Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD-70-99 Addendum 2 DN: PD-70-99 . THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON REPORT Meeting: General Purpose and Administration Committee File# 1)/1 Res. #(;(Jf}-ff)'t31 Date: Monday, November 1,1999 Report #: Addendum No.2 to PD-70-99 _ File #:18T-95029, DEV 95-020 By-law # Subject: REZONING AND PLAN OF SUBDIVISION APPLICATION APPLICANT: BLACK CREEK DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED PART LOTS 29 AND 30, CONCESSION 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTON Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: Resolution A. 1. THAT Resolution GPA #359-99 as amended by Resolution GPA #360-99 be rescinded. Resolution B. 1. THAT Report PD- 70-99 and Addendum No. 1 and Addendum No.2 to Report PD-70-99 be received; 2. THAT the draft plan of subdivision application 18T-95029 filed by D.G. Biddle and Associates on behalf of Black Creek Developments be recommended for approval to Durham Region Planning Department subject to the conditions contained in Attachment No. 4 to this report and the red-line revised draft plan of subdivision contained in Attachment No.6 to this report; 3. THAT the rezoning application DEV 95-020 submitted by D.G. Biddle and Associates on behalf of Black Creek Developments be APPROVED and that the amending by-law contained in Attachment No.5 to this report be forwarded to Council for adoption; 4. THAT a by-law to remove the (H) Holding Symbol be forwarded to Council at such time as the conditions of draft approval have been satisfied; and 5. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. 1. BACKGROUND On June 21, 1999, Report PD-70-99 was forwarded for consideration to the General 654 ADDENDUM TO REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 2 Pwpose and Administration Committee Meeting (Attaclunent No.1). The Committee referred the report back to staff requesting that the Ministry of Natural Resources be consulted regarding their work on the determination of the boundaries of the Black- Farewell Creek Wetland Complex. The Ministry advised in correspondence dated June 25, 1999 that the lands located south of the proposed extension to George Reynolds Drive were not included in the wetland evaluation. It was the understanding of the Ministry that development of these lands had been draft approved. Since the Ministry had not yet finalized the evaluation of the Black- Farewell Creek Wetland Complex it is the responsibility of the Municipality to determine whether the 1998 Environmental Impact Study conducted by Gartner Lee and Associates adequately takes into account the wetlands in the area. Following receipt of the Ministry's correspondence, the Planning Department forwarded an addendum to Report PD-70-99 to the July 5, 1999 General Pwpose and Administration Committee Meeting (Attaclunent No.2). The report stated that the 1998 EIS adequately addressed the wetland issues for the subject lands. The Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority concurred with this statement. At the meeting the Committee passed the following Resolution GPA #359-99 as amended by Resolution GPA #360-99: "THAT Addendum Report to PD-70-99 be received; THAT Report PD-70-99 be received; THAT the following recommendations contained in Report PD-70-99 be approved once the Ministry of Natural Resources has established the wetland boundaries and determined that they will not be negatively impacted by the development. THAT the draft plan of subdivision application 18T-95029 filed by D.G. Biddle and Associates on behalf of Black Creek Developments be recommended for approval to Durham Region Planning Department subject to the conditions contained in Attaclunent No.3 of Report PD-70-99; 655 ADDENDUM TO REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 3 THAT the rezoning application DEV 95-020 submitted by D.G. Biddle and Associates on behalf of Black Creek Developments be approved and that the amending by-law attached to Report PD-70-99 be forwarded to Council for adoption; THAT a by-law to remove the (H) Holding Symbol be forwarded to Council at such time as the conditions of draft approval have been satisfied; and THAT all interested parties listed oin Report PD-70-99 and any delegation be forwarded a copy of Report PD-70-99 and be advised of Council's decision." The Ministry of Natural Resources released the completed wetland evaluation on August 20, 1999. There were no wetlands or forests mapped on the lands subject to l8T-95029, however, the wetland mapping did not close off the wetland and forest boundaries. A revision to the wetland boundary was faxed to the Planning Department on August 25, 1999. The revision, although providing a limit to the wetland and forest, acknowledged that there are wetlands located south of the mapped wetland complex. These wetlands were not included within the evaluation of the wetland complex and as such are not identified as part ofthe provincially significant wetland complex. The Ministry of Natural Resources advised that since the Provincial downloading of responsibilities, the Ministry "no longer provides comments on site specific municipal land use planning applications". As such, they will not be providing comments with respect to draft plan of subdivision l8T-95029 and the impact it may, or may not have on the wetland complex. In that the previous resolutions can not be fulfilled, it is recommended that Council rescind Resolution GP A #359-99 as amended by Resolution GP A #360-99 prior to consideration of the other recommendations contained within this report. Upon review of the Ministry of Natural Resources response, the Planning Department requested Gartner Lee and Associates to revisit the site and determine: . the extent of wetlands on the subject lands; and 656 ADDENDUM TO REPORT PD-7Q-99 PAGE 4 . if any revisions are necessary to the development proposal to ensure that there will be no negative impact on the functions of the provincially significant wetland and on-site wetlands. 2. CONSULTANTS FINDINGS The consultant's report is included as Attachment No.3 to this report. The following is a summary of the consultant findings. The Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority has reviewed the consultants findings and concurs with the report. 2.1 Extent of Wetlands on the Subject Lands The consultant determined that the subject lands possess a high water table and are conducive to the development ofsmall wetland communities less than 0.5 ha in size. The Ontario Wetland Evaluation System requires the minimum size criteria of a wetland to be 0.5 hectares. Examination of the vegetation communities on site revealed that the area is dominated by facultative species (species which can survive in moist or dry soils). It was noted that there were very few obligate wetland species observed. Obligate species rely completely on moist soils for survival. When a vegetation community is difficult to classify, emphasis is placed on the canopy species as these species are the most deep- rooted and are better indicators of the long-term soil conditions. The consultant confirms that the canopy cover comprises upland forest species. The consultant identified two distinct wetland units on the subject lands: the Mineral Thicket Swamp; and the Willow Mineral Deciduous Swamp. The Mineral Thicket Swamp was previously identified in the EIS and is located where the extension of George Reynolds Drive is proposed. This site is comprised of common wetland species and does not contain any rare, uncommon or sensitive plant or wildlife species. It is the consultant's opinion that comparable and even better habitat is available elsewhere within the Black-Farewell Creek Wetland Complex. The second distinct wetland unit is the Willow Mineral Deciduous Swamp found within the floodplain of the main tributary to Black Creek. Locally and regionally rare plant 657 ADDENDUM TO REPORT PD-7o-99 PAGE 5 species are found within this wetland unit. These two wetland units are larger than 0.5 ha and perform a significant water conveyance function. The one site supports locally and site regionally rare plants. In the opinion of the consultant these units could have been complexed into the Black- Farewell Creek Wetland Complex if the Ministry had conducted a wetland evaluation on the subject lands. 2.2 Possible Impacts and Proposed Mitigation Methods The following impacts were first identified in the original EIS. The consultant was requested to review these impacts having consideration for the provincially significant wetlands and the on-site wetlands. 2.2.1 Extension to George Reynolds Drive The consultant identified a number of potential impacts the development may have on the Black-Farewell Creek Wetland Complex including the impact to the mineral thicket swamp that would be generated by the extension of George Reynolds Drive. The extension of the road will not obliterate the wetland as the southeast portion of this wetland will be preserved. Previous development approvals on lands located to the west of the subject site have fixed the geometry of the road, making realignment of this road virtually impossible. The Provincial Policy Statement provides for the construction of roads through provincially significant wetlands when other alternatives do not exist. The 1998 EIS recommended a number of mitigation methods in the construction of the extension of George Reynolds Drive that would maintain groundwater and surface water flow. The use of permeable bedding materials to maintain groundwater flow beneath the road was suggested, as was using compacted native material to prevent the redirection of groundwater flow along the roadbed. To help maintain surface water flow, the consultant proposed that construction of the road incorporate many small, horizontal culverts to facilitate sheet flow of water beneath the road. 658 ADDENDUM TO REPORT PD-7o-99 PAGE 6 2.2.2 Wildlife Habitat The consultant stated that the impact this development would have on the functions of the Black-Farewell Creek Wetland Complex would be minimal. The lands subject to draft plan of subdivision 18T-95029 do not possess habitat that can support forest area sensitive species, these species were found in the higher quality habitat located to the north of the subject lands. In addition, wetland-associated bird species are not commonly found in the area. The consultant noted that the loss of habitat on site can be compensated by the provision of a 50 to 100 metre wide wildlife habitat corridor located in association with the Black Creek tributary. 2.2.3 Groundwater and Surface Water In addition to the mitigation recommendations for the protection of groundwater and surface water under the extension of George Reynolds Drive, the 1998 EIS also recommended other mitigation methods to reduce the impact of the development on groundwater and surface water. For example, it is recommended that trench plugs be placed every 10m along the trenches of buried services, that rooftop runoff infiltration be utilized and that the groundwater from the weepers placed under and around the residential units be discharged to the tributary. Also, the development setback to the wetland adjacent to the tributary ranges from between 10 - 40 metres. The consultant advised that this distance is enough to filter surface water runoff from adjacent properties. The 1998 EIS also recommended a landowner's education package be prepared which would encourage the landowner to maintain as much natural vegetation in the rear yards to enhance the filtering function. The landowner's education package will also promote the conservative use of herbicides, pesticides and fertilizers. 2.2.4 Plant Species The consultants in the 1998 EIS identified 7 significant plant species on the lands subject to 18T -95029. In order to preserve these species, the consultant recommended that the plants located on lands proposed for development be staked and transplanted to the valley land block identified as Block 99 on the draft plan of subdivision. 659 ADDENDUM TO REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 7 3. DISCUSSION 3.1 The consultant has confirmed that there are two wetlands located on the subject site which would have been included in the Black-Farewell Creek Wetland Complex if the Ministry of Natural Resources had conducted an evaluation of the subject lands. One wetland is being protected, the second wetland will be impacted upon by the extension of George Reynolds Drive. As such, the consultant confirms that there will be negative impacts on the environmental features in the area. The consultant found that the remainder of the site is not as environmentally significant as those lands located to the north of the subject site. The proposed development protects as much of these areas as realistically possible without a complete prohibition on development. Mitigation measures are proposed for the identified impacts as detailed in Sections 2.2 and 3.3 of this report. 3.2 The designation of lands for urbanization has been in place since the 1976 Durham Region Official Plan. This designation and subsequent designations in both municipal and regional official plans, have inevitably led to a conflict between the natural environment and approved land uses. An EIS was conducted which thoroughly examined the environmental sensitivity of the subject lands, and proposed acceptable methods to mitigate the impacts of this development on the Black-Farewell Creek Wetland Complex. The applicant has made many revisions to the proposal in order to significantly reduce the impact of development on the lands. These revisions include a significant reduction in the allowable density of the site. It is inevitable that there will be impacts on the natural environment and wildlife habitat. Every possible action will be taken to preserve the most significant components and to mitigate the impacts of urbanization. 3.3 Although the consultant did not recommend any further changes to the plan of subdivision, the Clarington Official Plan in Section 14.4.3 requires a minimum setback of 5 metres from an environmental protection area. Since the finalization of the wetland boundary by the Ministry of Natural Resources the following revisions to the draft plan of subdivision are recommended. 660 ADDENDUM TO REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 8 1. That the Lot 39 be renamed Block 39. Block 39 and Block 103 be dedicated to the Municipality free and clear of any and all encumbrances. This maintains as wide as possible the corridor between this development and the identified wetland complex in order to maintain as many of the wetland functions as possible. 2. That the north limit of lots 40 to 45 inclusive, be red-line revised to delete the northerly 5 metres. The northerly 5 metre strip (new Block 107) provides the minimum of a 5 metre setback from an environmental protection area (in this case being the identified southern limit of the Black-Farewell Creek Wetland Complex). Block 107 shall be deeded to the Municipality free and clear of all encumbrances and zoned Environmental Protection. 3. That Lots 40 to 45 inclusive be red-line revised in order to accommodate an increase in the lot frontage of Lot 40 from 15 metres to 18 metres. The loss of the 5 metres at the rear of this lot necessitates this increase in lot frontage to ensure that the lot area requirements for a single detached dwelling will be met. 4. That Lots 40 to 45 inclusive as red-line revised be zoned Holding - Urban Residential Special Exception ((H) RI-49) to permit only single detached dwellings, to increase the rear yard setback to 10 metres to increase the setback 0 f accessory structures to 5 metres and to establish a natural landscape zone for the northerly 5 metres of the rear yards. The increased rear yard setbacks would further increase the buffer area between the development and the provincially significant wetland. 5. The red-lined revisions to Lot 45 in effect severs Block 102. As such, the north portion of Block 102 shall be identified as Block 108. 661 ADDENDUM TO REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 9 4. CONCLUSION The additional work undertaken by the Municipality's consultant confirmed that if the Ministry of Natural Resources had evaluated the subject site, portions would have met the criteria to be included in part of the Black-Farewell Creek Wetland complex. They also confirmed that negative environmental impacts will result from this development, in particular, the impact to the Mineral Thicket Swamp. Notwithstanding the above, the consultant is of the opinion that the impacts are acceptable or can be successfully mitigated. Red-line revisions to the plan of subdivision are recommended to provide a buffer area for the provincially significant wetland north of the subject site (Attachment No.6). It is recommended that these applications be approved subject to revised conditions of draft approval contained within for the plan of subdivision Attachment #4 and the revised amending zoning by-law contained in Attachment #5. Respectfully submitted, Reviewed by, r)t~~ David J. rome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Director of Planning & Development Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P., R.P.P., Chief Administrative Officer RH*FW*cd October 20, 1999 Attachment No.1 - Report PD-70-99 Attachment No.2 - Addendum No. 1 to Report PD-70-99 Attachment No.3 - Correspondence from Gartner Lee & Associates Attachment No.4 - Revised Conditions of Draft Approval dated October 1999 Attachment No.5 - Revised Amending By-law dated October 1999 Attachment No.6 - Red-lined Draft Revised Plan of Subdivision Attachment No.7 - Draft Plan of Subdivision by the Applicant 662 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF ClARINGTON ATTACHMENT NO.1 REPORT Meeting: General Purpose and Administration Committee File# Date: Monday, June 21, 1999 Res. # Report #: PD-70-99 File #: mv 95-020 & 18T-95029 By-law # Subject: REZONING AND PLAN OF SUBDIVISION APPLICATION APPLICANT: BLACK CREEK DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED PART LOTS 29/30, CONe. 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTON FILE NO.: mv 95-020; 18T-95029 Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PD-70-99 be received; 2. THAT the draft plan of subdivision application 18T-95029 filed by D. G. Biddle and Associates on behalf of Black Creek Developments be recommended for approval to Durham Region Planning Department subject to the conditions contained in Attachment No.3 of th is report; 3. THAT the rezoning application mv 95-020 submitted by D. G. Biddle and Associates on behalf of Black Creek Developments be APPROVED and that the amending by-law attached hereto be forwarded to Council for adoption; 4. THAT a by-law to remove the (H) Holding Symbol be forwarded to Council at such time as the conditions of draft approval have been satisfied; and 5. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. 1. APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Applicant: D. G. Biddle and Associates 1.2 Owner: 1.3 Rezoning: Black Creek Developments Limited From - Urban Residential Type One, Holding - Urban Residential Type Four ((H)R4), Agricultural (A), Agricultural Exception (A-B) and Environmental Protection (EP). 666 REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 2 1.4 Area: To - a zone appropriate to permit the development of 115 residential units comprising of 38 - 15 metre single family detached units, 39 - 12 metre single detached units and 38 semi-detached units. In addition, a block for parkland (0.48 ha) has been provided as well as an open space block (4.77 ha) 14.32 ha 2. LOCATION 2.1 The subject lands are located in Part of Lots 29 and 30, Concession 3, former Township of Darlington. The municipal address of the property is 3200 Courtice Road. The lands are situated just north of Jane Avenue, Glenview Road and Westmore Street in Courtice (Attachment No.1). To the west of the subject property is a registered plan of subdivision 18T-91006. 3. BACKGROUND 3.1 On March 28, 1995 Staff received an application (DEV 95-020) to amend the Municipality's Comprehensive Zoning By-law to permit this residential development. On April 5, 1995 the Municipality received correspondence from the Region of Durham stating that a subdivision application (18T-95029) had been submitted for the subject lands. 3.2 The original application comprised 144 medium density units, 10 - 15 m single detached units, 34 - 12 m single detached units and 28 - 9 m detached units for a total of 216 units. The original application did not have any dedicated parkland and had 3.14 ha of open space/valley lands. Numerous revisions have been made to the plan of subdivision and the plan now reflects the recommendations of the Environmental Impact Study, the traffic study, public input and Council Resolution HGPA 270-99 to 289-99H dealing with HParking in Residential AreasH. Generally, 667 REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 3 with each reiteration of the plan of subdivision more open space and parkland was provided and fewer residential units were proposed. 3.3 Numerous residents spoke out at the original public meeting held on July 10, 1995 and at subsequent public meetings. Many of the concerns expressed at these meetings are detailed in Section 7.2 of this Report. 3.4 Due to the environmental sensitivity of the lands, the site was subject to an Environmental Impact Study. The study has been completed and the results have been expressed in Staff Report PD-59-98 heard on May 4, 1998. Section 9.1 of this report briefly summarizes some of the key elements of this EIS. 4. EXISTING AND SURROUNDING USES Existing Uses: Surrounding Uses: Vacant East West - North South - Vacant and existing residential Registered Plan of Subdivision 18T-91006 and existing residential Woodlot and existing residential Existing residential 5. OFFICIAL PLAN POLICIES 5.1 The subject lands are designated "Living Area" in the Durham Region Official Plan. Within the Clarington Official Plan, the subject lands are designated "Urban Residential", "Medium Density Residential" and "Environmental Protection Area". Lands designated "Urban Residential" shall not exceed a density of 30 units per net hectare. lands Designated "Medium Density Residential" shall not exceed a density of 60 units per net hectare. The density identified in the Clarington Official Plan largely recognized the higher density allocated to the lands in the previous Town of Newcastle Official Plan. In consideration of the environmental sensitivity of the 668 REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 4 lands and the revisions made to the plan to meet the new "residential parking area" requirements, the medium density component of this application has been removed from the plan of subdivision. The tributary and adjacent lands possess the designation of "Environmental Protection". Development including structures, other than flood control structures are not permitted on lands so designated. Development located within or adjacent to a natural feature identified on Map C of the Official Plan must complete an Environmental Impact Study (EIS). Information with respect to the EIS is provided in Section 9.2. 6. ZONING BY-LAW PROVISIONS 6.1 The subject lands are zoned "Urban Residential Type One (Rl)", "Holding - Urban Residential Type Four ((H)R4)", Holding - Urban Residential Type Two Exception ((H) R2-3), Agricultural (A), Agricultural Exception (A-8) and Environmental Protection (EP). Lands zoned 'R4' shall be for apartments, lands zoned 'R2-3' will only allow single detached dwellings and lands zoned 'Rl' shall allow single and semi-detached residential units. Agriculturally zoned lands shall be used for farm and farm related purposes. The 'A-8' zone allows a golf course in addition to agricultural operations. The 'EP' zone allows conservation and forestation. 7. PUBLIC MEETING 7.1 As noted earlier in the report, a number of residents provided comments when the original application was submitted. The concerns expressed by the public at the July 10, 1995 Public Meeting and at subsequent meetings, and those concerns identified in various letters, can be summarized into a number of issues. . Environment - Residents expressed concerns about the impact this proposed development would have on the environment, in particular the woodlot that now exists. Th~y were also concerned with a loss of green space, removal of trees, impact on groundwater and impact on air quality. . Wells - The homes in the area are currently on private services (well and septic). Residents are concerned that the proposed development will have a negative impact on their well water. If wells are impacted, residents want assurance that 669 REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 5 potable water will be provided with no financial burden placed on them . Traffic - Residents have expressed a great deal of concern with the post development traffic and the construction traffic that would be generated by this development. Their concerns are itemized below: i} the volume of traffic; ii) the safety of the children in areas where there currently exist no sidewalks; iii) the ability of the existing condition of the neighbourhood roads to withstand an increase in traffic; Iv} who will pay for the cost of improvements made to their street; v) prohibit the extension of Jane Avenue; vi) do not allow the extension of Fourth Street; vii} construction traffic be restricted from travelling the roads in their neighbourhood; viii) Courtice HigtJ School and Courtice North Public School are both located on Nash Road. What is the impact on traffic volumes on Nash Road if this development is approved; ix) requested a traffic study be conducted. . Compatibility - Some residents were concerned that the proposed development is not in keeping with the existing neighbourhood. They do not want this development to impact upon the integrity of the area. They would like to see the construction of homes on lots with similar lot sizes to the ones existing today. They are opposed to the higher density components of this proposal. . School Capacity - Some residents have noted that the nearby schools are accommodating students in portables and question whether the schools can support more students. . Emergency Services - A concern was raised that emergency services are limited and that new development would further compromise the delivery of emergency services such as fire and police protection. . Property Tax - Many were concerned that this development would have an impact on their property taxes. They do not feel that they should contribute any further to the tax base of an increase need for educational and municipal services generated by this development. . Park and Fencing - Residents have asked that a parkette be provided in the neighbourhood and that fencing be erected at the rear of all existing abutting homes prior to on-site construction. 670 REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 6 8. AGENCY COMMENTS 8.1 In accordance with departmental procedures, the application was circulated to obtain comments from other departments and agencies. The following agencies were circulated: Municipality of C1arington Public Works Department; Municipality of Clarington Fire Department; Ontario Hydro; Peterborough Victoria Northumberland Clarington Separate School Board, Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board; Central lake Ontario Conservation Authority; Durham Region Planning Department; and Durham Region Works Department. 8.2 The Municipality of Clarington Public Works Department has no objection to the application. The Works Department is satisfied with the traffic study and agree to the recommendations and conclusions contained within that study. The following are conditions which must be satisfied: . That the 0.3 metre reserves be granted to the Municipal ity free and clear of any encumbrances; . No development will be permitted on Fourth Avenue until the road is physically connected with Jane Avenue. The developer is responsible for 100% of the costs associated to provide the required road connections. The cost shall include any works on existing road allowances external to this draft plan which are necessary to accommodate the proposed development traffic. . Prior to the authorization to commence the construction of a phase subsequent to phase 1, the developer shall be prepared to construct George Reynolds Drive to an urban collector standard from the east limit of this plan of subdivision to Courtice Road, or the developer has satisfied the Director of Public Works that he has made every reasonable effort to construct the extension of George Reynolds Drive. . That George Reynolds Drive and Street B be constructed to the east limit of the subdivision. Lot 45 will remain frozen until such time that George Reynolds Drive is extended easterly beyond the limits of the plan of subdivision. . The Developer is responsible for the construction of Jane Avenue to an urban road standard from Fourth Avenue northerly to the south limit of this plan of subdivision in order to facilitate the servicing of Lot 25 and phase 2 and phase 3. 671 REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 7 . No development will be permitted until such time as the adjacent draft plan of subdivision 18T-91 006 has been constructed in a manner which provides a road connection to Trulls Road via George Reynolds Drive. . The development cannot proceed until the Municipality has approved the expenditure of funds for the provision of road construction and installation of sidewalks on Jane Avenue, Fourth Avenue or Westmore Street, as well as any other external works or services which have been included in the Municipality's Development Charge By-law and have been deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works to service this development. . All stormwater management works are to be constructed to the satisfaction of the Conservation Authority and the Director of Public Works. . A Stormwater Management Implementation Report shall be provided by the applicant for the sequential construction of the stormwater management works necessary for the entire watershed and the report shall address the impacts of developing this plan of subdivision in the absence of the balance of the watershed. Development of this plan of subdivision will not be permitted until all oversized downstream works necessary to accommodate drainage from the subject draft plan have been constructed in a manner satisfactory to the Director of Public Works. . A Master Grading and Drainage plan be prepared detailing the configuration of the on-site storm sewer system and the conveyance of the overland flow from this subdivision. . A walkway shall be constructed on Block 99 to provide a pedestrian connection between Block 98 and the adjoining subdivision to the south. . That Block 100 (park area) and Block 99 be dedicated free and clear of any encumbrances to the Municipality. 8.3 The Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority has no objection to the application. They have stated that the application conforms to the provisions of the Environmental Impact Study and development of the subdivision must follow the recommendations of the EIS and fulfil the requirements of mitigation. Permits will be required. and the design of the extension of George Reynolds Drive will be subject to CLOCA approval. The detailed design of the stormwater system shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Authority. 672 REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 8 8.4 The Durham Region Planning Department stated that the application conforms to the EIS and to all relevant policies contained within the Durham Region Official Plan. 8.5 The Durham Region Works Department requested that a number of conditions be included within the subdivision agreement. The conditions include among other things, the financial obligation of the applicant, completion of sanitary sewer and water services design to the satisfaction of the Works Department, and the acquisition and future dedication of all required easements for servicing. These conditions will be incorporated in the Region's conditions of subdivision approval. 8.6 The School Boards have no objection to the application, however they request that sidewalks be provided and that the walkways be completed within the first phase of the subdivision. 9. BACKGROUND STUDIES 9.1 In conjunction with this application, two background studies were conducted. The first study being the environmental impact study as required by the Official Plan. The second study is a traffic study. A neighbourhood design plan has also been completed in accordance with the Clarington Official Plan. 9.2 Environmental Impact Study A four season environmental impact study was conducted for the lands. The study determined that the lands are subject to a high water table and that 7 rare vegetative species were found. Provisions have been incorporated in the draft conditions of approval to ensure the preservation of the rare vegetative species. Extensive hydrogeological work was done and the results of that study determined that the site is a drainage basin in itself and well interference will not occur. The study also concluded that the site does not contribute groundwater directly to Black Creek. 673 REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 9 The key recommendation of this study was that development may proceed provided that lands below the elevation of 134 metres remain undeveloped. The report also recommended that only the developable portion of the Plan of Subdivision will be subject to the removal of trees. More information regardi ng the process and findings of the environmental impact study is available in Report PD-59-98. The EIS made a number of recommendations with respect to methods of mitigation to protect the natural features from the proposed development. Included within these mitigation methods is the staking and relocation of the 7 rare plant species, an environmental construction management plan, and a planting plan for the edge of the stormwater pond. The report also recommended the use of trench plugs, the establishment of a third pipe and foundation weepers, the use of roof leaders and multiple downspouts to ensure the preservation of ground and surface water flow. The movement of water under the extension of George Reynolds Drive shall be facilitated through the use of small horizontal culverts. Also a homeowner education program will be established to educate landowners about the unique sensitives associated with the lands. The program will include policies regarding the disposal of garden refuse and swimming pool water. 9.3 Traffic Study The applicant conducted a traffic study. The traffic study examined 3 scenarios with respect to the impact of future traffic numbers and volumes when the proposed development is built to it's full extent. Scenario 1 - George Reynolds Drive is built only to Jane Avenue, Jane Avenue extends from George Reynolds to Westmore Street and the existing access from Westmore Street to Courtice Road remains open. Scenario 2 - Jane Avenue extends from George Reynolds Drive to Westmore Street, the Westmore Street access to Courtice Road remains open, and George Reynolds 674 REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 10 Drive is open from Trulls Road to Courtice Road. Scenario 3 - Jane Avenue is open from George Reynolds Drive to Westmore Street, George Reynolds Drive is built from Trulls Road to Courtice Road and the access from Westmore Street to Courtice Road is eliminated. The consultant has determined that Scenario 2 results in better compliance with the transportation policies of the Clarington Official Plan and results in lower traffic volumes along Fourth Avenue. In addition, Scenario 2 results in better connections between the local road network and the boundary roads and provides for a grid street system. The consultants found that Scenario 1 would be acceptable as an interim condition. The traffic study made the following conclusions and recommendations . The additional traffic will not have any operational impact on the existing local road intersections and no road improvements will be required at the Trulls Road/Nash Road or Trulls Road/George Reynolds Drive intersections. . Reconstruction of Fourth Avenue from Nash Road to Westmore Street and the reconstruction of the Fourth Avenue and Westmore Street intersection is required. . Reconstruction of Jane Avenue from the Fourth Avenue extension in the northern limit of the existing neighbourhood and reconstruction of the Jane Avenue and Fourth Avenue intersection will be required. . Sidewalks are to be constructed on Jane Avenue from George Reynolds Drive to the intersection of the Fourth Avenue extension, on Fourth Avenue, from Fourth Avenue (at Jane) to the Nash Road intersection and on George Reynolds Drive, from the western extent of the proposed development to Courtice Road. . All heavy construction vehicles shall not utilize any portion of Westmore Street or the southern portion of Jane Avenue from Fourth Avenue to Westmore Street during construction of the proposed subdivision. 675 REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 11 The cost of road improvements external to this plan of subdivision will be incorporated within a development charge by-law. 9.4 The submission and approval of a neighbourhood design plan is a requirement of the Official Plan. The neighbourhood design plan has been approved by the Director of Planning and the Director of Public Works. Staff Report PD-69-99 provides information regarding the approved neighbourhood design plan. 10. STAFF COMMENTS 10.1 . The application conforms to both the Durham Region Official Plan and the Clarington Official Plaf]. The proposal is well within the densities permitted and it provides a suitable mix of housing types. 10.2 Revisions to the Proposal This application has been revised significantly since it was originally submitted. The applicant has reduced the total number of units by 101. There are no longer any medium density units. This plan proposes a 0.48 hectare park and the open space component has increased to 4.77 hectares. The revisions have reflected the conclusions of the Environmental Impact Study, the Traffic Study, comments from the Public, and Council's resolution with respect to parking in residential areas. 10.3 Response to the Public's Concerns With respect to the Public's concerns regarding this proposal Staff have the following comments. . Environment - The residents concerns regarding the environmental impact have been addressed through the environmental impact study. The results of this study have been briefly summarized in Section 9.2 of this report. . Wells - The Regional Well Interference Policy ensures that where a residents well has been adversely impacted upon by a residential development, the resident will either have their well problems corrected or be connected to municipal water supply. However, the Region does not cover the cost of 676 REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 12 bringing the water connection from the road to each individual home. Mr. Halminen has stated that if wells are impacted, he will cover this cost. This is in accordance with municipal policy and would be incorporated into the subdivision agreement. Hence the homeowner does not face any financial burden for providing himself or herself with potable water. . Traffic - A traffic study has been conducted. The results of this study are hilighted in Section 9.3 of this report. Prohibiting the extension of Jane Avenue and Fourth Street would not be in conformity with the Official Plan which promotes grid street patterns and discourages the establishment of cul-de-sacs. . Compatibility - Residents want to see large lots similar to their own within the proposed development. The existing lots located along Jane Avenue, Westmore Street, Fourth Street and Glenview Road are serviced by private services hence requiring a larger lot size. The proposed development will be serviced by municipal water and sewer services and as such, larger lots are not a requirement. The applicant has proposed to locate 50 foot single dwelling lots adjacent to the existing lots rather than build homes on smaller lots. These lots will be subject to a special zone exception whereby only single detached dwellings will be permitted. In addition, the applicant has removed the medium density component entirely from this plan. . School Capacity - The School Boards do not have any objections to the approval of this plan of subdivision. . Emergency Services - The Clarington Fire Department has stated that they have no objection to this application. The fire station is located close to this site and 24 hour fire service is being implemented . Property Tax - Taxes are based upon the need of the Municipality as a whole. Taxes are not based on proximity, and the development of one subdivision will not have a direct impact on the property taxes of adjacent landholders. . Park and Fencing - The Municipality does not require fencing to be erected between residential uses. The Planning Department does not believe that separation or privacy in the form of fencing is needed between land uses that are the same. This does not apply between residential uses parks and open space blocks. In this case, the protection of the environmental features and the encroachment warrant fencing. 10.4 Zoning Staff are recommending that the by-law contained within Attachment No.4 to this report be approved. In light of residents concerns, Staff have proposed a specific 677 . . REPORT PD.71l-99 PAGE 13 zone regulation permitting only single detached dwellings and home occupations on the lots located on the extension of Fourth Avenue and on the south portion of the Jane Avenue extension. In addition, it incorporates the recommendation regarding parking in residential areas adopted by Council on May 10, 1999. 11. CONCLUSION 11.1 Staff recommend to Durham Region, that the application for draft plan of subdivision (18T-95029) be approved subject to the conditions of draft plan approval as contained in Attachment No.3 to this report. Staff also recommend that rezoning application (DEV 95-020) be approved and the accompanying by-law be passed. Respectfully submitted, Reviewed by, d V~""-=-~ Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P., R.P.P., Chief Administrative Officer David J C me, M.C.I.P., R.P.i'p. Directo f Planning & Develqpment HB*DJC*cc June 17, 1999 Attachment No. 1 Attachment No.2 Attachment No.3 Attachment No.4 Key Map Proposed Plan of Subdivision Draft Conditions of Approval Proposed Zoning By-law Amendment (Forwarded Separately) Interested parties to be notified of Council and Committee's decisi.(m:.._.~.~..._...__ ". ~..~--~~...._"._--,.." "Urban Residential Type One (Rl)" to "Holding - Urban Residential Type One Exception ((H)R 1-44)" and "Environmental Protedion (EP)" "Holding _ Urban Residential Type Two Exception ((H)R2-3)" to "Holding - Urban Residential Type One Exception ((H)Rl-44)" "Holding - Urban Residential Type Four ((H)R4)" to "Holding - Urban Residential Type One ((H)Rl)", "Holding - Urban Residential Type One Exception ((H)Rl-45)", "Holding _ Urban Residential Type Two Exception ((H)R2-45)", "Environmental Protedion (EP)" and "Agricultural (A)" "Environmental Protedion (EP)" to "Holding - Urban Residential Type One ((H)R1), Holding _ Urban Residential Type One Exception ((H)Rl-44)", "Holding - Urban Residential Type Two Exception ((H)R2-24)" and "Agricultural (A)" Agricultural Exception (A-8)" to "Holding - Urban Residential Type One Exception (H)R 1-45)" and "Environmental Protedion (EP)" 5. Schedule "A" attached hereto shall fonn part of this By-law. 6. This By-law shall come into effed on the date of the passing hereof, subjed to the provisions of Sedion 34 of the Planning Ad. BY-LAW read a first time this day of 1999. BY-LAW read a second time this day of 1999. BY-LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of 1999. MAYOR CLERK r 697 This is Schedule"A" to By-law 99- , passed this day of . 1999 A.D. _ _ ~~3~ ~ _ _ _ _ _ JJ!T ~ _ _ _ _ ~LDT IJ'JtOJYN'I'UCNlT 28 - ~""" ~ I -I:', '-"'1I.Az..r'" "_t _. . I N " Z < 00 N ~ r c J Z W ,W > r w ~ w u z < ~ il ~ [l [I I : ~ ~ M C ~ < 'I . :l. 6 REG. LA .NO. 75 ~~ ITRECT_ _ ZONING CHANGE FROM I::ZI ZONING CHANGE FROM ~ ZONING CHANGE FROM _ ZONING CHANGE FROM [ill] ZONING CHANGE FROM 1>>>\ ZONING CHANGE FROM _ ZONING CHANGE FROM m ZONING CHANGE FROM I~~~~~ ZONING CHANGE FROM ~ ZONING CHANGE FROM IIIlIDIIJI ZONING CHANGE FROM E ZONING CHANGE FROM IiIlI ZONING CHANGE FROM ~ ZONING CHANGE FROM ~ ZONING TO REMAIN "An ~ ZONING TO REMAIN "EP" COURTICE M Z t:J ~ '" '" W U Z t:J U "R1" TO "CH)R1-44" "R1" TO "EP" "CH)R2-3" TO "CH)R1-44" "CH)R4" TO ,. CH)R1" "CH)R4" TO "CH)R1-45" "CH)R4" TO "CH)R2-24" "CH)R4" TO "A" "CH)R4" TO "EP" "A-B" TO "CH)R1-45" "A-B" TO "Epn "Epn TO "CH)R1" "EP" TO "CH)R1-44" "EP" TO "CH)R2-24" "EP" TO "A" Mayor Clerk 698 DN: AD70-99 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON ATTACHMENT NO.2 REPORT Meeting: General Purpose and Administration Committee File # Date: Monday, July 5, 1999 Res. # Report #: ADDENDUM TO PD-70-99 FILE #: 18T-95029, DEV 95-020 By-law # and PLN 17.11.5 Subject: REZONING AND PLAN OF SUBDIVISION APPLICATION APPLICANT: BLACK CREEK DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED PART LOTS 29/30, CONe. 3, FORMER TOWNSHIP OF DARLINGTON FILES: DEV 95-020; 18T-95029 Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Addendum Report to PD-70-99 be received; 2. THAT Report PD-70-99 be received; 3. THAT the recommendations contained within Report PD-70-99 be approved; and 4. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegation be forwarded a copy of this report and be advised of Council's decision. 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 On June 21, 1999, Report PD-70-99 was dealt with at the General Purpose and Administration Committee meeting. The Committee referred the report back to Staff for review and consultation with the Ministry of Natural Resources regarding the work being conducted to determine the boundaries of the Black-Farewell Creek Wetland Complex. 1.2 Subsequent to this meeting, the Planning Department forwarded a letter to the Ministry of Natural Resources and copied it to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (Attachment No.1). 699 ADDENDUM REPORT TO.: PD-70-99 PAGE 2 2. BLACK-FAREWElL CREEK WETLAND COMPLEX 2.1 The Black-Farewell Creek Wetland Complex is currentlly identified by the Ministry of Natural Resources as a Class 3 wetland located on lands east and north of the Courtice Urban Area (Attachment No.2). The Ministry of Natural Resources has been conducting field investigations in the vicinity of the Black Farewell Wetland Complex for consideration of the re-definition of the wetland complex boundary. Some of the lands under consideration are located within the Courtice Urban Area. In September 1998, the Ministry of Natural Resources released draft mapping of the Black-Farewell Creek Wetland Complex. At the time of writing this report, the boundaries have not yet been finalized by the Ministry of Natural Resources. 2.2 Due to the sensitivity of the area, a number of environmental studies have been conducted which include the Environmental Impact Analysis of the Courtice Urban Area prepared by Gartner Lee and Associates (1981). The Environmental Impact Study of the Courtice Major Urban Area prepared by Ecological Services for Planning Ltd. (August 1994), and the Birchdale Village Environmental Impact Study prepared by Gartner Lee and Associates (February 1998). This last report was conducted in accordance with Section 4.3.8 of the Municipality's Official Plan as a requirement of the review of proposed plan of subdivision and rezoning (18T-95029 and Dev 95-020). 3. AGENCY REVIEW 3.1 The Ministry and the Conservation Authority were asked to provide answers to the following questions. . What are the limits of the wetland in relationship to the subdivisions? . An Environmental Impact Study identifying the unique vegetation and wildlife characteristics and the groundwater functions recognizing this area as a wetland was completed in February 1998. Would another EIS be required if these lands are identified as a Provincially Significant Wetland? 699001 ADDENDUM REPORT TO.: PD-70-99 PAGE 3 . Will an additional development setback need to be established? . When will the evaluation be complete and the wetland boundaries finalized? 3.2 The Ministry of Natural Resources in their correspondence dated June 25th, 1999, (Attachment No.3) stated that the "wetlands to the south of the proposed extension of George Reynolds Drive, in the vicinity of plan of subdivision 18T-95029, were not examined". It was their understanding that development in this area had already been approved. (although there was some confusion about the nature of the development approved.) MNR anticipates that the boundaries of the wetland complex will be completed by the end of July, 1999. 3.3 The Ministry noted that the Municipality must be satisfied that the EIS conducted by Gartner Lee and Associates (February 1998), adequately addresses the wetlands in the vicinity of the proposed plan of subdivision. In addition, the need for development setbacks or buffers can be determined through the EIS process with the EIS being revised or updated to reflect new information if necessary. 3.4 The Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority responded (Attachment No.5) by noting that the lands have been identified as having the highest level of sensitivity in the Authority's Environmental Sensitivity Mapping Project (1978). The Environmental Impact Study conducted by Gartner Lee and Associates (February 1998) was completed as a requirement of the Municipal Official Plan and at the request of the Conservation Authority. The purpose of the EIS was to determine the natural features on the subject lands and their interrelationship with the adjacent lands, as well as to assess the development impact on the natural functions and features, including the wetland and the wetland functions, and to determine the acceptability of the development concept. The Conservation Authority's comments conclude by stating: 699002 ADDENDUM REPORT TO.: PD-70-99 PAGE 4 NThe hydrogeologic structure, groundwater movement and water budget of the wetland, and its relationships with wetland vegetation and wildlife habitat and movement opportunities were a primary component of the EIS and therefore, the impact assessment should continue to be valid, regardless of whether or not the Courtice Wetlands are assigned additional designations through complexing with other wetlands." 4. STAFF COMMENTS 4.1 The Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) which provides guidance with respect to development in or adjacent to natural heritage features, including wetlands states in Section 2.3.2 that: "Development may be permitted on adjacent lands to significant wetlands if it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative impacts on the natural features or on the ecological functions for which the area is identified. " Negative impact is defined as the loss of the natural features or ecological functions for which an area is identified. 4.2 The identification of a Provincially Significant Wetland (PSW) does not affect the attributes of the natural features on the site. These natural features exist regardless of whether a PSW has been defined on the lands. It has been the Municipality's policy to recognize all wetlands which have been evaluated by the MNR criteria, even if they are not "provincially" significant. The PSW designation is simply a minimum standard required by the Provincial Policy Statement. Any environmental impact study conducted must: . identify and recognize the significance of the site's natural features and their interaction with adjacent lands . assess whether development can occur . assess the impact of the development on the features; and 699003 ADDENDUM REPORT TO.: PD-70-99 PAGE 5 . provide methods for mitigating the impact of the development on the natural features. 4.3 In this case, an EIS was conducted which although did not identify the area as being adjacent to a Provincially Significant Wetland, the EIS did however identify the wetland features on and adjacent to the site. In particular, the EIS identified that the lands to the north possess superior wetland and forest habitat. The EIS also identified the location of a thicket mineral swamp in the northwest portion of the subject lands. Based on the following, the EIS recommended the extension of George Reynolds Avenue though the wetland. . Habitat similar to the swamp exists around the stormwater management pond (Block 99 on the plan of subdivision), providing opportunities for the species to exist on-site, although in a reduced form. . The construction of George Reynolds Drive can be accomplished in such a manner as to preserve the groundwater and surface water flow through the area, preserving a small portion of the wetland which will remain connected to the valley system thus enhancing biodiversity and preserving some of the present habitat on-site. The conditions of draft approval (Attachment No.1) specify the use of large culverts and many small culverts as recommended by the EIS in order to maintain groundwater and surface water flows. . The EIS recognized that the lands in the vicinity and south of the George Reynolds extension are transitional and marginal and have been subject to a high level of disturbance in the past. The lands to the north possess better quality habitat. Based on this, the EIS recommended the extension of George Reynolds in part, to off-set the need to build Adelaide Avenue through the better quality wetland. The above illustrates that the EIS provides for the protection of the identified natural functions and features. Where preservation was not possible, the objective is to ensure that the wetland function was not eliminated and that similar habitat remained within Block 99 within the plan of subdivision. In addition, as recommended within the EIS, the proposed plan of subdivision provides for the maintenance of wildlife linkages through the provision of a 50 6990D4 ADDENDUM REPORT TO.: PD-70-99 PAGE 6 metre (minimum) wide open space corridor along the tributary which connects the northern wooded and wetland areas to Black Creek. 4.4 In staff's opinion, an additional EIS or a revision to the completed EIS is not required. The completed EIS identified the wetland on-site and recognized that the subject lands possess transitional and marginal habitat and that the lands to the north possess the better quality habitat, recommending preservation of these lands. 4.5 An important consideration is that the subject lands currently possess an official plan designation and zoning which would allow development to proceed today. The lands currently possess an "Urban Residential Type Four" zone which permits single detached dwellings, semi-detached dwellings, townhouses and apartment buildings. Lots 39-45 inclusive, located north of the extension of George Reynolds Drive, are currently zoned "Holding-Urban Residential Type Four ({HlR4)". Approval of the zoning of Lots 39-45 as "Rl-45" would only permit single detached dwellings or semi-detached dwellings, hence reducing the allowable density of development on the lands. The applicant has reduced the density of development on the lands substantially and has conducted an EIS to identify the natural features on the site and methods of mitigation. The applicant has exerted a lot of effort in eliminating and reducing the consequences of the proposed development on the natural environment. 5. CONCLUSION Staff concur with the Conservation Authority that the EIS adequately addresses the wetland issues for the subject lands having regard for previous planning approvals. The revision to the existing EIS or the completion of another EIS would not be necessary even though it would be within the "adjacent lands" (120 metres) of a provincially significant wetland if it were so identified in accordance with the draft boundaries. 6990~5 ADDENDUM REPORT TO.: P0-70-99 PAGE The future identification of a provincially significant wetland complex does not disqualify that an EIS has been completed. The EISrecognized not only th~ on site, but that better quality habitat is located north of the subject landsi of this, staff recommend that the recommendations contained within adopted. Respectfully submitted, Reviewed by, Ov~__~ Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Chief Administrative Officer. Dav d rome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Director of Planning & Development HB*DC*df 25 June 1999 Attachment No.1 - Correspondence to MNR Attachment No.2 - Original Black-Farewell Creek Wetland Complex Attachment No.3 - Correspondence Received from MNR Attachment No.4 - Correspondence Received from CLOCA Interested parties to be notified of Council and Committee's decision: ATTACHMENT NO.1 22 June 1999 _Clla;r;"g'i;;n ONTARIO Robert MesselVey District Manager Ministry of Natural Resources 50 Bloomington Road AURORA, Ontario L4G 3G8 Dear Sir: RE: Finalization of Black-Farewell Creek Wetland Complex Boundaries and Impact on Adjacent Proposed Plans of Subdivision Files: PLN 17.11.5,18T- 95029 and 18T-99007 plan of Subdivision 18T-95029 was submitted in March 1995 and its current revision includes 115 residential units with park and open space blocks. Another Plan of Subdivision 18T-99007 located just north and west of 18T-95029 was applied for in March 1999. This application proposes 20 residential units and includes blocks for park and open space. Draft boundaries of the Black-Farewell Creek Wetland Complex have been prepared by your office and released in September 1998. We understand that they were prepared in consideration of the approved C1arington Official Plan and the Environmental Impact Study for the above-referenced plans. According to the draft map, the south boundary of the wetland complex appears to be located north of the future extension of George Reynolds Drive. Council of the Municipality of Clarington, in dealing with the above-noted plans of subdivision (see Attachment #1) posed a number of questions to Municipal Staff. They are as follows: 1. What are the limits of the wetland in relationship to the subdivisions? 2. An Environmental Impact Study identifying the unique vegetation and wildlife characteristics and the groundwater functions recognizing this area as a wetland was completed in February 19f18. Would another EIS be required if these lands are identified as a PSW? 3. Will an additional development setback need to be established? 4. . When will the evaluation be complete and the wetland boundaries finalized? In response to Council's questions, Staff are preparing a report to be heard at the July 5, 1999 General Purpose and Administration meeting. Reports for this meeting must be prepared prior to June 25, 1999, therefore, there is some urgency to our request for this information. Thanking you in advance for addressing this matter immediately. a ). Crome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Director of Planning and Development 'df cc: Don Wright, CLOCA cg CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPEHANCF STHFET. BQWM....NVILlE 'ONTARIO-l1C 31.6' (90S) 623.3379' FAX 6234169 R[C'C'-( 699010 . ///~ ~-:; " ....' .1;::':~~_h"",/ \ V ) ---,-- :; . '" ":7'; ,,' . ;,- . ////7/ 1:-' ~. '/ 'l // /. ,I' \ ,I..: * .,' ~/ '", Ji f -:: ,~, , ':' t u. .'u_ ~E"/L&JV~~ n_~ -. ., ~8 _n :;<"=Jft~..,:~ ,'~/'~,/Y~~~:.//~~:///// '/I'r/j~!/;~ "^,. .~~ "'~i' I , ". ./ f-:r:: 1-' . ~"" rIT 11/,'/ .----h'H 111_., ~.:'" ,If \---l~<<"'::'''''''~'~''''~ ~u ~pb( J-L !'~ .' ~I~~ ~\ ~ ~ (\J _ - g . ~,""""" , ," ~'" ~ ~.: == ~ ':.Jr ; ", ~"'l ! T-+- ~ .1-:k'^">- :; I L<L.. .II..J ~~I i :" : = .~" -. Jt ~m~' '\ - "-~'~~~; ~~. k!--- ' r II ~i'T- '" L'_~ ~ ~ <. Dl~ n r"..., ' .. r.r . , 'ClJ .C" GP(:)NND 63lj ~.:s . ~- 5~~+:1; i:i .J.}~ .I.~ ." \ .-J [f ~ 0 ni." r ~',. R~~.:tD 0 ~ ~ ' . .' ~ /~.;-~.._". I =-J --Ill .. ~ .....w I' ~. ~ ~ ";>~\.~, ~ ~ , ~ ~." ~:~:' J 181 < ~ I s:' '~"I '~:~:" ,< ~.";~:" \ iT=-r _ I " ,,,, I r---+ 1 =' t:iJ.: ~'I ."... .,J,.,.... 1----+-.--1 ' .::.~'"!". .,n.". ~ ~ ,. . REG. ~A~_N~, 75 ~ :,- ;. .. , :/" .-- - ~ c:S o ~ '" - - .s ~ 81....c.k \ll':iTl4JRl: 'ST'RcrT . , ~ '-- AlAs If I<OA'V -N____ / . ..-/' 699011 t\11J-\\,.,nIV1CI"1 NU.c _BLACK/FAREWELL CREEK WETLANDS Source: Ministry of Natural Resources, 1992 p 30 29 28 27 26 25 24 23 T~-~~- 1- +_1_ I F~ . :: ~ I ~F : II ' I. 'I! II II ---LL . 8GI 22 21 ~L 20 19 L ll~ 'u _r- I -r <( 0 0:: 0 Z w <( 0 > 0 0 0:: (f) (j) z (f) -' w W -' w U ::J 0:: 0:: G Z I- 0 U NASH ROAD J DARLINGTON KEY MAP 1 aT -95029 PLN 17.11.5 ! 699012 Mlnl9try of Natural R8S0ufces Min19t~re d8S RlchefiSes naturelles ~ Ontario 50 Bloomington Road West Aurora, ON L4G 3G8 June 25, 1999 Mr. David J. Crome, RP.P. Director of Planning and Development Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, ON L1C 3A6 Dear Mr. Crome: Re: Finalization of the Black-Farewell Creek Wetland Complex Boundaries The Aurora District of the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) is in receipt of your letter, dated June 22,1999 on the above-mentIoned matter. In your letter, you pose four questions, which I would respond to as follows: 1) Limits of Wetlands: By letter, dated September 15, 1998, MNR forwarded information to the Municipality and others regarding the Provincially Significant Black-Farewell Wetland Complex. Wetlands to the south of the proposed extension of George Reynolds Drive, in the vicinity of plan of subdivision 18T-95029, were not examined because MNR was of the understanding, based on information from others, that development in this area had already been draft approved. As it turns out, this information was not correct. Although MNR has not reviewed the February 1998 Environmental Impact Study in detail, it is highly likely that the wetlands in the vicinity of plan of subdivision 18T-95029 would have been a logical extension of the provincially significant wetland complex. MNR does note that the area to the west of plan of subdivision 18T-99007, north of George Reynolds Drive, was identified on September 15, 1998, as being part of the provincially significant wetland complex. 2) Environmental Impact Study (EIS): Whether or not the February 1998 EIS adequately takes into account the wetlands in the vicinity of plan of subdivision 18T-95029, is a local matter to be determined by the Municipality. ...12 699013 Page 2 Mr. David J. Crome In the case of the provincially significant wetlands in the vicinity of plan of subdivision 18T.99007, it must be determined if the EIS meets the requirements of the Provincial Policy Statement. 3) Development Setbacks: The requirement for development setbacks or buffers from any wetlands needs to be determined through the EIS process. An EIS can be updated or revised to reflect new information. 4) Completion of Evaluation: As indicated in MNR's September 15, 1998 letter, additional areas, removed from the subject lands, are being considered for inclusion within the wetland complex. MNR anticipates that the boundaries of the complex and the written evaluation will be completed by the end of July 1999. Should you have any questions on this matter, please contact me at (905) 713-7367. ycurs truly, ~~; E . f..-~~ Coordinator Strategic Planning and Operations Aurora District ce. Carolyn Tudge, MMAH Tracy Smith, Aurora District, MNR Don Wright, CLOCA TOTAL P. 03 699014 ,f Central r,r, Lake Ontario , Conse,.,," ,ion 1 co WI',111I19 Aver',uc OSClawa, Onlaflo L lH 313 Tel [905) 579.0411 Fox (905) 579.0994 June 23,1999 11)m,'rmrr\W~:T\ I, I r'\ t ~. --' ~" I ( . I }.I ~ ,!_",-.~/ ~-'~zf,j I , JUN Z 8 1999 Municipality of Clarington Planning and Development Department 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, Ontario Ll C 3A6 , 1"'__'::.':'_" '~.".'.'_,._. ~_ P~~l~I'~ i :~~ L' c' ~ _ _ : , .1 Attention: David Crome, Director - Community Plannin!! Branch Dear Sir: Subject: Finalization of Black- Farewell Creek Wetland Complex Boundaries Courtice North, Municipality of Clarlngton - Adjacent Lands File: 18T-952029 & 18T-99007 In response to your inquiry regarding the above noted matters, I provide the following information, To-date, staff still only have the draft wetland mapping for the area (OMNR released September 1998). Our most recent staff discussions with Mr. S. Varga (OMNR), have indicted that certain wetland details are being revised, on the basis of additional information (submitted lor to be submitted by B. Henshaw, local naturalist/consultant), which would be reviewed for inclusion to the wetland map, prior to starting the wetland evaluation process for the complexing of wetlands into the Provincially Significant Black-Farewell Wetland Complex. Nevertheless, staff's review of above noted plans of subdivision was conducted using the draft OMNR mapping and site investigations, to determine the approximate boundaries of the plans of subdivision in relationship to the wetland features. cont'd.....2 What we do on the land is mirrored in the waleI' r(:;;;:'?' .;. " \'-"11'-'"1 - ~ , ' 699015 Mr. David Crome Municipality of Clarington Page 2 June 23, 1999 With particular reference to the proposed extension of George Reynolds Drive and the lots situated on the north side of the road (18T -95029 plan), it would appear that the draft OMNR wetland boundary is not infringed upon by the proposed development. However, the wetland boundary surrounding the 18T-99007 is irregular and more difficult to plot with any precision, in relation to the subdivision plan (OMNR free-hand drawn wetland boundary @ 1: 10,000 scale vs. CAD generated 1:2000 subdivision plan). Consequently, the 18T-99007 plan may require revisions once the precise wetland complex limits have been determined and surveyed in the field. This possible adjustment will have to stipulated in the subdivision conditions of draft approval. Notwithstanding the foregoing, these developments (18T-99007 & 18T-95029) have been examined in detail through the municipality's Environmental Impact Analysis (Gartner Lee Limited, February 1998). The purpose of this study was to assess the development impact on the wetland and wetland functions (vegetation, wildlife habitat/movement and hydrogeologic inter- relationships) and determine the' acceptability of the development concept. The Conclusions and Recommendations of this Study (section 8) determined that subject to the incorporation of specified impact mitigation measures (report section 8.2) the development of 18T-99007 & 18T- 95029 could proceed. "Based on the above conclusions, and the recommendations in Section 8.2, we conclude that this site can be developed in an environmentally sound manner. " Birchdale VillaRe Black Creek Develooments Ltd.. Environmental Imoact Studv-Phase 2. prepared for the Municipality of Clarington. Gartner Lee Limited, 1998. The hydrogeologic structure, groundwater movement and water budget of the wetland, and its relationships with wetland vegetation and wildlife habitat and movement opportunities were a primary component of the ElS and therefore, the impact assessment should continue to be valid, regardless of whether or not the Courtice Wetlands are assigned additional designations through ccmplexing with other wetlands. It should be noted, that the ElS requirement has not stemmed from the potential consideration for PSWC designation but from the Authority's long-standing recognition of the north Courtice Area as a significant wetland (Courtice Wetlands/Woods ESA- highest level of sensitivity in the Authority's Environmental Sensitivity Mapping Project, 1978) and the municipality's incorporation of Official Plan policies that require an impartial Environmental Impact Study, conducted under the control of the municipality. I trust this information satisfies your inquiry. If you have any questions regarding these matters, please contact the undersigned. lY'j 1_ a W- D rector- Environmental Approvals & Planning g:\planning\3bwetlnd.doc 699016 Gartner Lee Limited 140 Renfrew Drive Suite 102 Markham, Ontario L3R 6B3 Tel: (905) 477-8400 Fax: (905) 477-1456 WWW: v..rv.w,gartnerlee,com Environmental Services for Indus!f}' & Government Office Locations . Toronto . Vancouver . St. Catharlnes . Whitehorse . Yellowknife . Kuala Lumpur -~~ ~~,~L' ATTACHMENT NO.3 October 26, 1999 GLL 99-443 Mr. David Crome Director Planning and Development Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, Ontario LlC 3A6 J~CT ~~~ MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT I Dear Mr. Crome: Re: Birchdale Village Addendum Gartner Lee Limited (GLL) was retained by the Municipality of Clarington to clarify issues regarding the occurrence of wetland on the property known as Birchdale Village, for which a Plan of Subdivision has been submitted. The property is located in the Urban Area of Courtice, northwest of the intersection of Nash Road and Courtice Road. GLL prepared the Environmental Impact Study (EIS) for the Municipality with respect to these lands in February 1998. Following submission of the EIS, but prior to final approval by Clarington Council, the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) provided an evaluation of the Black-Farewell Wetland Complex which included lands adjacent to Birchdale Village in August 1999. The Municipality of Clarington has deferred approval of the submitted Plan pending clarification of the wetland boundaries on the Birchda]e Village property, and assurance that the proposal does not create an impact to the Provincially Significant Wetland. This addendum was requested in order to: a) clarify the extent of wetland within the Birchda]e Village planning area; and to determine what modifications to the plan are necessary to mitigate or prevent impacts to the wetland. b) The Birchdale Village site was visited on September 27, ]999 by myself and Ron Huizer, Principal Instructor for the Ontario Wetland Evaluation System (OWES). We entered the site via Fourth Avenue from the south, and walked a circuit northeast to the creek channel, east along the eastern tributary to Courtice Road and then walked north to the thicket swamp (Vegetation Unit 3; GLL, 1997). Soil samples were taken in representative units. Mr. Huizer and I evaluated the vegetation units on the Birchda]e Village property based on the following criteria: I. representation of obligate wetland species; 2. the OWES protocol that requires 50% of the vegetation to be hydrophytic within a wetland boundary; 699017 ~ Page 2 Municipality of Clarington October 26, 1999 3, whether the vegetation connnunity was greater than or equal to 0,5 ha in order to be mapped at a scale of 1: 10,000; and 4, soil conditions, As reported in GLL (1997), the water table is high in this area, Relatively small changes in elevation, combined with the silty fine to very fine sandy soil overlain by silts and organics, tend to perch surface runoff, and impede water movement through the soil, This results in the development of small wetland connnunities less than 0,5 ha in relatively small depressions within the forest, and within the floodplain of the Black Creek tributary, Vel!etation Analvsis Three vegetation communities were identified within the property to which the Plan of Subdivision applies. They have been classified according to the Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario (Lee et aI., 1998). Please refer to the attached map for the specific locations. Unit 1: Disturbed Fresh-Moist Cedar Hardwood Mixed Forest Ecosite (formerlv Disturbed Aspen/ Poplar Woodland) This forest is dominated by Balsam Poplar, Trembling Aspen, White Birch, Green Ash and Eastern White Cedar, with Black Cherry, Basswood, White Pine, White Ash, Large-toothed Aspen and Sugar Maple. Shrubs include Red Osier Dogwood and Chokecherry. The ground cover is diverse, ranging from dominance by mesic woodland species such as Wild Sarsasparilla, White Baneberry, Canada Mayflower, Scouring Rush and Shinleaf, to Sensitive Fern, Late Goldenrod, Spotted Touch-me-not and Variegated Horsetail, This latter group of four are species that are estimated to occur in wetlands more than 2/3 of the time (also called facultative wetland species), but are quite often found in upland situations. The fact that the water table is high enables these species to persist in an otherwise upland connnunity. The soil moisture regime varies between very fresh (index rating 3) to the upper edge of moderately moist (index rating 4) bordering on moist (index rating 5) (Denholm and Schut, 1993). The ELC considers a soil moisture regime ofless than five to be an indicator of a terrestrial system. In sunnnary, the plants growing in this vegetation unit (Unit I in GLL, 1997), are a mixture of upland and facultative wetland species. Very few obligate wetland species (i.e., plants that almost always grow in wetlands) were observed in the forest. When a community is this difficult to determine as being wetland or upland, the emphasis is placed on the canopy species (R. Huizer, pers.connn.) on the basis that they are the most deep rooted, and due to their longevity, do not respond quickly to changes in soil moisture. They are therefore better indicators of long term soil conditions. Although Eastern White Cedar and Balsam Poplar were common, they are facultative wetland species. To confirm the connnunity, the associated species are examined. In this case, most of the associated species were those more often found in upland communities. Therefore, the consensus of opinion between Ron and myself was that this connnunity was an upland forest (although perched on a high water table), and therefore not a wetland. This paper Is made from l'e(:ycled fibre 699018 (99443) .~ Page 3 Municipality ofClarington October 26, 1999 This area has been logged in the past 25 years and was planted with Scots Pine (Pinus sylvestris). Poplar and birch are pioneering species that have taken advantage of the disturbed site and moist soil conditions to proliferate extending to the drier sandy knoll where disturbance has continued since the initial clearance. This dryer area has been identified as Unit 2, and the vegetation type here can best be described as a Cultural Thicket Ecosite. Small pockets of wetland do occur within the upland forest however they are less than 0.5 ha in size and according to OWES, would not be comp]exed into the provincially significant wetland unless it can be demonstrated that they contribute significantly to wetland function. These scattered wetland pockets comprise less than half of the vegetation within this unit and therefore do not change the classification of this Unit. Unit 3: Mineral Thicket Swamp Ecosite As described in GLL (1997), this thicket swamp is dominated by Slender Willow and Pussy Willow, with Red Osier Dogwood. It is on line with the tributary to the B]ack Creek and clearly inundated for portions of the year. Water moves through it from the Crack Willow/Green Ash swamp floodplain that extends south through the cattail marsh to the gabion-basket lined channel (Please refer to the aerial photograph that accompanies this letter). Unit 3a: Willow Mineral Deciduous Swamp Ecosite This vegetation community occurs on the floodplain ofthe main tributary to Black Creek. It is clearly seasonally inundated, and is dominated by a canopy of Crack Willow with an understorey of Red Osier Dogwood. Although these woody species are also facultative wetland species, the patchy groundcover is largely comprised of Spotted Joe-Pye Weed, cattail, Fow] Manna Grass, Water Parsnip, Monkey Flower, Cut Grass and sedges. All of these are obligate wetland species, and together with the saturated soils, the determination of this unit as a swamp is conclusive. The minor eastern (first order) tributary was also examined for wetland properties. It provides a minimal water conveyance function and the habitat it provides is less than 0.5 ha in size and therefore too small to map at the ]:]0,000 scale required by the OWES. Therefore, it was not included in the delineation of significant wetland on the Birchdale Village site. Wetland Components In our opinion, the wetlands present on the Birchdale Village site are confined to Unit 3, the willow thicket on line with the tributary, and Unit 3a, the tributary floodplain that extends south from Unit 3, skirts Unit 2 (the highly disturbed sandy knoll), through the Birchda]e Village property to the development property to the west. These wetland units are large enough to be mapped, perform a significant water conveyance function and support locally and site regionally rare plants. Tbis paper is made from recycled fibre (9944.3) 699019 .~ Page 4 Municipality of CIa ring ton October 26, 1999 Proposed Plan of Snbdivision The Birchdale Village Draft Plan l8T-95029 (D.G. Biddle, 1995, revised 1999) was overlaid on the vegetation map. The wetland adjacent to the tributary is avoided, and setbacks from the wetland boundary range between 10 and 40 m. The extension of George Reynolds Drive crosses Unit 3. A remnant of this wetland to the north will likely remain, however, half of this unit will be removed by the road allowance. Impact Assessment and Mitil!ation The sources of impact to the wetland are: a) direct removal of swamp thicket by the George Reynolds Drive extension; b) impact to buffer to provincially significant wetland within the Plan of Subdivision; c) impact to buffer to provincial significant wetland to the north of the Plan of Subdivision; d) potential to impact water quality and conveyance; e) loss of regionally and locally significant plants; and f) lowering of the water table due to residential and road construction. Removal of Swamp Thicket The original ElS identified the wetland loss due to the road pattern. Although not desirable, it was felt by the Municipality and CLOCA at that time that the loss of this wetland was justifiable because: a) no other alignment was possible due to the geometry of the road pattern in the residential development to the west; b) construction of this extension (referred to as Cecil Found Drive in GLL, 1997) may make the proposed construction of the Adelaide Road extension through higher quality forest and provincially significant wetland to the north unnecessary; c) no rare plants were located in this unit, which is comprised of common wetland species; and d) this unit provides habitat for common species that exists elsewhere within the wetland complex. This unit has since been complexed into the Black-Farewell Wetland Complex by the Ministty of Natural Resources. Tbis paper is made from recycled fibre (99443) 699020 ~ Page 5 Municipality ofClarington October 26, 1999 Imvact to Buffer to Provinciallv Sirmificant Wetland Within the Plan or Subdivision While the loss of this forest will reduce the size of the habitat, it was determined through field investigations in 1997 that the populations within the study area were not unique. The forest area sensitive species were encountered in the higher quality habitat to the north of the Birchdale Village property, and the remaining habitat to the north will be sufficient to maintain those populations at the present level of function. A corridor of habitat between 50 and 100 m wide which includes the main tributary to Black Creek, has been retained to maintain some of these attributes on the site. Imvact to Burrer to Provincial Sifmificant Wetland to the North or the Plan or Subdivision As discussed above, habitat for area sensitive species is not an issue on the Birchdale Village lands. Due to the forested nature of the site, most of the birds are forest-associated, rather than wetland associated. Drainage is to the south, therefore water quality impacts should not occur to the north. Potential to Imvact Water Oualitv and Convevance The road extension through Unit 3 should be completed in such a way that groundwater and surface water flow is preserved. The intersection of the subdivision road and George Reynolds Drive should be designed to preserve a portion of the wetland, preferably on the southeast comer, to keep it connected to the valley system. Preservation of flow can be achieved through: a) use of permeable bedding materials to maintain groundwater flow beneath the road way; b) use of compacted native material to ensure a groundwater conduit is not formed along the road; and c) use of many small, horizontal culverts (in addition to the large culvert that would be required to convey storm flow) should be installed at ground level along the length of the road crossing to facilitate sheet flow. Setbacks from the edge of the wetland adjacent to the tributary (Unit 3a) range from 10 to 40 m, which is adequate to filter sheet runoff from the adjacent properties. The EIS (GLL, 1997) recommended a landowner's education package, and it should include encouragement for the landowner to maintain as much natural vegetation in the rear yards as possible to enhance this filtering function. In addition, conservative use of herbicides and fertilizers should be promoted. Loss or Rezionallv and Locallv Siznificant Plants Seven significant plant species were identified on the property, all of which occur in part within the corridor to be retained. Although the extent of the plants on the site will be reduced, they will not be eradicated by the proposal. The EIS (GLL, 1997) recommended that prior to construction, these plants be salvaged for relocation to the stormwater management pond to be incorporated into the planting plan. This paper is made from recycled fibre (99443) 699021 ~ Page 6 Municipality of CIa ring ton October 26, 1999 Lowerinf! of the Water Table Due to Residential and Road Construction In order to maintain the water table, it is proposed that: a) trench plugs I m long, be placed every 10m along the trenches for buried services to reduce the uphill drawdown of the water table from 1.5 m to 0.1 m; and b) groundwater from the weepers under the buildings will be discharged to the tributary and all opportunities for infiltration of rooftop runoff be employed. Policy Framework The Preamble to the 1996 Provincial Policy Statement states that: Section 3 of the Planning Act requires that, in exercising any authority that affects planning matter, planning authorities "shall have regard to" policy statements issued under the Act. Policy 1.3.3 Transportation Corridors and Infrastructure Corridors states: 1.3.3.1 Corridors and rights~of-way for significant transportation and infrastructure facilities will be protected. Policy 2.3 Natural Heritage states: 2.3.1 Natural heritage features and areas will be protected from incompatible development. a) Development and site alteration will not be permitted in: . significant wetlands south and east of the Canadian Shield.. Therefore, Provincial Policy does not appear to expressly prohibit the construction of linear transportation corridors through provincially significant wetlands when another alternative does not exist. Conclusion I. Previous planning approvals have already set the location the George Reynolds Drive extension and no opportunity exists to relocate it elsewhere. An impact to Unit 3 will be created by the construction of this road, which can be partially mitigated through specialized construction techniques discussed above and the maintenance of similar habitat at the outflow of the tributary onto the adjacent property. Tbis paper is made from recycled fibre 699022 (99443) ~ Page 7 Municipality ofClarington October 26, 1999 2. The remaining wetland on the Birchdale Village property will not be encroached upon, and the impacts can be mitigated. It is our hope that this review has answered the questions posed by the Municipality of Clarington Council. We will be happy to provide further assistance, if required. Yours very truly, GARTNER LEE LIMITED h~. . :x:: i .:' .' ~,-'/:. r r. ,. ., t~L- uj.Lu~:t:- Dale A. Leadbeater, B.Sc.,B.Ed. Biologist DAL:mm cc: Ron Huizer References Denholm. K.A. and L.w. Schut, 1993: Field Manual for Describing Soils in Ontario. Ontario Centre for Soil Research Evaluation, Guelph Agriculture Centre. Gartner Lee Limited, 1998.- Birchdale Village Black Creek Development Ltd. Environmental Impact Study, Phase 2. Final Report. Prepared for the Municipality ofelarington. Lee. HT., WD. Bakowsky, J Riley, J Bmli/es, M. Puddister, P. Vhligand S. McMurray, /998: Ecological Land Classification for Southern Ontario: First Approximation and Its Application. Ontario Ministry' of Natural Resources, South central Science Section, Science Development and Tramfer Branch. SCSS Field Guide F-02 This paper is made from recycled fibre 699023 (99443) "" L.~.~Jo/I~r;' .~ . ""''''''7 . ----: lJ---J- /' -=----(- ,. - "'--(i<';T_- - '~'':.'''_._I ~ '-'w" \ ~ \ '...... ..1-.... "--,I" '\ , '",_~", .--:-, \_~; r ':.:;.: " \ tr+'- '\ ! ",'- " 'i ~~~:';~'7~[ , ~~~~I "-" " ~" ~, i ! I ~ ,t<o i:: . ~ ; ~; .:: , 'I' . ! L. ~ ~ '] r~ I ,~.~ . Units LEGEND M'1I""tlf nrlW,l!"'''''~~~ Willow and Rsd Ot.kr 1 Dbdurbt.d F.=h-Ma:r.cl Ct!dl:ll Hardwood Mb:ed Forest Ecos.!t9 (forrnel1y dil;tl.dIed Aspen I PoplarWaodIam:lt 'Nillow Mineraf b,e-~d~ Swamp EMelie . 3 3. y '0 mwes 2 CtAlvroIThi<:k~1 Ceotit:e: HOMy8t/Ckk, Ckoke Cherry .!!nd MarWtoba Maolc '" ~ FIGU]U] VEGETATION COMMUNITIES 1 Gartner L.. Seltle I :2.0l}{l Birchdale Village R<!V!!!M Vcgcntion Ccmmunitie!! Proie~ 99-44J 19:9\<l43\l'i--balie.o:Ir) 699024 OCTOBER 1999 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAN REGISTRATION ATTACHMENT NO.4 PLAN IDENTIFICATION 1. That this approval applies to draft Plan of Subdivision 18T-95029 prepared by D.G. Biddle and Associates dated (revised) May 1999 as further red-lined revised, showing Lots 1-29,40-45,52-53 with 15m or greater lot frontages, Lots 30-38, 46-51,54,66-87, 92 with 12m lot frontages and Lots 55-65, 88-91, 93-96, for semi-detached or linked dwellings, Block 100 for a 0.48 park, Block 99 for 4.77ha of Open Space, Block 101, 102 and 108 to be retained by the applicant, Block 103, Block 107 and Block 39 of Open Space, and various blocks for reserve, road widening, site triange and walkways. FINAL PLAN REQUIREMENTS 2. That all streets within the Plan of Subdivision shall be dedicated as public highway and shown as such on the final plan. 3. That all streets shall be named to the satisfaction of the Municipality of Clarington and shown on the final plan. REQUIREMENTS TO BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT 4. That the Owner shall retain a qualified landscape architect to prepare and submit a Landscaping Plan to the Director of Public Works and the Director of Planning and Development for review and approval. The Landscaping Plan shall reflect the design criteria of the Municipality as amended from time to time. 5. That the Owner shall retain a professional engineer to prepare and submit a Master Drainage and Lot Grading Plan to the Director of Public Works for review and approval. All plans and drawings must conform to the Municipality's Design Criteria as amended from time to time. ....2 699025 -2- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAN REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS TO BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT (CONT'D) 6. That the Owner shall retain a qualified consultant to prepare a general plan showing buffers and tree removal areas to the Director of Planning and Development for review and approval. The plan shall identify those areas to be preserved and fenced to prevent intrusion of heavy machinery. Trees shall only be removed within the area directly subject to the residential subdivision. Notwithstanding, those trees located within the 5 metre naturalized area in lots 40-45 inclusive shall NOT be removed. 7. All apparent populations of the seven species of regionally significant plants shall be marked (staked) and mapped during the summer. All of the perennial plants deemed to be rare and located within an area of proposed vegetation clearing should be dug up and carefully transplanted into suitable microhabitat locations within the area of forest retention. The soil surrounding the rare annual plants located within an area of proposed vegetation clearing, can be moved to suitable microhabitat locations within the area of forest retention. Also, the seed capsules from these species should be collected, opened and the seeds can be randomly spread near the stormwater pond and in the forest retention area. 8. That a planting plan be developed for the edges of the stormwater management pond and for the wetland remnant adjacent to George Reynolds Drive incorporating the transplanting and seeding of the significant plant species identified in Section 5.2 of the Environmental Impact Study. 9. That an Environmental Construction Management Plan be prepared taking into account all recommendations of the Environmental Impact Study prepared by Gartner Lee and Associates (1998). 699026 REPORT PD-70-99 PAGE 21 -3- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAN REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS TO BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT (CONT'D) 10. No development will be permitted until such time as the adjacent draft plan of subdivision 18T-91006 to the west has been constructed in a manner which provides a road connection to Trulls Road via George Reynolds Drive. The suitability of any road connection will be subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works. 11. The applicant must provide the Public Works Department with a Stormwater Management Implementation Report, which provides for the sequential construction of the stormwater management works necessary for the entire watershed and addresses the impacts of developing this plan of subdivision in the absence of the balance of the watershed. 12. That the Owner shall dedicate Blocks 39,99, 100, 103 and 107 to the municipality free and clear of all encumbrances and in a form satisfactory to the Municipality's solicitor. Block 100 shall be used for park purposes. 13. The applicant's engineer will be required to prepare a Master Grading and Drainage Plan that details the configuration of the on-site storm sewer system (minor system) and the conveyance ofthe overland flow (major system) from this subdivision. 14. That the Owner shall enter into a Subdivision Agreement with the Municipality and agree to abide by all terms and conditions of the Municipality's standard subdivision agreement, including, but not limited to, the requirements that follow. 699027 -4- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAN REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT (CONT'D) 15. That all easements, road widenings, and reserves as required by the Municipality be granted to the Municipality free and clear of all encumbrances. 16. The 0.3 metre reserves indicated on the draft plan as Blocks 104, 105 and 106 be granted to the Municipality free and clear of any encumbrances and in a form satisfactory to the Municipality's Solicitor. 17. The developer is required to connect this subdivision plan to the existing road network by constructing Fourth Avenue, from and including the intersection of Fourth Avenue and Westmore Street north-easterly, within this plan of subdivision, to and including the intersection of Fourth Avenue and Jane Avenue. 18. Land acquisition will be required to facilitate the construction of Fourth Avenue at Jane Avenue. The developer is responsible for 100% of the costs associated to provide road connections between the subject draft plan and adjacent road network to the south and west. The cost shall include any works on existing road allowances external to this draft plan, which are necessary to accommodate the proposed development traffic, including sufficient road width and an appropriate transition taper to the existing pavement surface, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 19. No development of any kind will be permitted on Fourth Avenue until such time as the road is physically connected with Jane A venue to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 699028 -5- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAN REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS TO BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT (CONT'D) 20. That the developer makes every effort to secure the appropriate lands and constructs George Reynolds Drive to an urban collector standard from the east limit of this plan of subdivision easterly to Courtice Road, Regional Road 34. Prior to the authorization to commence the construction of a phase subsequent to phase I, the developer should be prepared to construct George Reynolds Drive extension, from this plan of subdivision easterly to Courtice Road, Regional Road 34, or that the Director of Public Works is satisfied that the developer has made every reasonable effort to construct the extension of George Reynolds Drive. 21. That the developer is responsible for the construction of Jane Avenue to an urban road standard, from Fourth Avenue northerly to the south limit of this plan of subdivision, in order to facilitate the internal servicing and connection of same between phase 2 and phase 3 of this plan of subdivision and the servicing of Lot 25. 22. George Reynolds Drive and Street B must be constructed to the east limit of the subdivision and Lot 45 will remain frozen until such time that George Reynolds Drive is extended easterly, beyond the limits of this draft plan and is constructed to a finished urban roadway including Regional services, asphalt paving, curb and gutter, sodded boulevard, sidewalk, street trees and street lighting, for the entire frontage width abutting the "frozen" lot. 23. That the north side of George Reynolds Drive be fully serviced with water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, hydro telephone and cable television for any developable lands on future lots which may front onto the north side of George Reynolds Drive. 699029 -6- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAN REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT (CONT'D) 24. That the construction and servicing of this plan of subdivision conform to the phasing plan submitted, approved and on file with the Director of Public Works. 25. This development cannot proceed until such time as the Municipality has approved the expenditure of funds for the provision of road construction and installation of sidewalks on Jane Avenue, Fourth Avenue and Westmore Street, as well as any other external works or services which have been included in the Municipality's Development Charge By-law and have been deemed necessary by the Director of Public Works to service this development. 26. The developer is required to construct the stormwater management works required for this development and specifically, the works proposed in the Stormwater Drainage Report prepared for Birchdale Village dated November 1998 and prepared by D. G. Biddle and Associates and the Black Creek Tributary Master Drainage Plan, dated May 1991 and prepared by G. M. Sernas and Associates. This work shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the Conservation Authority and the Director of Public Works. 27. Development of this plan of subdivision will not be permitted until all stormwater oversized downstream works necessary to accommodate drainage from the subject draft plan have been constructed in a manner satisfactory to the Director of Public Works. 28. Block 97 must align with the location of the existing walkway in the subdivision to the west (l8T -91006). 699030 -7- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAN REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT (CONT'D) 29. The developer is responsible to construct a walkway on Block 98 and Block 99 to provide a pedestrian connection between adjoining subdivisions to the south. The details of this walkway shall be determined at the detailed engineering stage of this plan of subdivision. 30. The location and design details for all construction accesses to the proposed development must be approved by the Director of Public Works. 31. The applicant must enter into a development agreement with the Municipality, which includes all requirements of the Public Works Department regarding the engineering and construction of all internal works, and services related to this plan of subdivision. 32. A "Staging Plan" shall be included within the subdivision agreement. Any other necessary provisions that will control the sequential development of this subdivision and other adjacent undeveloped lands, shall also be included within the subdivision agreement to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 33. All works and ServICeS must be designed and constructed in accordance with the Municipality of Clarington Design Criteria and Standard Drawings, provisions of the Municipality Development By-law # 92-015 and all applicable legislation and to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 34. That during construction, all heavy construction vehicles shall not use any portion of Westmore Street or the southern portion of Jane Avenue from Fourth Avenue to Westmore Street. 699031 -8- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAN REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT (CONT'D) 35. That Blocks 97 and 98 for walkways be constructed in Phase One and transferred to the Municipality free and clear of all encumbrances to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. 36. That the Owner shall fulfil the requirements of the Environmental Impact Study as prepared by Gartner Lee and Associates (February 1998) with respect to hydrogeology including the use of roof leaders directed toward the downhill edge of buildings and not directed to the storm sewer system. Multiple downspouts should be used to spread the flow over as wide an area as possible. In addition, one metre long trench plugs located every 10 metres shall be placed along all buried services, including services running from the individual homes where those services exceed 10 metres in length. All trench plugs shall be constructed within the right-of-way. A hydrogeologist shall review and be satisfied with the proposed design. 37. That the Owner shall fulfil the requirements of the Environmental Impact Study as prepared by Gartner Lee and Associates (February 1998) with respect to the establishment of foundation weepers and a third pipe system shall be utilized to direct groundwater downstream. Weeper drains and third pipes shall not be discharged to storm sewers. 38. In order to ensure the movement of water through the wetland crossed by the extension of George Reynolds Drive, small horizontal culverts located at ground level in combination with a large culvert designed to accommodate storm events, shall be installed to the satisfaction of the Conservation Authority and the Municipality. In addition, the use of compacted native material and the use of permeable bedding materials under and along the length of the extension of George Reynolds Drive is required. 699032 -9- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAN REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT (CONT'D) 39. That guidelines be prepared to establish a homeowner education program to encourage stewardship of the open space lands and to educate landowners about the unique sensitivities associated with the open space lands. Included in the guidelines shall be policies regarding disposal of garden refuse, and disposal of swimming pool water. In addition, residents should be made conscious of the impact users have on the valleylands. The guidelines shall be provided to all homeowners in their purchase and sale agreement. 40. That the Owner shall pay to the Municipality, the development charge in accordance to the Development Charge By-law as amended from time to time, as well as payment of a portion of front end charges pursuant to the Development Charge Act if any are required to be paid by the owner. 41. That the Owner shall provide and install sidewalks, street lights, temporary turning circles etc. as per the Municipality's standards and criteria. 42. That the Owner shall cause all utilities, including, hydro, telephone, Cable TV, etc. to be buried underground. 43. That the Owner shall provide the Municipality, at the time of execution of the subdivision agreement unconditional and irrevocable, Letters of Credit acceptable to the Municipality's Treasurer, with respect to Performance Guarantee, Maintenance Guarantee, Occupancy Deposit and other guarantees or deposits as may be required by the Municipality. 44. That the Owner shall adhere to architectural control requirements of the Municipality. 699033 -10- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAN REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT (CONT'D) 45. That prior to the issuance of building permits, the Owner shall, through its acoustic engineer, to provide a certification to the Director of Planning, certifying that the Builder's plans are in accordance with the Noise Control Report as approved by the Ministry ofthe Environment and the Municipality of Cia ring ton, if required. 46. That prior to the issuance of building permits, access routes to the subdivision must be provided to meet Subsection 3.2.5.2(6) of the Ontario Building Code and, that all watermains and hydrants are fully serviced and the Owner agrees that during construction, fire access routes be maintained according to Subsection 2.5.1.2 of the Ontario Fire Code, storage of combustible waste be maintained as per Subsection 2.4.1.1 and open burning as per Subsection 2.6.3.4 of the Ontario Fire Code. 47. The Owner agrees that where the well or private water supply of any person is interfered with as a result of construction or the development of the subdivision, the Owner shall at his expense, either connect the affected party to municipal water supply system or provide a new well or private water system so that water supplied to the affected party shall be of quality and quantity at least equal to the quality and quantity of water enjoyed by the affected party prior to the interference. 48. That the Owner satisfy the Municipality of Clarington Public Works Department, financially and/or otherwise. 49. That the Owner satisfy the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority financially and/or otherwise.h 699034 -11- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL OF FINAL PLAN REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS TO BE INCLUDED IN SUBDIVISION AGREEMENT (CONT'D) 50. That the builder include a disclosure in all purpose and sale agreements advising home buyers of municipal parking regulations. 51. That the Owner ensure that on-street parking spaces are appropriately located in the vicinity of dwelling units and are not adversely affected by road geometrics. 52. That all single detached and semi-detached/linked dwelling units be constructed with two (2) outdoor parking spaces. 53. That the Owner erect 1.2 metre high chain link fence along the side and rear yards of all residential lots within this plan of subdivision abutting Block 99 and Block 100. 54. The Owner agrees to establish a geodetic benchmark in the vicinity of Trulls Road and George Reynolds Drive which will serve as vertical control for the Glenview Neighbourhood. The Owner will be responsible for 100% of the cost of establishing this benchmark. 55. That the applicant provide the Planning Department, on disk in a CAD format acceptable to the Municipality a copy of the Plan of Subdivision as draft approved and final approved. 699035 OCTOBER 1999 THE CORPORA nON OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW NUMBER 99- ATTACHMENT NO.5 being a By-law to amend By-law 84-63, the Comprehensive Zoning Bylaw for the Corporation of the former Town of Newcastle. 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 former Town of Newcastle. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Council ofthe Corporation ofthe Municipality ofClarington enacts as follows: I. Section "12.4 Special Exception Urban Residential (RI) Zone", is hereby further amended by adding thereto, the following new Special Exception 12.4.44, as follows: "SECTION 12.4.44 URBAN RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION (Rl-44) ZONE Notwithstanding the provisions of Sections 12.1 and 12.2, those lands zoned (Rl-44) on the schedules to this By-law shall only be used for a single detached dwelling and a home occupation use in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.11 of this By-law, save and except the retail sale of antiques, arts, crafts, or hobby items. In addition, lands zoned (Rl ~ 44) on the schedules to this By-law shall also be subject to the following zone regulations: i) For the purposes of this zone, an OUTDOOR PARKING SPACE shall mean a parking space excluding a private garage or carport. ii) Yard Requirements (minimum) a) FrontYard 6.0 metres to private garage or carport 4.5 metres to dwelling 6.0 metres to private garage or carport 4.5 metres to dwelling b) Exterior Side Yard Hi) Parking Requirements a) 2 outdoor parking spaces (minimum) b) Where the two outdoor parking spaces are provided side by side the combined minimum width of the two spaces may be reduced to 4.6 metres provided the minimum landscaped open space within the front yard is 30%. c) The minimum area of a private garage or c.arport shall be 18.58 square metres and the minimum width shall be 3.0 metres. d) Private garages and carports may extend a maximum of 3.0 metres in front of the dwelling unit." 2. Section "12.4 Special Exception Urban Residential (Rt) Zone", is hereby further amended by adding thereto, the following new Special Exception 12.4.45, as follows: "SECTION 12.4.45 URBAN RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION (Rl-45) ZONE Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 12.2 those lands zoned (Rl-45) on the schedules to this By-law shall also be subject to the following zone regulations: i) For the purposes of this zone, an OUTDOOR PARKING SPACE shall mean a parking space excluding a private garage or carport. ii) Yard Requirements (minimum) a) Front Yard 6.0 metres to private garage or carport 4.5 metres to dwelling 699036 -2- b) Exterior Side Yard 6.0 metres to private garage or carport 4.5 metres to dwelling iii) Parking Requirements a) 2 outdoor parking spaces (minimum) b) Where the two outdoor parking spaces are provided side by side the combined minimum width of the two spaces may be reduced to 4.6 metres provided the minimum landscaped open space within the front yard is 30%. c) The minimum area of a private garage or carport shall be 18.58 square metres and tbe minimum width shall be 3.0 metres. d) Private garages and carports may extend a maximum of 3.0 metres in front of the dwelling unit." 3. Section "12.4 Special Exception Urban Residential (Rt) Zone:, is hereby further amended by adding thereto, the following new Special Exception 12.4.49, as follows: "SECTION 12.4.49 URBAN RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION (Rl-49) ZONE Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 12.1, 12.2 and 3.20 a., those lands zoned (R1-49) on tbe schedules to this By-law shall only be used for a single detached dwelling and a home occupation use in accordance with the provisions of Section 3.11 of this By- law, save and except the retail sale of antiques, art, crafts, or hobby items. In addition, lands zoned (R1-49) on tbe schedules to tbis By-law shall also be subject to tbe following zone regulations: i) For the purpose of this zone, an OUTDOOR PARKING SPACE shall mean a parking space excluding a private garage or carport. ii) Yani Requirements (minimum) a) Front Yard 6.0 metres to private garage or carport 4.5 metres to dwelling b) Exterior Side Yard 6.0 metres to private garage or carport 4.5 metres to dwelling c) RearYard 10 metres d) J\ccessory Structures All accessory buildings and/or structures shall be setback 5 metres from an Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. e) Naturalized Area Lands located within 5 metres of the rear yard shall be used only for the preservation of the natural environment and shall remain treed. iii) Parking Requirements a) 2 outdoor parking spaces (minimum) b) "Where the two outdoor parking spaces are provided side by side the combined minimum width of the two spaces may be reduced to 4.6 metres provided the minimum landscaped open space within the front yard is 30% 699037 - 3 - c) The minimum area of a private garage or carport shall be 18.58 square metres and the minimum width shall be 3.0 metres d) Private garages and carports may extend a maximum of 3.0 metres in front of the dwelling unit." 4. Section "13.4 Special Exception Urban Residential (R2) Zone", is hereby further amended. by adding thereto, the following new Special Exception 13.4.24, as follows: "SECTION 13,4,24 URBAN RESIDENTIAL EXCEPTION (R2-24) ZONE Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 13.2 those lands zoned (R2-24) on the schedules to this By-law shall also be subject to the following zone regulations:, i) For the purposes of this zone, an OUTDOOR PARKING SPACE shall mean a parking space excluding a private garage or carport. ii) Yard Requirements (minimum) a) Front Yard 6.0 metres to private garage or carport 4.5 metres to dwelling 6.0 metres to private garage or carport 4.5 metres to dwelling b) Exterior Side Yard iii) Parking Requirements a) 2 outdoor parking spaces (minimum) b) Where the two outdoor parking spaces are provided side by side the combined minimmn width of the two spaces may be reduced to 4.6 metres provided the minimum landscaped open space within the front yard is 30%. c) The minimum area of a private garage or carport shall be 18.58 square metres and the minimum width shall be 3.0 metres. d) Private garages and carports may extend a maximum of 3.0 metres in front of the dwelling unit." 5. Schedule "4" to By-law 84-63, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone categories from: "Urban Residential Type One (RI)" to "Holding - Urban Residential Type One Exception ((H)RI-44)" and "Environmental Protection (EP)" "Holding - Urban Residential Type Two Exception ((H)R2-3)" to "Holding - Urban Residential Type One Exception ((H)RI-44)" "Holding - Urban Residential Type Four ((H)R4)" to "Holding - Urban Residential Type One ((H)RI)", "Holding - Urban Residential Type One Exception ((H)RI-45)", "Holding- Urban Residential Type One Exception ((H)Rl-49), "Holding - Urban Residential Type Two Exception ((H)R2-24)", "Environmental Protection (EP)" and "Agricultural (A)" "Environmental Protection (EP)" to "Holding - Urban Residential Type One ((H)Rl), Holding - Urban Residential Type One Exception ((H)RI-44)", "Holding - Urban Residential Type Two Exception ((H)R2-24)" and "Agricultural (A)" Agricultural Exception (A-8)" to "Holding - Urban Residential Type One Exception (H)R 1-45)" and "Environmental Protection (EP)" 6. Schedule llA" attached hereto shall form part of this By-law. 699038 -4- 7. 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 read a first time this day of 1999. BY-LAW read a second time this day of 1999. BY-LAW read a third time and fmally passed this day of 1999. MAYOR CLERK 699039 This is Schedule"A" to By-law 99- , passed this day of ,1999 A.D. __~~LJ______~~____~LDT ~1~~~T ~ 28 - LDlITCF !II1AF"T Pl.) I '--~~ ~ - ~ ' , ,~,_. ,~ g ~ " " . 'I . =, . ~ REG LA NO 75 j!: "'CTlOlE ST~E"LT l'l z CJ 0; V) w u z CJ u I _ ZONING CHANGE FROM "R1" TO "CH)R1-44" ~ ZONING CHANGE FROM "R1" TO "EP" ~ ZONING CHANGE FROM _ ZONING CHANGE FROM Em ZONING CHANGE FROM m ZONING CHANGE FROM fi>> I ZONING CHANGE FROM _ ZONING CHANGE FROM ~ ZONING CHANGE FROM = ZONING CHANGE FROM ~ ZONING CHANGE FROM IilllIlIlIlIlII ZONING CHANGE FROM ~ ZONING CHANGE FROM _ ZONING CHANGE FROM _ ZONING CHANGE FROM ~ ZONING TO REMAIN "A" ~ ZONING TO REMAIN "EP" COURTICE "CH)R2-3" TO "CH)R1-44" "CH)R4" TO "(H)R1" "CH)R4" TO "(H)R1-45" "(H)R4" TO "(H)R1-49" "CH)R4" TO "CH)R2-24" "CH)R4" TO "A" "CH)R4" TO "EP" "A-8" TO "CH)R1-45" teA_8" TO It EP" "EP" TO "CH)R1" "EP" TO "CH)R1-44" "EP" TO "CH)R2-24" "Epn TO eeA" Mayor Clerk 699040 ATTACHMENT NO.6 . -- ,s U l! ! mHS I ~ ;1 ~ .; i~l! ! _o~;~zl!5 ..... ,.. . 1-11 .... ii ~~~~ ~ ;: ~I~ u I l:! S - - i L ~ .. ~1! Ii. c . I 0 ~~~ -I : Q I:d . - i; I & I;~illli .. .. ~: ;1 d. I Itl n; ",' ';Iii ill J> . . . iI - ;s I .s 11 I ,- , , , I '..l , , , , , , , , i 011 I NI._ I I'~ j 61 l- ...], , , , , , , , , I , I I I I , , i-- 1 1 1 I I ! l-l , _."11 ..M'nOS OU/.:JH:n'lJ ---- NV~. d~olv --- l- ~! - ---...--- - . '<>..J '............. ATTACHMENT NO.7 , ("- TTTlI T-l "'--J '............ ,i' i III i ~j lit ;I' iil .~. . November 1, 1999 Re: G.P. & A Agenda Attached please find additional attachments; No. 6 and No. 7 to be included with Addendum No. 2 to PD-70-99. Thaok you. '/1 j. 'iz( Belinda L. Mackey Ibm A I I Al;HMt: N I I'IU.O . I .~ ! .; ~~i! ! i5~I~l!s - 0 ,! >- I 1-11 ... li ~~~i! ~ ;: ~~I u I ll! ~ - oi L; .. ~'l Ii. : 1 i 0 ~ ~! --I : ij HH III. ..II I;~illli .. .. ~: ;1 d. I I!j I' ;fl ill 11 ~ I-- I I I I I I I I I I I I ",I NI_ l ;~ t--I J., o <.I JI ':30:' - I ~'-'. I ,--- I I I I I , T-T . _.'.11 .NmOS alll :In/iI NvtJ.~01ldl... =-, '-__ l. , "'--/~ A I I AvMIVIt:N I NU. { > ii~!! ~ ~ I ~ : ~ I ;!i Id~1 ;~diiiii i. .. ~: .. lil ~. 11 Ir. ~I ill ;; l' I I I I Ii I I I I 0". OLllJ_ n -(}NaroN -'311 (1Y01t 33111JflOj ,-" , , , , , , , , , , , , GJ' N' , :;, -,' , , I , , , , , I I I I I I , , (-----1 I I I Ii T'-l , _.-IM! uo___ .IN\ol'1OS anfdlOlM u Nvtd~D>ldl"v -- l-,,-:-1 ~J '''-.