones the subject lands Urban Residential Exception (R1-42), which permits only a public school. A rezoning is required to implement the proposed plan of subdivision. 7. Summary of Background Reports 7.1 Planning Justification Report A Planning Justification Report prepared by D.G. Biddle and Associates was submitted in support of the applications. Contrary to the report submitted, a Clarington Official Plan amendment is needed to allow the subdivision and rezoning applications to proceed prior to Regional approval of amendment 107. The report concludes that the proposed use of the subject lands conform to all applicable Provincial, Regional and Clarington planning policies. 7.2 Urban Design Brief An Urban Design Brief prepared by D.G. Biddle and Associates was submitted in support of the applications. The brief provides an architectural context and design goals while outlining the rationale for the proposed development in terms of the compatibility of built form, massing, density and lot fabric within the greater neighbourhood. 8. Public Notice and Submissions The Public Notice of this meeting was given by mail to landowners within 120 metres of the subject site and details of the application were included in the Planning Services Department E -update and posted to the municipal website. A Public Notice sign was also installed on the property's frontage along Grady Drive. As of writing this report, Staff have received one email submission on these applications. Concerns expressed centre around the need for an additional public elementary school in Newcastle as new development is testing the capacity of Newcastle Public School. Traffic is becoming a concern around Newcastle Public School with more and more families from the Foster Neighbourhood now attending. 45 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -012-17 Page 6 Figure 2: Property's frontage along Grady Drive I 9. Agency Comments Agency comments have not been received as of the writing of this report. Once received, they will be included in a subsequent report. 10. Departmental Comments 10.1 Engineering Services Comments from Engineering Services have not been received as of the writing of this report but will be included in a subsequent report. 10.2 Emergency and Fire Services The Clarington Emergency and Fire Services Department has reviewed the proposed plan and has no concerns or objections. Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -012-17 Page 7 11. Discussion 11.1 The subject site was draft approved for a public elementary school. In this case the school board had attempted to negotiate with the landowner to acquire the lands for an elementary school. After unsuccessful lengthy negotiations over several years with the owner, the school board has decided to not to pursue this site. The decision-making process lies with the local school board; in this case the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board. Students from this neighbourhood attend nearby Newcastle Public School or St. Francis of Assisi. 11.2 The Municipality of Clarington is not party to the decision-making process for the construction of schools. As a result of the termination of the option agreement with the School Board, Lindvest has made applications to develop the site for residential purposes. Proceeding with residential development on the subject lands is a logical alternative. The technical details of the applications will continue to be reviewed prior to the preparation of a subsequent report. 11.3 In addition to the lands that made up the former draft approved school block, the proposal includes 13 draft approved lots fronting on the south side of Whitehand Drive, abutting the north side of the school block and part of the park to the walkway connecting the park to Whitehand Drive. 12. Conclusion The purpose of this report is to provide background information on the subdivision proposal submitted by Lindvest Properties (Clarington) Limited for the Public Meeting under the Planning Act. Staff will continue processing the applications including the preparation of a subsequent report. 13. Strategic Plan Application Not applicable. 47 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -012-17 Submitted by: David J. Crome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services Reviewed by: (for) Curry Clifford, MPA, CMO Interim CAO Staff Contact: Mitch Morawetz, Planner, 905-623-3379 ext. 2411 or mmorawetz(a)_clarington.net Attachments: Attachment 1 — Proposed Plan of Subdivision Page 8 List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision is on file in the Planning Services Department. CP/MM/df I:\^Department\LDO NEW FILING SYSTEMWpplication Files\SC Subdivision\S-C-2017\S-C-2017-0001\Staff Report\PSD-012-17.docx M Municipality of Clarington Attachment 1 to Report PSD -012-17 ro 1 FUTURE ROGER SON STREET I - - - - -------------------I- -- 35.20 N19'19'15'W N21 -14'05'W 45.03 108.87 N1P15�15^N U� 1a.oz r s PU $ $ $ � 31.00 S�Po I O N W A U v OND N, 8 to — — - — — 92x1 12- 1e.Ds �4b �S,x 1z.oD ,x.oD Q-12-12.W12.W I - a 31.00 4 3,.05 I 12.00 12.. 1— 12.00 F 12- I 16.23 (A 31.00 W i 31.00 N I � m rn� e.ze M z THOMAS )'a_ P J $ 3 -4 311W§ 9 I Z WOOD OCK o 3— STREET jI 8 5�x n�i w p N) - - - - - - -+- -A---------------- - -I G (11 18.2! ls.2e ,3.x6 13.50 — 1— ' — F— 31.DD ! _ OD OI 3,.00 31.ao % A ('Qj1 �; N1109'15W 156.97 z J250 I �: q zDloo 46T m I PEDAfLL J' 5t 3z.3D I SIRE Tx- o I —_— —-- SBp N19'19'15'N 32.50 --1 f____ r -- r - -� 0 C d �n2 3 3 �p5 is up o�y--ii �, � F o;D 90�so $ z m 2 d 3 :2 1. o o 'j 0 m sx DJ❑❑ rou r> v Z Clarington Planning Services Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131. Report To: Planning and Development Committee Date of Meeting: February 21, 2017 Report Number: PSD -013-17 Resolution: File Number: PLN 27.10 By-law Number: Report Subject: Use of Holding Symbols in Rezoning Applications Recommendations: 1. That Report PSD -013-17 be received for information. 50 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -013-17 Report Overview Page 2 For zoning applications since 2011, Council pre -authorizes the removal of holding symbols at such time that staff is satisfied that all conditions are fulfilled. The development industry have generally found this to be efficient, both from a cost and time perspective. It provides the best protection to the Municipality to ensure that conditions imposed on a development, which may not be fully defined at the time of draft approval, are suitably going to be implemented. The removal of holding symbol is the last step of approvals in a complicated process of preparing and finalizing detailed drawings, preparing and reviewing studies, preparing agreements, arranging for securities and dealing with many agency requirements. It is a very minor step in the whole process of moving from application to conditional approval to final approval. The benefit of utilizing holding provisions of the Planning Act outweighs discontinuing this practice and have a minimal impact on workload. 1. Background On January 16t", Council asked for a report on whether Holding Symbols, as a condition of planning approvals, should be discontinued. 2. Previous Streamlining Improvements 2.1 For reference purposes, in December 2011, Report PSD -102-11 (Attachment 2) identified a number of initiatives to help stream line the planning approval process and address developer comments. The 2011 Report reviewed how applications for removal of holding zone could be processed in a more efficient manner. Consideration was given to whether this matter could be delegated to staff but at the end of the day, a zoning by-law must be passed. 2.2 The improvements to the removal of holding process made at that time were as follows: • Council pre -authorizes the removal the holding symbol at the time of original rezoning provided that staff are satisfied that all the conditions have been met; No staff report to Planning and Development Committee is required with pre- authorization. The removal of holding by-law goes directly on the Council agenda without delay • No application form needs to be filled out by the applicant and no fee is charged The development industry have generally found this to be very efficient, both from a cost and time perspective. Occasionally, there are still reports coming to the Planning and Development Committee. These are the result of: 51 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -013-17 Page 3 A holding symbol placed on the property at the time when the original zoning by-law was adopted or A holding symbol placed on the property through a rezoning prior to 2011 without pre- authorization for removal. In the case of the January 6, 2017 Planning Report PSD -05-17 that generated the request for this report, 1494339 Ontario Limited (The Foley Group) purchased a parcel that was zoned with a holding symbol in 1984 and no pre -authorization for removal had been granted by Council. There is simply no way around this. 3. Purpose of Holding Symbols 3.1 Municipalities can pass a zoning by-law with a holding symbol (H). This optional, commonly used tool, restricts the future uses on that property until certain conditions are met. The use of holding symbols must be supported by policies in Official Plans. 3.2 The Clarington Official Plan contains policies outlining what matters the Municipality may wish to ensure are addressed through the use of holding provisions prior to development or redevelopment of land. This includes: • The extension of services and municipal works including roads; • Detailing of specific measures to protect natural areas; • Detailing of specific measures to mitigate the impact of development; • Submission of technical studies; • Meeting the Plan's policies with regard to Waste Disposal Assessment Areas; • Entering into development agreements; and/or • Any other requirements as may be deemed necessary by the Municipality including the implementation of the policies of this Plan. 3.3 It has been our practice to use holding symbols as it best protects the Municipality's interests, providing a mechanism to ensure all the developers obligations have been met prior to issuing a building permit. This includes: • the transfer of lands for roads, road widenings, parkland or open space; • all financial obligations whether securities for work to be completed, payments to the Municipality, or collection of funds related to front-end agreements; and works required to support the development as identified through Environmental Impact Studies, Traffic Impact Studies or other supporting documents. This would include compensation work for destroyed habitat. 52 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -013-17 4. Benefits of Using Holding Provisions 4.1 There are the following benefits for using holding provisions: Page 4 • Provides the most effective control for the Municipality. The primary use of holding symbols is to ensure that the conditional requirements of an approval are completed to the satisfaction of the various agencies and the Municipality. This includes ensuring that servicing and road infrastructure is available and that the development is not premature. Provides the most effective enforcement mechanism. Zoning conveys certain rights to landowners. The Chief Building Official must issue building permits if all "applicable law" is met. In the case of site plan, that includes approval of the drawings but not the execution of an agreement. For plans of subdivision it includes registration of the plan to create the lots, but not other processes, such as approval of engineering drawings. It is more difficult to address and enforce compliance issues after the fact through site plan and subdivision provisions. Provides for the efficient completion of the planning approvals. Related to the above point, if holding symbols were not used, staff would be forced to be very conservative and sequential in final approvals. At the present time, we can allow a number of processes to proceed simultaneously to ensure that construction can start as soon as possible. For example, we can give final approval, allowing the registration of the plan of subdivision without waiting for all of the securities, grading deposits, the execution of agreements (which includes the mortgagees) or other final steps, with the knowledge that the holding symbol protects the Municipality from development proceeding prematurely. Provides a mechanism to address environmental issues. It has been helpful to address certain environmental issues. For example, the Northglen subdivision contained lands adjacent to Abe's Auto recycling facility. The plan of subdivision could be registered creating lots but the holding symbol will remain on certain lots until the industrial use ceases. It can allow for staging of development and thereby minimizing financial costs for the developer that may be required otherwise. For a site plan, financial costs heavily loaded at the front end. In addition to development charges, cash -in -lieu of parkland and fees to agencies, the Municipality requires performance guarantees. Landscaping costs are significant for a large site plan. In the instance of The Villas of McLaughlin Heights by Halminen Homes, there were nine buildings. The holding symbol was removed on three buildings at a time, allowing the developer to provide only one third of the landscaping security at a time. This allowed the developer to manage cash flow in a phased project and still secure a performance guarantee for the Municipality. 53 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -013-17 Page 5 Can be applied for use -specific basis when there are potential uses that need more detailed study. In a commercial project, the zoning provided may allow for a wide array of uses, which may or may not ever be tenanted. Some of those uses may have use -specific impacts that the Municipality may want more detailed information on prior to allowing. As an example, a bar or fast food restaurant could be one of the permitted uses in a commercially -zoned property but holding symbol could be used to require noise or traffic studies be completed prior to lift the holding symbol for that specific purpose. All other commercial uses could be permitted. Although we have not used it for this purpose, it may become considered with higher density infill redevelopment or neighbourhood commercial centres. 5. Potential Concerns with Using Holding Symbols 5.1 There are three potential concerns for using holding symbols: • Delay of Project Commencement There has been concern raised that the requirement to remove holding symbols can delay a project. This was somewhat of a concern in the context of preparing a report to Planning Committee which could delay a project due to the reporting cycle. As noted above, this was previously addressed in the changes made in 2011 to minimize the time required through pre -authorization of the removal of the holding symbol. Moreover, the finalization of a project is a complex process. As noted above, the removal of the holding symbol does not have to proceed sequentially. Provided that the key elements that protect the Municipality's interest (agreement, securities, etc.) there are some steps that could occur simultaneously. This includes registration of agreements, registration of the draft plan of subdivision. Furthermore, there are "relief valves" if there is any timing problem. This includes permission for site preparation work and conditional building permits. It should be noted that the removal of the holding symbol is one planning applications that does not require a notice to neighbouring land owners or interested parties, and there is no appeal process except for the applicant. • Cost Previously some developer raised concerns about the cost of filing an application in terms of their consultant's time and the municipal processing fees. The current application fee for removal of a holding symbol is $2,420, if an application is required. The previous changes in 2011 no longer require a landowner to make a separate application to remove a holding by-law, if it was pre -authorized at the time of putting the holding symbol on the property. 54 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -013-17 • Workload Page 6 The last point of concern, referenced is the discussion leading to the request for this report, was that eliminating the use of holding provisions would free up staff time. Preparing the by-law is a straightforward task and in comparison to all the other steps in moving from a draft or conditional approval to a final approval, it is a very minor task. Over the last three years, there has been an average of 12 zoning by-laws annually for the removal of holding symbols. The work required to produce a by-law to lift the holding symbol is very minor and mostly the task of a GIS technician, not a planner. In comparison to the benefits noted above, the workload is not significant. 6. Concurrence Not Applicable. 7. Conclusion Staff was requested to review the use of the "Holding" symbol in the rezoning process. The premise given for the review was that with the pending request for additional planning staff, this would be one way to reduce the workload. As noted above, the revisions undertaken 5 years ago have reduced the reporting requirements. Any reports to remove holding symbols that do come to Committee at this time are for lands that were zoned with a holding symbol generally prior to that time. The time required to prepare the actual by-laws to remove holding symbols is not significant in comparison to all of the work relating to the review of the detailed drawings and studies, the clearing the conditions, preparing agreements, obtaining financial securities and addressing the many details of a development process. There may be some situations where the placing of a holding symbol is not absolutely necessary. We will consider this on a case by case basis. 8. Strategic Plan Application Not applicable. 55 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -013-17 Submitted by: David Crome, MCIP, RPP, Director of Planning Services Page 7 Reviewed by: (for) Curry Clifford, MPA, CMO Interim CAO Staff Contact: David Crome, MCIP, RPP, Director of Planning Services, 905-623-3379 x 2402 or dcrome@clarington.net There are no interested parties to be notified of Council's decision. Attachments: Attachment 1 - PSD -102-11 Delegation of Authority in Planning Services Functions LkADepartment\LDO NEW FILING SYSTEM\PLN Planning . _ -/Ad min istration\PLN __molding ,,, Holding Symbols In z--,.17—Use Of Holding Symbol. Docx 56 Municipality of Clarington Attachment 1 to Report PSD -013-17 Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: December 12, 2011 Resolution #: % - 413y -law #: //--// Report #: PSD -102-11 File #: Subject: DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY IN PLANNING SERVICES FUNCTIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD -102-11 be received; and 2. THAT Council pass a by-law to delegate to the Director of Planning Services the following additional functions: a) the authority to execute agreements imposed or required in satisfaction of any condition of approval under the Planning Act regarding the development of land including plans of subdivision, plans of condominium, land division, exemption from part lot control, site plans and rezoning; b) the authority to approve releases from agreements where development has not proceeded; c) the authority to refuse a planning application where the file has remained inactive for more than one (1) year and only after the applicant has been given 60 days written notice that the application will be refused and has not responded or objected; d) the authority to approve draft plans of condominium where a public meeting is not required in accordance with Section 9(10) of the Condominium Act and Reg. 544/06 of the Planning Act; e) the authority to approve part lot control applications so that the by-law would be presented directly to Council for adoption without debate; 3. THAT the Clerk be authorized to amend the Procedural By-law to implement Sections 4.1 and 5.1 of Report PSD -102-11; and 4. THAT the Region of Durham Planning Department and all interested parties to Report PSD -102-11 be notified of Council's decision. CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 57 REPORT NO.: PSD -102-11 PAGE 2 Submitted by: _ ` p_. Reviewed by_ av6d,-'J. Crome, MCIP, RPP Franklin Wu Director, Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer DJC:sn December 7, 2011 Wei 0 9 PAGE 3 The Planning Services Department seeks to continuously improve or enhance customer service. To this end, in 2010, we established a Process Improvement Team (PIT) of front line staff to examine ways to improve our communication with clients as well as internal processes. One, of many ideas advanced by the PIT is to look to the delegation of part -lot control applications to staff. The Municipality's "Community Strategic Plan: 2011-2014" established a strategy, 2.5 to "undertake a review of municipal processes and regulations to streamline the Municipality's processes". This is an initiative to begin in 2012 with additional staff resources. There are some functions that staff undertake on behalf of Council under existing delegations or/and processes. As an interim step in reviewing municipal processes, this report examines some additional functions that could be delegated to staff which would aid in improving workflow, and timely response to clients. The initial objective was to seek delegation to approve by-laws to lift part lot control and by-laws for the removal of holding symbols in the Zoning By-law. Unfortunately, for reasons explained later in this report, at present the ability to approve by-laws, even for routine matters, cannot be implemented by delegation to staff. 2. CHANGES TO THE MUNICIPAL ACT For many years, Sections 41(13)(b) and 51.2(1) of the Planning Act, have enabled Council to delegate, by by-law, much of its authority with respect to site plan control and plan of subdivision approvals to an appointed officer of the Municipality. In 2006, the Municipal Statute Law Amendment Act, 2006 (Bill 130) amended the Municipal Act, 2001 to provide municipal councils with enhanced opportunity to delegate routine administrative matters. The intent of the amendment was to help create an effective and efficient governance structure that enables Councils to focus on their priorities. Sections 23.1 to 23.5 of the Municipal Act, 2001 enable municipalities to delegate certain Council responsibilities to: One or more Councillors or a Council Committee; A body having at least two members of whom at least 50 percent are Councillors, individuals appointed by Council, or a combination of Councillors or individuals approved by Council; and An individual who is an officer, employee or agent of the Municipality. 59 .: .9 a WIT,63K.J. 9 1 FXT041112, When considering delegating any of its authority to an individual, the Municipal Act requires that Council be satisfied that the power being delegated is of a minor nature having regard for the number of people, the size of geographic area and the time period affected by an exercise of the power. Additionally, Section 270(1)6 of the Municipal Act requires the Municipality to adopt and maintain policies with respect to the delegation of its powers and duties. With respect to Council powers and duties related to applications made under the Planning Act, the Municipal Act clarifies that Council does not have the ability to delegate its power to: • adopt an Official Plan • adopt an Official Plan Amendment • pass a Zoning By-law, or • adopt a Community Improvement Plan if the plan contains certain financial decision-making provisions. In accordance with Section 5(3) of the Municipal Act, any Council delegation of authority must be effected by by-law. Where a power is delegated, the power is deemed to be delegated subject to any limits on the power and to any procedural requirements, including conditions, approvals and appeals which apply to the power and any duties related to the power are deemed to be delegated with the power. 3. CURRENT DELEGATED FUNCTIONS Over the years, Council has delegated certain functions to the Director of Planning Services or to the Director of Planning Services and the Director of Engineering Services concurrently. 3.1 Site Plan Approval The Director of Planning Services and the Director of Engineering Services have been delegated the power to approve site plan drawings and impose conditions of site plan approval. The Site Plan Control By-law also authorizes the Mayor and Clerk to execute any agreements that may be required to implement the approval. 3.2 Plans of Subdivision and Plans of Condominium By-law 2001-072 delegates all of Council's powers under Section 51 of the Planning Act to the Director of Planning Services. This includes the power to approve draft plans of subdivision, amend conditions of approval of plans of subdivision, and approve final plans of subdivision for registration. This similarly applies to plans of condominium. . .s. 0 . 9 1 3.3 Consent Agreements By-law 92-43 authorizes the Mayor and Clerk to execute agreements required as a condition of a consent to sever land under Section 53 of the Planning Act. Staff issue comments with respect the Municipality's position on applications to the Durham Region Land Division Committee. 3.4 Complete Applications Council delegated to the Director of Planning Services the authority to deem applications made under the Planning Act as "complete" with the enactment of By-law 2007-131. This was the result of the more recent changes to the Planning Act to ensure that when applications are made, there is all of the required information available at that time for the Municipality to be able to undertake its review within the prescribed timeframes. 3.5 Community Improvement Plan(CIP) Grants The Community Improvement Plans for Orono, Newcastle and Bowmanville include grant programs. The approved CIPs delegate to the Director of Planning Services or designate the final decision regarding eligibility for funding, approval of funding or withdrawal of funding in the event of certain circumstances. The Director has authority to execute agreements for the grants within parameters set in the CIP Project Plan and the current year's capital budget approved by Council. The largest possible grant is $10,000 for one of the programs and a maximum of $50,000 for a property, utilizing various programs (facade improvement, signage improvement, building code upgrades, planning and building fees, etc.). 3.6 Minor Heritage Permits The Beech Avenue Heritage Conservation District Plan identifies activities that require a heritage permit, in addition to any other municipal approvals (e.g. building permit). By-law 2006-102 delegates that approval of Minor Heritage Permits to the Director of Planning Services for approval. 4. PROPOSED ADDITIONAL DELEGATED FUNCTIONS 4.1 Exemation from Part Lot Control Section 50(5) of the Planning Act generally prohibits land within a registered plan of subdivision from being further subdivided and conveyed. This is referred to as part lot control. Exempting land from part lot control generally occurs where a plan of subdivision has been draft approved and registered with blocks for freehold multiple dwellings or semi-detached dwellings. In these instances, it is appropriate to determine the lot line between the units once the building foundation has been poured and/or walls erected. Lot lines are established in accordance with the as -built common walls. Approval of a by-law to exempt lands from part lot control is required by the developer prior to the closing of a house sale. 194-1 REPORT NO.: PSD -102-11 PAGE 6 This is a routine administrative function. At the point that the lifting of part lot control is considered, Council through a public process would have previously authorized the draft approval of the plan of subdivision and amended the Zoning By-law for the proposed use. From a customer service perspective, we occasionally have problems if developers have not submitted their applications in a timely manner or may not have realized that the lifting of part lot control has expired. There are times when this would create a hardship for the home purchaser, particularly during the summer recess when Council cannot approve a by-law to exempt certain lands from part lot control. This is an appropriate power for delegation. However, when Bill 130 was enacted to allow for greater delegation of powers, it would seem that corresponding changes to other sections of the Municipal Act to implement this were overlooked. Section 249 of the act provides that every by-law "shall be signed by the clerk and by the head of council or presiding officer at the meeting at which the by-law was passed." Thus while it is concluded that the power to pass a by-law may be delegated to a committee or individual, the procedures outlined in the Municipal Act do not provide a means to implement this. It is recommended that the Director of Planning be delegated the authority to approve a part lot control application but the by-law itself would still have to be enacted by Council. The Clerk has indicated that she is prepared to recommend an amendment to Section 7.11.1 of the Procedural By-law which would allow for the by-law to be presented to Council based on the Director's approval of the Part Lot Control application, without the matter first being considered by Council or GPA. This amendment has the potential of slightly expediting the process during the timeframe when Council is meeting and reducing staff time in report writing; however, it does not address the issue of Part Lot Control approval during summer recess. If Council agrees with delegating the approval of the application to the Director, Council would not be able to debate the merits of the application but would simply enact the by-law. 4.2 Condominiums that do not Require a Public Meeting There are six types of condominiums: • Leasehold — a form of ownership where a unit is owned by the occupant while the condominium corporation can lease the land and a third party can retain ownership in the land. 62 . awoTZT T e �l • Vacant Land — a plan of condominium where the common elements and units are created but no buildings or structures have been constructed at the time of registration of the condominium plan. This works like a small subdivision where the road and other common elements are established but each owner has flexibility to choose their own building design. • Common Elements — a plan of condominium where the condo corporation retains ownership of the common elements portion of the condominium (such as internal roads, greenspace, visitor parking and garbage collection areas). The owner's enjoy freehold ownership of their house but have common interest with other owners for the common elements. • Standard — the traditional condominium where the title of a unit is held together by a share in the rest of the property, which is common to all. Usually, condominium ownership begins with the interior wall of the unit. • Phased — a condominium where it is developed in phases, allowing for the sale of units while other areas of the development are still under development. • Conversion from Rental to Condominium Status — this situation is a variation of a standard condominium which occurs for an existing building which is currently occupied on a rental basis but is converted to condominium tenure. In Clarington, to date we have had only standard condominiums and more recently common elements condominiums. Since condominium applications are about the tenure of a building or buildings, in most cases the principle of development has been previously determined by Council. For example, a high density block in a plan of subdivision was approved for apartment buildings but did not bind the proponent to rental or condominium tenure. Only Vacant Land Condominiums and Common Elements Condominiums are required to have public meetings, since they divide land into parcels for freehold ownership, much like a plan of subdivision. It should be noted that with the shortage of rental housing in Durham, there are policies in the Regional and Clarington Official Plan with respect to the conditions which would allow for a condominium conversion. We would also hold public meetings for conversions of rental housing to condominium tenure. Council previously delegated approval of plans of condominium. We have traditionally brought all condominium applications to Council for review prior to the Director's approval. In most cases, the project will have already received site plan approval under delegated authority and the building is likely fully or partially constructed at that point. We are seeking to amend procedures and the delegation so Planning would only report to Council on a condominium application where a public meeting is required. 63 It is recommended that the Delegation By-law clarify that the Director of Planning Services be authorized to approve plans of condominium that do not require a public meeting, subject to reporting to Council periodically. 4.3 Execution of Agreements At the present time, the Site Plan Control By-law authorizes the Mayor and Clerk to execute agreements related to site plan approval under Section 41 of the Planning Act. In addition, Council by by-law authorized the Mayor and Clerk to execute any agreement required with respect to a Land Division application approved by the Regional Land Division Committee. In all other cases, the staff report dealing with planning applications such as a plan of subdivision or plan of condominium, or in the rare case rezoning, the execution of an agreement would have to be authorized by Council through a recommendation in a report. It is recommended that the execution of agreements imposed or required in satisfaction of any condition of approval under the Planning Act in connection with the development of land including plans of subdivision, plans of condominium, land division, exemption from part lot control, site plans and rezoning be delegated to the Director of Planning Services and the Clerk subject to the agreements being in a form as approved by the Municipal Solicitor. In addition to executing agreements, there may be the occasional time when a development application is approved; agreements are executed and registered against title but the development does not proceed. In this circumstance, a subsequent owner may want a release from the agreement that is registered on title. This may or may not be done in the context of a new application. It is a very rare circumstance but in this circumstance, if Council determines to grant authority to the Planning Services Director and the Clerk to execute agreements, it would be appropriate to also delegate authority to release a subsequent owner. It is recommended that the Director of Planning Services be delegated the authority to grant a release from an agreement that has been executed in connection with the development of land where the application is no longer proceeding. The release would be in a form approved by the Municipal Solicitor. 4.4 Closing Inactive or Dormant Development Applications For various circumstances, the occasional development proponent does not actively pursue the approval of applications by addressing issues raised in the circulation and review. • A 14:10613 . __. • PAGE 9 Where Council hold a public meeting, the application is referred back to staff to continue processing. Our practice has been that when Council has made this type of resolution, Planning Staff will report back to have the application refused and the file closed. For site plan applications, which have been delegated, Planning Staff will close files when the applicant no longer is pursuing the application. The Director of Planning Services has also been delegated functions that enable the closing of subdivision files. However, most subdivision files also have related rezoning application and our practice has been to report to Council to close these files. It is recommended that the Director of Planning Services be delegated the authority to refuse a planning application where the file has remained inactive for more than one (1) year and only after the applicant has been given written notice that the application will be refused and given 60 days to respond. In a circumstance where the applicant does not agree with the decision to refuse the application and close the file, staff may still report to Council to consider closing a file which is dormant. 4.5 Sign By-law Amendments The current By-law 2009-123 does not provide opportunity for administrative variances to signs. Under separate report (PSD -103-11), it is proposed that the Sign By-law be amended to provide for limited administrative variances without seeking amendments to the By-law. 5. PROPOSED PROCEDURAL CHANGES 5.1 Removal of a Holding Symbol In many instances, when a property is rezoned, a Holding Symbol "H" will be placed on the zone to prevent development on the site until conditions of draft plan approval for a subdivision have been satisfied or conditions of site plan approval have been negotiated and an agreement entered into. There may be additional considerations for the lifting of the H symbol as well, as determined by the Official Plan policy. In many circumstances, the lifting of the Holding Symbol could be considered a routine matter, particularly where Council has previously considered a site- specific application. That is not to say that in all cases the lifting of a Holding Symbol can be considered a routine matter. For example, there could be a property that has a long standing holding symbol on it from the time of the adoption of the Zoning By-law. Council may never have considered a development application through the rezoning or subdivision process. In considering the lifting of the holding symbol, there is no requirement for public notice, except to the applicant. There is no public meeting and the zone provisions and performance standards are established. Lastly there is no opportunity for a member of the public to appeal the approval of a by-law for removal of a holding symbol. 65 1-:14W91:41Vloilo 2Tc]n Indeed Council may have limited discretion available to deny an application. However, an amendment to a Zoning By-law to lift the holding symbol remains a legislative action because of its underlying effect. This is reflected in Section 23.3(1) of the Municipal Act which provides certain restrictions on delegation including restrictions on the power to pass a Zoning By-law. Since the lifting of the holding symbol is a Zoning By-law, it has been determined that this power cannot be delegated to staff. Although the problem we sought to address cannot be dealt with through delegation, it could be somewhat mitigated with a change to Council's procedures. It is recommended that the Procedural By-law be changed to permit Planning Staff Reports for the lifting of a holding symbol to be submitted directly to Council, without first going to the GPA Committee. This would be for urgent circumstances as determined by the Director of Planning, particularly before the summer and Christmas recess improve efficiency. Even with regularly scheduled meetings, this could mean a difference of up to three weeks, which is substantial in the construction season. 5.2 Reportinq on Minor Variance Applications Our current practice is to report on the decisions of the Committee of Adjustment at the next possible meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee. Our reports outline not only the decision but go into some detail to explain the reasons for the recommendation, the consideration of the Committee and the variance from the recommendations of staff, if any. Our reports also request that Council concur with the decision of the Committee of Adjustment and authorize staff to support the decision where if conforms with the recommendation of staff. The report may also recommend that an appeal be filed. In certain circumstances, such as during Christmas or summer recess or due to the scheduling of meetings, the deadline for filing an appeal may be in advance of a Council meeting. Staff may initiate an appeal and subsequently seek Council's confirmation. Staff would continue with the appeal or withdraw it depending on Council's direction. Over the last 5 years, there have been 6 appeals of the decisions of the Committee of Adjustment; there have been a total of 293 decisions. Council has initiated 3 of these appeals on staff's recommendation and the applicant or third parties have initiated 3 appeals. This is an average of 1.2 appeals a year, yet we report to Committee approximately 13 times a year for concurrence of the Committee's decision to authorize a municipal position in the event of an OMB hearing. . • T�7i7 �r�■ 1+'��GY�fi1 For the most part, the scheduling of the hearing before the Ontario Municipal Board takes some time, usually around 4-6 months from the filing of the appeal. Staff time preparing reports to GPA Committee could be minimized if it was done on a periodic basis. It would appear that reporting three times a year would be suitable. Staff would initiate any appeals that were deemed important and upon consideration of the periodic report, Council could confirm or withdraw the appeal. This would be similar to the process now used for the summer recess. Any applicant or third party appeals could be addressed in the report and Council's concurrence with the decision of the Committee of Adjustment would be obtained at the time of the periodic report. There is the remote possibility that Council may wish to appeal a decision which staff had not recommended. However, we can remember no occasion where Council has even discussed this possibility let alone initiate such an appeal of the Committee's decision. Every municipal appeal has been the result of a staff recommendation. It is recommended that staff report on the activities of the Committee of Adjustment periodically with the understanding that staff would initiate any appeal deemed necessary and report to obtain Council's concurrence in the periodic report. 6. CONCURRENCE: This report has been reviewed by the Municipal Clerk and Municipal Solicitor who concur with the recommendations. 7. CONCLUSION The 2006 amendments to the Municipal Act provided for enhanced opportunities for municipal councils to delegate more routine matters to Committees or individuals. In addition, the Planning Act has provided for delegations of a number of powers to staff. After reviewing potential improvements to enhance customer service, the delegations and procedural changes proposed within this report provide for the opportunity to streamline some processes and reduce staff time spent preparing reports to Council on routine matters. It should be noted that not all delegated functions are included within the attached by-law. The subdivision delegation by-law, the site plan control by-law would remain in force as is, in part because they address other matters or are known by the Land Registrar. The sign by-law would contain delegation provisions if Council approves Report PSD -103-11 67 REPORT NO.: PSD -102-11 CONFORMITY WITH STRATEGIC PLAN PAGE 12 The recommendations contained in this report conform to the general intent of the following priorities of the Strategic Plan: X Promoting economic development Maintaining financial stability Connecting Clarington Promoting green initiatives Investing in infrastructure Showcasing our community Not in conformity with Strategic Plan Staff Contact: David Crome Attachments: Attachment 1 - Proposed Delegation By-law Attachment 2 — Proposed Amendment to Procedural By-law List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: BILD Durham Clarington Board of Trade Attachment 1 To Report PSD -102-11 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW NO. 2011 - being a by-law to delegate authority to the Director of Planning Services WHEREAS Sections 23.1 to 23.5 of the Municipal Act, 2001, authorize municipalities to delegate powers and duties under the Municipal Act, 2001, or any other Act subject to certain restrictions and reporting requirements; WHEREAS the Planning Act allows certain functions to be delegated to a municipal official; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: INTERPRETATION 1. In this By-law, "General Purpose and Administrative Committee" means the Municipality's committee of Council known as the General Purpose and Administrative Committee or its successor committee of Council appointed to deal with matters contained within this By-law; 2. In this By-law, reference to Municipal Officials includes designates of such officials. 3. Schedule "A" is attached to and forms part of this By-law. DELEGATION 4. Within each row of each table in Schedule "A", the authority described in the column entitled "Delegated Authority" is delegated to the person or persons identified in the column entitled "Delegate", subject to the restrictions, if any, in the column entitled "Delegation Restrictions". 5. Within each row of each table in Schedule "A", each person identified in the column entitled "Delegate" shall report or communicate in the manner, if any, specified in the column entitled "Communication". GENERAL 6. For the purpose of subsection 23.2(4) of the Municipal Act, 2001, it is the opinion of Council that any legislative powers delegated pursuant to this By-law are of a minor nature. 7. In the event of any inconsistency between this By-law and any other Municipal By-law, the provision that more effectively delegates authority prevails to the extent of the inconsistency. 8. This By-law is effective on the date of its passing. 9. The short title of this By71aw is the "Planning Services Delegation By-law". REPEAL 10. The following by-laws are repealed: a) By-law 92-43, being a by-law to authorize the Mayor and Clerk to execute agreements required as a condition of approval for consent to sever land; and b) By-law 2007-131 being a by-law to authorize the Director of Planning Services to make decisions on whether planning applications are deemed complete. BY-LAW read a first time this BY-LAW read a second time this BY-LAW read a third time and finally passed this 70 day of December 2011 day of December 2011 day of December 2011 Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk Schedule "A" to By-law Development 71 DELEGATED AUTHORITY DELEGATE SOURCE OF DELEGATION COMMUNICA POWER OR RESTRICTIONS TION DUTY 1. Provide notice that the information Director of Planning S.22(6.1), None Not and material required under any Services 34(10.4) and applicable application under the Planning Act 51(19.1), has either been provided or not Planning Act provided and that the application is deemed to be complete or incomplete, as the case may be 2. Give notice of complete Director of Planning S.22(6.4), None Notice applications to the prescribed Services 34(10.7) and provided to persons and public bodies, in the 51(19.4), Members of prescribed manner and Planning Act Council accompanied by the prescribed information; and make the prescribed information and material available to the public 3. Approve condominium applications Director of Planning S. 51, 51.1 and Consistent with Periodic that do not require a public meeting Services 51.2 approved site plan reporting to under the Condominium Actor Planning Act and Zoning By-law Council under Council policy Section 9 Condominium ,Act 4. Approve applications for the Director of Planning S.50(7) Removal of Part Lot Periodic removal of part lot control Services Planning Act Control to be reporting to presented to next Council Council meeting for adoption 5. Refusal of an application made Director of Planning Planning Act Applicant must be Periodic under the Planning Act which is Services notified and provided reporting to inactive for over one (1) year 60 days to respond Council with no objection 6. Execute agreements imposed or Director of Planning Planning Act Agreements to be in Not required in satisfaction of any Services and a form as approved applicable condition of approval under the Municipal Clerk Condominium by the Municipal Planning Act in connection with Act Solicitor the development of land such as subdivisions, plans of condominium, land divisions, removal of part lot control, site tans and rezoning 7. Releases of agreements where Director of Planning Planning Act Releases to be in a Not development has not proceeded o Services form as approved by applicable if imposed or required in Condominium the Municipal satisfaction of any condition of Act Solicitor approval under the Planning Actor Condominium Act, in connection with the development of land 8. Approve and execute agreements Director of Planning S.28 Implements CIP Annual under the Community Improvement Services Planning Act program reporting to Programs requirements Council 9. Minor Heritage Permits for Director of Planning S.33(1) Excludes Periodic alterations and additions, as Services Ontario construction of new reporting to described in the Beech Avenue Heritage Act buildings, additions Council as Heritage Conservation District Plan to buildings, necessary demolition of all or a portion of a building, relocation of a building on a property, relocation of a building outside of the district, site and park functions at Clarington Beech Centre and streetscape improvements 71 Attachment 2 to Report PSD -102-11 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW 2011 - Being a by-law to amend By-law 2011-016, a by-law to govern the proceedings of the Council of the Municipality of Clarington, its General Purpose and Administration Committee and Special Committees WHEREAS Council has delegated certain functions to the Director of Planning Services: THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON HEREBY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: 1. THAT By-law 2011-016 be amended as follows: a) Section 7.8.1 be amended by adding the words "Removal of a Holding Symbol report upon urgent circumstances as determined by the Director of Planning Services and" between the words "shall include" and "any staff report"; and b) Section 7.11.1 be amended by adding the following bullet: • a part lot control by-law. 2. THAT this By-law shall come into full force and effect upon its passage. Passed in open session this 19th day of December, 2011. Adrian Foster, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 72 Clar;wgton Planning Services Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Report To: Planning and Development Committee Date of Meeting: February 21, 2017 Report Number: PSD -014-17 Resolution Number: File Number: C -C-2016-0001 By-law Number: Report Subject: An Application by Prestonvale Heights Limited to Create a Common Elements Plan of Condominium, 25 Meadowglade Road, Courtice Recommendations: That Report PSD -014-17 be received; 2. That the request to deem the subject application exempt from the public notice provisions of Section 51 of the Planning Act be considered appropriate in the circumstances as authorized by Section 9(7) of the Condominium Act; 3. That the Durham Region Planning and Economic Development Department and Municipal Property Assessment Corporation be forwarded a copy of Report PSD -014-17 and Council's decision; and 4. That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -014-17 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. 73 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -014-17 Report Overview Page 2 Staff is seeking Council's concurrence in exempting a proposed plan of condominium from the public process provisions and support a proposal by Prestonvale Heights Limited to create a common elements plan of condominium. 1. Application Details 1.1. Owner: Prestonvale Heights Limited 1.2. Agent: GHD 1.3. Proposal: Draft Plan of Condominium —Common Elements Application to permit for the 66 townhouse unit development, common element condominium tenure for —a private street; entrance, parkette and two amenity areas; 20 visitor parking spaces; water meter room; sidewalk; and landscaped areas. 1.4. Area: 1.03 hectares for the total area of the 66 Parcels of Tied Land (P.o.T.L.$) containing the townhouse dwellings, and 0.46 hectares for the area all the common elements. 1.5. Location: 25 Meadowglade Road, Courtice at the northeast corner of Bloor Street and Meadowglade Road. 1.6. Roll Number: 18-17-010-060-19679 1.7. Within Built Boundary: No 2. Background 2.1. On December 1, 2016, Prestonvale Heights Limited submitted an application for a common elements Draft Plan of Condominium. The subject land is Block 91 of Registered Plan of Subdivision 40M-2513 (see Figure 1). The physical design of the 66 townhouse units and the space around them was approved through Site Plan SPA2009- 0014. 74 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -014-17 Page 3 �v w O� AJ O � l` r �Subjj�ect U C V WFZ FQL V FX i I CG2016p00D1 n ` `cat ` , Figure 1: Context of Subject Site 2.2 Approval of the Plan of Condominium is delegated to the Director of Planning Services. Approval of the proposed Plan of Condominium only deals with tenure of the development. An Application for Removal of Part Lot Control was submitted concurrently and has been approved. 75 DALE AVEE- r ♦ 1 � W_ W m �U r U C V WFZ FQL V FX i I CG2016p00D1 n ` `cat ` , Figure 1: Context of Subject Site 2.2 Approval of the Plan of Condominium is delegated to the Director of Planning Services. Approval of the proposed Plan of Condominium only deals with tenure of the development. An Application for Removal of Part Lot Control was submitted concurrently and has been approved. 75 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -014-17 Page 4 2.3 A common elements draft plan of condominium was submitted as was a draft reference plan showing the boundaries of the Parcels of Tied Land or P.o.T.L.s and areas of common elements (see Figure 2). Figure 2: Draft Plan of Condominium 3. Land Characteristics and Surrounding Uses 3.1 The subject area is under construction with the approved three storey townhouse blocks (see Figure 3). 76 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -014-17 Page 5 7��2; Tyvek Tyve1 yak Tyvek Tyvek Tyvek ;r fyvuk Fyvek Tyvek T l ry..y r k TYyvek icNu T` + _- *en- nom. r _ Figure 3: Site in mid-January 2017 3.2 The surrounding uses (see Figure 1) are as follows: North - Single detached houses fronting on Cale Avenue South - Bloor Street and beyond, the Neighbourhood Commercial Centre East - Single detached houses fronting on west portion of McRoberts Crescent West - Meadowglade Road and beyond, residential dwellings fronting on Beckett Crescent 4. Provincial Policy Block 91 of Plan 40M-2513 was reviewed for conformity to both the Provincial Policy Statement and Provincial Growth Plan during the review of Draft Plan of Subdivision S -C- 2007-007. The application is consistent with both policy documents. 77 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -014-17 5. Official Plans 5.1 Durham Regional Official Plan Page 6 The Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands as "Living Areas" and Regional Corridor. The subject lands conform to the Durham Regional Official Plan. 5.2 Clarington Official Plan The Clarington Official Plan designates the subject lands Urban Residential with an indication of Medium Density. The subject lands conform to the Clarington Official Plan. 5.3 Clarington Official Plan as amended by Amendment 107 The Clarington Official Plan as amended by Amendment 107 designates the subject lands as "Regional Corridor" and "Urban Residential". The subject lands conform to the Clarington Official Plan. 6. Zoning By-law Zoning By-law 84-63 zones the subject lands "Urban Residential Exception (R3-33)". The R3-33 zone allows the townhouse units. The subject lands conform to Zoning By- law 84-63. 7. Agency Comments Regional Municipality of Durham The Durham Region Planning and Works Departments notes that the previous related subdivision approval process confirmed the subject development conformed to provincial and regional policies. Delegated Provincial Plan Review Responsibilities were addressed through the previous related subdivision approval process except regarding noise impacting the development. A noise impact study must be completed to the Region's and Clarington's satisfaction. The study's recommendations must be implemented through the development agreement for this common elements plan of condominium. The provision of Regional Municipality of Durham services has been dealt with through the Regional Subdivision Agreement and relevant Regional by-laws. The Region has two conditions of draft approval, found in Attachment 1. 8. Departmental Comments Engineering Services The Engineering Services Department has no objection. Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -014-17 Page 7 9. Discussion 9.1 The proposed Draft Plan of Condominium will establish a common elements condominium for the private street (named Ferris Square); parkette and two amenity areas; 20 visitor parking spaces; water meter room; sidewalk; and landscaped areas (Figure 2). Each townhouse unit and surrounding parcel of tied land (P.o.T.L.) will eventually be freehold, meaning each townhouse unit can be bought and sold individually, while having a shared common interest in the above-mentioned common elements. 9.2 The subject lands and surrounding lands were previously considered under planning applications with public meetings. The townhouse development was also subject to site plan approval, including the taking of appropriate securities through the registered site plan development agreement. The conditions of draft approval requested by Durham Region are included in Conditions of Draft Approval for the Plan of condominium contained in Attachment 1. 9.3 The principle of the development has been established through previous development approval processes, including an Official Plan Amendment, a Zoning By-law Amendment, a Plan of Subdivision and a Site Plan Approval Application. All of these applications were submitted, reviewed and approved in accordance with Planning Act requirements including applicable statutory public meetings. 9.4 Section 9(7) if the Condominium Act provides the Municipality the authority to grant an exemption of the condominium application from the public notice provisions of Section 51 of the Planning Act. In essence, the requirement to hold a public meeting, can be waived. In consideration of the previous public consultation process and approvals following the requirements of the Planning Act, it is recommended that the Municipality exercise its option to exempt the proposed draft plan of condominium from the public meeting provisions of Section 51 of the Planning Act. 10. Concurrence Not Applicable 11. Conclusion It is respectfully recommended that the application for a proposed Draft Plan of Condominium be exempt from the public meeting provisions of Section 51 of the Planning Act and that the application be supported. The Director of Planning Services will subsequently issue Draft Approval for the Plan of Condominium subject to the Conditions of Draft Approval, substantially in the form of those outlined in Attachment No. 1. An amendment to the Site Plan Development Agreement will be prepared if any of the Draft Approval Conditions requires inclusion in a registered legal agreement. 79 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -014-17 12. Strategic Plan Application Not applicable. Submitted by: David J. Crome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services Page 8 Reviewed by: (for) Curry Clifford, MPA, CMO Interim CAO Staff Contact: Bob Russell, Planner II, 905-623-3379 ext. 2421, or brussell(o)-clarington.net Attachments: Attachment 1 — Proposed Conditions of Draft Approval The following is a list of the interested parties to be notified of Council's decision: Cyrus Yan, Planner, GHD BR/CP/ah/df I:\^Department\LDO NEW FILING SYSTEMWpplication Has= Condominium\2016\C-C-2016-0001\Staff Report\PSD-014-17_.docx Attachment 1 to Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -014-17 Conditions of Draft Approval File Number: C -C-2016-0001 Date: February , 2017 The Owner shall have the final plan prepared on the basis of approved draft plan of condominium C -C-2016-0001 prepared by J.D. Barnes Limited, dated July 28, 2016, identified as reference number 15-25-098-00, which illustrates a common element condominium for common facilities and services including private street and private sidewalks and curbs, street lights, water supply, sanitary and storm sewers, entrance, central, and basketball amenity areas, 20 visitor parking spaces, water meter room, utilities, community mailboxes and landscaped areas, to accommodate 66 townhouse units. 2. The Owner shall satisfy all requirements, financial and otherwise, of the Municipality of Clarington. This shall include, among other matters, the execution of a site plan amending agreement between the Owner and the Municipality of Clarington, concerning such matters as follows: compliance with the municipality's approved site plan in terms of refuse collection, snow storage and private street entrance maintenance. 3. The Owner shall submit to the Region of Durham, for review and approval, a noise impact study prepared by an acoustic engineer based on projected traffic volumes provided by the Region of Durham Planning and Economic Development Department, and recommending noise attenuation measures for the draft plan in accordance with the Ministry of the Environment and Climate Change guidelines. The Owner shall agree in the Condominium Agreement to implement the recommended noise control measures. The Agreement shall contain a full and complete reference to the noise report (ie. Author, title, date and any revisions/addenda thereto) and shall include any required warning clauses identified in the acoustic report. The Owner shall provide the Region with a copy of the Condominium Agreement containing such provisions prior to final approval of the plan. 4. The private street in the common elements is to be named and consequently signed in a manner satisfactory to the Municipality of Clarington. 5. Prior to final approval of this Plan of Condominium for registration, the Director of Planning Services for the Municipality of Clarington shall be advised in writing by: a) Durham Region planning and Economic Development Department, how Conditions 1 and 3 have been satisfied. W Attachment 1 to Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -014-17 NOTES TO DRAFT APPROVAL As the Owner of the proposed condominium, it is your responsibility to satisfy all of the conditions of draft approval in an expeditious manner. The conditions of draft approval will be reviewed periodically and may be amended at any time prior to final approval. The Planning Act provides that draft approval may be withdrawn at any time prior to final approval. 2. All plans of condominium must be registered in the Land Titles system within the Regional Municipality of Durham. 3. If final approval is not given to this plan within 3 years of the draft approval date, and no extensions have been granted, draft approval shall lapse and the file shall be CLOSED. Extensions may be granted provided valid reason is given and is submitted to the Director of Planning Services for the Municipality of Clarington well in advance of the lapsing date. 4. At such time as the draft approval is in effect, the Owner is required to provide digital copies of the draft approved plan and Conditions of Draft Approval to the Region of Durham Planning and Economic Development Department and the Municipality of Clarington Planning Services Department. I:\^Department\LDO NEW FILING SYSTEM\Application Files\CC Condom inium\2016\C-C-2016-0001\Staff Report\PSD-014-17 Attachment 1.docx Clarftwa Planning Services Addendum Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131 Report To: Planning and Development Committee Date of Meeting: February 21, 2017 Addendum to Report Number: PSD -070-16 Resolution Number: File Number: COPA2016-0002, ZBA2016-0013 & S -C-2016-0002 By-law Number: Report Subject: Revised applications by 2399263 Ontario Limited (Matanda Homes) for a 17- unit draft plan of subdivision on Gordon Vinson Avenue and Frank Wheeler Avenue in Courtice Recommendations: That Report PSD -070-16 and Addendum to Report PSD -070-16 be received; 2. That the application COPA2016-0002 to amend the South West Courtice Secondary Plan be closed and proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 108 be withdrawn in accordance with the applicant's request dated February 2, 2017; 3. That the revised application for Draft Plan of Subdivision (S -C-2016-0002) submitted by 2399263 Ontario Limited be supported subject to conditions contained in Attachment 2 to Addendum Report PSD -070-16; 4. That the revised Zoning By-law Amendment application (ZBA 2016-0013) submitted by 2399263 Ontario Limited be approved as contained in Attachment 3 to Addendum Report PSD -070-16; 5. That once all conditions contained in the Official Plan and Zoning By-law with respect to the removal of the (H) Holding Symbol are satisfied, the By-law authorizing the removal of the (H) Holding Symbol be approved; 6. That the Durham Regional Planning and Economic Development Department and Municipal Property Assessment Corporation be forwarded a copy of Report PSD -070-16 and Council's decision; and 7. That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -070-16 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Municipality of Clarington Addendum to Report PSD -070-16 Report Overview Page 2 On December 5, 2016 Planning staff recommended approval of a 19 unit draft plan of subdivision (eight singles and 11 townhouses) subject to increasing the lot frontage of the townhouse units to 7.0 metre minimum. The applicant has since revised the plan by removing the townhouse blocks. The plan now proposes 17 single detached dwellings. This Addendum Report to PSD -070-16 recommends approval of revised applications by 2399263 Ontario Limited (Matanda Homes) to create a residential plan of subdivision. The revised proposed plan no longer includes townhouse units, and the applicant withdrew the application to amend the South West Courtice Secondary Plan for medium density units. Attached to this report are revised conditions of draft approval and a revised zoning by-law amendment to permit the 17 unit draft plan of subdivision. 1. Background 1.1 The original submission for the subject applications included a draft plan of subdivision creating eight single detached lots along Frank Wheeler Avenue and two blocks for 13 street townhouse units along Gord Vinson Avenue, totalling 21 units. 1.2 Report PSD -070-16 recommended approval of the applications subject to increasing the lot frontage of the townhouse units from 6 metres to 7 metres consistent with Council policy to accommodate on street parking according with municipal standards. This revision reduced the townhouse units from 13 to 11, for a total of 19 units. The applicant did not agree with the proposed redline revisions. 1.3 At the Planning and Development Committee meeting on December 5, 2016, the applicant requested the application be Tabled to January 9, 2017. 1.4 On December 19, 2016, Planning Staff received a revised draft plan of subdivision for 17 single detached dwellings. The plan replaces the townhouse blocks along Gord Vinson Avenue with single detached dwellings on lots with 9.3 metre frontage (see Figure 1 - Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision). 1.5 At the January 9t" Planning and Development Committee, the applicant requested that the report be referred back to staff to allow for consideration of the revised plan. 1.6 The proposed change reduces unit yield by two units. The revised proposal is comprised of all single detached lots as follows: • Eight lots with 10.48 metre frontages on Frank Wheeler Avenue; and • Nine lots with 9.3 metre frontages on Gord Vinson Avenue. MI Municipality of Clarington Addendum to Report PSD -070-16 Figure 1: Proposed Revised Draft Plan of Subdivision DRAFT PLAN OF SUBDIVISION PART OF LOT 35 AND PART OF R/A BETWEEN LOTS 34 AND 35 CONCESSION 1, AND ALL OF BLOCK 159, PLAN 40M-2113 GEOGRAPHIC TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTON, COUNTY OF DURHAM, NOW IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON REGIONAL MUNICIPALITY OF DURHAM FUTURE RES �ENTIAL CORb 9.3 9.13-- 9.. -9. 9.3 9.3 9.3 9.3 9Y3— 17 16 15 14 13` 1'2 11 10� 9 z I 1 ell s II �. �1' 2 3 4 5 1 6 7 1 8 d sI L Y—�M --- 0 .. NnTDI _ ;PUPI FRANK.. WHEELER AVENUE : II VW WHEELER I 1 1 �EX�S-ING ,ES`OENTI L 2. Discussion Page 3 DRAFT PLAN 5—C-2016— KEY PLAN SECTION 51, PLANNING ACT, ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Sl1)�VEYORESCERTIFICATE�` OWNER'S CERTIFICATE 2399263 ONTARIO LTD. SOHEDULE OF LAND USE AVENUE NOM -- n eIROJECi No. P-2842 DWG_ No. - 1602 The revisions have minor impact to the original recommendations of PSD -070-16 and resolve the parking concerns. 2.1 Density By removing the townhouse product and replacing with single detached units, density is slightly reduced and the Official Plan Amendment is no longer required. The 17 unit plan generates a density of 30 units per unit hectare. Both the proposed lots on Gord Vinson Avenue and Frank Wheeler Avenue are considered small lot singles, being generally equivalent to a linked dwelling lot with a reduced setback on one side. Municipality of Clarington Addendum to Report PSD -070-16 2.2 On -street Parking Page 4 Recommending the increase in townhouse lot width from 6 metres to 7 metres ensured the development would have adequate on -street parking. This is fully discussed in Report PSD -070-16. Replacing the townhouse units with single detached dwellings will result in three off-street parking spaces per lot: one parking space in the garage and two outdoor spaces. In addition, there will be one on -street parking space for every four single detached units. Overall there will be more parking available for less units. To accommodate on -street parking, each driveway will be 4.6 metres wide and paired together with a neighbouring driveway. The 4.6 metres width is wide enough to accommodate two private outdoor parking spaces, but also narrow enough at the curb to provide for an adequate parking space along the street. 2.3 Grading Clarington Engineering Services received and accepted a revised grading plan in support of the revised plan. Some grading is necessary on adjacent lands to the east in an effort to eliminate the need for retaining walls. The applicant received permission from the adjacent landowner's to grade on their property. Final grading and coordination with the adjacent landowner will be resolved during the detailed design stage of the subdivision. 3. Concurrence Not applicable. 4. Conclusion As the amendment to the South West Courtice Secondary plan is no longer required based on the removal of the medium density units, Staff agrees with the request to close the Official Plan Amendment file. The revised draft plan of subdivision is acceptable. Revised conditions are included as Attachment 2 to this Addendum Report. An additional condition was inserted to ensure driveways are paired to protect future on street parking spaces. The applicant concurs with the revised conditions of Draft Approval. A revised Zoning By-law Amendment is contained in Attachment 3. The amendment places lands in the existing R2-76 zone permitting the 9 metre single detached units fronting on Gord Vinson Avenue. The zones applied reflect current standards seen in newer subdivisions with respect to lot coverage and setbacks, and allow for a built form that is consistent with the surrounding neighbourhood. Municipality of Clarington Addendum to Report PSD -070-16 5. Strategic Plan Application The recommendations contained in this report conform to the Strategic Plan. Submitted by: David J. Crome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services Reviewed by: (for) Curry Clifford, MPA, CMO, Interim CAO Staff Contact: Anne Taylor Scott, Senior Planner, 905-623-3379 ext. 2414 or ataylorscott .clarington.net Attachments: Attachment 1 — PSD -070-16 Attachment 2 — Revised Proposed Conditions of Draft Approval Attachment 3 — Revised Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment Page 5 The list of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision is available in the Planning Services Department. ATS/CP/df/tg Municipality of Clarington CICV*MR Attachment 1 to Addendum to Report PSD -070-16 Planning Services Report If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Municipal Clerk at 905-623-3379 ext. 2102. Report To: Planning and Development Committee Date of Meeting: December 5, 2016 Report Number: PSD -070-16 Resolution Number: File Number: COPA2016-0002, ZBA2016-0013 & S -C-2016-0002 By-law Number: Report Subject: Applications by 2399263 Ontario Limited (Matanda Homes) for a 21 - unit draft plan of subdivision on Gordon Vinson Avenue and Frank Wheeler Avenue in Courtice Recommendations: That Report PSD -070-16 be received; 2. That Amendment No. 108 to the South West Courtice Secondary Plan to permit Medium Density Residential units as contained in Attachment 1 be adopted and the by-law adopting the Official Plan Amendment contained in Attachment 2 to Report PSD -070-16 be passed; 3. That the application for Draft Plan of Subdivision S -C-2016-0002 submitted by 2399263 Ontario Limited be supported subject to redlined revisions and conditions as contained in Attachment 3 to Report PSD -070-16; 4. That the Zoning By-law Amendment application submitted by 2399263 Ontario Limited be approved as contained in Attachment 4 to Report PSD -070-16; 5. That once all conditions contained in the Official Plan and Zoning By-law with respect to the removal of the (H) Holding Symbol are satisfied, the By-law authorizing the removal of the (H) Holding Symbol be approved; 6. That the Durham Regional Planning and Economic Development Department and Municipal Property Assessment Corporation be forwarded a copy of Report PSD -070-16 and Council's decision; and 7. That all interested parties listed in Report PSD -070-16 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -070-16 Report Overview Page 2 This is a recommendation report for approval of the applications by 2399263 Ontario Limited (Matanda Homes) to create a residential plan of subdivision. Staff recommend approval of the proposed draft plan subject to red -lined revisions. This will result in the development of 8 single detached dwelling units and 11 street townhouse units, for a total of 19 units versus the original proposed 21 units. The plan requires an amendment to the South West Courtice Secondary Plan to allow for Medium Density residential development and an amendment to the Zoning By-law to place these lands in appropriate zones to permit this residential development. 1. Application Details 1.1. Owner/Applicant: 2399263 Ontario Limited (Matanda Homes) 1.2. Agent: KLM Planning Partners Inc. 1.3. Proposal: Proposed Amendment to Clarington Official Plan and Courtice South West Secondary Plan To place lands in the medium density residential designation. Proposed Draft Plan of Subdivision To create a 21 unit draft plan of subdivision consisting of eight lots for single detached residential units and two blocks for a total of 13 street townhouse units. Rezoning To rezone the lands from the existing Agricultural (A) zone to appropriate zones that permit the proposed residential development. 1.4. Area: 0.562 hectares 1.5. Location: 1445 Gord Vinson Avenue, Part of Lot 35, Concession 1, Former Township of Darlington 1.6. Roll Number: 1817 020 070 03500, 1817 010 070 03578 1.7. Within Built Boundary: Yes Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -070-16 2. Background 2.1 The subject applications were received and circulated for comments in late June 2016. Primary Heritage N Resource L 0 Z. z .f�■. w A LL A WHEELER AVE Page 3 L rx- DE ■ - ■i h ' NIONTAGUE AVE - - ;LU BATHG of ZEA 2016-0013 ` COPA 2016-0003 Figure 1: Key Map 2.2 The location and proposal for the subject lands is shown on Figure 1. This small infill subdivision includes a residential parcel along the original alignment of Bloor Street in Courtice, a small block from a previously registered plan of subdivision, and a portion of unopened road allowance that was conveyed in May 2016. 2.3 The lands are now within the South West Courtice Secondary Plan and designated for urban residential development. The development parcel has frontage along Gord Vinson Avenue (formerly Bloor Street) and Frank Wheeler Avenue with municipal services available on both frontages. 2.4 The proposal includes two street townhouse blocks fronting onto Gord Vinson Avenue (a total of 13 units) and eight single detached lots along Frank Wheeler Avenue. Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -070-16 Page 4 2.5 With the approval of the 2016 Clarington Official Plan, it is no longer necessary for a Clarington Official Plan Amendment for the townhouse development. The new policies allow for limited townhouse development internal to neighbourhoods provided it is appropriate. An amendment to the South West Courtice Secondary Plan to allow medium density development is required for the townhouse component of the proposal. 2.6 The applicant submitted the following studies in support of the applications and are reviewed in Section 7 of this report: • Planning Justification Report • Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report • Energy Conservation and Sustainability Plan • Archaeological Assessment • Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment These reports will be detailed in a subsequent report. 3. Land Characteristics and Surrounding Uses 91 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -070-16 3.1 The surrounding uses areas follows: Page 5 North - Existing semi -rural property, agricultural uses and residence identified as a "Primary Heritage Resource" South - Existing residential development in approved plans of subdivision East - Existing semi -rural property and residence West - Existing residential development in approved plans of subdivision 4. Provincial Policy 4.1 Provincial Policy Statement The Provincial Policy Statement identifies settlement areas as the focus of growth. Land use patterns shall be based on densities and a mix of land uses that efficiently use land, resources and infrastructure. Opportunities for redevelopment and intensification must be promoted. Municipalities must provide a variety of housing types and densities, and a range of housing options that are affordable to the area residents. Healthy and active communities should be promoted by planning public streets to be safe, meet the needs of pedestrians, foster social interaction and facilitate active transportation and community connectivity. Compact and diverse developments promote active modes of transportation such as walking and cycling. The applications are consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement. 4.2 Provincial Growth Plan The subject lands are within the defined Built Boundary. Population and employment growth will be accommodated by directing a significant portion of new growth to the built up areas through intensification and efficient use of existing services and infrastructure. The development of complete communities is encouraged by promoting a diverse mixof land uses, a mix of employment and housing types, high quality public open space and easy access to local stores and services. New transit -supportive and pedestrian -friendly developments will be concentrated along existing and future transit routes. The Growth Plan establishes minimum targets for residential development occurring annuallywithin each upper tier municipality to be within the built up area. The applications conform to the principles of the Growth Plan. 92 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -070-16 5. Official Plans 5.1 Durham Regional Official Plan Page 6 The Durham Regional Official Plan designates the subject lands Living Area. Lands within the Living Area designation shall be used predominantly for housing purposes incorporating the widest possible variety of housing types, sizes, and tenure. Living Areas shall be developed in a compact form through higher densities and by intensifying and redeveloping existing areas. The Durham Regional Official Plan requires a minimum intensification target of 32%for lands within the built boundary in Clarington. The applications conform to the Durham Regional Official Plan. 5.2 Clarington Official Plan The lands are designated Urban Residential. Urban Residential lands are predominately intended for housing purposes. Gord Vinson Avenue and Frank Wheeler Avenue are local streets. The proposed subdivision falls within the Bayview neighbourhood which has a housing target of 1250 low, 300 medium, and 125 high-density housing units, in addition to50 intensification units, for a total of 1,725 units by the year2016. The Urban Residential designation permits a density of between 10 and 30 units per hectare, and does not identify townhouse units as the predominant built form. The applicant requested a Clarington Official Plan Amendment to allow Medium Density development with the introduction of townhouse units and a development with a density of 38 units per hectare. 5.3 Clarington Official Plan as Amended by Amendment 107 On November 1, 2016, Council adopted the Official Plan Amendment 107 to bring the Clarington Official Plan into conformity with the Regional Official Plan and provincial policies. The direction for neighbourhood planning differs from the previous low, medium and high density residential framework. The amended Clarington Official Plan establishes urban structure typologies and built form directives for Centres, Corridors, Transportation Hubs, Waterfront Places, Edge of Neighbourhoods, Along Arterial Roads and Internal to Neighbourhoods. The subject lands are considered to be "Internal to Neighbourhood". Limited townhouse units are permitted with a maximum height of three storeys. Proposals for multi -unit residential must consider appropriateness of the site, compatibility, provision of suitable access points, traffic and parking impacts, massing and urban design policies. 93 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -070-16 5.4 South West Courtice Secondary Plan Page 7 The South West Courtice Secondary Plan currently designates the land Low Density Residential. The proposed Amendment to the Secondary Plan would redesignate a portion of the lands as Medium Density Designation to permit the requested townhouse units. 6. Zoning By-law Zoning By-law 84-63 zones the subject lands Agricultural (A) Zone. Zoning By- law84-63 does not have a future development zone and the Agricultural (A) Zone is often used for that purpose on lands within the urban areas. The proposed rezoning would place lands in residential zones that would permit single detached and street townhouse units. 7. Summary of Background Studies 7.1 Planning Justification Report prepared by KLM Planning Partners Inc., June 2016 The report provides an analysis of the development's conformity to Provincial, Regional and Clarington Official Plan land use planning policies. The Official Plan Amendment is required to place lands in a medium density designation given built form and density. An analysis of population and housing targets in the neighbourhood was completed and the introduction of 13 street townhouse units is modest and appropriate. The development was reviewed against the policies for medium density development and was found to be suitable in size and shape to accommodate the proposed density and built form. The development provides for adequate off-site parking and suitable amenity space is provided in rear yards. The Official Plan polices limit the number of townhouse units to generally not more than six attached units. The report identifies that because there is no development across the street and adequate on -street parking can be accommodated that the one block of seven townhouse units is appropriate. The report attached a draft Official Plan Amendment and a draft Zoning By-law amendment for consideration. The report finds that the development conforms to applicable land use planning policies and makes use of existing infrastructure, transit and public facilities. The development is consistent and compatible with neighbouring development and provides a density and built form that contributes to the completion of the neighbourhood. MI Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -070-16 Page 8 7.2 Functional Servicing and Stormwater Management Report prepared by Cole Engineering, June 2016 The report provides an overview of site servicing, grading and stormwater management techniques for the servicing of the lands. The report identifies that existing neighbourhood infrastructure was sized to accommodate the development of the subject lands, including a downstream stormwater management pond. 7.3 Energy Conservation and Sustainability Plan prepared by KLM Planning Partners Inc., June 2016 The plan identifies preliminary measures to address energy efficiency, air and water quality, solid waste management and enhancement of the natural environment. 7.4 Stage 1-2 Archaeological Assessment prepared by York North Archaeological Services Inc., May 25, 2016 The assessment did not uncover any archaeological resources on the site and no further archaeological assessment is recommended. 7.5 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment prepared by GHD, May 25, 2016 The property was found to have a low risk of existing soil contamination and is suitable for future residential development. No further soil investigation is warranted. 8. Public Submissions 8.1 During the review of the applications, a total of six individuals contacted staff regarding the applications. Planning staff received three written submissions via email. 8.2 Concerns raised to date include unit mix and the introduction of townhouse units, the lack of gas stations and commercial uses to serve area residents, school capacity, traffic and parking and impacts from area construction sites. 8.3 The neighbouring resident to the east has raised concerns about changes to grades post -development and potential impacts to his property. 95 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -070-16 9. Agency Comments 9.1 Regional Municipality of Durham Page 9 Regional Planning has no objection to the applications. The applications were found to conform to the Growth Plan, the Provincial Policy Statement and the Durham Regional Official Plan. The proposed Official Plan Amendment is exempt from Regional approval. Regional Works identified that sanitary and water services are available to accommodate these proposed lots. The development does not present any significant Regional transportation or transit impacts. Regional conditions were provided and included in the proposed Conditions of Draft Approval included as Attachment 3. 9.2 Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority The Conservation Authority has no objections to the proposal and provided technical comments to the applicant regarding grading and stormwater managementthat must be addressed. The Conservation Authority also provided standard conditions of approval. 9.3 Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board Students from this development would attend Dr. G.J. MacGillivray Public School, Courtice Intermediate and Courtice Secondary School. Board staff request that consideration be given to sidewalk connections and pedestrian routes to allowsafe access for students to Dr. G.J. MacGillivray. 9.4 Other Agencies Enbridge Gas, Canada Post and Rogers have no objections to the applications. 10. Departmental Comments 10.1 Engineering Services The applicant has submitted a Functional Servicing Report in support of this application which addresses grading, servicing and stormwater management for this proposed development. During the detailed design stage, the grading of the site should eliminate proposed retaining walls along the east limit of the development. Every effort must be made to preserve the trees along the east boundary of the proposed development. Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -070-16 Page 10 The Robinson Ridge and Huntington subdivisions were developed and services constructed anticipating development of these lands. The existing road network on Gord Vinson Avenue can support the two townhouse blocks, and Frank Wheeler Avenue can support eight single family dwellings without requiring any road improvements in thearea. Additional technical considerations would be part of the detailed review of the subdivision such as site alteration, construction traffic routes (to be limited to Gord Vinson Avenue), service connections, road restoration and driveway alignment to accommodate on -street parking. A cash -in -lieu of parkland payment would be required as a condition of approval. A former municipal road allowance is included within the limits of the draft plan of subdivision. This unopened road allowance was conveyed subsequent to approval of recommendations contained in the Legal Service Department Report LGL -002-16. 10.2 Emergency and Fire Services No concerns. 10.3 Operations Department Operations has provided comments regarding necessary streetlighting upgrades along Gord Vinson Avenue. The subdivision agreement would require provisions relating to protection measures for mud tracking on municipal streets. 11. Discussion 11.1 This small infill subdivision is located along the former Bloor Street alignment (nowGord Vinson Avenue) in a growing area of southwest Courtice. The development is very efficient and takes advantage of existing roads and servicing. The lots can be serviced and accessed from both Gord Vinson Avenue and Frank Wheeler Avenue. The development has a density of 38 units per net hectare. All housing units would contribute to intensification targets. 11.2 Staff recommends approval of the draft plan of subdivision subject to red -lined revisions shown in Attachment 3 in the draft plan of subdivision. Instead of 13 street townhouse units, each having a minimum lot frontage of six metres, staff recommend revisions to the draft plan of subdivision to permit 11 street townhouse units, each having a minimum lot frontage of seven metres. The applicant is not in support of this revision and believe the six metre frontage is consistent with existing townhouse development in the area. 97 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -070-16 Page 11 11.3 However, while the minimum frontage for a street townhouse unit in the Urban Residential Type Three (R3) Zone is six metres, Council supported staff's recommendation in 1999 to approve new street townhouse units with a minimum lot frontage of seven metres (Refer to PD -36-99 and PD -117-99). Requiring a minimum lot frontage of seven metres allows for driveways to be paired and provides for additional on -street parking which the six metre units cannot provide. See Section 11.5 for the result of applying this policy to this property. Approval of the existing townhouse units in the area pre -date the 1999 Council resolution. 11.4 The proposed townhouse component of the development, as red -lined revised, satisfies the applicable criteria of the Clarington Official Plan for multi -unit residential development, as follows: a) The size has a suitable size and shape to accommodate the townhouse development; b) The proposed development is compatible with surrounding development where there is a mix of single detached, semi-detached, street townhouse and condominium townhouse development. The proposed 11 townhouse units are limited and not significantly increasing the townhouse unit mix in the neighbourhood; c) The impact on local streets is minimized with the provision of adequate on- street parking. Local streets were constructed to accommodate development on the subject lands. d) Street townhouse units shall generally not comprise more than six attached units and shall not be located across the street from multi -unit residential development. With the recommended red -lined revision, the draft plan illustrates a block of five street townhouse units, and a block of six street townhouse units. As lands to the north are development, additional review of on -street parking availability will be reviewed. Lands on the north side could be developed with wider units to continue to provide more opportunities for on -street parking, or could be a private condominium development with on-site visitor parking. 11.5 On -street parking was identified as a concern at the Public Meeting stage. Zoning By-law 84-63 establishes minimum parking rates for differing types of residential units. All single detached and semi-detached units are required to have two outdoor parking spaces located in the driveway contained on the lot. Townhouse units do not require two outdoor parking spaces but require one parking space in the driveway, and the other space is provided in the attached garage that must be large enough to function as a parking space. These regulations have been in effect since 1999. Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -070-16 Page 12 In addition to Zoning By-law requirements, each development must demonstrate to Engineering Services through an on -street parking plan that on - street parking can also be accommodated at a rate of one space for every four single detached or semi-detached units, and one for every three townhouse units. On -street parking is not a requirement of the Zoning By-law, but is a standard that is reviewed during the review and design stage. On -street parking functions as additional visitor parking and limited overnight parking subject to obtaining the appropriate municipal parking permits. The subject draft plan of subdivision, as red -lined revised, can provide sufficient on -street parking on the north side of Frank Wheeler Avenue and on the south side of Gord Vinson Avenue in accordance with the rates provided above. Increasing the unit widths from six metres to six metres results in three additional on -street parking spaces in front of the street townhouse units (an increase from three spaces to six). In the interim and until lands to the north develop, there would be additional on - street parking available on the north site of Gord Vinson Avenue. 11.6 Engineering Services and the owner of the property to the east of the subject lands have identified grading as a concern. The applicant will be required to demonstrate that the grading of the development can be completed in a manner that takes into consideration transitions to new developmentto the west and the existing property to the east. 11.7 It is recommended that the subject lands be placed in two urban residential zones: R2-65 for the single detached dwellings R3-35 for the townhouse dwellings The zones applied reflect current standards seen in newer subdivisions with respect to lot coverage and setbacks are consistent with the surrounding neighbourhood. 11.8 The Holding (H) symbol will be applied on the proposed zoning to ensure adequate access and services are in place prior to development and will be lifted by Council when the appropriate conditions are met. 11.9 Conditions of draft approval have been prepared based on staff and agency comments and would be fulfilled as the subdivision application moves through the final approval stage. The owner of the lands will be required to enter into a subdivision agreement with the Municipality of Clarington. . T • Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -070-16 Page 13 11.10 The applicant concurs with the conditions of Draft Approval, but does not agree with the red -lined revisions shown that increases the minimum width of street townhouse units to seven meters and reduces the unit yield by two townhouse units as shown on the draft plan of subdivision included in Attachment 3. 11.11 All taxes owing to the Municipality of Clarington have been paid in full. 12. Concurrence Not applicable. 13. Conclusion In consideration of all agency, staff and public comments, it is respectfully recommended that the applications to permit a 21 -unit draft plan of subdivision be approved. 14. Strategic Plan Application The recommendations contained in this report conform to the Strategic Plan. Submitted by: David J. Crome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services Reviewed by: Curry Clifford, MPA, CMO, Interim CAO Staff Contact: Anne Taylor Scott, Senior Planner, 905-623-3379 ext. 2414 or ataylorscott clarington.net Attachments: Attachment 1 — Proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 108 Attachment 2 — Clarington Official Plan Amendment Adopting By-law Attachment 3 — Proposed Conditions of Draft Approval Attachment 4 — Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment 100 Municipality of Clarington Report PSD -070-16 Page 14 The following is a list of the interested parties to be notified of Council's decision: 2399263 Ontario Limited c/o Ray Abraham KLM Planning Partners Inc. c/o Billy Tung Dave Bandreth John Gilmore Susan Young Ashwin Balmri John Slemko Karolina Gardzinski ATS/CP/df;tg I:\^Department\LDO NEW FILING SYSTEMWpplication Files\SC Subdivision\S-C 2016\S -C-2016-0002 1445 Gord Vinson Ave\Staff Report\PSD-070-16 Matanda Homes.docx 101 Municipality of Clarington Attachment 1 to Report PSD -070-16 Amendment Number 108 To The South West Courtice Secondary Plan Purpose: To allow Medium Density Residential development (11 street townhouse units) Basis: This amendment is based on the applications by 2399263 Ontario Limited (Matanda Homes) for a draft plan of subdivision that includes 11 street townhouse units fronting onto Gord Vinson Drive in Courtice (COPA 2016-0002, S -C-2016-0002 and ZBA 2016-0013). Actual Amendment: The South West Courtice Secondary Plan Land Use Map (Map A) is hereby amended as shown on Exhibit "A" to this Amendment. Implementation: The provisions set forth in the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, regarding the implementation of the Plan, shall apply in regard to this Amendment. Interpretation: The provisions set forth in the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, regarding the interpretation of the Plan, shall apply in regard to this Amendment. 102 BLOOR ST. DRI EXHIBIT "A" TO AMENDMENT No. 108 TO THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON OFFICIAL PLAN mil ................. VVI Change From "Low Density Residential' To "Medium Density Residential' - - PLANNING AREA BOUNDARY FUTURE URBAN RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL - NEIGHBOURHOOD PARK PARKETTE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AREA STORM WATER FACILITY ®PUBLIC SECONDARY SCHOOL PUBLIC ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ®SEPARATE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE UTILITIES OH HERITAGE HOUSE ARTERIAL ROADS TYPE A ARTERIAL ROADS TYPE B ARTERIAL ROADS TYPE C --------- COLLECTOR ROADS ♦ LOCAL ROAD ACCESS INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT • ••• .•.. ••.* PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE ROUTES l.9� ZNO 0- 0/v -ON RA/L WA Y OO Ao, BASELINE ROAD r MAP A LAND USE SOUTH WEST COURTICE SECONDARY PLAN AUGUST. 2014 is Municipality of Clarington Attachment 2 to Report PSD -070-16 Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington By-law Number 2016 - being a By-law to adopt Amendment Number 108 to the Clarington Official Plan Whereas Section 17 (22) of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, as amended, authorizes the Municipality of Clarington to pass by-laws for the adoption or repeal of Official Plans and Amendments thereto (COPA 2016-0002); And Whereas the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to amend the Clarington Official Plan to permit the development a draft plan of subdivision in South West Courtice Secondary Plan area; Now Therefore Be It Resolved That, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. That Amendment Number 108 to the Clarington Official Plan being the attached Explanatory Text is hereby adopted. 2. This By-law shall come into force and take effect on the date of the passing hereof. By-law passed in open session this day of , 2016. Adrian Foster, Mayor C. Anne Greentree, Municipal Clerk 104 Municipality of Clarington CONDITIONS OF DRAFT APPROVAL File Number: S -C-2016-0002 Date: November 21, 2016 Part 1 - PLAN IDENTIFICATION Attachment 3 to Report PSD -070-16 The Owner shall have the final plan prepared on the basis of approved draft plan of subdivision S -C-2016-0002 prepared by KLM Planning Partners Inc. identified as project number P-2642, dated March 9, 2016, as redline revised, which illustrates a total of 19 residential dwelling units, including 8 single detached dwelling lots and 2 blocks for 11 street townhouse units. Part 2 — GENERAL 2.1 The Owner shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington (the "Municipality") that contains all of the terms and conditions of the Municipality's standard subdivision agreement respecting the provision and installation of roads, services, drainage, other local services and all internal and external works and services related to this plan of subdivision. A copy of the Municipality's standard subdivision agreement can be found at httD://clarinaton.net/documents/Dlannina/subdivision-aareement-feb20l4.Ddf 2.2 All works and services must be designed and constructed in accordance with the Municipality's Design Guidelines and Standard Drawings. Architectural Control 2.3 (1) The Owner shall be 100% responsible for the cost of the "Control Architect" to review and approve all proposed models and building permits, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services. (2) No residential units shall be offered for sale to the public on the draft plan until such time as architectural control guidelines and the exterior architectural design of each building has been approved by the Director of Planning Services. (3) No building permit shall be issued for the construction of any building on any residential lot or block on the draft plan, until the architectural control guidelines for the development and the exterior architectural design of each building and the location of the building on the lot has been approved by the Director of Planning Services. Marketing and Sales 2.4 (1) The Owner shall prepare a Land Use Plan which shows the draft plan and surrounding land uses. The Land Use Plan shall be in a format approved by the Director of Planning Services. Page 11 105 (2) The Owner shall erect and maintain a sign on the development site and/or in the sales office which shows the Land Use Plan as approved by the Director of Planning Services. (3) The Owner shall submit its standard Agreement of Purchase and Sale to the Director of Planning Services which includes all warning clauses/ notices prior to any residential units being offered for sale to the public. Site Alteration 2.5 Draft plan approval does not give the Owner permission to place or dump fill or remove fill from, or alter the grade of any portion of the lands within the draft plan. The Owner shall be required to obtain a permit from the Municipality under Site Alteration By-law 2008-114, as amended, for any such work. If any portion of the lands are within an area regulated by a conservation authority, the Owner shall obtain a permit from the conservation authority in addition to obtaining approval from the Director of Engineering Services regarding the intended haulage routes, the time and duration of the site alteration work and security relating to mud clean up, dust control and road damage. After registration of a subdivision agreement, the provisions of the Municipality's standard subdivision agreement shall apply to any proposed site alteration on the lands covered by the subdivision agreement. Part 3 - FINAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS — not applicable Part 4 — PLANS AND REPORTS REQUIRED PRIOR TO SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT/FINAL PLAN REGISTRATION 4.1 The Owner shall submit the following plans and report or revisions thereof: Functional Servicing (1) The Owner shall submit an updated Functional Servicing Report satisfactory to the Director of Engineering Services and Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. Environmental Sustainability Plan (2) The Owner shall submit an update of the Environmental Sustainability Plan based on the preliminary Environmental Sustainability Plan prepared by KLM Planning Partners Inc., dated June 2016, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services. Such plan shall identify the measures that the Owner will undertake to conserve energy and water in excess of the standards of the Ontario Building Code, reduce waste, increase recycling of construction materials and utilize non-toxic, environmentally sustainable materials and finishes. The plan shall include the location of a shade tree, or provision for a voucher from a local nursery to allow the purchaser to acquire a shade tree to provide passive solar gain during the various seasons. Page 12 106 Soils Management Plan (3) Prior to Authorization to Commence, the Owner shall provide a Soils Management Plan for review and approval by the Director of Engineering Services. Such plan shall provide information respecting but not limited to any proposed import or export of fill to or from any portion of the Lands, intended haulage routes, the time and duration of any proposed haulage, the source of any soil to be imported, quality assurance measures for any fill to be imported, and any proposed stockpiling on the Lands. All imported material must originate from within the Municipality of Clarington. The Owner shall comply with all aspects of the approved Soils Management Plan. The Director may require the Owner to provide security relating to mud clean up, dust control and road damage Part 5 —SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT Parkland 5.1 The Owner shall pay the Municipality an amount in lieu of conveying land for park or other public recreational purposes under section 51.1 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13. The Owner acknowledges that this amount, represents an equivalent of 1 ha per 300 dwelling units as included in the draft plan, and shall be based on the value of the Lands as of the day before the approval of draft Plan of Subdivision S -C-2016-0002. Existing Structures 5.2 The Owner shall obtain demolition permit(s) to remove all existing buildings and structures from the Lands, unless such buildings or structures are to be preserved for heritage purposes. Construction Traffic 5.3 Construction traffic for the subject development shall occur via Gord Vinson Avenue. No construction access, parking or storage will be permitted along Frank Wheeler Avenue. Part 6 — AGENCY CONDITIONS 6.1 Region of Durham (1) The Owner shall submit plans showing any proposed phasing to the Region for review and approval, if this subdivision is to be developed by more than one registration. (2) The Owner shall provide for the extension of such sanitary sewer and water Page 13 107 supply facilities which are external to, as well as within, the limits of this plan that are required to service this plan. In addition, the Owner shall provide for the extension of sanitary sewer and water supply facilities within the limits of the plan which are required to service other developments external to this subdivision. Such sanitary sewer and water supply facilities are to be designed and constructed according to the standards and requirements of the Region. All arrangements, financial and otherwise, for said extensions are to be made to the satisfaction of the Region, and are to be completed prior to final approval of this plan. (3) Prior to entering into a subdivision agreement, the Region shall be satisfied that adequate water pollution control plant and water supply plant capacities are available to the proposed subdivision. (4) The Owner shall grant to the Region any easements required for provision of Regional services for this development and these easements shall be in the location and of such widths as determined by the Region. (5) The Owner shall submit a letter of clearance from the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport for the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment prepared by York North Archaeological Services Inc. (dated May 25, 2016). (6) Prior to the finalization of this plan of subdivision, the Owner must provide a Regional Reliance Letter and Certificate of Insurance from GHD in accordance with the Region's Site Contamination Protocol. (7) The Owner shall satisfy all requirements, financial and otherwise, of the Region. This shall include, among other matters, the execution of a subdivision agreement between the Owner and the Region concerning the provision and installation of sanitary sewers, water supply, roads and other regional services. 6.2 Conservation Authority (1) Prior to any on-site grading or construction or final registration of the Plan, the Owner shall submit and obtain approval from the Municipality of Clarington, and the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority for reports describing the following: (a) The intended means of controlling and conveying stormwater flow from the site to an appropriate and acceptable location, including use of stormwater techniques which are appropriate and in accordance with the provincial guidelines.; (b) The intended means of providing water quality treatment for the site in accordance with provincial guidelines; and, Page 14 1 (c) The means whereby erosion and sedimentation and their effects will be minimized on the site during and after construction in accordance with the provincial guidelines. The report must outline all actions to be taken to prevent an increase in the concentration of solids in any water body as a result of on-site or other related works. (2) The Owner shall satisfy all financial requirements of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. This shall include Application Processing Fees and Technical Review Fees as per the approved Authority Fee Schedule. (3) The subdivision agreement between the Owner and the Municipality of Clarington shall contain, among other matters, the following provisions: (a) The Owner agrees to carry out the works referred to in Condition 1 and 2 to the satisfaction of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. (b) The Owner agrees to maintain all stormwater and erosion and sediment control structures and measures operating and in good repair during the construction period, in a manner satisfactory to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. 6.3 Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Sport (1) No demolition, grading or other soil disturbances shall take place on the lands prior to the Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Sport confirming that potential adverse impact to the archaeological resources identified in the archaeological assessment prepared by York North Archaeological Services, and dated May 25, 2016 have been addressed through measures such as preservation, resource removal, licensing and resource conservation requirements. 6.4 Canada Post Corporation (1) The Owner shall satisfy the following requirements of Canada Post Corporation and the Municipality with respect to the provision of mail delivery to the Subdivision Lands and the provision of community mailbox locations, as follows: (a) The Owner shall advise Canada Post as to the excavation date for the first foundation/first phase as well as the date development work is scheduled to begin. (b) If applicable, the Owner shall ensure that any street facing installs have a pressed curb or curb cut. (c) The Owner shall advise Canada Post as to the expected first occupancy date and ensure the site is accessible to Canada Post 24 hours a day. (d) The Owner will consult with Canada Post and the Municipality to determine suitable permanent locations for the Community Mail Boxes. Page 15 109 The Owner will then indicate these locations on the appropriate servicing plans. (e) The Owner agrees, prior to offering any units for sale, to display a map on the wall of the sales office in a place readily accessible to potential homeowners that indicates the location of all Community Mail Boxes within the development, as approved by Canada Post. (f) The Owner will provide a suitable and safe temporary site for a Community Mail Boxes upon approval of the Municipality (that is levelled with appropriate sized patio stones and free of tripping hazards), until curbs, sidewalks and final grading are completed at the permanent locations. Canada Post will provide mail delivery to new residents as soon as the homes or units are occupied. (g) Owner agrees to provide the following for each Community Mail Boxes and to include these requirements on the appropriate servicing plans (if applicable): i) Any required walkway across the boulevard, per municipal standards; and ii) Any required curb depressions for wheelchair access, with an opening of at least two meters (consult Canada Post for detailed specifications). 6.5 Utilities (1) The Owner shall coordinate the preparation of an overall utility distribution plan that allows for the safe installation of all utilities including the separation between utilities to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. (2) All utilities will be installed within the proposed road allowances. Where this is not possible, easements will be provided at no cost to the utility provider. Proposed easements are not permitted on lands owned by the Municipality unless it can be demonstrated that there is no other alternative. Such easements must not impede the long term use of the lands and will be at the discretion of the Director of Engineering Services. (3) The Owner shall cause all utilities, including hydro, telephone, and cable television within the streets of this development to be installed underground for both primary and secondary services. Part 7 — STANDARD NOTICES AND WARNINGS 7.1 The Owner shall include a clause in Agreements of Purchase and Sale for all Lots informing the purchaser of all applicable development charges in accordance with subsection 58(4) of the Development Charges Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, C.27. Page 16 110 7.2 The Owner shall include the notices and warnings clauses set out in Schedule 3 of the Municipality's standard subdivision agreement in Agreements of Purchase and Sale for all Lots or Blocks. 7.3 The Owner shall include the following notices and warning clauses in Agreements of Purchase and Sale for the Lots or Blocks to which they apply: Nearby Farm Operations The Owner shall include the following warning clause in agreements of purchase and sale for all lots within the draft plan of subdivision: "Farm Operations —There are existing farming operations nearby and that such farming activities may give rise to noise, odours, truck traffic and outdoor lighting resulting from normal farming practices which may occasionally interfere with some activities of the occupants." Canada Post Corporation The Owner shall include the following notice in the agreements of purchase and sale for all lots: "Mail Service - Purchasers are advised that Canada Post intends to service this property through the use of community mailboxes that may be located in several locations within this subdivision." Part 8 - CLEARANCE 8.1 Prior to final approval of the plan for registration, the Municipality's Director of Planning Services shall be advised in writing by, (a) the Region of Durham how Condition 6.1 has been satisfied; (b) the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, how Condition 6.2 has been satisfied; (c) the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, how Condition 6.3 has been satisfied; and, (d) Canada Post how Condition 6.4 has been satisfied. Part 9 - NOTES TO DRAFT APPROVAL 9.1 Terms used in these conditions that are not otherwise defined have the meanings given to them in the Municipality's standard subdivision agreement. 9.2 As the Owner of the proposed subdivision, it is your responsibility to satisfy all conditions of draft approval in an expeditious manner. The conditions of draft approval will be reviewed periodically and may be amended at any time prior to final approval. The Planning Act provides that draft approval, may be withdrawn at any time prior to final approval. Page 17 111 9.3 If final approval is not given to this plan within three (3) years of the draft approval date, and no extensions have been granted, draft approval shall lapse and the file shall be closed. Extensions may be granted provided valid reason is given and is submitted to the Director of Planning Services for the Municipality of Clarington well in advance of the lapsing date. 9.4 Where an agency requirement is required to be included in the Municipal subdivision agreement, a copy of the agreement should be sent to the agency in order to facilitate their clearance of conditions for final approval of this plan. The addresses and telephone numbers of these agencies are: (a) Durham Regional Planning Department, 605 Rossland Road East, P.O. Box 23, Whitby, Ontario L1 N 6A3 (905) 668-7721. (b) Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, 100 Whiting Avenue, Oshawa, Ontario LIH 3T3 (905) 579-0411. (c) Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, Ministry of Tourism Culture and Sport, Programs and Services Branch, Culture Division, 401 Bay Street, Suite 1700,Toronto, ON M7A OA7 (d) Canada Post, Metro Toronto Region, 1860 Midland Ave. 2nd Floor Scarborough ON, M1 P 5A1 I:\^Department\LDO NEW FILING SYSTEM\Application Files\SC Subdivision\S-C 2016\S -C-2016-0002 1445 Gord Vinson Ave\Draft Approved\Conditions of Draft Approval- Nov 1-16.docx Page 18 112 C) 0z¢ fir o I o °aZa C o • aaZ� O o%�gac JOy $ w E4 ' 3 O J rn EL w w w d F Q W `S g N� Zia U€ o oo O U o zOZ z €�€sorsa ��g cn a f~ I�LD• N Ld c o� 'hillA�� �B� z t i�d a aF 11 t cn � wo n�� n��s � Y �o e M mem U c' g z if/i�g a Y cnQ latiaWLLdY_�iJ cn _� a O _€� € N ,� V) os , o a f z O o (n U) W W = � 05 � z Ln O It tf) z 49'99 0 ca 0 Q Q r� Ii n, cr icc U U OZqQ O LL - 0 O c m Cn Q O cD o I w w O ' `' Q 2 � t� �VIIN--IUIS-38 JNII.SIX-1 w o 05 � Ln mNZ It 0 ca r^ Q r� Ii n, cr icc U OZqQ O W W W I m Cn Q O cD o I c, 7 t� a- M z 0p, t2 �� I ALN,00.60 m z = J 9i Y9 ItiGY.C{�.61Y (n<U7' n I LL- V) W� o m�0z z 0 LL- i CLQ CIL 0O J Q W Z — z RNU ONINNIJ Q 00 CD Elf Qzww 0 Q 0 IVILNJ JIS3p JiyjSIX� 05 Ln It r� u7 c, 7 m z = J 9i Y9 ItiGY.C{�.61Y (n<U7' n I LL- V) W� o m�0z z 0 LL- i CLQ CIL 0O J Q W Z — z RNU ONINNIJ Q 00 CD Elf Qzww 0 Q 0 IVILNJ JIS3p JiyjSIX� Municipality of Clarington Attachment 4 to Report PSD -070-16 Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington By-law Number 201 - being a By-law to amend By-law 84-63, the Comprehensive Zoning By-law for the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington Whereas the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to amend By-law 84-63, as amended, of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington for ZBA 2016-0013; Now Therefore Be It Resolved That, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. Schedule `3' to By-law 84-63, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone designation from "Agricultural (A) Zone" to • "Holding - Urban Residential Type Two ((H)R2-65) Zone", and; • "Holding - Urban Residential Type Three ((H)R3-35) Zone" as illustrated on the attached Schedule `A' hereto. 2. Schedule `A' attached hereto shall form part of this By-law. 3. This By-law shall come into effect on the date of the passing hereof, subject to the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act. By -Law passed in open session this day of , 2016 Adrian Foster, Mayor C. Anne Greentree, Municipal Clerk 114 This is Schedule "A" to By-law 2016- , passed this day of , 2016 A.D. GORD VINSON AVENUE LU .i;, ti �'-•�':::;�if;. •"��;'• �Jr�s= :ail +;, ';',• �1,,, �'s�,t;,. ,.1�•: ��•I �i �,, � t,. l•11� i '.'•, ll'J r/ 1�-. syl' '•i�,l lel r•rt i', it.l" ,•1r��,• •, .'l i,.••.,llr r"I '. .i Z(tl • I,i- ,1"I ' i . '" '1, 1:'r , •��••�,•1�•�%��d �,�1r '� y_.•II� 7,,�i. rlClii �l•��'%i,'i�t'•y''� LLI1 V 11''x• ,, �"t, tr .•, i1X i1 ••J.,," �.l .�;f ,':Ir.li'I�:� :'', ''LL „1i 71 FRANK WHEELER AVENUE ® Zoning Change From "A" To "(H)R2-6511 N Zoning Change From "A" To "(H)R3-3511 Courtice • ZBA 2016.0013 • Schedule 4 Adrian Foster, Mayor C. Anne Greentree, Municipal Clerk 115 Municipality of Clarington Attachment 2 to Addendum to PSD -070-17 Conditions of Draft Approval File Number: S -C-2016-0002 Date: February 1, 2017 Part 1 — Plan Identification The Owner shall have the final plan prepared on the basis of approved draft plan of subdivision S -C-2016-0002 prepared by KLM Planning Partners Inc. identified as project number P-2642, dated December 19, 2016 which illustrates a total of 17 residential dwelling units, including 8 single detached dwelling lots with minimum lot frontage of 10.48 metres and 9 single detached dwelling lots with minimum lot frontage of 9.3 metres. Part 2 — General 2.1 The Owner shall enter into a subdivision agreement with the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington (the "Municipality") that contains all of the terms and conditions of the Municipality's standard subdivision agreement respecting the provision and installation of roads, services, drainage, other local services and all internal and external works and services related to this plan of subdivision. A copy of the Municipality's standard subdivision agreement can be found at http://clarington.net/documents/planning/subdivision-agreement-feb20l4.pdf 2.2 All works and services must be designed and constructed in accordance with the Municipality's Design Guidelines and Standard Drawings. Architectural Control 2.3 (1) The Owner shall be 100% responsible for the cost of the "Control Architect" to review and approve all proposed models and building permits, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services. (2) No residential units shall be offered for sale to the public on the draft plan until such time as architectural control guidelines and the exterior architectural design of each building has been approved by the Director of Planning Services. (3) No building permit shall be issued for the construction of any building on any residential lot or block on the draft plan, until the architectural control guidelines for the development and the exterior architectural design of each building and the location of the building on the lot has been approved by the Director of Planning Services. Page 11 116 Marketing and Sales 2.4 (1) The Owner shall prepare a Land Use Plan which shows the draft plan and surrounding land uses. The Land Use Plan shall be in a format approved by the Director of Planning Services. (2) The Owner shall erect and maintain a sign on the development site and/or in the sales office which shows the Land Use Plan as approved by the Director of Planning Services. (3) The Owner shall submit its standard Agreement of Purchase and Sale to the Director of Planning Services which includes all warning clauses/ notices prior to any residential units being offered for sale to the public. Site Alteration 2.5 Draft plan approval does not give the Owner permission to place or dump fill or remove fill from, or alter the grade of any portion of the lands within the draft plan. The Owner shall be required to obtain a permit from the Municipality under Site Alteration By-law 2008-114, as amended, for any such work. If any portion of the lands are within an area regulated by a conservation authority, the Owner shall obtain a permit from the conservation authority in addition to obtaining approval from the Director of Engineering Services regarding the intended haulage routes, the time and duration of the site alteration work and security relating to mud clean up, dust control and road damage. After registration of a subdivision agreement, the provisions of the Municipality's standard subdivision agreement shall apply to any proposed site alteration on the lands covered by the subdivision agreement. Part 3 — Final Plan Requirements — not applicable Part 4 — Plans and Reports Required Prior to Subdivision Agreement/Final Plan Registration 4.1 The Owner shall submit the following plans and report or revisions thereof: Functional Servicing Report and Engineering Drawings (1) The Owner shall submit an updated Functional Servicing Report satisfactory to the Director of Engineering Services and Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. (2) Driveway widths shall not exceed 4.6 metres and shall be paired to accommodate on -street parking. Environmental Sustainability Plan (2) The Owner shall submit an update of the Environmental Sustainability Plan based on the preliminary Environmental Sustainability Plan prepared by KLM Planning Partners Inc., dated June 2016, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning Services. Such plan shall identify the measures that the Owner will Page 12 117 undertake to conserve energy and water in excess of the standards of the Ontario Building Code, reduce waste, increase recycling of construction materials and utilize non-toxic, environmentally sustainable materials and finishes. The plan shall include the location of a shade tree, or provision for a voucher from a local nursery to allow the purchaser to acquire a shade tree to provide passive solar gain during the various seasons. Soils Management Plan (3) Prior to Authorization to Commence, the Owner shall provide a Soils Management Plan for review and approval by the Director of Engineering Services. Such plan shall provide information respecting but not limited to any proposed import or export of fill to or from any portion of the Lands, intended haulage routes, the time and duration of any proposed haulage, the source of any soil to be imported, quality assurance measures for any fill to be imported, and any proposed stockpiling on the Lands. All imported material must originate from within the Municipality of Clarington. The Owner shall comply with all aspects of the approved Soils Management Plan. The Director may require the Owner to provide security relating to mud clean up, dust control and road damage Part 5 —Special Terms and Conditions to be Included in the Subdivision Agreement Parkland 5.1 The Owner shall pay the Municipality an amount in lieu of conveying land for park or other public recreational purposes under section 51.1 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13. The Owner acknowledges that this amount, shall be based on the value of the Lands as of the day before the approval of draft Plan of Subdivision S -C-2016-0002. Existing Structures 5.2 The Owner shall obtain demolition permit(s) to remove all existing buildings and structures from the Lands, unless such buildings or structures are to be preserved for heritage purposes. Construction Traffic 5.3 Construction traffic for the subject development shall occur via Gord Vinson Avenue. No construction access, parking or storage will be permitted along Frank Wheeler Avenue. 118 Page 13 Part 6 — Agency Conditions 6.1 Region of Durham (1) The Owner shall submit plans showing any proposed phasing to the Region for review and approval, if this subdivision is to be developed by more than one registration. (2) The Owner shall provide for the extension of such sanitary sewer and water supply facilities which are external to, as well as within, the limits of this plan that are required to service this plan. In addition, the Owner shall provide for the extension of sanitary sewer and water supply facilities within the limits of the plan which are required to service other developments external to this subdivision. Such sanitary sewer and water supply facilities are to be designed and constructed according to the standards and requirements of the Region. All arrangements, financial and otherwise, for said extensions are to be made to the satisfaction of the Region, and are to be completed prior to final approval of this plan. (3) Prior to entering into a subdivision agreement, the Region shall be satisfied that adequate water pollution control plant and water supply plant capacities are available to the proposed subdivision. (4) The Owner shall grant to the Region any easements required for provision of Regional services for this development and these easements shall be in the location and of such widths as determined by the Region. (5) The Owner shall submit a letter of clearance from the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport for the Stage 1 and Stage 2 Archaeological Assessment prepared by York North Archaeological Services Inc. (dated May 25, 2016). (6) Prior to the finalization of this plan of subdivision, the Owner must provide a Regional Reliance Letter and Certificate of Insurance from GHD in accordance with the Region's Site Contamination Protocol. (7) The Owner shall satisfy all requirements, financial and otherwise, of the Region. This shall include, among other matters, the execution of a subdivision agreement between the Owner and the Region concerning the provision and installation of sanitary sewers, water supply, roads and other regional services. 6.2 Conservation Authority (1) Prior to any on-site grading or construction or final registration of the Plan, the Owner shall submit and obtain approval from the Municipality of Clarington, and the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority for reports describing the following: Page 14 119 (a) The intended means of controlling and conveying stormwater flow from the site to an appropriate and acceptable location, including use of stormwater techniques which are appropriate and in accordance with the provincial guidelines.; (b) The intended means of providing water quality treatment for the site in accordance with provincial guidelines; and, (c) The means whereby erosion and sedimentation and their effects will be minimized on the site during and after construction in accordance with the provincial guidelines. The report must outline all actions to be taken to prevent an increase in the concentration of solids in any water body as a result of on-site or other related works. (2) The Owner shall satisfy all financial requirements of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. This shall include Application Processing Fees and Technical Review Fees as per the approved Authority Fee Schedule. (3) The subdivision agreement between the Owner and the Municipality of Clarington shall contain, among other matters, the following provisions: (a) The Owner agrees to carry out the works referred to in Condition 1 and 2 to the satisfaction of the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. (b) The Owner agrees to maintain all stormwater and erosion and sediment control structures and measures operating and in good repair during the construction period, in a manner satisfactory to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority. 6.3 Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Sport (1) No demolition, grading or other soil disturbances shall take place on the lands prior to the Ministry of Culture, Tourism and Sport confirming that potential adverse impact to the archaeological resources identified in the archaeological assessment prepared by York North Archaeological Services, and dated May 25, 2016 have been addressed through measures such as preservation, resource removal, licensing and resource conservation requirements. 6.4 Canada Post Corporation (1) The Owner shall satisfy the following requirements of Canada Post Corporation and the Municipality with respect to the provision of mail delivery to the Subdivision Lands and the provision of community mailbox locations, as follows: (a) The Owner shall advise Canada Post as to the excavation date for the first foundation/first phase as well as the date development work is scheduled to begin. Page 15 120 (b) If applicable, the Owner shall ensure that any street facing installs have a pressed curb or curb cut. (c) The Owner shall advise Canada Post as to the expected first occupancy date and ensure the site is accessible to Canada Post 24 hours a day. (d) The Owner will consult with Canada Post and the Municipality to determine suitable permanent locations for the Community Mail Boxes. The Owner will then indicate these locations on the appropriate servicing plans. (e) The Owner agrees, prior to offering any units for sale, to display a map on the wall of the sales office in a place readily accessible to potential homeowners that indicates the location of all Community Mail Boxes within the development, as approved by Canada Post. (f) The Owner will provide a suitable and safe temporary site for a Community Mail Boxes upon approval of the Municipality (that is levelled with appropriate sized patio stones and free of tripping hazards), until curbs, sidewalks and final grading are completed at the permanent locations. Canada Post will provide mail delivery to new residents as soon as the homes or units are occupied. (g) Owner agrees to provide the following for each Community Mail Boxes and to include these requirements on the appropriate servicing plans (if applicable): i) Any required walkway across the boulevard, per municipal standards; and ii) Any required curb depressions for wheelchair access, with an opening of at least two meters (consult Canada Post for detailed specifications). 6.5 Utilities (1) The Owner shall coordinate the preparation of an overall utility distribution plan that allows for the safe installation of all utilities including the separation between utilities to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services. (2) All utilities will be installed within the proposed road allowances. Where this is not possible, easements will be provided at no cost to the utility provider. Proposed easements are not permitted on lands owned by the Municipality unless it can be demonstrated that there is no other alternative. Such easements must not impede the long term use of the lands and will be at the discretion of the Director of Engineering Services. (3) The Owner shall cause all utilities, including hydro, telephone, and cable television within the streets of this development to be installed underground for both primary and secondary services. Page 16 121 Part 7 — Standard Notices and Warninas 7.1 The Owner shall include a clause in Agreements of Purchase and Sale for all Lots informing the purchaser of all applicable development charges in accordance with subsection 58(4) of the Development Charges Act, 1997, S.O. 1997, C.27. 7.2 The Owner shall include the notices and warnings clauses set out in Schedule 3 of the Municipality's standard subdivision agreement in Agreements of Purchase and Sale for all Lots or Blocks. 7.3 The Owner shall include the following notices and warning clauses in Agreements of Purchase and Sale for the Lots or Blocks to which they apply: Nearby Farm Operations The Owner shall include the following warning clause in agreements of purchase and sale for all lots within the draft plan of subdivision: "Farm Operations —There are existing farming operations nearby and that such farming activities may give rise to noise, odours, truck traffic and outdoor lighting resulting from normal farming practices which may occasionally interfere with some activities of the occupants." Canada Post Corporation The Owner shall include the following notice in the agreements of purchase and sale for all lots: "Mail Service - Purchasers are advised that Canada Post intends to service this property through the use of community mailboxes that may be located in several locations within this subdivision." Part 8 - Clearance 8.1 Prior to final approval of the plan for registration, the Municipality's Director of Planning Services shall be advised in writing by, (a) the Region of Durham how Condition 6.1 has been satisfied; (b) the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, how Condition 6.2 has been satisfied; (c) the Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, how Condition 6.3 has been satisfied; and, (d) Canada Post how Condition 6.4 has been satisfied. Part 9 — Notes to Draft Approval 9.1 Terms used in these conditions that are not otherwise defined have the meanings given to them in the Municipality's standard subdivision agreement. 9.2 As the Owner of the proposed subdivision, it is your responsibility to satisfy all conditions of draft approval in an expeditious manner. The conditions of draft Page 17 122 approval will be reviewed periodically and may be amended at any time prior to final approval. The Planning Act provides that draft approval, may be withdrawn at any time prior to final approval. 9.3 If final approval is not given to this plan within three (3) years of the draft approval date, and no extensions have been granted, draft approval shall lapse and the file shall be closed. Extensions may be granted provided valid reason is given and is submitted to the Director of Planning Services for the Municipality of Clarington well in advance of the lapsing date. 9.4 Where an agency requirement is required to be included in the Municipal subdivision agreement, a copy of the agreement should be sent to the agency in order to facilitate their clearance of conditions for final approval of this plan. The addresses and telephone numbers of these agencies are: (a) Durham Regional Planning Department, 605 Rossland Road East, P.O. Box 23, Whitby, Ontario L1 N 6A3 (905) 668-7721. (b) Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, 100 Whiting Avenue, Oshawa, Ontario LIH 3T3 (905) 579-0411. (c) Ministry of Tourism, Culture and Sport, Ministry of Tourism Culture and Sport, Programs and Services Branch, Culture Division, 401 Bay Street, Suite 1700,Toronto, ON M7A OA7 (d) Canada Post, Metro Toronto Region, 1860 Midland Ave. 2nd Floor Scarborough ON, M1 P 5A1 I:\^Department\LDO NEW FILING SYSTEM\Application Files\SC Subdivision\S-C 2016\S -C-2016-0002 1445 Gord Vinson Ave\Staff Report\Addendum to PSD-070-16\Addendum to PSD -070-17 Attachment 2.docx Page 18 123 Municipality of Clarington Attachment 3 to Addendum Report PSD -070-16 Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington By-law Number 2017 - being a By-law to amend By-law 84-63, the Comprehensive Zoning By-law for the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington Whereas the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to amend By-law 84-63, as amended, of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington for ZBA 2016-0013; Now Therefore Be It Resolved That, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. Schedule `3' to By-law 84-63, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone designation from "Agricultural (A) Zone" to: • "Holding - Urban Residential Type Two ((H)R2-65) Zone"; and • "Holding - Urban Residential Type Two ((H)R2-76) Zone" as illustrated on the attached Schedule `A' hereto. 2. Schedule `A' attached hereto shall form part of this By-law. 3. This By-law shall come into effect on the date of the passing hereof, subject to the provisions of Section 34 of the Planning Act. By -Law passed in open session this day of , 2017 Adrian Foster, Mayor C. Anne Greentree, Municipal Clerk 124 This is Schedule "A" to By-law 2017- , passed this day of , 2017 A.D. GORD VINSON AVENUE LU I�,, •'l l'~•�•., I1.1.1 fr •'�`�.'�%t.JS"�� //�r� ;; 5"�'�+, j•%t�,•�j�+r••i��,. V i�r. ! �r ,il"1'ri ,7f rJil 'y .. FiS_ .� � •, rll.l" � l,, •;•»,f,rY Z`•rA ,tr. I;�r '' r �i.Y r,r'�s•Ir•i ,: �r•; •'!i t �, •..li., znor' �i��'��-{9,�•r�, rlf rr'r'.Y" ;: '.i� r ., ,<s �, ,;ii -i ��: •;�;, ill iA�•, '1+•l`C f;",r ;;,rt'�r .l. ZLL LU FRANK WHEELER AVENUE ® Zoning Change From "A" To "(H)R2-76" N Zoning Change From "A" To "(H)R2-65" Courtice • ZBA 2016-0013 • Schedule 4 Adrian Foster, Mayor C. Anne Greentree, Municipal Clerk 125 Application By: Lindvest Properties (Clarington) Ltd. Proposed draft plan of subdivision, Clarington Official Plan amendment and rezoning to permit a total of 50 single detached dwelling lots. Public Meeting: Tuesday, February 21, 2017 r a w o f C i .a R, ry C r o N ' 46 es 186 187 1 ss D -- j FUTURE WHITEHAND DRIVE I e+.00N95 ----------- -------------------- --------------- - --- ,spo s I� 0�0 ° s 29 $ I T 28 44 45 46 47 4$ 49 50 n 1 45 1 44 I 43 42II 27 s 30 2 9 _2 1 REC ft- 4OMI-2567 4I ❑❑❑ —26 — 8 dee — 31 — wm4o W[ .x.47 �'I— VILLAGE KO�Fp LN�1/£�WCASTL£ j nw j 43 25 6LAND32 ,am ,D use SCHEDULE o ❑ USE wn/elxs ► ► or ► or AREA .mow 42 2+ $ i 9 / � 3Dx LLJ 23 34 41 .. rmK 30 3o z.sm V1 j N.le 3,.3r g 22 $ j g BtOCA 159 war, n[sipFtnui D - REG. PC. M-2 45 ? 45LOCK 160 a° N 35 3fi 37 8 38 39 40 i PARK w - I ,sm REG. PC. 4OM-2445 � wa,MIM IMFO WnoR kEauwffo mom a� 06C l ,s.ao ,x•ao ,xm L3J 20 5, ° WE K T - -rrm r..esr. `inuex a I surrnLL 1xm ,soo S awercs AUTHOWuM SUITALnrt's cenrlrATE akaffL _ e.ri Aeo Assoc. LTD. RIDY-ronF7c i mµvs A8 8 17 8 16 g 15 $ 14 j 13 12 11 � a ,,�„ ,� ,,,,,,Lm # I g a 8 a ar - j 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 j 6 9 10 - J ,xw ,xIMI DRAFT PLAN r- - - — -_ - - - - - _ - - - - - BLACK 158, PLAN 40U-2445 sw4rxt ,s4ai GR40Y DRIVE � AND PART of Lor M, 00KESSIDN 2 ------- �-- - {CEOCRAPF,IC 70WIN TH OF CIAAI[Ej ----- --------- --------- - NOW IH THE _ _.... _.__._.__....__. F I... MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTCN - - - - REGIONAL 3U1NK:IPA11iY OF OURK4U I I I I I I 32rl l f I REGIS ER£ PLAN o) vo W 713 4OM 2445 � �¢ � . I R C. PC. 01V-2 40 1 I Q _ — �]� I L — —_ _ - �1 I 4 ?Q ?] ?? ?3 24 ?5 26 27 28 79 .3LJ 31 L - O p - fi - 3 �u 36 37 38 39 4p eeieOO^� ' 11o037 U 2Iy 1 112 115 p cl 1 1 os s ea * — — — — 1 1, - L. - I - 1 - 1- --4 - L _ . I 1 I Background • Draft approved school block • School Board waived option on site • Adjacent to Rickard Neighbourhood Park � I I Future Development N�pENc Subject Site Future Walkway Area WHITEHAND DRIVE Rickard " Neighbourhood Park is 1s �a In �. GRADY DRIVE w r CO rA U)* "ERSKINE DRIVE J W o GOMMEAVENUE Public Notice and comments • One written submission received • Two oral submissions received DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL Applicant Lindvest Properties (Clarington) Limited s � - Site Location 90 Grady Drive, Newcastle - ._.- � Tuesday, February 21, 2017 -1 7 p.m. T 1TEHgNpoR Council Chambers (2"V,Floor) T T 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, ON L1C 3A6 develop s - 111 Contact the Planner Mitch Morawetz PROPOSAL: to a draft approved former school block and 13 single detached dwelling lot , _ --' ' '• - _.q� Planning Services in the Foster Neighbourhood as a subdivision — -- Department containing a total of 50 single detached dwelling X lots. vrop°sea s,bawri— rayon m, so s1"ale ae<-ned d—m"g loss P 905-623-3379 ext. 2411 ®www. FILES: Clarington Official Plan Amendment 2017- ir� - -r *0001, Zoning Bylaw Amendment 2017-000& ® 50 single detached dwel mmorawetz I on Subdivision 2017-0001 • fi- f �ilL1 l>I _ Policy Review and Comments • Public Elementary School symbols • Amendment 107 • No major issues raised to date from agencies r Future Development Subject Site N�� R Future Walkway Area WHITEHAND DRIVE LU JRickardNei LU LU GRADY DRIVE •t LU' w> LL) :, ,,. 0 GQMUEAVENUE '-" `,+I a