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 THAT Resolution GPA #359-99 as amended by Resolution GPA #360-99 be rescinded.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
'''-.