Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/14/2009 (!m;mglOn GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE DATE: TIME: PLACE: September 14, 2009 9:30 A.M. COUNCIL CHAMBERS 1. MEETING CALLED TO ORDER 2. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST 3. ANNOUNCEMENTS 4. MINUTES (a) Minutes of a Regular Meeting of July 6,2009 401 5. PRESENTATIONS 6. DELEGATIONS (Draft List at Time of Publication - To be Replaced with Final List) 601 (a) Marion Manders, Regarding Report PSD-079-09, Clarington Sign By-law (b) Richard Ward, Regarding Report PSD-086-09, Modification to the Oak Ridges Moraine Zoning By-law 2005-109 (c) Richard Ward, Regarding Cost Cutting Measures (d) Richard Ward, Regarding his Personal Property Standards Issue 7. PUBLIC MEETINGS (a) An Application to Amend the Clarington Zoning By-law Applicant: Green Martin Holdings Ltd. Report: PSD-078-09 701 8. PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) PSD-078-09 Application to Amend Zoning By-law 84-63 by Green 801 Martin Holdings Ltd. to Permit the Development of Two (2) Single Detached Lots, Each Having a Minimum Frontage of 10 Metres, Fronting onto Boswell Drive CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1 C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 G.P. & A. Agenda - 2 - September 14, 2009 (b) PSD-079-09 Clarington Sign By-law 809 (c) PSD-080-09 Land Acquisition 856 10 Duchess Street - Orono (d) PSD-081-09 Dissolution of Clarington Highway 407 Community 868 Advisory Committee (e) PSD-082-09 Monitoring of the Decisions of the Committee of 875 Adjustment for the Meetings of July 9, 2009, July 30, 2009 and August 20, 2009 (f) PSD-083-09 Application for Removal of Holding 890 Owner: Prestonvale Road Land Corporation (g) PSD-084-09 Ontario Municipal Board Decision on Official Plan 895 Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Control Application, Files COPA 2007-0007, ZBA2007- 0026, SPA2007-0021 Appellant: ADESA/lmpact Auto Auction Canada Corp. (h) PSD-085-09 Ontario Municipal Board Decision on Official Plan 899016 Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Applications . Appellant: Bowmanville Creek Developments Inc. (i) PSD-086-09 Modification to the Oak Ridges Moraine 899029 Zoning By-law 2005-109 0) PSD-087-09 Heritage Conservation District Review 899086 9. ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) EGD-026-09 Monthly Report on Building Permit Activity for June 2009 901 (b) EGD-027-09 Monthly Report on Building Permit Activity for July 2009 907 10. OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT No Reports 11. EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) ESD-010-09 Monthly Response Report - June, July & August 2009 1101 12. COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) CSD-014-09 Grade 5 Action Pass 1201 G.P. & A. Agenda - 3 - September 14, 2009 13. MUNICIPAL CLERK'S DEPARTMENT (a) CLD-014-09 Animal Services Quarterly Report - April - June, 2009 1301 (b) CLD-015-09 2nd Quarter Parking Report 1308 14. CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT (a) COD-052-09 Contract Awards, Summer Council Recess 1401 (b) COD-053-09 Tender CL2009-40, Snow Clearing & Winter Maintenance 1426 of Municipal Property, Sidewalks & Parking Lots for Newcastle & Surrounding Areas 15. FINANCE DEPARTMENT (a) FND-019-09 Report on Revenue Sensitive to Economic Conditions- 1501 June 2009 (b) FND-020-09 Report on Revenue Sensitive to Economic Conditions - 1510 July 2009 (c) FND-021-09 Financial Update as at June 30th, 2009 1519 (d) FND-023-09 Sales Tax Reform - 2010 HST Update 1525 16. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE (a) CAO-005-09 2009 Long Term Service Event 1601 17. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (a) Addendum to PSD-067 -09, Status Report: Appeal to the Ontario 1701 Municipal Board By Smooth Run Developments Inc. (Metrus Developments Inc.) Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited on Application in the Village North Neighbourhood in Newcastle 18. OTHER BUSINESS (a) Dennis Hefferon, Solicitor, Confidential Verbal Report Regarding an Expropriation 19. COMMUNICATIONS 20. ADJOURNMENT l;J.winglOn General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6,2009 Minutes of a meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee held on Monday, July 6, 2009 at 9:30 a.m., in the Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Present Were: Also Present: Mayor J. Abernethy Councillor A. Foster Councillor R. Hooper Councillor M. Novak Councillor G. Robinson Councillor C. Trim Councillor W. Woo Chief Administrative Officer, F. Wu Director of Community Services, J. Caruana Director of Engineering Services, T. Cannella Manager of Special Projects, Planning Services, F. Langmaid Director of Corporate Services & Human Resources, M. Marano Director of Finance, N. Taylor Fire Chief, Emergency Services, G. Weir Deputy Clerk, A. Greentree Clerk II, E. Atkinson Mayor Abernethy chaired this portion of the meeting. DISCLOSURES OF PECUNIARY INTEREST There were no disclosures of pecuniary interest stated at this meeting. ANNOUNCEMENTS Councillor Foster attended the Canada Day fireworks display organized by the 18 members of the Courtice Rotary Club. He announced over 8,000 residents attended and the Courtice Rotary Club should be congratulated and thanked for the great job regarding this event. Councillor Woo announced that Thursday, July 9, 2009 the Lakeridge Health Annual General Meeting will be held at the TOSCA banquet hall, Oshawa, starting at 6:30 p.m. Councillor Hooper announced that the Canadiana Banners are now up in the downtown core of Bowmanville and Councillor Hooper extended his gratitude to Council for their support in this endeavour. 401 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6,2009 MINUTES Resolution #GPA-458-09 Moved by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Foster THAT the minutes of the regular meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee held on June 22,2009, be approved. CARRIED PRESENTATIONS Paul Draycott, Morrision Hershfield, provided the Committee with a verbal presentation supported by a PowerPoint presentation regarding Report PSD-073-09. Mr. Draycott stated the scope of the project is for construction and operation of up to four new nuclear reactors and associated buildings and facilities adjacent to the Darlington Nuclear Generating Station. These reactors will generate approximately 4,800 megawatts of electrical power. Mr. Draycott informed the Committee the principle facilities will include a power block, cooling system, and switchyard. He stated the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) examined the potential environmental effects including cumulative effects of the site preparation, construction, operation, and refurbishment if required. It examined the decommissioning and abandonment and their significance. He stated that OPG is responsible for providing sufficient data and analysis on any environmental effects. The scope of the peer review identified the environmental effects of the projects and the requirements for a follow-up program but it did not include human health issues as it relates to radiation or radioactivity, nuclear waste management, aboriginal interests or the licensing application. Overall, Mr. Draycott stated the peer review findings were comprehensive, professional and the documentation met the EIS obligations. He discussed the six peer review recommendations including: impacts of transportation and traffic; socio-economic and municipal finance effects; requirement for additional municipal expenditures; development of site-specific details during the licensing phases; development of local follow-op monitoring programs; and completion of project benefits. Mr. Draycott confirmed that a number of changes were made to the document based on the peer review and is satisfied that the EIS for the project was completed professionally, and identified the concerns of the Municipality. Mr. Draycott acknowledged the participation of all partners involved with the peer review. Shelia Hall, Clarington Board of Trade, provided the Committee with an Economic Development update for the period of October 2008 to June 2009, supported by a PowerPoint presentation. Ms. Hall informed the Committee of the new board members for the Clarington Board of Trade which were elected this past April. Ms. Hall highlighted the economic development activities confirming they have remained steady. There were 9 vacant land inquiries and 14 vacant space inquiries. The respective businesses range from small to medium and are mostly from retired persons requesting information on setting up their own businesses. She informed the Committee the leads from the - 2 - 402 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6, 2009 Region are of a larger scale and are site specific, She listed the 14 new businesses to Clarington as well as the 6 businesses that relocated and 5 businesses that closed since her last economic update to the Committee. These 14 new businesses have created 48 jobs within the Municipality. She informed the Committee of the goals for the Clarington Energy Summit, which included educating local businesses on New Nuclear Opportunities, and educating external nuclear business on opportunities in Clarington. There were 129 attendees of which 69 where from Clarington and she stated this event was a great success. During the economic development workshops the following five top priorities were identified: infrastructure, retention activities, identity/branding, delivering the message, and customer services. Ms. Hall informed the Committee the Clarington Board of Trade will continue to work with local businesses and she highlighted some of the Board's accomplishments such as: completion of website update; creation of databases for vacant buildings and land; completion of electronic community profile video, success of the "shop local" campaign. Three local businesses, who have had great success, are Atlantic Lifts, who secured a contract to provide lifts to Kuwait, Holburn for their partnering success, and Pingles Farm Market, who was the recipient of the award for outstanding farm in 2009. In- closing, Ms. Hall thanked the Municipality of Clarington for their continued support of the Clarington Board of Trade. Resolution #GPA-459-09 Moved by Councillor Foster, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT the Committee take a 5 minute recess. CARRIED The meeting resumed at 10:40 a.m. Steve Rowe, Environmental Planner, Will McCrae, AECOM and Mehran Monabbati, SENES provided the Committee with a presentation regarding Report PSD-071-09. This presentation was an update on the Durham/York Residual Waste Study, Individual Environmental Assessment Municipality of Clarington Peer Review. Mr. Rowe stated the intention of the peer review was to identify whether the proponent had gathered information, evaluated alternatives, and concluded the preferred undertaking in an appropriate, consistent and traceable manner. The peer review raised issues that the proponent was to address based on legislation, Terms of Reference, guidelines, and good planning practices. Mr. Rowe provided an overview of his services to Clarington. Mr. Rowe informed the Committee that this was a mammoth undertaking and some issues remain unresolved, including: . Section 8 - Site Selection . Section 9 - Vendor Indentifications . Sections 10 & 12 - Undertaking and Changes to the EA . Section 13 - Commitments . Section 14 - Monitoring; and . Section 16 - Consultation Summary - 3 - 403 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6, 2009 Resolution #GPA-460-09 Moved by Councillor Trim, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT the Committee direct questions to each presenter directly following their portion of the presentation regarding Report PSD-071-09. CARRIED William McCrae, AECOM, informed the Committee that AECOM focused on Section 8, Site Selection of the EA process. This involved review of the evaluation process, consideration of mitigating factors and sensitivity of haul routes to development scenarios. Mr. McCrae stated the overall analysis of the traffic assessment is generally sound and that a private lane to the Energy-From-Waste facility from Courtice Road should be implemented. The surface water and groundwater assessment was also reviewed by Mr. McCrae and he stated the overall analysis is sound and conservative and there should be more analysis done at the detailed design stage. In closing, Mr. McCrae stated most of the issues have been addressed, with only two outstanding issues. Mehran Monabbati provided the Committee with a brief history of SENES. He informed the Committee that SENES focused on the Air Quality Assessment, Groundwater Assessment, the Facility Energy and Life Cycle Assessment, Acoustic Assessment, the Natural Environment Impact Assessment, the Social-Cultural Assessment, and the Economic Assessment. He provided comments on the outcome of each section. Mr. Monabbati advised that the majority of SENES' comments have been incorporated into the next version of the document. With respect to Air Quality, they have agreed to disagree and will look to the Ministry of Environment to decide. In closing, Mr. Monabbati informed the Committee that in most cases the Region's Consultants made a commitment to include the appropriate update in the final document, and that the peer reviewers would like to review the final report. Resolution #GPA-461-09 Moved by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT the Committee take a 30 minute recess. CARRIED The meeting resumed at 1 :00 p.m. DELEGATIONS Louis Bertrand addressed the Committee regarding PSD-071-09. Mr. Bertrand requested that the Committee recommend that Council adopt Report PSD-071-09. In Mr. Bertrand's opinion, the Report raises some valid concerns which should be addressed and that the concerns are ones that were present in the earlier phases of the - 4 - 404 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6,2009 project which still have not been addressed. He stated that site selection does matter and that if the site selection process is not transparent, traceable, replicable, logical and systematic then it may not be conclusive. Mr. Bertrand expressed concerns with sections 2.3.1, 2.3.2, 2.3.3, and 3,2.11 of Report PSD-071-09. He would like to see the questions raised regarding the economic assessment technical study report answered, and the contract with the peer reviewers extended. Mr. Bertrand further stated that while he is making these comments, it does not mean he supports the project. He requested that Members of Council re-state their reasons for supporting the incinerator project at the next Council meeting for the benefit of a broader audience. Karen Buck addressed the Committee regarding the DurhamlYork Residual Waste Study. Ms. Buck expressed concerns with the health impacts from the incinerator. Her concerns included that the Health Risk Assessment is indicating that local residents will be affected by the health contaminents in the air. Ms. Buck sited three benchmarks that were established involving exposure of health risks to local infant residents, local toddler residents, local infant farmers and local toddler farmers. She stated the consultant's remarks throughout the report were cautionary. Ms. Buck inquired as what level the health risks have to reach before health risks issues are reviewed. Catherine McKeever was listed in the Agenda to speak to Report PSD-071-09, but cancelled her delegation prior to the meeting. Frank Vaniersel, listed in the Agenda to speak regarding on-street parking issues, was called but was not in attendance. Richard Ward addressed the Committee regarding his property standards situation. Mr. Ward informed the Committee that he is trying to resolve the property standards issue, stating the initial complaint was against his barn which has been removed. Mr. Ward expressed concerns over the timing of the Order for the property clean-up. He stated that the vehicles which were removed from his property were not derelict vehicles nor were they abandoned. Mr. Ward stated the response from Council regarding his past delegation was a violation of the Criminal Code and he suggested the only solution would be for Council to direct a legitimate criminal investigation. Mr. Ward requested that a recorded vote be taken regarding this request of Council. Angie Darlison addressed the Committee regarding Report CSD-013-09. Ms. Oarlison informed the Committee that the Clarington Older Adults Association is working closely with staff regarding the use of satellite locations and feels this is a positive move. She requested the Committee to endorse Report CSD-013-09. Linda Gasser addressed the Committee regarding Report PSD-075-09. Ms. Gasser has concerns with Council's position always being the same as the Region. She stated that staff has done a good job capturing issues. Ms. Gasser informed the Committee that she currently sits on the Community Advisory Group. She requested that no site alterations proceed on components of the project that would be subject to any future EA process, and that any areas that are not in the immediate transitway not be disturbed - 5 - 405 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6,2009 until they are approved and construction begins. She suggested that the Municipality retain the Peer Review Consultants to help comment throughout this EA and any future EA as they never know what will arise during further reviews. Councillor Novak chaired this portion of the meeting. PUBLIC MEETING (a) Subject: Applicant: Report: Application to Amend Zoning By-law 84-63 1210191 Ontario Inc. PSD-068-09 Anne Taylor-Scott, Planner, Planning Services Department provided a verbal report supported by a PowerPoint presentation pertaining to Report PSD-068-09. No one spoke in opposition to or support of Report PSD-068-09. John Albi, applicant, was present to address any concerns or questions raised at today's meeting. There were no concerns or questions. PLANNING SERVICES DEPARTMENT PROPOSED ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT TO PERMIT AN OUTDOOR SALES CENTRE ACCESSORY TO A BUILDING SUPPLY AND HOME IMPROVEMENT OUTLET APPLICANT: 1210191 ONTARIO INC. Resolution #GPA-462-09 Moved by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Trim THAT Report PSD-068-09 be received; THAT while the notice of public meeting was prepared for the purposes of adding an "Outdoor Garden Centre" as a permitted use accessory to a building supply and home improvement outlet, the recommendatioR to add an "Outdoor Sales Centre" as a permitted use accessory to a building supply and home improvement outlet is a minor change from the notice provided and does not require further notice under Section 34(13) of the Planning Act; THAT the application to amend Comprehensive Zoning By-law 84-63 be approved and that the amending By-law contained in Attachment 3 to Report PSD-068-09 be passed; THAT the Region of Durham Planning Department and the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation be forwarded a copy of Report PSD-068-09 and Council's decision; and - 6 - 406 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6, 2009 THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-068-09 and any delegation be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED APPLICATION FOR AMENDMENT TO DRAFT APPROVED PLAN OF SUBDIVISION AND ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT APPLICANT: WEST DIAMOND PROPERTIES LTD. Resolution #GPA-463-09 Moved by Councillor Trim, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT Report PSD-069-09 be received; THAT the application to amend the Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision be approved as contained in Attachment 4 to Report PSD-069-09; THAT the application to amend Comprehensive Zoning By-law 84-63 be approved and that the Amending By-law contained in Attachment 5 to Report PSD-069-09 be passed; THAT the by-law authorizing the entering into an amending Subdivision Agreement between the Owner of the lands and the Municipality of Clarington be approved as contained in Attachment 6 to Report PSD-069-09; THAT the Region of Durham Planning Department and the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation be forwarded a copy of Report PSD-069-09 and Council's decision; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-069-09 and any delegation be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED MONITORING OF THE DECISIONS OF THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE MEETING OF JUNE 18,2009 Resolution #GPA-464-09 Moved by Councillor Foster, seconded by Councillor Robinson THAT Report PSD-070-09 be received; and THAT Council concurs with the decision of the Committee of Adjustment made on June 18, 2009, for applications A2009-0016, A2009-0017 and A2009-0018, and that Staff be authorized to appear before the Ontario Municipal Board to defend the decisions of the Committee of Adjustment. CARRIED - 7 - 407 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6,2009 DURHAM/YORK RESIDUAL WASTE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON PEER REVIEW COMMENTS ON PRE- SUBMISSION Resolution #GPA-465-09 Moved by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Trim THAT Report PSD-071-09 be received; THAT Report PSD-071-09, including attachments #2 through #14, be forwarded to the Region and the Ministry of the Environment; THAT SENES, AECOM and Steven Rowe be thanked for their efforts in completing the peer review in a timely manner; THAT the Region's Project Team be requested to work closely with Clarington Staff on the detail design of Energy Park Drive, the stormwater management works and other Clarington Energy Business Park design details, the architectural concepts for the Energy from Waste facility and implementation plans for development; THAT a copy of Report PSD-071-09 and Council's decision be forwarded to the Region of Durham, the Region of York and Ministry of Environment; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-071-09 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT AND MODIFICATION TO DRAFT APPROVED PLAN OF SUBDIVISION APPLICANT: BA YSONG DEVELOPMENTS INC. Resolution #GPA-466-09 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Mayor Abernethy THAT Report PSD-072-09 be received; THAT the proposed Amendment to Condition 1 of the Conditions of Draft Approval for Draft Approved Plan of Subdivision S-C-2007 -0004 submitted by Baysong Developments Inc. be approved, as contained in Attachment 2 to Report PSD-072-09, and that the Director of Planning Services be authorized to amend the Draft Approved Plan upon receipt of the red-line revised draft Plan of Subdivision; THAT the application for Zoning By-law Amendment (ZBA 2008-0022) submitted by Baysong Developments Inc. as contained in Attachment 4 to Report PSD-072-09 be passed; - 8 - 408 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6,2009 THAT the Region of Durham Planning Department and Municipal Property Assessment Corporation be forwarded a copy of Report PSD-072-09; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-072-09 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED DARLINGTON NEW NUCLEAR BUILD ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON PEER REVIEW COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Resolution #GPA-467-09 Moved by Councillor Woo, seconded by Councillor Foster THAT Report PSD-073-09 be received; THAT Report PSD-073-09, including the peer review report prepared by Morrison Hershfield Limited (Attachment 1 to Report PSD-073-09), be submitted to Ontario Power Generation as the Municipality of Clarington's comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Darlington New Nuclear Build Project; THAT Ontario Power Generation be thanked for providing the Municipality of Clarington with the opportunity to undertake a peer review of the draft Environmental Impact Statement prior to its submission to the Joint Review Panel; THAT Morrison Hershfield be thanked for their efforts in completing the peer review in a timely manner; THAT a copy of Report PSD-073-09 and Council's decision be forwarded to Ontario Power Generation and the Regional Municipality of Durham; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-073-09 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMENTS TO THE CANADIAN NUCLEAR SAFETY COMMISSION HEARING ON THE PORT GRANBY SCREENING REPORT Resolution #GPA-468-09 Moved by Councillor Trim, seconded by Councillor Robinson THAT Report PSD-074-09 be received; - 9 - 409 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6,2009 THAT Report PSD-074-09 be approved as the Municipality of Clarington's comments to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission on the Screening Report for the Port Granby project; THAT Report PSD-074-09 be submitted to the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission at such time as the Commission releases a Public Notice advising of the holding of a Hearing with respect to the Port Granby Screening Report; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-074-09 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED AS AMENDED (See following motion) Resolution #GPA-469-09 Moved by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Trim THAT the final paragraph on page 6 of Attachment #1 to Report #PSD-074-09, section 7.0 - Communications Protocols, be amended to add the wording "the Community" after the word "Canada" and before "the CNSC". CARRIED The foregoing resolution #GPA-468-09 was then put to a vote and carried as amended. MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMENTS HIGHWAY 407 EAST EA AND PRELIMINARY DESIGN STUDY PRE-SUBMISSION REVIEW Resolution #GPA-470-09 Moved by Mayor Abernethy, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT Report PSD-075-09 be received; THAT Report PSD-075-09 be approved as the Municipality of Clarington's comments on the Draft Highway 407 Environmental Assessment Report (Pre-Submission); THAT the Region of Durham be requested to review the implications of advancing the capital works for a four-lane cross-section of the Taunton Road overpass at the East Durham Link, the connection of Enfield Road and Regional Road 34, and the transfer of the Darlington-Clarke Townline north of Taunton Road to the Region; THAT the Region of Durham be further requested to review the implications of advancing the capital works that will be required due to the tolling of the Highway 407 Mainline and the East Durham Link; - 10- 410 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6,2009 THAT a copy of Report PSD-075-09 and Council's decision be forwarded to the Ministry of Transportation and the Region of Durham; and THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-075-09 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED AS AMENDED (See following motion> Resolution #GPA-471-09 Moved by Councillor Foster, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT the foregoing resolution #GPA-470-09 be amended to add the following new paragraph immediately following paragraph 4: "THAT, where possible, the lands required for the transitway not be disturbed." CARRIED The foregoing resolution #GPA-470-09 was then put to a vote and carried as amended. Councillor Foster chaired this portion of the meeting. ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT HIGH STREET, FIRST STREET, THIRD STREET, FOURTH STREET, ROAD RECONSTRUCTION - PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTRE Resolution #GPA-472-09 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT Report EGD-024-09 be received; THAT Staff proceed to finalize the detail design and tender based on the information received at the Public Information Centre to meet the summer 2009 construction start schedule; and THAT all those who attended the Public Information Centre and who have contacted the Municipality as interested parties be informed of Report EGD-024-09. CARRIED - 11 - 411 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6,2009 MUNICIPAL ACCESS AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON AND BLINK COMMUNICATIONS INC. Resolution #GPA-473-09 Moved by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT Report EGD-025-09 be received; THAT the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute a Municipal Access Agreement between the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington and Blink Communications Inc.; and THAT Council approve the by-law attached to Report EGD-025-09. CARRIED Councillor Trim chaired this portion of the meeting. OPERATIONS DEPARTMENT 2009 WINTER BUDGET REPORT Resolution #GPA-474-09 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Foster THAT Report OPD-007-09 be received for information. CARRIED EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES DEPARTMENT There were no reports to be considered under this section of the Agenda. Councillor Robinson chaired this portion of the meeting. - 12 - 412 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6, 2009 COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ON THE DELIVERY OF PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMS, BETWEEN THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON AND THE CLARINGTON OLDER ADULT CENTRE BOARD Resolution #GPA-475-09 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT Report CSD-013-09 be received; and THAT the Mayor and Clerk be authorized to execute the Memorandum of Understanding on the Delivery of Partnership Programs, between the Municipality of Clarington and the Clarington Older Adult Centre Board. CARRIED Councillor Hooper chaired this portion of the meeting CLERK'S DEPARTMENT APPOINTMENTS TO CLARINGTON HERITAGE COMMITTEE AND CLARINGTON TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT ADVISORY COMMITTEE Resolution #GPA-476-09 Moved by Mayor Abernethy, seconded by Councillor Foster THAT Report CLD-O 13-09 be received; THAT Ingrid Saravia be appointed to the Clarington Heritage Committee; THAT Shauna Visser be appointed to the Clarington Traffic Management Advisory Committee; and THAT the interested parties listed in Report CLD-013-09 be advised of Council's decision. CARRIED Mayor Abernethy chaired this portion of the meeting. - 13 - 413 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6,2009 CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING, THE RADIATION PROTECTION SERVICE OF THE ONTARIO MINISTRY OF LABOUR FOR PLACEMENT OF AIR MONITORING DEVICES AT FIRE STATIONS Resolution #GPA-477-09 Moved by Councillor Hooper, seconded by Councillor Foster THAT Report COD-050-09 be received; THAT the updated letter of understanding with The Radiation Protection Service of The Ontario Ministry of Labour, for the placement of air monitoring devices at current and future Fire Stations as deemed appropriate by the Director of Emergency and Fire Services be approved; and THAT the By-law marked Schedule "A" attached to Report COD-050-09, authorizing the Mayor and Clerk to execute the necessary agreement be approved. CARRIED FINANCE DEPARTMENT REPORT ON REVENUE SENSITIVE TO ECONOMIC CONDITIONS - MAY 2009 Resolution #GPA-478-09 Moved by Councillor Trim, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT Report FND-017-09 be received for information. CARRIED (See following motions) Resolution #GPA-479-09 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Trim THAT the foregoing resolution be amended to add the following: "THAT the CAO be authorized to immediately take appropriate actions to effect possible mediation measures for both the 2009 and 2010 budget processes." MOTION WITHDRAWN -14 - 414 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6,2009 Resolution #GPA-480-09 Moved by Councillor Trim, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT the foregoing resolution be amended to add the following: "THA T the CAO immediately begin the process for analyzing the total operation of the Municipality and make recommendations relating to the budget and details regarding the economic conditions for the forthcoming budget implications for 2010; and THAT the CAO report back to Council at the final scheduled meeting of the General Purpose and Administration in September with a plan which shall include all projects and monies allocated for each project." MOTION LOST Resolution #GPA-481-09 Moved by Councillor Foster, seconded by Councillor Novak THAT the foregoing resolution be amended to add the following: "THA T the CAO immediately begin the process for analyzing the total operation of the Municipality and make recommendations relating to the budget and details regarding the economic conditions for the forthcoming budget implications for 2010; and THAT the CAO report back to Council at the final scheduled meeting of the General Purpose and Administration in September with a plan." MOTION LOST The foregoing resolution #GPA-478-09 was then put to a vote and carried. CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE HOST MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN ONTARIO POWER GENERATION AND THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON WITH RESPECT TO THE TWO-UNIT NEW NUCLEAR NEW BUILD AT DARLINGTON Resolution #GPA-482-09 Moved by Councillor Woo, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT Report CAO-003-09 be received; THAT Council approve the Draft Host Municipal Agreement as negotiated and agreed to by both the Clarington and the OPG Negotiation Teams; and - 15 - 415 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6,2009 THAT Council authorize the Mayor and the Clerk to execute the Host Municipal Agreement with Ontario Power Generation subject to its final review by the Municipal Solicitor. CARRIED UNFINISHED BUSINESS DELEGATION - KAREN BUCK - DURHAMNORK RESIDUAL WASTE STUDY DELEGATION - RICHARD WARD - REGARDING PROPERTY STANDARDS SITUATION Resolution #GPA-483-09 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Foster THAT the delegation of Karen Buck be received with thanks; and THAT the delegation of Richard Ward be received with thanks. CARRIED PRESENTATION - SHEILA HALL, CLARINGTON BOARD OF TRADE- REGARDING ECONOMIC UPDATE Resolution #GPA-484-09 Moved by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT the presentation of Sheila Hall, Clarington Board of Trade, regarding Economic Update be received with thanks. CARRIED OTHER BUSINESS COURTICE ROTARY CLUB - CANADA DAY CELEBRATIONS Resolution #GPA-485-09 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Foster THAT the Courtice Rotary Club be sent a formal thank-you for their Canada Day Celebrations fireworks display. CARRIED - 16 - 416 General Purpose and Administration Committee Minutes July 6, 2009 DEVELOPMENT OF BUSINESS REGISTRY Resolution #GPA-486-09 Moved by Councillor Novak, seconded by Councillor Hooper THAT Staff investigate and report back to the Committee, in September, on the feasibility of developing a Business Registry. CARRIED COMMUNICATIONS There were no items considered under this section of the Agenda. ADJOURNMENT Resolution #GPA-487-09 Moved by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Woo THAT the meeting adjourn at 3:50 p.m. CARRIED MAYOR DEPUTY CLERK - 17 - 417 DRAFT LIST OF DELEGATIONS GPA Meeting: September 14, 2009 (a) Marion Manders, Regarding Report PSD-079-09, Clarington Sign By-law (b) Richard Ward, Regarding Report PSD-086-09, Modification to the Oak Ridges Moraine Zoning By-law 2005-109 (c) Richard Ward, Regarding Cost Cutting Measures (d) Richard Ward, Regarding his Personal Property Standards Issue 601 ClarhJpf-~ Leading the Way b tAl. PUBLIC MEETING REPORT # PSD-078-09 GREEN MARTIN HOLDINGS L TD CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION AND PUBLIC MEETING tDEVELOPMENT APPLICATION BY: GREEN MARTIN HOLDINGS LTD AN APPLICATION TO AMEND THE ZONING BY.LAW 84-63 TAKE NOTICE that the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington has deemed the Zoning By-law Amendment application submitted for processing complete. The Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington will consider a proposed Zoning By-law Amendment, under Section 34 of the Planning Act, 1990, as amerided. . The proposed Zoning By-law Amendment submitted by Green Martin Holdings Ltd would permit the development of two (2) single detached lots, each having a minimum frontage of 10 metres, fronting onto Boswell Drive. The subject property is located on Boswell Drive, south of Durham Highway 2 within Part lot 17 Concession 1, Former Township of Darlington as shown on reverse. Planning File No.: ZBA2009-0009 PUBLIC MEETING The Municipality of Clarington will hold a public meeting to provide interested parties the opportunity to make comments, identify issues and provide additional information relative to the proposed development. The public meeting will be held on: DATE: Monday, September 14, 2009 TIME: 9:30 a.m. PLACE: Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, Municipal Administrative Centre, 40 Temperance St., Bowmanville, Ontario ANY PERSON may attend the public meeting and/or make written or verbal representation either in support of or in opposition to the proposal. The start time listed above reflects the time at which the General Purpose and Administration Committee Meeting commences. If you cannot attend the Public Meeting on this application you can make a deputation to Council at their meeting on Monday, September 21, 2009, commencing at 7:00 p.m. Should you wish to appear before Council, you must register with the Clerks Department by the Wednesday noon, September 16, 2009 to have your name appear in the Agenda. COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? If you wish to make a written submission or if you wish to be notified of subsequent meetings or the adoption of the lroposed Zoning By-law Amendment, you must submit a written request to the Clerk's Department, 2n Floor, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, Ontario L 1 C 3A6. Additional information relating to the proposal is available for inspection between 8:30 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. (during July and August 8:00 a.m. and 4:00 p.m.) at the Planning Services Department, 3rd Floor, 40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville, Ontario L 1C 3A6, or by calling Meaghan Kroon at (905) 623- 3379 extension 3270r bye-mail atmkroon@clarington.net. APPEAL If a person or public body does not make oral submissions at a public meeting or make written submissions to the Municipality of Clarington Planning Services Department before the proposed Official Plan Amendment is adopted, the person: i) is not entitled to appeal the decision of Clarington Council to the Ontario Municipal Board; and ii) the person or public body may not be added as a party to the hearing of an appeal before the Ontario Municipal Board unless, in the opinion of the Board, there are reasonable grounds to add the person or public body as a party. Da~;ty of Clac;ngton this 7.JJ,. day of ~ David J. Crome, MCIP, RPP 40 Temperance Street Director of Planning Services Bowmanville, Ontario Municipality of Clarington L 1 C 3AG ,2009 cc LDO Records ." -- ......~......... -- 701 ~ '> c co E 3: o !Xl Q. CO :E c ~. II '" o ..J ~ Cl> Q. o a- D.. 1 / I. / .- / .- / ~~, ~~ v' ~~V 0<:::> <c - . I: ell C). E C''C C I: o ell I E get o ~ N ro <(~ mm ND) I: 'E o N III D) .1: i5 '0 J: .1: :e ro :E I: ell E (!) l.: ell C ;: o << '+UQ /6> ~ 11&175 702 CJl}!.-!lJgtnn REPORT PLANNING SERVICES PUBLIC MEETING Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, September 14, 2009 Report #: PSD-078-09 File #: ZBA 2009-0009 By-law #: Subject: APPLICATION TO AMEND ZONING BY-LAW 84-63 BY GREEN MARTIN HOLDINGS LTD. TO PERMIT THE DEVELOPMENT OF TWO (2) SINGLE DETACHED LOTS, EACH HAVING A MINIMUM FRONTAGE OF 10 METRES, FRONTING ONTO BOSWELL DRIVE RECOMMENDA TIONS: It is respectfully recommended to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-078-09 be received; 2. THAT the application submitted by Green Martin Holdings Ltd. be REFERRED back to Staff for further processing and the preparation of a further report; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: David rome, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Director, Planning Services :-.... /~ 1- } 0 0" \7 Reviewed by~~} r ~~ ~ l.{.... Franklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer MK/CP/sh/df August 27, 2009 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 801 REPORT NO.: PSD-078-09 PAGE 2 1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Applicant: 1.2 Rezoning: Green Martin Holdings Ltd Appropriate to permit the development of two (2) single detached lots 1.3 Location: Part Lot 17, Concession 1, Former Township of Darlington (Attachment 1) 1.4 Site Area: 0.138 ha 2.0 BACKGROUND 2,1 The subject property is located on the west side of Boswell Drive just south of Highway 2, west of Green Road and East of Watson's Farm. The property was registered as a future development block; block 98 in registered plan 40M-1904, as identified in the conditions of draft approval for plan of subdivision 18T-88047. During the construction of the surrounding lots on Boswell Drive and Shady Lane Crescent, the subject site was used for the location of construction trailers and equipment. 2.2 On May 14, 2009 Staff received an application from Green Martin Holdings Ltd. for a Zoning By-law amendment to permit the development of Block 98 into two (2) single detached lots. The applicant proposes to submit a land division application with the Region following the rezoning of the subject property. 2.3 A pre-consultation was held on January 9, 2009 with Green Martin Holdings Ltd., to discuss the potential development of the subject property. The applicant was advised that a report would be necessary in support of the Zoning By-law amendment application discussing the appropriateness of developing the block now. In addition, the Engineering Services Department provided preliminary comments to the applicant on January 20, 2009, which indicated that their department was not in support of the application as the development of the block may preclude appropriate future development (in terms of use and configuration) of the lands, and Boswell Drive would have to be excavated to service the two lots, 3.0 SITE CHARACTERISTICS AND SURROUNDING USES 3.1 The subject property is triangle-shaped, bound by Boswell Drive, the western most urban boundary of Bowmanville and the rear yards of existing residential lots which front onto Shady Lane Crescent (See Photo 1). The vacant block backs onto the Watson's Farm land which continues to be actively farmed. It would appear that the subject site is the only remaining undeveloped parcel of land within registered plan 40M-1904, as all other lots have been developed for some time now. 802 REPORT NO.: PSD-078-09 PAGE 3 3.2 The surrounding uses are as follows: North: South: East: West: Existing Petro Canada gas station on the south side of Highway 2 Low density residential lots on Shady Lane Crescent Low density residential lots on east side of Boswell Drive Agricultural land (Watson's Farm) 4.0 PROVINCIAL POLICY 4.1 Provincial Policy Statement The Provincial Policy Statement addresses the need to maintain and direct land use to achieve efficient development and land use patterns. Land use must be carefully managed to accommodate appropriate development to meet the full range of current and future needs, while achieving efficient development patterns. The policies also identify settlement areas as the focus of growth and supports residential intensification of vacant and underutilized property, 803 REPORT NO.: PSD-078-09 PAGE 4 4.2 Places to Grow: Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe The Provincial Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe encourages new growth and intensification in built-up areas. The Plan recognizes the importance of optimizing the use of existing land supply to avoid over-designating new land for future urban development, an approach that concentrates more on making better use of our existing infrastructure, and less on continuously expanding the urban area. The proposed development of the subject lands, which are already designated for urban residential development, is in keeping with the intent of the Provincial Growth Plan. 5.0 OFFICIAL PLANS 5.1 Durham Reqional Official Plan The subject property is designated "Living Area" in the Durham Regional Official Plan. Living Areas shall be used predominantly for housing purposes. The intent of the Plan is to achieve a compact urban form. The proposed use is in conformity with the Regional Plan policies. Those lands located to the west of the subject property, and outside the urban boundary of Bowmanville, are designated "Major Open Space Areas" which does not permit the development of urban residential development. Durham Regional Official Plan Amendment No. 128 was recently adopted by Regional Council but not approved by the Province, which incorporates the policy direction of the Growing Durham Study, and suggests that up to the year 2031 the urban area boundary of Bowmanville will not be expanding to the west and those lands currently located outside of the Bowmanville urban area will remain designated as "Major Open Space Areas". However, those lands located west of the Bowmanville urban area boundary and west of the subject lands, are identified on Schedule F of Durham Regional Official Plan Amendment No. 128 as "Future Living Areas". Schedule 'F' is meant to provide an extended outlook to 2056 to assist in long-range infrastructure planning. 5.2 Municipality of Clarinqton Official Plan The subject property is designated "Urban Residential" in the Clarington Official Plan, The predominant use of lands designated "Urban Residential" within each neighbourhood shall be used for housing purposes. The proposed residential use of the subject lands is permitted within the "Urban Residential" designation. The basis of the Clarington Official Plan, among other matters, is that future growth is to be accommodated primarily in fully serviced urban areas. The growth management principles of the plan recognize the importance of pursuing sustainable development and the collective health and well-being of Clarington by managing growth, and directing future growth to existing urban areas. It is 804 REPORT NO.: PSD-078-09 PAGE 5 however, also important to encourage an efficient use of public infrastructure and services; existing infrastructure and services shall accommodate future growth by extending in an orderly and cost-effective manner. 6.0 ZONING BY-LAW 84-63 The entire property is currently zoned "Agricultural (A)" which does not permit the creation of two single detached lots. In order to permit the development of two single detached lots, the applicant was required to submit a rezoning) application to rezone the subject lands for urban residential development. If approved, the lots will be rezoned to permit the creation of residential lots with a minimum frontage of 10 metres. 7.0 PUBLIC NOTICE AND SUBMISSIONS Public notice was given by mail to each landowner within 120 metres of the subject site, and a public notice sign was erected on site. Comments from general inquiries and written submissions received to date are summarized below: · A neighbourhood park would be best accommodated on the remnant block of undeveloped land, since their children are forced to walk a fair distance to reach the nearest neighbourhood park. A park would also slow the traffic down since a crosswalk could be accommodated. · The construction of two (2) new dwellings on the subject property would ruin their view, and properties backing onto the subject property would be staring at the wall of the house while in their backyards. . The driveway of one of the proposed lots would be located in the exact location of the existing bell pedestal. . Property values will be affected and privacy will be lost if two (2) dwellings are located on subject property. Any windows located on the southern elevation of the proposed dwelling will be looking right into the backyards of the properties along Shady Lane Crescent. 8.0 AGENCY COMMENTS 8.1 The application has been circulated to the applicable agencies for comment. Hydro One Networks Inc., Rogers Cable, Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board and Clarington Emergency Services Department have no objections to the proposal. 8.2 The Durham Regional Planning Department provided the following comments to Clarington Planning Staff: . The proposal to permit two single detached residential lots conforms to the Durham Regional Official Plan. 805 REPORT NO.: PSD-078-09 PAGE 6 . The subject site is in proximity to Regional Highway 2, a Type 'B' arterial road in the Durham Regional Official Plan. In accordance with Regional and Provincial Policy, a Noise Impact Study, prepared by a qualified consultant, will be required upon submission of severance application(s) to the Region of Durham Planning Department for review and approval. · Municipal Water supply and sanitary sewers are available to the subject site from the existing 300mm water main and 200mm sanitary sewer on Boswell Drive. 8.3 Bell Canada has informed Staff that there is an existing OPI cabinet located on the boulevard of one of the proposed lots on the subject property; its location would encroach on the proposed driveway, and therefore poses a conflict with this application. In order to relocate the cabinet, Bell Canada will require Municipal consent to place 2 new pedestals as well as a new cabinet. The first pedestal would need to be placed in the boulevard to the north of the proposed lots, and the second pedestal and OPI cabinet would be placed on the east side of Block 77 (abutting the townhouse block located southeast of subject property). The cost for all the work involved will be approximately $85,000.00, which will be payable to Bell Canada by the owner/applicant. Bell Canada will require approximately four (4) months to obtain necessary permit approvals and complete the work. 8.4 The Clarington Engineering Services Department objects to the proposed application for the following reasons: · Although development on the lands located to the west of the subject property is not imminent, the creation of 2 lots on Boswell Drive as proposed may preclude appropriate development (in terms of use and configuration) of the lands located to the west in the future. · The subject block of land within the Clarington Corners Subdivision was not intended to be developed when the remainder of the subdivision was planned and ultimately constructed. Boswell Drive would have to be excavated to provide service connections to the 2 proposed lots. The excavation of the finished roadway for the purpose of servicing 2 lots is not acceptabfe to the Engineering Services Department. The Building Division of the Engineering Department has no concerns with the application. 8.5 As of the writing of this report, comments have not been received from the following agencies: · Peterborough Victoria Northumberland Clarington District Catholic School Board · Conseil Scola ire de District Catholique Centre-Sud · Conseil Scolaire de District Centre-Sud Ouest · Canada Post Corporation 806 REPORT NO.: PSD-078-09 PAGE 7 9.0 STAFF COMMENTS 9,1 Considering that the subject lands are designated for urban residential uses (Le. low-density residential), the proposed creation of two (2) single detached lots would be permitted. The proposed rezoning could be considered an infill development on an underutilized parcel of land within an existing serviced area. However, it is also noted that municipal staff have significant concerns related to the extension of service across Boswell Drive in order to accommodate two (2) single detached lots. Engineering Services staff does not believe that the extension of services for two (2) lots only is an efficient or cost-effective approach. Further discussions between the applicant and Staff should occur prior to any decisions made. 9.2 As staff have become aware of many residents' concerns relating to the proposed rezoning, a public meeting will provide a forum in which all residents' concerns can be heard prior to any decisions made, Once all resident's concerns are heard and documented they will be reviewed and the applicant will need to address those concerns where appropriate. 9.3 In addition staff believe that other outstanding items, such as the potential relocation of the Bell Canada pedestal, should be resolved prior to moving forward with a recommendation for the proposed rezoning. 10.0 CONCLUSION 10.1 As the purpose of this report is to satisfy the requirements for Public Meeting under the Planning Act, and taking into consideration all of the residents' and agency comments received to date, it is respectfully recommended that this report be referred back to Staff for further processing and the preparation of a subsequent report. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Key Map List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Kelvin Whalen Kenneth Bromley Tina Leblanc Stewart Bennett & Penny Roote 807 To Report PSD-078-09 ~ I/) "> C) c: - c: l'O c: :c E Q) ~ (7) E (5 0 "C J: I:C 0 c: 0 Q) c: Co I E :e l'O (7) :!: 0 <( ns c: 0 ;: ~ 0 /I N ns r:: ;: .. Q) l'O < U >. l!:! 0 m m (!) ...J N >- C) &.: 't: c: C1) Q) Co c: c: 0 0 ;: ... N a.. 0 / / / / / / / / / / J' / ", / ~~~ Q'{, f<"v'" f:J~ <QO << -Y. 00/0 on on ,.; 118.175 . ~ 808 CI!J!-!lJgron REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: Date: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Monday, September 14, 2009 Report #: PSD-079-09 File #: PLN 8.11.1 By-law #: Subject: CLARINGTON SIGN BY-LAW RECOMMENDA TIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administrative Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-079-09 be APPROVED; 2. THAT the Sign By-law contained in Attachment 1 to PSD-079-09 be PASSED and come into effect January 1, 2010; 3. THAT By-law 97-157 be REPEALED effective December 31, 2009; 4. THAT consideration of the content of Section 8.4 Election Signs of the By-law contained in Attachment 1 be deferred until Council is able to hold a meeting for the purpose of educating and training the members of Council concerning municipal election matters; 5. THAT subsequent to the meeting of Council referred to in Recommendation 4, the Municipal Clerk report to Council on the content of Section 8.4 Election Signs; 6. THAT the Mobile Sign Business Licensing By-law contained in Attachment 3 to PSD-079-09 be PASSED and come into effect January 1, 2010; and 7. THAT all interested parties listed for this report and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. '" f. Reviewed by:<~~>l--r~ k~~ Franklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer 8 September 2009 IL/FL/DC/df CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1 C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-08~9 REPORT NO.: PSD-079-09 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 The review of the Municipality's current Sign By-law 97-157 began with background research and analysis which included: . reviewing the current Sign By-law . reviewing other municipal by-laws that may affect signage . reviewing regional and provincial regulation for signage . examining the sign by-laws of other municipalities . researching the recent court decisions in regards to freedom of expression . reviewing the Municipal Act's provisions · determining the applicable policies within the Clarington Official Plan, Corporate Strategic Business Plan, Community Improvement Plans, and Urban Design Guidelines · reviewing past applications for sign by-law amendments and variances, and consulting with sign by-law administrators in other municipalities This information and analysis has been used as the basis for the preparation of the proposed Sign By-law (Attachment 1). The Sign By-law is the result of the joint efforts of Planning Services, Municipal Law Enforcement, our consultant Martin Rendl and has been reviewed by the Municipal Solicitor. 2.0 PUBLIC CONSULTATION 2.1 Public consultation is a key factor in determining community expectation in regards to signage and in preparing a Sign By-law that is specific to Clarington. There have been 5 stages to the public consultation for the Sign By-law review. A full explanation of the first four steps of the public consultation process was set out in Report PSD-051-09: . Public Consultation Paper . Open Houses . Interviews and Meetings (Councillors, stakeholders, signage company representatives) . Sign Preference Survey · Release of Draft Sign By-law and Public Meeting This report addresses the comments received on the Draft Sign By-law and recommends further refinements as noted in Attachment 2. 2.2 Public Meetinq In order to allow for an opportunity for comments to be received on the draft Sign By-law a Public Meeting was scheduled for May 25, 2009. The Municipal Act does not require that a Public Meeting be held prior to the adoption of a Sign By- law. However, the Municipality wanted to provide the public with an opportunity to review and comment on the draft by-law. 810 REPORT NO.: PSD-079-09 PAGE 3 The Public Meeting report addressed the following issues: . The objectives to be achieved through the approval of a new Sign By-law . The Official Plan polices and urban design standards that support the proposed regulations . Changes in sign production methods and image display technology . Variance and amendment applications . Responsibilities for regulation and enforcement . Public complaints . Grandfathering of signs . Comments received through the public consultation process . Enforcement costs . The Road Occupancy By-law . Signs on municipal lands . Licensing of mobile sign companies Martin Rendl, the Municipality's consultant, provided a presentation regarding the Sign By-law review process and the proposed changes and regulations. Four members of the public spoke in regards to the proposed Sign By-Law. Dave Davidson stated that he understands that businesses need to advertise but the proliferation of signage is not the answer. He expressed concerns over the number of signs along Regional Road 57 and Longworth Avenue, suggested an inventory be conducted of sign permits issued; and commented that the number of days election signs can be posted should be reduced from the six weeks permitted currently, not increased to 70 days as proposed. Daryl McMasters, owner of Little Caesar's Pizza in Bowmanville, questioned why he could not have signs shaken by his employees when similar types of signs were being used in other locations such as Oshawa. He has laid off sixteen youth employees as a result. When questioned by Council, Mr. McMasters stated that the length of time that election signs should be posted should remain at six weeks. Jill Cooke of Forsey Signs stated that she is in support of not permitting mobile signs to contain fluorescent lettering and limiting their size to 4 ft x 8 ft. She stated that the appearance of signs should be addressed, especially within the heritage areas, and that signs which do not look 'good' should not be grandfathered. She noted that mobile signs are located off site at the customers' request and she would like this addressed by leasing sites to sign companies. She encouraged the Municipality to pursue the licensing of mobile sign companies. In regards to election signs, they should be permitted to be installed 20 days before the mail-in voting date and if the municipality selects another method of voting then the six week timeframe should remain. Ron Cooke of Forsey Signs stated that small businesses rely on off-site signs as they cannot afford newspaper advertising. He requested that Council consider the effects on businesses, he suggested the Municipality designate areas within the Municipality where mobile signs could be displayed to assist these small businesses in advertising. 811 REPORT NO.: PSD-079-09 PAGE 4 2.3 Public Meetinq Issues Mobile Sign Issues One of the biggest sign issues noted throughout the Sign By-law review was that there are too many mobile signs. As a number of these signs are being installed without permits, many are in prohibited locations. Many of the mobile signs along Regional Road 57 and Longworth Avenue have been installed without sign permits and in some cases without the permission of the owner. They are located within the road allowance, on vacant private property, on vacant municipal property, or on plaza developments. The current Sign By-law 97-157 does not permit mobile signs on vacant land, and although the Road Occupancy By-law does permit temporary signs, mobile signs are not permitted within the road allowance. Regional Road 57 and other main roads are Regional roads; the Region of Durham maintains the same policy as the municipality, mobile signs are not permitted within the road allowance. The proposed changes to the Sign By-law and the introduction of a licensing system for mobile signage companies will assist with the overall enforcement. In the existing Sign By-law only one mobile sign is permitted per property, including multi-business plaza developments. The message on the sign must relate to the product or service available at that location and there are specific regulations in regards to size, location, and the length of time the sign is permitted to be on the lot. The May 15th draft Sign By-law proposed that one mobile sign be permitted per single business property and the number of mobile signs for multi-business properties be determined by the amount of store-front street frontage, One mobile sign per 50 metres of frontage was suggested and has now been refined to one per 75 metres with a maximum of 3 mobile signs per property. This increase was proposed to address the desire expressed by business owners, that limiting multi-business properties to one sign per property was too restrictive and not meeting the requirements of business owners. Permitting one mobile sign per single business site, and permitting a multi- business site to have more than one mobile sign based on the lot frontage, with a maximum of three, will give business owners the opportunity to advertise while controlling the number of signs and their placement along the street. Forsey Signs (Ron and Jill Cooke) on behalf of their customers have requested that locations be designated for off-site mobile signs. There are several mobile sign companies that install mobile signs within Clarington. Should designated areas be defined, a tendering process would need to be established in order to determine which companies could install signs at these locations and for what time period. A monitoring program would be required. The concept and implementation of leased and designated sites is outside the Sign By-law. Should Council wish to pursue this suggestion a specific report addressing the issues surrounding the siting of potential locations and tendering process with the input of all the affected departments including Corporate Services and Engineering Services would be appropriate. Separate designated areas for off-site mobile signs while desired by some businesses would have a number of issues associated with their implementation. It is staff's opinion that there is sufficient opportunity for business signage on properties on which businesses are located and other means of advertising available. 812 REPORT NO.: PSD-079-09 PAGE 5 Sign Appearance Jill Cooke stated that the appearance of signs should be addressed within the heritage areas and that signs that do not have a 'good' appearance should not be grandfathered. The proposed Sign By-law contains special regulations for Heritage Resource Areas, which are the older downtown cores of Bowmanville, Orono, and Newcastle Village. Within these areas larger signs such as billboards, monolith, pylon and subdivision development direction signs are not permitted. Electronic message board signs are not permitted and the size of ground signs and real estate signs are limited. Special provisions are included in Section B of the Sign By-law in regards to preferred sign materials and lighting, to assist in maintaining the heritage character of the buildings and surrounding area. Animated Signs Daryl McMaster of Little Caesar's inquired as to why the signs shaken by his employees at the Bowmanville store were not permitted but were permitted in other locations. These types of signs are carried by people that generally stand on the sidewalk within the municipal road allowance and are shaken to attract the attention of motorists. There is a Little Caesar's in Courtice close to Townline Road, and in Oshawa on Simcoe Street. Both locations have employees that shake signs in the road allowance. No complaint has been filed in regards to the Courtice site and Oshawa staff have confirmed that their Sign By-law does not regulate these types of signs so they are not asking the sign shaking to cease. In June of 200B the Municipal Law Enforcement Division received a complaint in regards to Little Caesar's signs that were been shaken by employees on both the north and south sides of King Street in front of the Bowmanville Mall. The McMasters were notified that their employees were not permitted to occupy the road allowance without obtaining a road occupancy permit. It was suggested that they could file an application to permit these signs on the Bowmanville Mall property. Planning staff spoke with Mrs. McMaster and informed her that the current Sign By-law does not include any provisions in regards to these types of signs, that the Municipality was undergoing a review of the Sign By-law and that the signs would be considered during the review process. As no guarantee could be given as to whether these signs would be permitted in the new Sign By-law, it was suggested that an amendment application be filed to the existing Sign By-law. No application was received. Staff have addressed these signs within the new Sign By-law by including them under the animated signs definition as "a sign which is manually displayed by an individual for the purposes of advertising". The Sign By-law does not permit them as a right anywhere within the Municipality. Should a business or property owner wish to have these types of sign on their property they will need to file an application for a Sign By-law amendment for that particular property. The amendment application will only deal with signage on private property and will not address signs within the road allowance. Should the McMasters wish to obtain approval to have their employees shake signs within the road allowance 813 REPORT NO.: PSD-079-09 PAGE 6 they will need to obtain a Road Occupancy permit from the Engineering Services Department as well as apply for a Sign By-law amendment. Election Signs Election signs are temporary signs erected by candidates during the period of a federal, provincial or municipal election or by-election. Many of the complaints received by the Municipality have been in relation to election signs. During the open houses there was much discussion on election signs. The size and requirements for election signage have not been raised as an issue rather it is the timing of when election signs can be installed, the number and location. Many of the complaints received by Municipal Law Enforcement relate to the installation of election signs on road allowances and the proliferation of them during elections. The specific clauses for campaign offices in the current By-law did not relate to the land use, causing confusion and it is recommended they be removed. The new Sign By-law proposed the following: i) Election signs associated with a federal or provincial election shall not be erected earlier than the date of notice of the dropping of the writ for any federal or provincial election. ii) Election signs associated with a municipal election shall not be erected or displayed any earlier than 70 days before voting day. iii) Election signs shall be removed within forty-eight (48) hours after voting day. iv) Election signs shall be erected only on private property. The owner's permission is required. v) Election signs shall not be erected in a road allowance. vi) The maximum size of a campaign office sign will be based on the type of sign being used and requested in relation to the land use. In response to the questions raised on election signs during the General Purpose and Administrative Committee meeting on June 1S\ 2009 Council passed the following: THAT the Municipal Clerk be directed to arrange for and schedule a Special Meeting of Council for the purpose of educating members of Council on the methods of conducting the 2010 Municipal Elections under consideration, including signage; and THAT this Special Meeting be open to the public. Staff have removed the regulations in regards to election signs from the Sign By- law in Attachment 1 pending the Special Meeting of Council. Once Council has met, a report will be brought forward to Council to address the Election Sign section of the By-law. Two letters requesting that road allowance be available for the use of federal political parties during elections have been received and will have to be considered prior to any recommendations being brought forward. It is anticipated that the report regarding election signage will be brought forward prior to the January 1, 2010 enactment date of the new Sign By-law. 814 REPORT NO.: PSD-079-09 PAGE 8 3.3 Multi-unit Residential Siqns These types of signs generally identify medium density townhouse blocks within plans of subdivision or identify condominium developments and they are similar to Community Theme signs in appearance. The placement of the sign is regulated through the site plan approval process. The new Sign By-law contains provisions addressing these types of signs as detailed in Attachment 2. 3.4 Flaq Siqns Developers often use flags as a means of drawing attention to their sales office sites. These flags can contain the development's logo or words of an advertising nature. As such, they are considered signs and regulations to govern their size and number have been included in the Sign By-law. 3.5 Mobile Siqns A concern has been raised in regards to the number of mobile signs proposed to be permitted on multi-business properties. The draft Sign By-law had proposed one mobile sign per 50 metres of store-front frontage. Further review has determined that one mobile sign per 75 metres of store-front frontage would be a more appropriate number, with a maximum of three per property. For example, the property located at the southwest corner of Clarington Blvd. and Highway 2, exclusive of Loblaws, is a large L-shaped site with seventeen stores that face both streets. There is a total of approximately 375 metres of frontage along the two streets, At one per 50 metres of frontage 7 mobile signs could be on display at anyone time. Having this many mobile signs scattered along the road frontages would not be visually attractive. It is proposed that the permitted number be reduced to one per 75 metres of frontage with a maximum of three for the entire site which should be sufficient to accommodate the businesses' needs 4.0 OTHER MATTERS 4.1 Licensinq of Mobile Siqn Companies The potential for licensing of mobile sign companies was raised during the public consultation process and the local mobile sign companies have indicated that they would be in support of licensing regulation. The Clerks Department has prepared a Mobile Sign Business Licensing By-law for Council's consideration at this meeting (Attachment 3). Enactment of the By-law would mean that a sign company must obtain a license prior to leasing, renting or placing a mobile sign within Clarington. In addition, approval of a sign permit application would be required prior to a mobile sign being erected or placed. Mobile sign companies would be required to carry sufficient insurance and each mobile sign would have to display the name, address, and telephone number of the sign company. 816 REPORT NO.: PSD-079-09 PAGE 10 5.0 CONCLUSION 5.1 A comprehensive review of the existing Sign By-law 97-157 has been completed. The regulations contained within the proposed Sign By-law (Attachment 1) are based on significant background research and analysis, considerable public consultation, and input from the Municipal Law Enforcement Division and the Municipality's Solicitor. Staff are satisfied that the regulations contained within the Sign By-Iawwill assist in achieving the Municipality's objective of maintaining community character and preserving the rural landscape while permitting businesses appropriate signage opportunities. 5.2 The Municipality is currently undergoing a review of the Clarington Official Plan which involves some site specific studies and additional urban design principles. The Official Plan review and other planning studies may require amendments to the Sign By-law in the future. 5.3 The proposed by-law to licence the leasing and renting of mobile signs within the Municipality will assist with the enforcement of illegal signs. The licensing process will also afford the opportunity for staff to advise those sign companies who are carrying on business within the Municipality on the requirements of correctly placing their signs and ensuring they obtain sign permits. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Sign By-law Attachment 2 - Changes to the draft Sign By-law May 15th, 2009 Attachment 3 - Mobile Sign Business Licensing By-law 818 Attachment 1 To Report PSD-079-09 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW NO. WHEREAS Section 11 of the Municipal Act, 2001, Chapter 25, as amended establishes a sphere of jurisdiction of municipalities; AND WHEREAS the Table contained in Section 11 of the Municipal Act, 2001, identifies signs as being within the non-exclusive sphere of jurisdiction of upper-tier and lower-tier municipalities; AND WHEREAS the Municipality of Clarington is a lower-tier municipality which under sub section 11.3 of the Municipal Act, 2001 has authority to pass by-laws within the sphere of jurisdiction "structures including fences and signs"; AND WHEREAS Section 391 of the Municipal Act, 2001, provides that municipalities may pass by-laws imposing fees or charges on persons for services or activities provided by a municipality; NOW THEREFORE the Municipal Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: SECTION 1 - SCOPE OF BY-LAW 1.1 Short Title of By-law This By-law and any amendments thereto shall be known as the "Clarington Sign By-law. " 1.2 Purpose of the By-law The purpose of this By-law is to: a) regulate signs placed on lands, buildings, and other structures within the corporate limits of the Municipality of Clarington; and b) to implement the policies of the Clarington Official Plan and Urban Design Guidelines. 1.3 Legislative Authority This By-law is passed by the Council of The Municipality of Clarington pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended. 1.4 Area of Applicability This By-law applies to the lands in The Municipality of Clarington. 1.5 Compliance with By-law No person shall hereafter erect or display or cause or permit to be erected or displayed a sign except in conformity with the provisions of this By-law. 1.6 Contents of By-law All references in the By-law to sections, regulations, exceptions, Tables, figures, schedules and maps, refer to those in this By-law unless otherwise indicated. 1.7 Lawful Non-Conforming Signs The provisions of this By-law shall not apply to a sign or the use of an existing sign that was lawfully erected on or before the day this By-law comes into force if the sign is not substantially altered and the maintenance and repair of the sign or 820 Page 2 a change in the message or content displayed is deemed not in itself to constitute a substantial alteration. 1.8 Relation to Other Government Requirements (Compliance with Other Regulations) 1.8.1 This By-law shall not be construed so as to reduce or mitigate restrictions or regulations for any sign that are lawfully imposed by the Municipality, or by any governmental authority having jurisdiction to make such restrictions or regulations. 1.8.2 Compliance with this By-law does not relieve a property owner from complying with: a) the requirements of the Ontario Building Code; b) the requirements of any federal, provincial, regional, or conservation authority legislation or regulations; or any By-law of the Municipality provided that in the event of a conflict between any of the provisions of this By-law and By-law 83-57, the Road Occupancy By-law, as amended, the provisions of the Road Occupancy By-law, or its successor, shall prevail. SECTION 2 INTERPRETATION OF BY-LAW 2.1 The terms set out below shall have the following meanings in this By-law: "ALLOWED" means allowed by this By-law. "ALTER" means any change to a sign including the addition or removal or rearrangement of parts, but excluding the changing of copy or the replacement of similar parts for maintenance purposes. "ATTIC" means the portion of a building situated wholly or in part under a roof, but which is not a storey or a one-half storey. "BASEMENT" means the portion of a building between two floor levels that has less than 50% of its height below the average finished grade of the lot on which the building is located. The term basement shall not include a cellar. "BUILDING" means a structure used for the shelter, accommodation or enclosure of persons, animals, goods, materials or equipment that is supported by columns or walls, has one or more floors, is covered by a roof and is permanently affixed to the land. "BUSINESS" means an establishment in which one or more persons are employed in conducting, managing, or administering a business. The term business includes the administ~ative offices of a government agency, a non-profit organization, or a charitable organization. "CANOPY" means any structure which projects from the exterior face of a building wall and extends across part or all of that exterior face of a building wall or is a self- supporting unenclosed structure. "CELLAR" means the portion of a building between two floor levels that has 50% or more of is height below the average finished grade of the lot on which the building is located. The term cellar shall not include a basement. "COMMERCIAL" means, for the purposes of this By-law, a use which includes tourism uses. "COMMUNITY BULLETIN BOARD" means a bulletin board erected by the Municipality for the purpose of providing a display surface for posters. "COMMUNITY FACILITIES" means and shall include such uses as post offices, places of worship, cemeteries, community centres, fire and police stations, libraries, art and cultural facilities, and day care centres. 821 Page 3 "CONSERVATION AUTHORITY" means a conservation authority having jurisdiction in the Municipality of Clarington. The term conservation authority shall include the Central Lake Ontario Conservation, the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority, the Kawartha Region Conservation Authority, and the Otonabee Region Conservation Authority. "COPY" means the wording, letters, numerals, graphics, logos, and artwork of a sign, on the display surface and is either permanent or removable. "COUNCIL" means the Council of The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington. "COURTICE WEST SHOPPING DISTRICT (CWSD)" means the area identified in Schedule 2 contained in and forming part of this By-law. "DISPLAY SURFACE" means the surface of the sign, upon, against, or through which the copy of the sign is displayed. "DRIVEWAY" means that portion of a lot designed to provide motor vehicle access from the lot to the traveled portion of the street, private road or lane. "ERECT" means display, attach, affix, post, alter, construct, place, locate, install or relocate. "FA<;ADE" means the exterior wall of a building facing a street or private road. . "Principal Fa(,;ade" In the case of a building located on an exterior lot or a through lot, the fac;ade within which the principal entrance to the building is located. · "Building Fac;:ade Area" The entire surface area of the fac;ade including windows and doors. "FINISHED GRADE" means the lowest of the levels of finished ground adjacent to the location of the sign, exclusive of any artificial embankment. "HERITAGE RESOURCE AREA (HRA)" means the areas identified in Schedule 1 contained in and forming part of this By-law. "HOME INDUSTRY" means a small scale industrial operation that is carried on in accordance with the provisions of the Municipality's zoning by-laws, as accessory to a permitted single detached dwelling. "HOME OCCUPATION" means an occupation or business that is carried on in accordance will all provisions of the Municipality's by-laws within a dwelling as accessory to a permitted residential use. "INDUSTRIAL" means a use that includes the assembly or processing of substances, goods or raw materials related to the manufacture or fabrication of finished goods, warehousing or bulk storage of goods, and may include accessory uses such as storage and facilities for receiving and shipping materials and goods. Mineral aggregate and utility uses are considered industrial uses for the purposes of this By-law. "INSPECTOR" means any Municipal Law Enforcement Officer or any other inspector appointed by Council pursuant to a by-law. "INSTITUTIONAL" means a use that includes community facilities, parks, schools under the jurisdiction of a board, government offices and hospitals. "LANE" means a road owned by the Municipality that provides either the primary access to abutting lots or the secondary access to abutting lots where the primary access/frontage is available from a street. The term lane shall not include a street. 822 Page 4 "LOT" means a parcel of land within a registered plan of subdivision or any land that may be legally conveyed under the exemption provided in Section 50 (3)(b) or section 50 (5)(a) of the Planning Act, or a remnant of a lot that remains in private ownership after part of the lot has been expropriated. · Exterior Lot A lot situated at the intersection of and abutting upon two streets, a street, and a private road, two private roads or the same street or private road, provided that the interior angle of the intersection of the street lines is not more than 135 degrees. In the case of a curved corner, the interior angle of the intersection shall be measured as the angle formed by the intersection of the extension of each of the street lines. STREET I PRIV ATE ROAD STREET LINE BlllLDING ,17-1 I.1S -1-1:t/'lj> bf:C'f./~ C'~f:f:s \P. .,... ~. '1". .,... ... ~L 7. .,.. if' 'f!> ..,. ~o -e. ~ '~" '0 .... ... ..,. :1~ '1" · Interior Lot A lot other than an exterior lot or a through lot. · Through Lot A lot bounded on two opposite lot lines by streets and/or private roads. A lot that qualifies as both an exterior lot and a through lot shall be deemed to be an exterior lot. "LOT LINE" means any boundary of a lot or the vertical projection thereof. · Exterior Side Lot Line A side lot line abutting a street or private road on an exterior lot · Front Lot Line In the case of an interior lot, a lot line dividing the lot from the street or private road shall be deemed to be a front lot line. In the case of an exterior lot, the shorter lot line abutting a street or private road shall be deemed to be a front lot line, and the longer lot line abutting a street or private road shall be deemed to be an exterior side lot line. In the case of a throughj!2J. whether or not such lot is deemed to be an exterior lot, the lot line where the principal access to the lot is provided shall be deemed to be a front lot line. · Interior Side Lot Line A side lot line that is not an exterior side lot line · Rear Lot Line A lot line (or point of intersection of the side lot lines) furthest from and opposite to the front lot line. · Side Lot Line A lot line other than a front lot line or a rear lot line. 823 Page 5 "MOTOR VEHICLE" means an automobile, truck, motorcycle, motor assisted bicycle and any other vehicle propelled or driven by other than muscular power. "MUNICIPAL AGREEMENT" means an agreement made with The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington. "MUNICIPALITY" means The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington. "MUNICIPALITY'S ZONING BY-LAW" means Zoning By-law 84-63 as amended and Zoning By-law 2005-109 as amended or replaced from time to time. "MURAL" means a painting, illustration, or decoration applied to a free standing sign or the exterior wall of a building and that is otherwise not a sign as defined by this By-law. "OWNER" means the registered owner of the premises upon which any sign or sign structure is located, and includes any person described on a sign or whose name or address or telephone number appears on the sign, or who has installed the sign, or who is in lawful control of the sign, or who benefits from the message on the sign, or has permitted the sign to be erected or used and for the purposes of this By-law there may be more than one owner of a sign. "PERSON" means, but is not limited to an individual, sole proprietorship, partnership, association, or corporation. "PREMISES" means a lot or a building or a part of a lot or building. "PRIVATE ROAD" means a road, the fee simple of which is owned by a single person, that is subject to one or more easements registered against title in favour of one or more abutting lots to which the easements are appurtenant. Such easements entitle the owners of the lots to use the private road for the purposes of access to and from the lots. The term private road includes a private road shown on a registered plan of condominium plan but does not include a right-at-way, a street or a lane. "PROPERTY" means a parcel of land having specific boundaries, which is capable of legal transfer. "PROVINCE" means the Province or Government of Ontario, the word "Provincial" shall have the same meaning as Province. "PUBLIC AUTHORITY" means any department or agency of the Municipality of Clarington, the Regional Municipality of Durham, a conservation authority, the Province or Government of Ontario, or the Government of Canada. "REGION" means The Corporation of the Regional Municipality of Durham, the word Regional shall have the same meaning as Region. "RIGHT-OF-WAY" is an area of land on which has been created and registered against the title of the lot on which it is located, perpetual easements appurtenant to one or more lots that provide access to such lots to a street. The term right-at-way shall not include a private road. "ROAD ALLOWANCE" shall have a corresponding meaning to that of a street. "SIGN" means any visual medium used to convey information by way of words, pictures, images, graphics, emblems, or symbols, or any device used for the purpose of providing direction, identification, advertisement, business promotion, or the promotion of a person, product, activity, service, event or idea. · "A-Board Sign" means a freestanding temporary sign with no more than two faces joined at the top of the sign that is intended for temporary use during the hours of the business to which it applies and that is constructed in a manner and of materials such that it can be placed and moved manually by a person without mechanical aid. (T-Board and Sandwich Board signs have the same definition) 824 Page 6 · "Animated Sign" means a sign which contains a video screen or any kinetic or illusionary motion of all or part of a sign, including rotations; or any sign which is manually displayed by an individual for the purposes of advertising, or any sign which is projected on a display surface by electronic means, but does not include an electronic message board sign or a spinning portable sign. · "Barn Sign" means a sign affixed parallel to a wall or roof of a farm structure and which identifies the name of the occupant and/or of the farm on which said farm structure is located, butshall not be a roof sign as defined in this By-law. · "Billboard Sign" means an outdoor sign erected and maintained by a person, firm, corporation, or business engaged in the sale or rental of the space on the sign to a clientele, upon which space is displayed copy that advertises goods, products, or services not necessarily sold or offered on the property. · "Canopy Sign" means a sign which is contained within or affixed to the surface of a canopy and which does not project beyond the limits of the surface of the canopy. · "Community Theme Sign" means a sign erected on a property adjacent to an arterial road allowance, as indicated in the Clarington Official Plan, which identifies the name of the subdivision development. · "Directional Sign" means a sign erected on a property to identify an entrance, exit, or area for the purpose of directing persons and/or regulating the movement of traffic or pedestrians on a property. · "Election Sign" means a temporary sign advertising any political party or candidate participating in the election for public office. · "Electronic Message Board Sign" means a sign which has messages displayed by electronic means. · "Flag Sign" means a sign made of cloth or lightweight material attachable by one edge to a pole or rope. · "Ground Sign" means a sign permanently affixed to the ground by one or more self-supporting poles or supported by a free-standing masonry structure. · "Inflatable Sign" means a sign which is designed to be inflated by air or other gas and is designed to be airborne or tethered to the ground, a vehicle, or any other structure. Seasonal items that do not contain any copy of an advertising nature are not considered to be signs. · "Illuminated Sign" means a sign lit by artificial light which is direct, indirect, internal or external to the sign. · "Menu Board Sign" means a sign erected as part of a drive-through facility and used to display and order products and services available from a drive-through business. · "Mobile Sign" means a temporary sign which is not permanently affixed to the ground or to any structure, and typically designed for the rearrangement of copy of the sign face, and which is capable of being readily moved from one location to another, and may be part of or attached to a wheeled trailer or frame without wheels in such a manner so as to be able to be moved from place to place.. · "Monolith Sign" means a sign permanently affixed to the ground by a solid continuous base that is equal to the width of the sign. · "Multi-Unit Residential Sign" means a sign erected on a property to identify the name of the multi-unit residential development. 825 Page 7 · "Off-Site Directional Sign" means a sign providing directions to the site where a business or service is located. · "Off-Site Directional Tourism Sign" means a sign for the purpose of only identifying a name of a tourism destination, business or service and providing directions to the tourism destination, business or service and shall be erected in compliance with a Municipal Agreement. · "Overhanging Sign" means a sign not directly supported from the ground but generally erected perpendicular to a supporting building wall, but shall not be a wall sign as defined in this By-law. · "Permanent Sign" means a sign permanently erected on or affixed to a premises. · "Personal Sign" means a temporary sign used for a personal announcement or congratulatory message which is located on a property zoned for residential uses. · "Poster Sign" means a printed notice conveying information intended to be displayed for a temporary period of time and includes but is not limited to a bill, handbill, leaflet, notice, or placard. · "Pre-Menu Board Sign" means a sign erected as part of a drive-through facility and only used to display products and services available at the drive-through business. · "PortClble Sign" means a sign not permanently attached to the ground or a permanent structure and which is designed to be moved readily and manually by one person from one location to another, and includes signs commonly referred to as A-Board, T-frame, Personal and sandwich board. · "Projection Sign" means a sign that is displayed on a surface, building, or structure, by the projection of a beam of light or other source of illumination. "Promotional Construction Sign" means a sign advertising construction, reconstruction, repair, renovation and/or development and may include the name of the project, the name of firms and personnel related to the project. · "Promotional Subdivision Development Direction Sign" means a portable sign providing direction to a development site within a plan of subdivision or plan of condominium or a proposed plan of condominium. · "Public Use Sign" means a sign erected by or under the jurisdiction of a Public Authority. · "Pylon Sign" means a sign supported by one or more poles and with an open base. · "Real Estate Sign" means a sign located on a property for the purpose of announcing the sale, lease, or rental of such property or building or part of a building located thereon. · "Roof Sign" means a sign the entire face of which is above the lowest point at which the roof meets the building. · "Sandwich Board Sign" means a freestanding temporary sign with no more than two faces joined at the top of the sign that is intended for temporary use during the hours of the business to which it applies and that is constructed in a manner and of materials such that it can be placed and moved manually by a person without mechanical aid. (A-Board and T-Board signs have the same definition). 826 Page 8 · "Subdivision Development Sign" means a sign that advertises the sale of properties within a plan of subdivision, plan of condominium or proposed plan of condominium but not the realtor's, developer's or landowner's business in general. · "T -Board Sign" means a freestanding temporary sign with no more than two faces joined at the top of the sign that is intended for temporary use during the hours of the business to which it applies and that is constructed in a manner and of materials such that it can be placed and moved manually by a person without mechanical aid. (A-Board and Sandwich Board signs have the same definition). · "Temporary Sign" means a sign which is erected without foundations and is not affixed to any other building, or structure on which an activity or event that is transitory or not permanent in nature is advertised. .. "Traffic Control Sign" means a sign erected under the jurisdiction of the Highway Traffic Act or the manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices for the purpose of regulating traffic on streets. · "Transit Shelter Sign" means a sign located in or on a transit shelter. · "VehiclelTrailer Sign" means a sign which is painted on or affixed to a motor vehicle or trailer which is parked and visible from a public right-of-way and its intended use is as a sign, unless said vehicle or trailer is used in the normal day- to-day operation of the business. · "Wall Sign" means a sign which is painted on or permanently affixed to a single wall of a building or structure. · "Window Sign" means a sign within a building which is located within 1.0 metre of a window and is intended primarily to be visible from a street or parking area. "SIGN, ABANDONED" means a sign which located on premises which becomes vacant and unoccupied for a period of ninety (90) days or more, or any sign that pertains to a time, event, or purpose that no longer applies. "SIGN AREA" means: i) in the case of a sign having one display surface, the area of the display surface; ii) in the case of a sign having two display surfaces, which are separated by the thickness of the sign structure and the thickness is not used as a display surface, the area of one display surface; iii) in the case of a free standing number, letter, picture, image, graphic, emblem, symbol, or shape, the smallest rectangle which will enclose the number, letter, picture, image, graphic, emblem, symbol, or shape. DDD SL.~~ DSOsD I SIGN AREA MEASURED BY FREE STANDING LETTERING. ETC. ~ 827 Page 9 "SIGN, HEIGHT" means the vertical distance from the ground on which the sign is erected to the highest physical point of the sign. "SIGN, LENGTH" means the horizontal distance between the extremities of the sign. "SIGN PERMIT" means a permit issued under this By-law. "SIGN SUPPORT STRUCTURE" means the framework, bracing and support of a sign. "STOREY" means the portion of a building, other than an attic, basement or cellar, included between any floor level and the floor, ceiling or roof next above it. A mezzanine shall be deemed to be a storey. · One-Half Storey means a storey located wholly or in part under a sloping roof in which there is sufficient space to provide a height between finished floor and finished ceiling of at least 2.3 metres over a floor area equal to at least 50% of the floor area of the storey immediately below. "STREET" means a road or public highway under the jurisdiction of the Municipality or the Region or the Province or Ontario that is maintained so as to allow normal use by motor vehicles, or a road or public highway located within a registered plan of subdivision that has not yet been assumed by a public authority. The term street shall not include a lane. "STREET LINE" means the limit of a street, private road or lane. "STRUCTURE" means a man-made construction that is fixed to the ground or attached to another structure on a temporary or permanent basis. "USE" means the uses allowed in the Municipality's Zoning By-law and as identified in the Tables of this By-law. "VACANT LAND" means a property that does not contain any buildings or structures. "VISIBILITY TRIANGLE" means a triangular-shaped area of land abutting a lane, street or private road that is required to be kept free of obstructions that could impede the vision of a pedestrian or the driver of a motor vehicle exiting onto or driving on the lane, street or private road. As illustrated, a visibility triangle shall be determined as follows: a) the visibility triangle adjacent to an exterior side lot line shall be the area enclosed by each of the street lines measured to a point specified in the applicable Municipal Zoning By-law back from the intersection of the street lines, and a diagonal line drawn between these two points: b) the visibility triangle from a driveway, lane, or right-or-way shall be the area enclosed by the line along the limits of the driveway and the street line measured to a point 3.0 metres back from the intersection of the street lines and the limit of the driveway, lane, or right-or-way and a diagonal line drawn between these two points. c) the visibility triangle extends beyond private property into the road allowance as illustrated 828 Page 10 STREET I PRIVATE ROAD STR.KET L1NIl: ( EXTDlIOR SIDE LOT LINE) VISmILITY TRIANGLE WITHIN ROAD ALLOWANCE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE ON A CORNER LOT VISIBILITY TRIANGLE WJTIIJN ROAD ALLOWANCE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE AD.JACENT A DRlVEWA Y DRJY.EWAY ~ ~ ~ PROPERTY LIl'Ot /' * VISmILITY TRIANGLE MEASUREMENT WD...L VARY DEPE..~ING ON THE APPROPRIATE MUNlCIPAL ZONlNG BY-LAW 2.2 The Tables contained in this By-law form part of this By-law. A reference in the By-law to a Table shall be deemed to be a reference to a Table contained in the By-law. 2.3 Notwithstanding Section 2.2, terms defined in this By-law are capitalized, italicized and underlined for the purposes of convenience only. If a term defined by this By- law is not capitalized, italicized and/or underlined, the definitions provided in Section 2.1 shall apply when consistent with the context. 2.4 In this By-law, reference to the masculine includes the feminine and corporations regardless of which term in question appears. 2.5 In this By-law, reference to the singular includes the plural. 2.6 All measurements and dimensions in this By-law are expressed in metric. 2.7 Schedule 1 and 2 to this By-law shall be interpreted as if they are contained in the text of the By-law. SECTION 3 ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS 3.1 The Planning Services Department and the Municipal Law Enforcement Division of the Municipality shall be responsible for the administration and enforcement of this By-law, respectively. 3.2 Except for signs otherwise exempted in this By-law from the requirement for a sign permit, no person shall erect, keep, or maintain a sign on any premises unless a sign permit is obtained from the Municipality prior to the erection or use of the sign. 3.3 Every person applying for a sign permit shall apply on the application form or forms as may be prescribed by the Municipality and shall submit the required plans and information and pay the applicable fees. 3.4 The Municipality shall refund the fees paid for a sign permit where the applicant in writing requests a refund and the Municipality has not commenced its review of the sign permit application for compliance with this By-law. 829 Page 11 3.5 There shall be no refund of fees where: i) the Municipality has issued the sign permit as the result of false, mistaken, incorrect, or misleading information, statements, or undertakings on the application; or, ii) the sign for which the sign permit application is made, has been erected, located, or displayed prior to the issuance of the sign permit; or iii) where the Municipality has already commenced the review. 3.6 Where the applicant for a sign permit is not the owner of the premises where the sign is to be erected, the applicant shall provide written authorization from the owner of the premises where the sign is to be erected. 3.7 A sign permit shall be refused if the proposed sign does not comply with this By- law and all other applicable law. 3.8 A sign permit may be revoked where the sign permit was issued as the result of false, mistaken, incorrect, or misleading information, statements, or undertakings on the application, or if the sign has not been installed in compliance with the sign permit. 3.9 Where a sign is subject to the regulations of a public authority other than the Municipality by virtue of its location or type: i) An applicant for the sign shall provide the Municipality with the written permission of the public authority having jurisdiction prior to making an application to the Municipality for a sign permit; and, ii) Approval of the sign by a public authority does not exempt the sign from having to comply with the provisions of this By-law. 3.10 Every sign permit issued by the Municipality for a permanent sign shall expire six (6) months from the date of issuance unless the sign is erected for its intended purpose and the sign permit shall become null and void upon the removal of the sign. 3.11 No sign permit is required to erect the following signs provided the signs otherwise comply with the applicable provisions of this By-law: i) Election signs; ii) Real Estate signs; iii) Personal signs; ivy Portable signs; v) Promotional Construction Direction signs; vi) A sign having a sign area less than 0.10 m2 (e.g. poster). 3.12 The following signs shall be exempt from the provisions of this By-law: i) Public use signs including signs required by and approved by the Municipality to inform the public of planning applications; ii) Flags or emblems of patriotic, civic, educational or religious organizations; iii) Commemorative plaques or corner stones that do not advertise; iv) Murals that do not advertise. 4.0 ENFORCEMENT PROVISIONS 4.1 Any sign erected in contravention of any provision of this By-law may be removed by the Municipality immediately without notice, if such sign is located wholly or partially on or over a road allowance or on any other lands owned by or under the jurisdiction of the Municipality. 4.2 The Municipal Law Enforcement Officer may cause a notice to be sent to any owner of a property, owner of a sign, or to both, by means of registered mail or by hand delivery where any sign is found to be in contravention of any provision of this Municipal By-law. 830 Page 12 4.3 Any sign determined by the Municipal Law Enforcement Officer to be in contravention of any provision of this By-law may be removed without notice and such sign may be disposed of or impounded at the direction of the Municipal Law Enforcement Officer. 4.4 Any sign impounded by the Municipality shall be held for a period of thirty (30) calendar days from the date of the sign being impounded and at 12:01 a.m. of the thirty first (3151) day the sign, if not released to the owner upon payment of the expenses incurred by the Municipality, may be disposed of in a manner at the discretion of the Municipal Law Enforcement Officer, without compensation or notice to any person. 4.5 The reasonable expense as determined by the Municipal Clerk for the removal and disposal of any sign removed by the Municipality shall be the responsibility of the sign's owner and such costs are recoverable under the authority of the Municipal Act, 2001, as amended. 5.0 PROHIBITIONS 5.1 No person shall erect, use or maintain, or cause or permit to be erected, used or maintained any of the following signs: i) A sign located on premises which does not specifically identify or advertise a business, service, or occupant of the premises where it is located, unless otherwise specified in this By-law; ii) Roof sign, except a barn sign; iii) Vehicle/Trailer sign on non-motorized vehicles where the purpose of the sign meets the definition of a sign under this By-law; iv) A sign which may cause confusion with a traffic control sign or a traffic control signal; v) A sign located above the first storey of a building; vi) Abandoned signs. 5.2 Prohibited Locations i) No sign or sign support structure shall be located in a manner which, in the opinion of the inspector, impedes the necessary view of a pedestrian or motorist; ii) No person shall locate a sign in a manner which obstructs or impedes any fire escape, fire hydrant, fire exit or door, any window required for natural ventilation or natural lighting or required as an emergency escape, or a fire fighter's access panel or skylight, or so as to prevent or impede free access from or to any part of a building, and no sign can be placed within one (1) metre of any fire escape, fire hydrant, fire exit or door, any window required for natural ventilation or natural lighting or required as an emergency escape, or a fire fighter's access panel or skylight, or so as to prevent or impede free access from or to any part of a building if the sign will impede visibility or access. iii) No person shall erect a sign which obstructs or otherwise impedes the utilization of a parking space, loading space, driveway or aisle unless additional parking spaces or loading spaces are provided to comply with the requirements and regulations of the Municipality; iv) No person shall locate a sign which obstructs or impedes the functioning of any flue or air intake, or any exhaust system; v) No person shall nail, screw, tape or otherwise fasten a sign to a tree, fence or fence post other than a no trespass sign; vi) No person shall erect a sign less than 1.0 metre from a street line; vii) No person shall erect a sign higher than 0.75 metres within 3.0 metres of any road allowance where the sign may impede vision of an access from any improved public street to any lot; viii) No person shall erect a sign within any road allowance other than a transit shelter sign, a bench sign or garbage can sign installed by Municipal agreement, a portable sign, or an off-site directional tourism sign; ix) No person shall erect a sign within a visibility triangle. 831 Page 13 SECTION 6 GENERAL PROVISIONS FOR ALL SIGNS 6.1 Where a sign is illuminated, the sign and source of illumination shall be designed and located so as to prevent light trespass beyond the sign supporl structure and/or display surface area. Night sky friendly lights, down-lights that are of a full cut-off design, goose neck lights, and back lights are the preferred lighting methods, unless otherwise noted in this By-law. 6.2 Nothing in this By-law applies to a sign that is lawfully erected on the day this By- law comes into force, provided the sign is not altered in any way. The maintenance and repair of the sign or a change in the message displayed shall be deemed not to in itself constitute an alteration. 6.3 In the event a sign that is lawfully erected on the day this By-law comes into force is altered or removed, all applicable provisions of this By-law shall apply. 6.4 In the event that an existing building is located within a road allowance, signs are allowed on the fac;ade of the building within the road allowance subject to complying with all the provisions of this By-law. SECTION 7 ALLOWED SIGNS 7.1 Section 7 and Section 8 of this By-law are interdependent and shall be read together. 7.2 If a sign is specifically defined in this By-law, but not listed as an allowed sign in any table, then the sign shall not be allowed. 7.3 A sign that is listed in a Table as being allowed shall only be allowed if it satisfies all applicable provisions of this By-law. 7.4 In the Tables to this By-law, the letter "A" indicates a particular sign that is allowed. The letter "N" indicates a particular sign is not allowed. 7.5 For the purposes of this By-law, the type of sign allowed on a properly is based on the use of the properly. The following land uses which are permitted on particular lands by the Municipality's Zoning By-law are identified in the Tables to this By-law: RES residential INO industrial COM commercial INS institutional AGR agricultural 7.6 Two special areas have been identified in Schedules 1 and 2, attached as part of this By-law, Heritage Resource Areas (HRA) and the Courlice West Shopping District (CWSD) respectively. Table 1 also shows the sign type allowed in the HRA or CWSD, notwithstanding the use of the property or building as set out in the previous section 7.5. 7.7 The sign types listed in Column 1 of Table 1 - Signs Allowed by Property Use below, shall only be allowed in the properly use category (Column 3). The section of this By-law applicable to each sign type is set out in Column 2. 7.8 SIGNS ALLOWED BY PROPERTY USE The sign and conditions under which they are allowed in properly use categories shall be in compliance with Table 1 - Signs Allowed By Property Use. 832 Page 14 TABLE 1 - SIGNS ALLOWED BY PROPERTY USE Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 PROPERTY USE CATEGORY Sign Type Section RES IND COM INS AGR HRA CWSD (1 ) (2) Billboard Sign 8.1 N N N N A N N Canopy Sign 8.2 A A A A A A A Community Theme 8.3 A N N N N N N Sign Directional Sian nla A A A A A A A Election Sign 84 Electronic Message 8.5 N A A A N N A Board Ground Sign 8.6 A A A A A A A Flag Sign 8.7 A N N N N N N Inflatable Sign 8.9 N N A N N N N Menu Board Sign nla N N A N N N A Mobile Sian 8.9 N A A A A N A Monolith/Pvlon Sign 8.10 N A A A N N N Multi-Unit Residential 8.11 A N N N N N N Sian Off-Site Directional nla N A A N A N A Sign Overhanging Sign 8.12 N N N N N A N Portable Sign 8.13 A A A A A A A Poster 8.14 A A A A A A A Pre-menu Board Sign n/a N N A N N N A Promotional 8.15 A A A A A A A Subdivision Development Direction Sign Promotional 8.16 A A A A A A A Construction Sign Real Estate Sign nla A A A A A A A Roof Sign 8.17 N N N N A N N Subdivision 8.18 A A A N N N N Development Sign Wall Sign 8.19 A A A A A A A Window Sign n/a A A A A A A A N = Not Allowed A = Allowed 1. See Section 8.21 2. See Section 8.20 833 Page 15 7.9 MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNS The maximum number of signs allowed on a properly shall be in compliance with Table 2 - Maximum Number of Signs Allowed on a Property. TABLE 2 MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIGNS ALLOWED ON A PROPERTY * Number Allowed 1 1 per each side of a first floor entrance and/or window 1 er side of the motor vehicle service station cano ies 2 er arterial road allowance entrance No maximum for multi-business 1 1 1 per road frontage of draft plan of subdivision site Window Si n 1 per residential property Unlimited for all other uses 1 A maximum of 1 permanent or temporary sign is allowed per home occupation or home industry. 834 Page 16 7.10 MAXIMUM SIGN AREA The maximum area of a sign shall comply with Table 3 - Maximum Sign Area. TABLE 3 MAXIMUM SIGN AREA PROPERTY USE SIGN TYPE RES IND COM INS AGR HRA CWSD Billboard Sian N N N N 18 m< I N N Canopy Sign 20% of the Canopy Area Community Theme Sign 75% of N display surface Directional Sign 0.3 m2 Election Sign Electronic Message Board N 50% of the area of a N N 50% of the Sign ground, pylon, or monolith, area of a sign ground, pylon, or monolith, sian Flag Sign 0.60 m< N Ground Sign 055 m2 3.75 m2 1.5m2 3.75 m2 Inflatable Sign N N 6.75 m2 IN N N N Menu Board N N 14.0 m2 IN N 4.0 m2 Mobile Sign N 3.0 m< N 3.0 m2 Monolith/Pylon Sign N 7.5 m2 N N N 9 m2 for multi-tenant property with buildi'!.gs from 5001-8000 m' floor area 11 m2 for multi-tenant property with buildings 8001 m2+ floor area Multi-Unit Residential Sign 75% of N display surface Off-Site Directional Sign N 1.5 m2 N 15 m2 Overhanging Sign N N IN N N 1.0 m2 N Portable Sign 1.0 m2 Poster 0.1m2 Pre-menu Board Sign N N 120 m2 N N N 2.0 m2 Promotional Subdivision 1.0 m2 Development Direction Sign Promotional Construction 6.0 m2 Sign Real Estate Sign 0.55 m2 2.75 m2 2.75 m2 275 m2 2.75 m2 0.55 m2 2.75 m2 Roof Sign N N N N 20% of N N roof area Subdivision Development 10 m2 10m2 10m2 N N N N Sign Wall Sign 055 m2 15% of building facade area for one storey building or barn 10% of building facade area for two storey and higher building or barn 40% of the building facade area facing the front lot line and/or exterior lot line for subdivision sales offices Window Sign 10% of 50% of window area distributed across 100% of the glass window residential building in the CWSD and HRA are allowed 10% of area the window area Agricultural building are allowed 10% of the window area N = Not Allowed 835 Page 17 7.11 MAXIMUM SIGN HEIGHT The maximum height of a sign shall comply with Table 4 - Maximum Height. TABLE 4 - MAXIMUM HEIGHT . SIGN TYPE MAX HEIGHT Billboard Sign 7.5 m Community Theme Sign 1.8m Ground Sign 3.0m. Inflatable Sign 2.7 m Menu/Pre-menu Board Sian 2.5 m Mobile Sign 2.0 m Monolith/Pylon Sign 7.5 m Multi-Unit Residential Sign 1.8m Portable Sign 1.25m Promotional Construction 7.5m Subdivision Development Siqn 7.5 m . Maximum height for residential ground signs is 1.0 metre. SECTION 8 SPECIFIC SIGN REGULATIONS 8.1 Billboard Signs i) Billboard signs shall only be allowed along the Highway 35/115 corridor from Highway 2 northward to the City of Kawartha Lakes boundary and are limited to the portions of private property that are within 400 metres of the Highway road allowance. ii) A billboard sign shall not be located, erected or displayed within 400 metres of any other billboard sign. iii) A billboard sign is limited to one display surface only. iv) Animated signs are not allowed as billboard signs. v) All billboards signs within 400 metres of Highway 35/115 shall require the approval of a permit issued by the Ministry of Transportation in addition to the Municipality of Clarington. 8.2 Canopy Signs i) Motor vehicle service station fueling areas may have 1 sign on each side of fueling area canopies. 8.3 Community Theme Signs i) The sign display surface may be a maximum of 25% of the sign support structure. ii) The sign copy may be a maximum of 75% of the sign display surface. iii) The maximum width of the sign support structure is 4.5 metres. iv) The maximum height of the sign support structure is 1.8 metres. If the sign support structure is incorporated into a noise fence requirement, the height of the sign support structure can be the same height as the noise fence. / 4.5 melres ~I /1 ./ COPY\ , ~ ~ ~ '\ \ L Sign Support Structure \~ Display Surtace J 836 Page 18 8.4 Election Signs 8.5 Electronic Message Board Signs i) The minimum display time for any electronic message, without movement or change in colour, shall be thirty (30) seconds, and the intensity of the illumination shall be maintained at a constant level. 8.6 Flag Signs i) All flag signs are to be removed within thirty (30) days after the date of the last sale of the last property within the plan of subdivision. 8.7 Ground Signs i) All ground signs outside of residential areas must include the municipal street address if the sign is located on the street frontage pertaining to the street address. ii) The maximum height of a ground sign on a residential property is 1.0 metre. 8.8 Inflatable Signs i) Inflatable signs are allowed on a property for a maximum of seven (7) consecutive days. A maximum of two (2) sign permits will be issued per property, for a total of fourteen (14) days, per calendar year. All inflatable signs are to maintain a setback of 3.0 metres from any property line. All are to be secured to a fixed base and liability insurance may be required. ii) The maximum width of an inflatable sign is 2.5 metres. iii) Inflatable signs are not allowed on roofs. 8.9 Mobile Signs Mobile signs shall be erected in compliance with the following: i) A maximum of three (3) sign permits may be issued within a twelve (12) month period for the same business provided that a minimum sixty (60) days has elapsed between the expiry of the last sign permit and the mobile sign has been removed; ii) A sign permit for a mobile sign shall expire sixty (60) days after the erection date specified on the sign permit. Where an erection date is not specified, the effective date for the purpose of this section shall be the date the sign permit is issued; iii) Upon expiry of a sign permit for a mobile sign, the sign must be removed within twenty-four (24) hours and the Municipality must be informed of the removal of the mobile sign. If the mobile sign is not removed in compliance with this By-law, the Municipality may remove the sign in accordance with Section 4; iv) In no case shall any person erect a mobile and portable sign at the same time on the same property; v) Mobile signs are not allowed on vacant land; vi) Home occupations or home industries are not allowed to have a mobile sign; vii) No person shall rent a mobile sign from a person that is not licensed under a by-law of the Municipality to carry on the business of renting mobile signs; viii) If the mobile sign is rented, the name and telephone number of the owner of the mobile sign must be on the sign structure and easily read; ix) Fluorescent colours are prohibited on a sign area. 837 Page 19 8.10 Monolith/Pylon Signs i) Monolith or pylon signs can be used as ground signs where ground signs are allowed. The regulations for ground signs will apply in regards to height and size. ii) All monolith and pylon signs must include the municipal street address if the sign is located on the street frontage pertaining to the street address. iii) Monolith signs shall not have a sign display surface located lower than 1.5 metres above finished grade. iv) Pylon signs shall not have a sign display surface located lower than 2.44 metres above finished grade. v) No monolith/pylon sign is permitted for any building located within 6 metres of a road allowance. 8.11 Multi-Unit Residential Signs i) The sign display surface may be a maximum of 25% of the sign support structure as shown in Section 8.3. iv) The sign copy may be a maximum of 75% of the sign display surface. v) The maximum width of the sign support structure is 4.5 metres. iv) The maximum height of the sign support structure is 1.8 metres. If the sign support structure is incorporated into a noise fence requirement, the height of the sign support structure can be the same height as the noise fence. 8.12 Overhanging Signs Overhanging signs shall be erected in compliance with the following: i) No overhanging sign shall be erected less than 2.5 metres above finished grade or the surface of the road allowance or public sidewalk; ii) Every owner of an overhanging sign shall carry adequate liability insurance for any such sign and that insurance coverage shall also name the Municipality as an additional insured, where the overhanging sign is over a road allowance; iii) Prior to the issuance of a Sign Permit, a Road Occupancy permit will be obtained for the installation of signs overhanging a road allowance, if required; iv) An overhanging sign that weighs more than 115 kg will require a building permit. 8.13 Portable Signs Portable signs shall be erected in compliance with the following: i) A portable sign shall only be used and displayed during the actual hours of operation of the business that it is advertising; ii) No portable sign shall be located in a manner that restricts the free and safe movement for any pedestrian, vehicle or other conveyance on any sidewalk, path, road allowance or driveway, or in a manner which impedes vision; iii) In no case shall a person erect a portable sign and a mobile sign at the same time on the same property. 8.14 Poster Signs Poster signs shall be erected in compliance with the following: i) A poster sign shall be displayed for a maximum of 21 days and not more than three days after the end of an advertised event; ii) The Municipality may remove and dispose of a poster sign without notice or compensation to any person. 838 Page 20 8.15 Promotional Subdivision Development Direction Signs Promotional Subdivision Development Direction signs shall be erected in compliance with the following: i) The sign shall only be used and displayed during the actual hours of operation of the subdivision sales office during week days; and signs may be displayed on Saturdays and Sundays provided that such signs are displayed on street boulevards only and are not located any closer than one (1.0) metre to the curb, or where there are no curbs, three (3.0) metres from the edge of the travelled portion of the street and that such signs are removed no later than 08:00 hours (8:00 a.m.) on each Monday. ii) No Promotional Subdivision Development Direction sign shall be located in a manner that restricts the free and safe movement for any pedestrian, vehicle or other conveyance on any sidewalk, path, road allowance or driveway, or in a manner which impedes vision; iii) In no case shall a person erect a Promotional Subdivision Development Direction sign and a mobile sign at the same time on the same property. 8.16 Promotional Construction Signs i) Promotional construction signs shall be removed within thirty (30) days of the completion of the project. 8.17 Roof Signs i) Roof signs shall only be allowed as a barn sign on an agricultural use property. 8.18 Subdivision Development Signs i) A subdivision development sign shall not be erected until the subdivision being advertised has been draft approved and must be located on the plan of subdivision site. ii) A subdivision development sign shall be removed within thirty (30) days after the date of the sale of the last property within the plan of subdivision. iii) A Performance Guarantee will be required as part of the subdivision development agreement. 8.19 Wall Signs i) A wall sign cannot project more than 0.3 metres from the wall of a building or structure. 8.20 Heritage Resource Area Signs i) Signs within the Heritage Resource Areas identified in Schedule 1 to this By-law shall comply with the provision of any applicable Community Improvement Plan. ii) No person shall erect a sign which disfigures or conceals any significant architectural feature of a building, and no person shall erect a sign which distracts from the heritage nature of the surrounding area. iii) Preferred sign materials include wood (painted, carved or cutout letters) and metal (porcelain coated, photo or line-etched, engraved or brass letters). Alternative material may be considered, provided that they maintain the heritage character of the streetscape. The colour and design of a sign shall be sympathetic and compatible with the surrounding area. iv) Ambient, overhead, gooseneck or low-key lighting should be used for exterior lighting of all signs, regardless of the age of the building. 8.21 Agricultural Signs Along Provincial Highways A permit is not required from the Ministry of Transportation for properties within 400 metres of a Provincial highway as set out in Bill 98, regardless a municipal sign permit is required. 839 Page 21 SECTION 9 EXCEPTIONS BY AMENDMENT 9.1 Two ground identification signs may be permitted at 234 King Street East, Bowmanville. 9.2 A 1.48 m' on-site directional sign may be permitted on the rear wall of the structure referred to as "Williams Coffee Pub" located at 1414 Highway 2, Courtice (PD-45-99). 9.3 The allowable size of three wall signs may be increased, being specifically 12.3% on the north wall, 12.3% on the south wall, and 11.4% on the east wall of the structure referred to as "Payless Shoe Source" located at 70 Clarington Boulevard, Bowmanville (PD-79-99). 9.4 A ground sign with a total sign area of 2.0 m' located at 84 Mill Street South, Newcastle United Church, Newcastle (PSD-095-02). 9.5 A second ground sign on the property located at 105 Clarington Boulevard, Bowmanville, with a height of 3.20 metres and a total sign area of 1.92 m' (PSD- 051-02). 9.6 An 8.92 m' promotional construction sign located on Lot 27 of Plan of Subdivision 18T89064 (PSD-114-02). 9.7 Site specific minor variances that were granted and duly recorded as part of a Site Plan Agreement during the time Sign Bylaw 97-157 was in force. 9.8 The construction of an electronic media sign on an existing pylon sign located at 2401 Highway 2, Bowmanville (PSD-114-07). 9.9 An increase in the number of permitted signs from one permanent sign to three permanent signs at 5324 Main Street, Orono (PSD-99-07). 9.10 Three signs having a maximum sign area of 3.5 m' (2.54m x 1.39m) each attached onto two elevated wall sections at the east and west end of the existing building located at 219 King Street East, Bowmanville, to be used by the tenants of any unit of the building (PSD-1 08-07). 9.11 An increase in the number of permitted signs, for a stand-alone building on a multiple business site located at 361 King Avenue, Newcastle, from two (2) wall signs to three (3) wall signs, with a maximum size of 2.9 m' for the third wall sign (PSD-088-08). 9.12 A pylon sign with a sign area of 10.2 square metres for the property known as Home Depot, 120 Clarington Blvd., Bowmanville (Resolution #C-017-08). 9.13 A pylon sign with a height of 9 metres and a sign area of 9.93 square metres for the property identified as 8262 Highway 35/115 (PSD-162-04). SECTION 10 OFFENCE 10.1 It shall be the duty of every person who erects, uses, maintains or causes a sign to be erected, used or maintained to ensure that any sign erected, used or maintained by them shall comply with all the provisions and requirements of this By-law. 10.2 Every person who fails to comply with any provision or requirement of this By-law shall be guilty of an offence and liable to a fine as prescribed by the Provincial Offences Act. SECTION 11 SEVERABILITY 11.1 If a court of competent jurisdiction should declare any section or part of a section of this By-law to be invalid, such decision does not affect the validity, effectiveness, or enforceability of the other sections or parts of the provisions of this By-law unless the court makes an order to the contrary. Page 22 SECTION 12 DATE EFFECTIVE 12.1 This By-law shall come into force on January 1, 2010. Read a first, second and third time and finally passed this _ day of _ 2009. Jim Abernethy, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 841 Page 23 SCHEDULE 1 HERITAGE RESOURCE AREAS ---------- -------1 Schedule "1" to Sign By-Law -09 HERITAGE RESOURCE AREAS \ 842 Page 24 SCHEDULE 2 COURTICE WEST SHOPPING DISTRICT Schedule "2" to Sign By-Law -09 COURTICE WEST SHOPPING DISTRICT -- ///. ~..~.-~' l' I- Ce ~ -. '- l I I r-I. ~,~~,'D~' rf....r>r1TTTTr, I I I I : E,-7i';E~;";.l.'i"'-?-- '7 ~~ W.L WL t= ~'c.~O~;~-I':rn~ ,',4 S}",' HC,\4LI iT I ~M1. I.. '. ~~rILCIJ:mt ... l ] I. .... ..- 1'i",,{- , , "".(-'. ~" - .... J~~ - . '." "'-1' //~" T 'Tl"7.:'~V I ;;c,.i....,"!! ~"" ~I I-fl.. 'r--J t " + - I r -: ---LUJ.J..J - c I i ~- ~').li.FP.lfiK--1'i~'~.~lA.l<r;r.,.Jl' 5 . ',~~ t c-:: "" c; tC "J ~ ~ --J, -'. -'J '... ". .--.. J '~~~r" -...,. 'r.--. .-:;,~~~;~:-~f."':'-.--C.} l - -., ,.'..'ii}A ". 'J -.---- ..: '. '. I, . , "- -l:.. .-\ ./" ':/ '-~ 7 ,/ ....--.'- .,--.-.-....r- .. ,. I I " - -. - --...... :::.:...."1-:' ... -- ~ I F"- ~J ,^,". - - II u - - IJ l~l"'!'-""',r '10 - -~i,f' --.--'.: .. ,.' or 1-". J "1"1' V' .-- r-. .' ,,/ (,',Ir-- --, ...... ___ r:- ----~~ - I ,]jlIIJ 1-~'~ "-,.-_.~I UL_.. ---1-,61 _'__.,.& E~'~.'" M"j' '., 'I, " .~ ... ... _--i.LJ ". .....-~: ........, -=u '\~;U iTI '1 J?AR;;>GI'i }---) f:. "_._~,' ..( ,', ~" ~~) '" ~ ---..., ? .j. :t. ~~ .~ COURT ICE 843 Attachment 2 To Report PSD-079-09 CHANGES TO DRAFT SIGN BY-LAW Community Theme Si~ms The following definition is to be added after the canopy sign definition: "Community Theme sign" means a sign erected on a property adjacent to an arterial road, as indicated in the Clarington Official Plan, which identifies the name of the subdivision development. Table 2 indicates that a maximum of two community theme signs are permitted per arterial road entrance. Table 3 indicates that the sign display surface may be a maximum of 25% of the sign support structure with the sign copy set at a maximum of 75% of the display surface area. The maximum height of the sign support structure will be 1.8 metres and includes in Table 4. Section 8 notes that the maximum width of the sign support structure is 4.5 metres and that when the sign is incorporated into a noise fence, the sign can be the same height as the noise fence requirement. ../"/ 4.5 metres 1 COpy I/) ~ ..... Q) E ~ ...... Sign Support Structure J Display Surface Multi-Unit Residential Si~ms The following definition is to be added after the monolith sign definition: "Multi-Unit Residential Sign" means a sign erected on a property to identify the name of the multi-residential development. Table 2 indicates that a maximum of one multi-unit residential sign is permitted per development. Table 3 indicates that the sign display surface may be a maximum of 25% of the sign support structure with the sign copy set at a maximum of 75% of the display surface area. The maximum height of the sign support structure will be 1.8 metres and included in Table 4. Section 8 notes that the maximum width of the sign support structure is 4.5 metres and that when the sign is incorporated into a noise fence, the sign can be the same height as the noise fence requirement. Multi- residential development signs are only permitted on sites with five or more residential units. 844 Flag Signs The following definition is to be added after the electronic message board definition: Flag sign means a sign made of cloth or lightweight material attachable by one edge to a pole or rope. Table 2 indicates that one flag sign will be permitted per 7.5 metres of frontage. The maximum size of a flag sign is 0.6 square metres as indicated in Table 3. Section 8 states that all flag signs are to be removed within 30 days after the date of the last sale of the last property within the plan of subdivision. Additional Changes to Definitions Section "Or a spinning portable sign" has been added to the end of the Animated sign definition. A definition of Commercial has been added which states "Commercial" means, for the purposes of this By-law, a use which includes tourism uses. The Community Facilities definition has been refined to add the words "and shall include" before "such uses as post offices...." A definition of Industrial has been added which states "Industrial" means a use that includes the assembly or processing of substances, goods or raw materials related to the manufacture or fabrication of finished goods, warehousing or bulk storage of goods, and may include accessory sues such as storage and facilities for receiving and shipping materials and goods. Mineral aggregate and utility uses are considered industrial uses for the purposes of this By-law, The "inflatable sign" definition has been expanded to include seasonal items that do not contain any wording or symbols of an advertising nature are not considered to be signs. The definition of mobile signs has been changed to reflect the definition of mobile signs within the Mobile Sign Business Licencing By-law The definition of Promotional Construction Direction Sign has been changed to Promotional Subdivision Development Direction Sign and now means a portable sign providing direction to a development site within a plan of subdivision or plan of condominium or a proposed plan of condominium. The definition of Subdivision Development Sign now contains reference to plans of condominium as well as plans of subdivision. As certain signs are not permitted on vacant land a definition of vacant land has been included which states "Vacant Land" means a property that does not contain any buildings or structures. 845 "Visibility Triangle" now includes a subsection (c) the visibility triangle extends beyond private property into the road allowance as illustrated in the following sketch. STREET I PRlV ATE ROAD STREET LlNB ( EX"I'ERJOR SIDE LOT LINE) VISIBILITY TRIANGLE W.l".lH.lN ROAD ALLOWANCE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE ON A CORNER LOT VISIBILITY TRIANGLE WJ','H.lN ROAD ALLOWANCE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE AD.JACE.J'll."T A DRIVEWAY PROPERTY I..INJt ~ I ~ DRIVEWAY * VISmn..ITY TRIANGJ__E MEASURE:MENT Wll..L VARY DEPE..~ING ON THE APPROPRIATE MUNlCIPAL ZONING BY-LAW Additional Chanqes Section 1.8.2 indicates that a property must also comply with the Road Occupancy By- law. The words "or its successor' have be added to this section in the event that the By- law is repealed or its title changes. Section 3.8 addresses when a sign permit can be revoked. It now includes that it can be revoked if the sign "is not installed in compliance with the permit". Section 5.2 ji) now contains a reference that no sign can be placed within 1 metre of any fire escape, fire hydrant, fire exit or door, etc., if the sign will impede visibility or access. Section 6.1 addresses how signs are to be illuminated. The section has been reworded so that it now states: 846 Where a sign is illuminated, the sign and source of illumination shall be designed and located as to prevent light trespass beyond the sign support structure and/or display area. Night sky friendly lights, down-lights that are of a full cut-off design, goose neck lights, and back lights are the preferred lighting methods, unless otherwise noted in this By-law. , ~;) ;:j:tf~f:,o , .' t ' "i'" ," ~,,': ~ "' " t,,; 1." U/,~ii-;,h'\~~::'f., -<{:;;~~li" ' " :.:. ~'b' . ...::: .,,,,:::, '. ,,,', : .: t..' ~V" v1~ ,i?,;_,:,:..;,.;,..y,'.d _:-~ ~- r" ~~- ,~~<< ~, Full cut-off wall mount light The Maximum Sign Area table in Section 7 has been amended so that the real estate sign size for the Heritage Resource Area is 0.55 sq. metres and for the Courtice West Shopping District is 2.75 sq. metres. Th~ Mobile and Portable sign provision of Section 8 have been revised to clarify that mobile and portable signs are not permitted to be erected at the same time "on the same property", The Promotional Construction Sign provisions also state that these signs and mobile signs can not be erected at the same time "on the same property". The number of mobile signs permitted on a multi-business property has been reduced from 1 per 50 metres of store-front frontage to 1 per 75 metres in Table 2. The number of mobile signs permitted per property is limited to three and the period of time that the sign must be removed before it can be used again by the same business has been increased from 28 days to 60 days. The Promotional Subdivision Development Direction sign provisions in Section 8 has been clarified to state that these signs may be displayed on Saturdays and Sundays provided that such signs are displayed on street boulevards only and are not located any closer than one (1) metre to the curb, or where there is no curb, three (3) metres from the edge of the traveled portion of the road, but in no case shall a sign be located on the shoulder of a road. The signs are removed no later than 08:00 hours (8:00 a.m.) on each Monday. The display area referenced in the Monolith/Pylon Sign provisions of Section 8 has been clarified. The size of Promotional Construction signs has been increased from 5 square metres to 6 square metres, as indicated in Table 3, to reflect the size of signs previously constructed and a height maximum has been added to Table 4. The size of real estate signs for institutional uses has been increased to 2.75 square metres in Table 3. 847 The requirement for adding a municipal street address to certain ground, pylon and monolith signs will indicate that the address is to be included where the sign is located along the street frontage pertaining to the address. A provision has been added to Section 8 for Subdivision Development Signs stating that a Performance Guarantee will be required as part of the subdivision development agreement. Monolith/pylon signs will only be permitted on sites where the building is set back a minimum of 6 metres from the road allowance. The. exceptions to Sign By-law 97-157 that remain in force once it is repealed have been listed in Section 9 - Exceptions. Section 10 - Offence has been added to allow for enforcement of the By-law. 848 Attachment 3 To Report PSD-079-09 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY LAW 2009- Being a By-Law to Regulate and Licence Persons and Businesses that Carry on the Business of Leasing or Renting Mobile Signs Within The Municipality of Clarington WHEREAS the Municipal Act, 2001, S.O. 2001, c.25 provides that the Council of a local Municipality may, by By-law, licence, regulate and govern any business carried on within the Municipality and may revoke such licence; AND WHEREAS the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to exercise its powers over the business of leasing or renting mobile signs for the purpose of safety, nuisance control and consumer protection by establishing procedures and regulations to ensure the mobile signs leased or rented are of an approved type and that they do not create a potential nuisance for those in the Municipality; NOW THEREFORE THE COUNCIL OF THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON ENACTS AS FOLLOWS: DEFINITIONS 1. In this By law: "APPLICANT" shall mean a person applying for a licence under this By-law; "CERTIFICATE OF LICENCE:' shall mean a document issued by the Municipal Clerk and bearing the seal of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington which identifies the name of the holder of the licence, description of the business being licenced and, where applicable, the location of operation; "COUNCIL" shall mean the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington "LICENSEE" shall mean any person holding a current, valid licence to carry on or engage in the business, trade or occupation of leasing or renting mobile signs; "MOBILE SIGN" shall mean a temporary sign which is not permanently affixed to the ground or to any structure, and typically designed for the rearrangement of copy on the sign face, and which is capable of being readily moved from one location to another, and may be pari of or attached 849 to a wheeled trailer or frame without wheels in such a manner so as to be able to be moved from place to place. "MUNICIPALITY" shall mean the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington. "OWNER" shall mean the registered owner of the premises upon which any sign or sign structure is located, or any person described on a sign or whose name or address or telephone number appears on the sign, or who has installed the sign, or who is in lawful control of the sign, or who benefits from the message on the sign, and for the purposes of this By-law there may be more than one owner of a sign. "PERSON" shall mean, but is not limited to an individual, sole proprietorship, partnership, association, or corporation or other entity to which the context can apply according to the law. 2.0 LICENCING REQUIREMENTS 2.1 No person shall carry on or engage in the business, trade or occupation of leasing or renting mobile signs without holding a valid licence to do so issued pursuant to the provisions of this By-law. 2.2 For the purposes of this By-law, a person who carries on or engages in the business, trade or occupation of leasing or renting mobile signs from a location outside the Municipality shall be deemed to be carrying on business in the Municipality if the person leases or rents mobile signs that are erected, located or displa'yed in the Municipality. 2.3 No person shall rent or lease a mobile sign to be located in the Municipality from a company that is not licenced pursuant to the provisions of this By-law. 2.4 Every person who carries on or engages in the business trade or occupation of leasing or renting mobile signs shall ensure that all required permits are obtained prior to the placement of a mobile sign and that its placement is in accordance with any permit issued. 2.5 Every person issued a licence under this By-law shall, upon request of a Police Officer or Municipal Law Enforcement Officer, produce the Certificate of Licence for inspection. 850 2.6 Once issued, the licence shall be specific to the holder thereof and no owner shall transfer a licence to another holder except with the written consent of the Municipal Clerk who is required to give consent subject to any instructions of Council to the contrary. There shall be an Administrative Fee of $50.00 charged for any transfer of a Certificate of Licence prior to the expiry date. 3.0 LICENCE APPLlCA liONS 3.1 An application for a licence or a renewal thereof shall be duly completed on the forms provided by the Municipality. 3.2 If the applicant is a corporation, a certified copy of the incorporating document showing the names and addresses of all Directors, Officers and Shareholders shall be included in the application. 3.3 In the event that the names or addresses of the Directors, Officers and Shareholders listed in the incorporating document change, it shall be the applicant's duty to notify the Municipality in writing of such change within 10 calendar days of the change taking place. Failure to do so shall be an offence. 3.4 If the applicant is a registered partnership, a certified copy of the registered Declaration of Partnership, showing the names and addresses of the partners shall be included in the application. 3.5 In the event that the names or addresses of the partners listed in the Declaration of Partnership change, it shall be the applicant's duty to notify the Municipality in writing of such change within 10 calendar days of the change taking place. Failureto do so shall be an offence. 3.6 Subject to the provisions of this By-law, when an application for a licence is made in accordance with the provisions of this By-law, the Municipal Clerk shall issue a licence which shall set an expiry date of the 31st day of December.of each year. 3.7 The fee payable upon issuance of a licence pursuant to this By-law shall be $250.00 There shall be no prorating of the fee for licence periods of less than 12 months. 3.8 No person shall enjoy a vested right in the continuance of a licence. 3.9 The applicant shall, upon application for a licence, file proof of insurance with the Municipal Clerk. Such insurance shall: 851 a) be in an amount to be determined by the Municipal Treasurer as sufficient and shall nar:ne the Municipality of Clarington as an insured party; b) hold the Municipality harmless from any action that may be taken against it resulting from the placement of any mobile sign in the Municipality; and c) be endorsed to provide the Municipality at least 10 days notice in writing prior to cancellation, expiration or change of the policy. 3.10 Every licensee shall ensure that every mobile sign that is being leased or rented clearly displays the name, address, and telephone number of the licensee. Failure to do so shall be an offence. 4.0 GROUNDS FOR REFUSAL TO ISSUE OR RENEW A LICENCE 4.1 An applicant who otherwise complies with the provisions of this By-law is entitled to be licenced and a licensee is entitled to have a licence renewed except where: a) having regard to the applicant's or licensee's financial position, the applicant or licensee cannot be reasonably expected to be financially responsible in the conduct of the business which is to be licenced or is licenced; b) the past or present conduct of the applicant or licensee, or if a corporate entity, the past or present conduct of its directors, officers, employees or agents, affords reasonable grounds for belief that the applicant or licensee will not carry on the business which is to be licenced or is licenced in accordance with the law or with integrity and honesty; c) the applicant or licensee is carrying on activities that are or will be if the applicant is licensed, in contravention of this or any other Municipal by-law; d) the conduct of the applicant or licensee, or if a corporate entity, the past or present conduct of its directors, officers, employees or agents, affords reasonable grounds to believe that the carrying on of the business would infringe on the rights or endanger the health or safety of one or more members of the public; e) there are reasonable grounds to believe that any application or other document provided to the Municipal Clerk by or on behalf of the applicant or the licensee contains a false statement or provides false information. 852 4.2 The Municipal Clerk may require affidavits in support of an application. 4.3 The Municipal Clerk shall not issue a licence or renewal of a licence until: a) all required approvals and inspections have been obtained by the applicant; b) all required documentation has been provided; and c) the business licence fee has been paid in full. 4.4 The Municipal Clerk, upon re~eipt of the application for a licence may make, cause to be made, or request, any additional documents, investigations or inspections in respect of such application for a licence as the Municipal Clerk deems appropriate or in the interest of the general public and any costs incurred for such inspections or documents shall be at the applicant's expense. 4.5 If the investigation discloses that: a) the applicant's premises or place of business is the subject of an Order issued pursuant to the Property Standards By-law, or discloses non-compliance with the Zoning By-law or any parking requirements of the Corporation; b) the applicant is incompetent in a manner that affects the safety, health or welfare of the public; c) the applicant is in breach of this or some other Municipal or Regional by-law or law of Ontario or Canada; or d) the applicant has beel') convicted of an offence pursuant to a similar by-law in another municipality; the Municipal Clerk shall deny the application. 4.6 Notwithstanding section 4.5, if more than seven years have lapsed since the final disposition date of the Criminal Record, and it is, in the opinion of the Municipal Clerk, of a minor nature, the Municipal Clerk may approve the application. 5.0 REFUSAL, REVOCATION, SUSPENSION, IMPOSITION OF CONDITIONS 5.1 An applicant who has been denied a licence by the Municipal Clerk pursuant to Section 4.5 may request that his application be heard by Council, which may, in its discretion, issue the licence in question. 5.2 Upon request, the Municipal Clerk shall refer the matter to Council. 853 5.3 The Municipal Clerk may require affidavits in support of an application. 5.4 Council shall consider the matter. 5.5 In considering an application under Section 5.1, Council may impose any conditions it sees fit as a requirement of obtaining, continuing to hold or renewing a licence, including any condition which would otherwise contravene any other provisions of the By-law. 5.6 Council may revoke any licence issued under the authority of this By-law where such power to revoke may, pursuant to the provisions of the Municipal Act or any other Act, be exercised by the Council of the Municipality but, before any licence is revoked, the holder of the licence shall be given at least seven days notice mailed or delivered to the address given in his application and shall be permitted to appear before Council to show cause why he believes such licence should not be revoked. 5.7 A licence that is cancelled or suspended shall remain the property of the Municipality. 5.8 Upon notification of cancellation or suspension of a licence, the licensee shall forthwith surrender the Certificate of Licence to the Municipal Clerk until such time as the licence has been reinstated. 6.0 PENALTY 6.1 Any person who contravenes the provisions of this By-law is guilty of an offence and upon conviction is liable to a fine as provided for in the Provincial Offences Act. 6.2 Should any section, clause or provision of this By-law be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid the same shall not affect the validity of this By-law as a whole or any part thereof other than the part so declared to be invalid. 6.3 This By-law shall come into f~1I force and effect on the 1st day of January, 2010. BY LAW read a first and second time this th day of ,2009 BY LAW read a third time and finally passed this th day of ,2009 854 Jim Abernethy, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 855 C!![-!lJgtnn REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING Date: Monday, September 14, 2009 Report #: PSD-080-09 File #: RE 6.12.8 By-law #: Subject: LAND ACQUISITION 10 DUCHESS STREET - ORONO RECOMMENDA TIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-080-09 be received; 2. THAT the property identified as 10 Duchess Street, Orono, Ontario and being more particularly described as part of Lot 10, Block "C" C.G. Hanning's Plan, former Village of Orono, being Part of Lot 29, Concession 5, Municipality of Clarington, Regional Municipality of Durham be APPROVED for acquisition for the purchase price of (TEN THOUSDAND DOLLARS) $10,000.00 plus adjustments; 3. THAT in addition, the Municipality will pay the Vendors on the Closing Date the sum of ONE THOUSAND, FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($1,500.00) as an allowance to compensate for topsoil and reseeding necessitated by the erosion washout; and the sum of EIGHT HUNDRED AND NINETY FIVE DOLLARS ($895.00) which are the taxes paid from August 2008 to closing; 4. THAT the funds for the purchase, and any associated costs, be charged to account number 110-50-130-85002-7401 Land Acquisition; 5. THAT the attached By-law be PASSED to authorize the Mayor and the Clerk, on behalf of the Municipality, to EXECUTE an Agreement to acquire the property; and 6. That staff and the Municipal Solicitor be directed to take all necessary actions to complete the transaction. 856 REPORT NO.: PSD-080-09 PAGE 2 Submitted by: Davi . Crome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services Reviewed by: U ~~ t.rL Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer 26 August 2009 FUDJC/df CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 857 REPORT NO.: PSD-080-09 PAGE 3 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 On August 14, 2008, the owners of the property located at 10 Duchess Street (at the rear of their home at 5068 Main Street, Orono) contacted the Director of Operations with regard to the damage that had occurred to their property (Attachment 1). The solution offered by the owners was to have the property come under the ownership of the Municipality. The property is located adjacent to other lands owned by the Municipality as part of the Orono Park. 1.2 A property appraiser was engaged by the Municipality to complete an appraisal report and as of February 21, 2009, the fair market value of the property was estimated to be $25,000. The property owner has agreed to sell a portion (approximately one third) of the property to the Municipality. The appraiser revisited their appraisal and based on the portion being acquired and its impact on the overall desirability of the lot (it will no longer have access to Duchess Street) estimated the portion being acquired at $10,000 as fair market value. Staff considers the agreed upon price of $10,000 to be reasonable, 1.3 To compensate the owners for the damage that has been done to their lands an additional $1,500 to provide for topsoil and seeding is being provided to the vendor for their use in replanting the land as they see fit. In addition, the vendor has asked that they be reimbursed for the taxes on the property back-dated to August 2008, estimated to be $895. The vendor will be provided with an easement over the section that will be Municipally owned to allow for access to the rear of their lot (Attachment 2). 1.4 As set out in the Offer to Sell (Attachment 3), the Municipality will be responsible for reasonable legal costs for the Vendor. The Municipality will have a survey of the property prepared and will have a new survey of 5068 Main Street prepared showing the lot melded with the remaining portion of 10 Duchess Street which is being retained by the vendor. 1.5 The closing date of the transaction is September 30, 2009. 2.0 CONCLUSION 2.1 This property has been identified by the Acting Director of Operations as necessary for erosion control works at the western limit of Duchess Street and will also form part of the Orono Park. It is recommended that the property purchase be approved. 2.2 The Acting Director of Operations and Director of Finance has reviewed this report. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Letter to Director of Operations Attachment 2A - Key Map and Aerial Map Attachment 2B - Aerial Map Attachment 3 - Signed Offer to Sell Duchess Street Attachment 4 - By-law 858 ,"",L""""""''''I-''. . / To Report PSD-080-09 Kim and Peter Gunn, llD" "l-'"-,j ((' ',\ c\! i' qr' I" r.. 1\". .1.... /I .~. \ i ' . I \. " i i ,: ~: '; , :\' ~'l""\~~~ .J.li .i',' 'Iii I. 1 _,"'~'. . "v '-~i 0""1'- .-, 0 '"l!'\'l8 l v '- L UU ~ j , MUNiCiPAliTY OF CLp,R1NGimJ , PLANI.JI~!G DEPAffi;VitNT RECEIVED j, : ".; 1 ", "LrJ18 r,Vl..J \"t "-iu OPERATiONS DEPT. August 14,2008. Attention: Fred Horvath Director of Operations Hampton Depot Dear Mr. Horvath, After a series ofrainstonns throughout the summer, the property behind us has been seriously damaged. In the past this was not a problem due to the fact that the old roadway was sloped toward Main Street. Tbe fairly new paved roadway (done about 2-3 years ago) is sloped toward the back lot instead of Main Street and now all nmotTis directed toward the road allowance and unfortunately, our property. To be exact, the property in question is #0 Duchess Street, pIan CG Hanning BLK C PT lot 10. This is a severed lot that nms adjacent to our bome on Main Street. We have owned this lot and paid taxes on it for the last fifteen years. It is CUJ'J'eDtly zoned as R2 by the Town ofClarington. After a series of phone caIls from our neighbours, this was recently addressed as Murray Devitt bad a crew remove trees, dig the area, dump earth, gravel and gabion stones to help with the massive erosion. It was not realized at the time by this crew that part of the land was private so when trees were removed, a partial fence destroyed and an invisible dog fence broken they were clearly on our property to make adjustments. This is easily mistakable, as the Town ofClarington owns all lots in this area backing onto Orono Parle area with the exception of ours, lot 10. We appreciate the Town addressing the road issue, as this is a main safety concern, although the erosion suffered by our property remains. Not only are there trees that were removed, but also there are large trees currently standing which will fall if fwther erosion continues. In an anemjt to make this issue known. Murray Devitt was kind enough to meet us on the morning of August 12 and as we discussed there are few alternatives. The solution we see is for the lot to come under the ownership of the Town allowing the Town full access to all lots backing onto the park and control of the Lands parallel to the Road allowance. We would like your advice regarding how to move forward and additional contacts we may need. Obviously our property has suffered serious damage, and the way the road issue has been rectified, we will continue to lose valuable land The Town can not properly correct this problem without continuing to damage our land as it needs proper access to all areas to rectify the initiaJ problem. Please contact us to discuss this further at' Ir at Peter's cell at Thank you for your time in looking into this. (J ;~ riM- Peter and Kim Gunn Cc: Murray Devitt \ 859 N Jf'~Ji; s 10 Duchess Street to be melded with 5068 Main Street 150681 en m o DUCHESS STREET Easement For Access In Favour Of 5068 Main Street Property Location Map (Orono) I- W W a:::: I- en Z ;;: ~ ~ N . ~'j..~ I s LAND ACQUISITION Portion of 10 Duchess Street, Orono -f o :::0 eo "0 o::r> ;:::l._ lJfi) (1')("') o:Y , 3 Oeo CO:J 0_ 'l\.) ~::r> Attachment 3 To Report PSD-080-09 OFFER TO SELL The undersigned, Kimberley -AIm Gunn (the "Vendor"), hereby agrees to and with THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARlNGTON (the "Purchaser"), to sell the propel1y known for municipal purposes in 2009 as part of 10 Duchess Street, Village of Orono and described as Part of Lot 10, Block "c" according to C.G. Hanning's Plan of the fom1er Village of Orono being Pan of Lot 26, Concession 5, fonner Township of Clarke now the Municipality of Clarington, Regional Municipality of Durham and shown on Attachment 1 hereto as "Property to be Acquired" (the "Property"), for the purchase price ofTEN THOUSAND ($] 0,000.00) DOLLARS (the "Purchase Price"), subject to adjustments including any adjustments provided for below in this Agreement. In addition, the Purchaser shall pay the Vendor on the Closing Date (i) the sum of ONE THOUSAND; FIVE HUNDRED ($1,500) DOLLARS as an allowance to compensate for reseeding the topsoil in the area damaged by erosion and washout, (ii) the sum of EIGHT HUNDRED NINETY -FIVE ($895.00) DOLLARS to cover the property taxes from August 2008 until Closing Date and (iii) the reasonable legal costs of the Vendor to complete this transaction. ADDITIONALL Y, the Purchaser agrees with the Vendor to the following ten11S and conditions: I. This transaction is to be completed no later than 5:00 p.m. on September 30th, 2009 (the "Closing Date"), which date may be extended or amended by written agreement of the solicitors for the pal1ies, and on which date vacant possession of the Property is to be given to the Purchaser. At least five days prior to the Closing Date, the Purchaser shall atTange for the deposit of a reference plan of survey delineating the Propeny and the Easement (as hereinafter defined). 2. This Agreement of Purchase and Sale may be executed in counterparts and delivel)' of an executed copy of same by each pany to the other shall constitute complete offer and acceptance thereof. 3. The Vendor shall reserve an easement ("Easemenf') over and upon the propeny shown on Attachment 1 hereto as "Easement for access in favour of 5068 Main Street" for the purpose of pedestrian and vehicular access to the remainder of] 0 Duchess Street, Village of Orono (the "Remainder Property") and the propeny municipally known as 5068 Main Street, Village of Orono (the "Main Street Property"). Immediately following the transfer of the Property to the Purchaser, the Vendor shall transfer the Remainder Property to the owner of the Main Street Propeny subject to the restriction (the "Restriction") that, in the future, the Remainder Property and the Main Street Property shall only be conveyed together. The undersigned, Peter Gunn, spouse of the Vendor hereby (i) consents to the disposilion of the Property pursuant to the provisions of the Family Law Act. R.S.O. 1990, and hereby agrees with the Purchaser that he will execute all necessary or incidental documents to give full force and eiTect to the sale evidenced herein and (ii) agrees to accept a conveyance of the Remainder Propel1y subject to the Restriction. 4. Except as provided in paragraph 6 hereof, the Vendor shall discharge all encumbrances and restrictions registered against title to the Property at its expense on or before the completion of this transaction. 5. This Offer to Sell is conditional upon the Vendor being satisfied with the survey that is to be prepared showing the melded property and the delineation of the lands to be conveyed to the Purchaser. This condition is insel1ed for the sole benefit of the Vendor and may be waived in writing by giving written notice to the Purchaser at their place of business no later than five (5) days from their receipt of a copy of the draft of the survey of the subject lands. 6. The Purchaser is to be allowed until September 23rd, 2009 (the "Requisition Date") to examine the title to the Propeny at his own expense and to satisfy itself that there are no outstanding orders or deficiency notices atTecting the Propel1y and that its present use may be lawfully continued. The Vendor hereby consents to govel11mental agencies releasing to Purchaser details of all outstanding orders affecting the Propeny. The Vendor agrees to execute and deliver such funher authorizations in this regard as Purchaser may reasonably require in this regard. 7. PROVIDED the title is good and free from all registered restrictions, charges, liens and encumbrances save and except for: 862 2 (a) any registered restrictions or covenants that run with the land, provided that such are complied with; (b) any municipal agreements and registered agreements with publicly regulated utilities, providing such have been complied with or security has been posted to ensure compliance and completion as evidenced by letter from the relevant municipality or utility supplier; and (c) any minor easement for the supply of domestic utility or telephone services to the Property or adjacent properties. If on or before the Requisition Date any valid objection to title or to any outstanding work order or deficiency notice and \vhich the Vendor is unable or unwilling to remove, remedy or satisfy and which Purchaser will not waive, this Agreement notwithstanding any intermediate acts or negotiations in respect of such objections, shall be at an end and all monies paid shall be returned with interest but without deduction by the Vendor to the Purchaser. Save as to any valid objection so made by such day and except for any objection going to the root of the title, the Purchaser shall be conclusively deemed to have accepted Vendor's title to the Property. 8. (a) This Agreement is condition on the Purchaser, in the Purchaser's discretion, being satisfied on or before the Requisition Date that the environmental condition of the Property will not require remediation measures to be undertaken to make it or any portion of it suitable as a cemetery or for use by members of the public as open space accessible to members of the public. This condition is for the sole benefit of the Purchaser and may be waived by the Purchaser giving the Vendor written notice that it has been waived. (b) Forthwith after the execution of this Agreement, the Vendor shall deliver to the Purchaser without cost to the Purchaser, all rep0l1s, studies or written communications that the Vendor has received from any person or has caused to be prepared dealing with the environmental condition of either the Property. TIle Vendor will permit the Purchaser, its employees, contractors and agents to enter on the Property to conduct such inspections or tests to deternline the environmental condition of the Property during regular business hours, provided that twenty-four (24) hours written notice is given to the Vendor before such entry takes place. 9. TIle Purchaser shall be credited towards the Purchase Price with the amount, if any, which it shall be necessary for the Purchaser to pay to the Minister of National Revenue in order to satisfy the Purchaser's liability in respect of tax payable by the Vendor under the non-residency provisions of the Income Tax ACI by reason of this sale. The Purchaser shall not claim such credit if the Vendor delivers on completion the prescribed certificate or the statutOlY declaration stating that the Vendor is not then a non-resident of Canada. 10. The Vendor shall deliver on the completion of this transaction additional evidence of compliance of the transaction with the Family Law ACI, R.S.O. 1990, c.F3, as amended, as the Purchaser, acting reasonably, may require. II. Except as herein expressly provided, this Agreement shall extend to and be binding upon and enure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors and assigns of tIle parties hereto. 12. THIS OFFER TO BE ACCEPTED BY THE Purchaser on or before September 22, 2009, otherwise it shall become null and void. This offer, when accepted, shall constitute a binding contract of purchase and sale and time in all respect shall be the essence of this Agreement. It is agreed that there is no representation, wan-anty, collateral agreement or condition affecting this Agreement or the Property other than as expressed herein in writing. 13. If this transaction is subject to Goods and Services Tax (G.S.T.), then such tax shall be paid in addition to the Purchase Price. The Purchaser hereby confirms that the Purchaser is a registrant under the Excise Tax Act (Canada), (Registration No. I 06979800RTOOO I). The Purchaser covenants to remit as required by the Act any G.S.T. payable in respect of the sale of the Property to the Purchaser and to indemnify the Vendor in respect of any G.S.T. so payable. The Purchaser is not 863 / ~ w w r:t: ~ tJ) z < :E ., so r~' - ~_.. -40 I' - ~.f .,," ,.. ~ '~ co m DUCHESS Easement For Access In Favour Of 5068 Main Street '. Property to be Acquired ... ,.~~~ :..-" t .~ .. (l ,. , tv w~12 S Property Location Map (Orono) -l o ::0 en "0 0)> ~- ~S' C/)(") o~ I 3 Oen CXl:J o- bI\.) <0 OJ LAND ACQUISITION Portion of 10 Duchess Street Orono . , 3 required to remit to the Vendor G.S.T. on the Closing Date. This covenant shall survive and not merge on the completion of this transaction. 14. If requested by Purchaser, Vendor will deliver any sketch or survey of the Propel1y within Vendor's control to Purchaser as soon as possible and prior to the Requisition Date. If a discharge of any Charge/M0I1gage held by a corporation incorporated pursuant to the Trust and Loan Companies Act (Canada), Chartered Bank, Trust Company, Credit Union, Caisse Populaire or Insurance Company and which is not to be assumed by Purchaser on completion, is not available in registrable fOlm on completion, Purchaser agrees to accept Vendor's la\'.')'ers personal undertaking to obtain, out of the closing funds, a discharge in registrable form and to register same on title within a reasonable period of time after completion, provided that on or before completion Vendor shall provide to Purchaser a mortgage statement prepared by the mortgagee setting out the balance required to obtain the discharge, together with a direction executed by Vendor directing payment to the mOJ1gagee of the amount required to obtain the discharge out of the balance due on completion of this transaction. 15. The Property shall remain at the risk of the Vendor until the completion of this transaction. 16. The Vendor covenants that the Propert)' \vill be in a clean condition immediately prior to the completion of this transaction. This covenant shall survive and not merge on the completion of this transaction. 17. This Agreement shall be effective to create an interest in the PropeJ1y only if Vendor complies with the subdivision control provisions of the Planning Act by completion of this transaction, and Vendor covenants to proceed diligently at her expense to obtain any necessary consent by prior to the completion of this transaction. 18. A Transfer/Deed for the Propel1y shall, save for the Land Transfer Tax Affidavit, be prepared in re'gistrable form at the expense of the Purchaser. If requested by the Purchaser, Vendor covenants that the Transfer/Deed to be delivered on completion shall contain the statements contemplated by Section 50(22) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P. I 3, as amended. 19. Where each of the Vendor and Purchaser retain a lawyer to complete this Agreement, and where the transaction will be completed by electronic registration pursuant to PaJ1 ]] of the Land Registration Reform Act, R.S.O. ] 990, Chapter L4 and the Electronic Registration Act, S.O. 1991, Chapter 44 and any amendments tbereto, the Vendor and Purchaser acknowledge and agree that the exchange of closing funds, non-registrable documents and other items (the "'Requisite Deliveries') and the release thereof to tbe Vendor and Purchaser will (a) not occur at tbe same time as the registration of the transfer/deed (and any other documents intended to be registered in connection with the completion of this transaction), and (b) be subject to conditions whereby the solicitor(s) receiving any of the Requisite Deliveries will be required to hold same in trust and not release same except in accordance with the terms of a documents registration agreement between the said solicitors, the form of which is as reconmlended from time to time by the Law Society of Upper Canada. Unless otherwise agreed to by the solicitors, such exchange of the Requisite Deliveries will occur in the applicable Land Titles Office or such other location agreeable to both solicitors. 20. On the closing of the transaction, the Vendor shall provide to the Purchaser, the Purcbaser's form of the following documents: a. Undertaking to Re-adjust b. Seclion 116 of the Income Tax Act/Family Law Act Affidavit c. Declaration of Possession d. Construction Lien Act affidavit 2 I. Any rents. mortgage interest realty taxes including local improvement rates and unmetered public or private utility charges and unmetered cost offuel, as applicable, shall be apportioned and allowed to the day of completion, the day of completion itself to be appoJ1ioned to the Purchaser. 22. Time shall in all respects be of the essence hereof provided that the time for doing or completing of any malleI' provided for herein may be extended or abridged by an agreement in writing signed by Vendor and Purchaser or by their respective lav/)'ers who are hereby specifically authorized to do so. 864 4 23. The Municipality shall prepare, at its expense, a plan of survey for the Property and a plan of survey of the property being retained by the Vendors melded with their property at 5068 Main Street, Orono. 24. Any tender of documents or money may be made on the pal1ies or their respective solicitors. 25. This Agreement shall be read with all changes of gender or number required by the context. 26. Any Notice required to be served by the Vendor upon the Purchaser pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to be good, valid and sufficient service upon the Purchaser if served personally, mailed by pre-paid registered mail or sent by facsimile transmission addressed to: Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, Ontario Ll C 3A6 Attention: David Crome, Director of Planning Services Facsimile No. (90S) 623-0830 and any notice required to be served by the Purchaser upon the Vendor pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to be good, valid and sufficient service upon the Vendor if served personally, mailed by pre-paid registered mail or sent by facsimile transmission addressed to: Kimberly-Ann and Peter Gunn 5068 Main Street Orono, ON LOB lMO or such other telefax number or address of which either pal1y has notified the other pal1y in writing. Any such notice telefaxed or mailed or delivered shall be deemed good and sufficient notice under the terms of this Agreement and if telefaxed or delivered prior to 4:30 p.m. on any business day (excluding Saturdays, Sundays and statutory holidays) shall be deemed to have been received at the time of delivery or transmission and ifmailed by pre-paid registered mail, it shall be deemed to have been received on the third business day (excluding Saturdays, Sundays and statutory holidays) following the mailing thereof. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event that it may be reasonably anticipated that due to Force Majeure any notice will not be received within the time limit set out above, then such notice shall be sent by an altemate means of trans po nation which it may reasonably be anticipated will cause the notice to be received reasonably expeditiously by the addressee. 27. For the purposes of this Agreement, the tem1 "Force Majeure" means any delay for the duration of the delay which is imposed by reason of strikes, lockouts, riots, wars or acts of military authority, acts of public enemies, sabotage, epidemics, washouts, nuclear and radiation activity or fallouts, rebellion or civil commotion, fire or explosion: Hood, wind, water, earthquakes or other casualty, or an Act of God and any act, omission or event whether of the kind herein enumerated or otherwise not within the control of the pi111ies none of which has been caused by the deliberate default or act or omission by the pal1ies and none of which has been avoidable by the exercise of reasonable eff0l1 or foresight by the parties. j~ : DATED at BO\\'l11anvi.lIe, Ontario thisL day of ~~:.r.J-.", , 2009. . ~ /. ,).."'. ) .;..' (/.., '-/~ (..//1--''- Peter Gunn . ) ...1 C'}, . I, -' '-~-k( tr\ (;i.J.'v'- . Ill\. Kimberly-Ann Gunn . )/ i/l' j /1 //,. c< ..-' . , / \Vitness / , '-'"' Witness '. { , I ' ,... ; /- /-'",:;-/ c.2;Jt~ 865 I have the authority to bind the Corporation. DATED at Bowmanville, Ontario this_ day of THE CORPORATION OF THE MUMCIPALITY OF CLARINGTON Per: Jim Abernethy, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk We have the authority to bind the Corporation. 5 ,2009. 866 /"'\llO\J11I11'-"1 n . To Report PSD-080-09 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW NO. 2009- being a By-law to authorize the purchase agreement between the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington and PETER GUNN and KIMBERLY-ANN GUNN, in respect to the purchase of a portion of 10 Duchess Street, Orono, Ontario and being more particularly described as Part of Lot 10, Block "C" e.G. Hanning's Plan, former Village of Orono, being Part of Lot 29, Concession 5, Municipality of Clarington, Regional Municipality of Durham NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. That the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington, with the Corporate Seal, a purchase agreement between Peter Gunn and Kimberly-Ann Gunn and said Corporation. BY-LAW read a first time this day of 2009 BY-LAW read a second time this day of 2009 BY-LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of 2009 Jim Abernethy, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 867 Clfllmgton REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, September 14, 2009 Report #: PSD-081-09 File #: PLN 23.5.12 By-law #: Subject: DISSOLUTION OF CLARINGTON HIGHWAY 407 COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-081-09 be received; 2. THAT the Clarington Highway 407 Community Advisory Committee be DISSOLVED; 3. THAT the members of the Clarington Highway 407 Community Advisory Committee be thanked for assisting the Municipality in the review of the Environmental Assessment for the Highway 407 East Extension; and 4. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: DaVi~IP' RPP Director of. Planning/Services /L~'./ ..... / ~ ' ~ . . '" " .--" . /'/r->j..(/.' / . c.1n,y Ii-I/ _ A~.S. Cannella, C~E.T. Director of Engineering Services /---- \ 0-_ /7 () ,,( " Reviewed b~:) l ~ l)-.)u. ''Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer Submitted by: JS/FL/sh August 24, 2009 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 868 REPORT NO.: PSD-081-09 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 Council approved the establishment of the Clarington Highway 407 Community Advisory Committee (CAC) in January 2003. The CAC has been re-established and new members appointed in January 2004 and January 2007 at the start of new terms of Council. 1.2 The Terms of Reference for the CAC, as initially approved by Council in January 2003 and re-approved in January 2004, indicate that the CAC's mandate will be to "provide advice to Clarington Council, from a community perspective, regarding the need and justification for the highway, the proposed Terms of Reference (for the EA Study), and the environmental, social, cultural and economic issues associated with the proposed highway." The Terms of Reference forthe CAC form Attachment NO.1 to this report. 1.3 CAC membership currently consists of two residents from each ward, as well as representatives from the Clarington Agricultural Advisory Committee, the Clarington Heritage Committee, and industry and business. Councillor Novak sits on the CAC as the Council liaison, and technical and administrative support is provided by Planning Services staff. Engineering Services staff attends meetings as required. 1.4 The Terms of Reference state that 'The Committee will disband upon completion of the Environmental Assessment for the Highway 407 East Completion or at such time as Council may determine." 2.0 STATUS OF 407 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STUDY 2.1 In mid-June 2009, the 407 Project Team released a Draft EA Report that documented the entire EA process for the proposed 407 East Transportation Corridor that has been underway since 2005. The Report was made available to agencies and the public for comment prior to a formal submission to the Ministry of the Environment (MOE). Council provided comments on the draft EA Report through its consideration of Staff Report PSD-075-09 (July 6, 2009 GPA meeting). 2.2 The 407 Project Team has finalized the EA Report in response to comments provided on the Draft Report. The final EA Report, which consists of both the Individual Environmental Assessment for the 407 and the Preliminary Design Study, has been submitted to MOE for the formal provincial review and approval process. The Report is available for public review from August 28th to October 16th, 2009. 2.3 Given the extensive consultation that the 407 Project Team has undertaken with various agencies, including the Municipality of Clarington, throughout the EA Study process, Staff does not expect any further major changes will be made to the planning component of the EA Study (e.g. corridor alignment). The Municipality's comments through the formal provincial review will focus primarily on technical and engineering issues such as detailed road design and traffic modelling. 869 REPORT NO.: PSD-081-09 PAGE 3 3.0 CONCLUSIONS 3.1 Over the past several years the Highway 407 CAC has provided comments on the various studies and reports prepared as part of the 407 EA Study process. Through their input and comments, the CAC has provided a valuable community perspective on the impact of the proposed transportation corridor on Clarington's residents, businesses and agricultural operations. 3.2 The planning phase of the 407 EAStudy, as documented in the Individual EA Report, has been completed. As such, the 407 CAC has fulfilled its mandate as set out in the Committee's Terms of Reference. 3.3 Should additional comments on specific functional design-related items be necessary in the future, it is anticipated that the appropriate Council advisory committee can be called upon to provide advice, such as the Clarington Heritage Committee, the Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington and/or the Traffic Management Committee. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Terms of Reference List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Jo-Anne McFarland Bradford Soles Denise Pickett John Sturdy Mark Canning Jean-Maurice Cormier Linda Gasser Mark Bragg Karina Isert AEComlTSH Ministry of Transportation 870 Attachment 1 To Report PSD-081-09 TERMS OF REFERENCE CLARINGTON HIGHWAY 407 COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE Background The Ontario Ministry of Transportation has initiated the Environmental Assessment study for the Highway 407 East Completion. The highway extension is proposed to start at the current terminus at Brock Road in Pickering and run eastward to connect with Highway 35/115 in Clarington. The section of Highway 407 through Clarington will be approximately 25 kms, As well, a 10 km north-south highway to connect Highway 407 with Highway 401 is also proposed in the vicinity of Solina Road. Due to the scale of the project through Clarington, the Highway 407 extension has the potential to significantly affect the entire community. In order to facilitate public input on the project, Clarington C?uncil is establishing a Community Advisory Committee for the Highway 407 East Extension. Mandate The Clarington Highway 407 Community Advisory Committee (CAC) will provide advice to Clarington Council, from a community perspective, regarding the need and justification for the highway, the' proposed Terms of Reference, and the environmental, social, cultural and economic issues associated with the proposed highway. Scope of Activities The Community Advisory Committee, in fulfilling its mandate, is to provide advice to Council and communicate information back to their respective stakeholder groups, where appropriate. The Committee will review information associated with the proposed highway and provide strategic advice to Council on these matters. Terms of Reference - Clarington Highway 407 Community Advisory Committee Approved - January 19, 2004 871 While individual members of the CAC may represent various interest groups, the opinions and positions taken by the members and the CAC are not binding, in whole or in part, on either Clarington Councilor the groups they represent. Membership The Community Advisory is a volunteer Committee consisting of eight citizen members, two representing each ward. Council shall seek to appoint members representing a variety of interests from across the Municipality, including, but not limited to: · residents within the study area · agriculture · industry and business · social/cultural environment · natural environment. In the event that insufficient applications are received to fill the two positions from each ward, members will be appointed from the remaining applications. Members may represent a specific committee or group. In particular, the following groups will be invited to nominate members to sit on the CAC: · Clarington Board of Trade - one member from a local BIA and one industry representative · Clarington Agricultural Advisory Committee - 1 member · Durham Regional Police Services - 1 member · LACAC - 1 member. One member of Council shall also be appointed to sit on the Committee. Staff representatives from both the Planning Services Department and the Engineering Services Department shall sit on the Committee as non-voting members. In addition, the Committee may recommend to Council that Durham Region staff, Conservation Authority staff and staff of other municipalities be invited to attend as non-voting members. Members appointed to sit on the Committee must be willing to commit the time required to understand and evaluate the information provided, as well as be open- minded to various opinions and perspectives on the Project. Terms of Reference - Clarington Highway 407 Community Advisory Committee Approved - January 19, 2004 872 Openings for membership shall be publicly advertised and all residents of the Municipality are eligible to apply., Applicants will submit applications to the Municipality of Clarington Clerk's Department. Members will be formally appointed by Council. The Council representative shall sit as the interim Chair. The Committee will select a Chair and Vice-Chair from among, its membership. The Chair shall provide leadership to the Committee, ensure that the Committee carries out its mandate, and act as the primary liaison between the Committee and Staff. If an individual member is unable to attend a meeting, he/she may request permission from the Chair to send an alternate, at least 24 hours in advance of the meeting. The Chair shall advise the Clerk of any member who is absent for three consecutive meetings, and may request that the member be removed from the Committee. The Chair shall also advise the Clerk of the resignation of any member. Council shall appoint new members to the Committee to fill any vacancies as required. Technical Support Municipal staff will provide clerical, administrative and technical assistance to the Committee. Staff and consultants, including consultants hired by the Ministry of Transportation, will share technical information and assist in the interpretation of this material. Meetings Committee meetings shall be held in the Municipal Administrative Centre. The Committee shall generally meet a minimum of once per month; however, the Chair may schedule additional meetings or cancel meetings after consulting with the other members of the Committee. The Chair shall set the agenda for each meeting in consultation with Municipal Staff. Terms of Reference - Clarington Highway 407 Community Advisory Committee Approved - January 19, 2004 873 A majority of voting members (6) shall constitute a quorum. Recommendations and decisions reached by the CAC will be based on consensus, wherever possible. In the event that a consensus cannot be reached and there are divergent opinions on issues, formal votes may be called by the Chair, with each member having one vote. Decisions will be carried by a majority of the members present. All members of the Committee will be eligible to participate in discussions related to the project. However, any member who would be directly affected by a specific issue related to the project shall refrain from voting on a motion directly related to that issue. Individual members of the Committee shall be responsible for determining whether they have a conflict of interest with respect to any issue. " ReportinQ to Council The Community Advisory group shall report to Council as follows: · The recording secretary shall submit the minutes of all Committee meetings to the Municipal Clerk for inclusion in the Council agenda for information; · All recommendations from the Committee shall be submitted to the Clerk for inclusion in the Council agenda for direction; · The Committee Chair will submit reports to Council prior to key decisions being made by Council on the proposed highway. Term of the Committee The term of the Committee shall coin'cide with the term of Council. The Committee will disband upon completion of the Environmental Assessment for the Highway 407 East Completion or at such other time as Council may determine. Terms of Reference - Clarington Highway 407 Community Advisory Committee Approved - January 19, 2004 874 CI![mgtnn REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION MEETING Date: Monday, September 14, 2009 Report #: PSD-082-09 File No's: A2009-0017 & A2009-0019 through A2009-0028 Subject: MONITORING OF THE DECISIONS OF THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR THE MEETINGS OF JULY 9, 2009, JULY 30, 2009 AND AUGUST 20, 2009. RECOMMENDA TIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: ' 1. THAT Report PSD-082-09 be received; and, 2. THAT Council concurs with the decisions of the Committee of Adjustment made on July 9, 2009, July 30, 2009 and August 20, 2009 for applications A2009-0017 and A2009- 0019 through A2009-0028 and that Staff be authorized to appear before the Ontario Municipal Board to defend the decisions of the Committee of Adjustment. Submitted by: Oav' . Crom ,M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Director of Planning Services -_\~' ~ " -..,.., ...... i, Jk, Reviewed by: \'0 I -~ /, \ Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer August 26, 2009 MK/CP/sh CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 875 REPORT NO.: PSD-082-09 PAGE 2 1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 All applications received by the Municipality for minor variance are scheduled for a hearing within 30 days of being received by the Secretary-Treasurer. The purpose of the minor variance applications and the Committee's decisions are detailed in Attachment 1. The decisions of the Committee are summarized below. DECISION OF COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR JULY 9, 2009 Ap lication Number Staff Recommendation Decision of Committee A2009-0017 A rove A roved A2009-0019 A rove A roved A2009-0020 Approve with conditions A roved with conditions A2009-0021 A rove A roved A2009-0022 A rove with conditions A roved with conditions A2009-0023 A rove with conditions A roved with conditions A2009-0024 A rove with conditions A roved with conditions DECISION OF COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR JULY 30, 2009 A lication Number Staff Recommendation Decision of Committee A2009-0025 A2009-0026 Ap rove with conditions A roved with conditions A rove with conditions A roved with conditions DECISION OF COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FOR AUGUST 20, 2009 A Iication Number Staff Recommendation Decision of Committee A2009-0027 A2009-0028 A rove A roved A prove with conditions A roved with conditions 876 REPORT NO.: PSD-082-09 PAGE 3 1.2 Application A2009-0017 was originally heard at the Committee of Adjustment meeting of June 18, 2009. The application was approved in part and tabled in part, as the applicant had later revised the application to include an existing porch located within a required interior side yard setback, The amended application was heard by the Committee on July 9, 2009, and was approved as per Staff recommendations. 1.3 Application A2009-0019 was filed to recognize an existing commercial driveway entrance and parking area which was deficient in setbacks to zone and property boundaries. The application was submitted by the applicant in order to satisfy a condition of Site Plan Approval for a proposed eat-in restaurant in Burketon. The Committee concurred with Staff's recommendations and approved the application. 1.4 Application A2009-0020 was filed to permit the conversion of an existing single detached dwelling into an accessory building by increasing the maximum permitted height and total floor area. Staff recommended that all interior plumbing be removed and that the building be disconnected from the well and septic as it could no longer be used as a dwelling unit, once converted. The Committee concurred with Staff's recommendations and approved the application with conditions. 1.5 Application A2009-0021 was filed to permit the enclosure of an existing unenclosed porch by reducing the minimum required front yard setback, and to permit the construction of an attached unenclosed deck at the rear of the dwelling by increasing the maximum permitted projection into a required rear yard. Committee concurred with Staff's recommendation and approved the application. 1.6 Applications A2009-0022, A2009-0023 and A2009-0024 were submitted by the applicant in order to satisfy conditions of a land severance application. The minor variance applications were requesting the recognition of existing site conditions in order to facilitate the creation of three (3) commercial properties located in the East Town Centre of Bowmanville. The site deficiencies included reduced drive aisle widths and reduced landscaped open space. All existing businesses on site would continue to operate in the same manner and there would be very little change to existing site conditions; therefore Staff believed the applications would have no detrimental impact on the neighbourhood. Committee concurred with Staff's recommendations and approved all three applications with conditions. 1.7 Application A2009-0025 was filed to permit the enlargement (second story addition) of a legal non-conforming use (single detached dwelling) in an "Environmental Protection (EP) Zone" subject to the condition that no additional bedrooms or plumbing fixtures are added and that the size of the residence does not exceed 200 square metres in total floor area, Committee concurred with Staff's recommendation and approved the application. 1.8 Application A2009-0026 was filed to permit the construction of a proposed detached garage by increasing the maximum allowable height from 4 metres to 4.5 metres subject to the condition that the sitting area on the south side of the detached garage remain open and unobstructed by walls, windows or doors, excluding the wall of the 877 REPORT NO.: PSD-082-09 PAGE 4 garage to which the sitting area is attached. Committee concurred with Staff's recommendation and approved the application. 1.9 Application A2009-0027 was filed to permit the construction of a livestock building by reducing the minimum required agricultural setback from four existing neighbouring dwellings. The applicant was proposing to replace an existing livestock! hay storage building, with a new building having the same capacity for livestock as the existing. The proposed location of the new livestock met the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs' Minimum Distance Separation guidelines and therefore Staff believed the proposed variance was minor in nature and meeting the intent of the Zoning By-law. Committee concurred with Staff's recommendations and approved the application. 1.10 Application A2009-0028 was filed to permit the construction of a liquid manure storage tank and the expansion of an existing livestock barn by reducing the minimum required agricultural setback in both Zoning By-law 84-63 and Zoning By-law 2005-109, as well as provincial Minimum Distance Separation from two existing neighbouring dwellings. During the review of the application it was discovered that two farm buildings (hoop and tarp structures) had been constructed in 2004 without a building permit. It was made a condition of this variance that building permits be taken out for these two structures, Committee concurred with Staff's recommendations and approved the application, COMMENTS 2.1 Staff have reviewed the Committee's decisions and are satisfied that applications A2009-0017 and A2009-0019 through A2009-0028 are in conformity with both Official Plan policies, consistent with the intent of the Zoning By-law, are minor in nature and desirable. 2.2 Council's concurrence with the decisions of the Committee of Adjustment for applications A2009-0017 and A2009-0019 through A2009-0028 is required in order to afford Staff official status before the Ontario Municipal Board in the event of an appeal of any decision of the Committee of Adjustment. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Periodic Report for the Committee of Adjustment (July 9, 2009) Attachment 2 - Periodic Report for the Committee of Adjustment (July 30, 2009) Attachment 3 - Periodic Report for the Committee of Adjustment (August 20, 2009) 878 Attachment 1 To Report PSD-082-09 Cl!Jl.WglOn PERIODIC REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICANT: OWNER: JEFF KELSO JEFF KELSO PROPERTY LOCATION: 34 SILVER STREET, BOWMANVILLE PART LOT 12, CONCESSION 1 FORMER TOWN OF BOWMANVILLE FILE NO.: A2009-0017 PURPOSE: TO PERMIT THE EXISTING UNENCLOSED PORCH (CONCRETE PAD NOT . DEMOLISHED) IN THE INTERIOR SIDE YARD BY INCREASING THE MAXIMUM UNENCLOSED PORCH PROJECTION FROM 1.5 METRES TO 2.1 METRES; AND BY DECREASING THE REQUIRED (INTERIOR) SIDE YARD MINIMUM SETBACK FROM 1.2 METRES TO 0.9 METRES. DECISION OF COMMITTEE: TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO PERMIT THE INCREASE OF THE MAXIMUM UNENCLOSED PORCH (CONCRETE ,PAD) PROJECTION INTO THE WESTERLY INTERIOR SIDE YARD FROM 1.5 METRES TO 2.1 METRES; AND TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM INTERIOR SIDE YARD SETBACK FROM 1.2 METRES TO 0.9 METRES, TO PERMIT THE CREATION OF THE NEW RESIDENTIAL LOT WITH ITS EXISTING SEMI- DETACHED RESIDENTIAL BUILDING, AS IT IS MINOR IN NATURE, MEETS THE INTENT OF THE ZONING BY-LAW AND BOTH OFFICIAL PLANS, AND IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE NEIGHBOURHOOD. DATE OF DECISION: July 9,2009 LAST DAY OF APPEAL: July 29, 2009 879 Cl!Jl-!nglOn. PERIODIC REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT FILE NO.: KARIN DIETER KARIN DIETER 10249 OLD SCUGOG ROAD, BURKETON PART LOT 19, CONCESSION 10 FORMER TOWN(SHIP) OF DARLINGTON A2009-0019 APPLICANT: OWNER: PROPERTY LOCATION: PURPOSE: TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN EAT-IN RESTAURANT BY REDUCING THE SIZE OF THE REQURIED LOADING SPACE FROM 4 METRES X 11 METRES TO 3 METRES X 7.5 METRES. TO PERMIT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A COMMERICIAL DRIVEWAY AND PARKING AREA BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM SETBACK FROM THE SOUTHERLY SIDE LOT LINE BOUNDARY ABUTTING A RURAL SETILEMENT (RS) ZONE FOR THE DRIVEWAY FROM 7.5 METRES TO 4 METRES, FOR THE PORTION OF THE DRIVEWAY AND PARKING AREA LOCATED EAST OF THE EXITING REAR BUILDING LINE FROM 7.5 METRES TO 1.5 METRES AND FOR THE PORTION OF THE DRIVEWAY LOCATED WITHIN 5 METRES OF THE MUNICIPAL ROAD ALLOWANCE FROM 7.5 METRES TO 1.5 METRES. TO PERMIT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A COMMERCIAL ENTRANCE BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM REQUIRED SETBACK FROM THE BOUNDARY OF THE SOUTHERLY SIDE LOT LINE BOUNDARY OF A RESIDENTIAL ZONE FROM 7.5 METRES TO 1.5 METRES DECISION OF COMMITTEE: TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN EAT-IN RESTAURANT BY REDUCING THE SIZE OF THE REQUIRED LOADING SPACE FROM 4 METRES X 11 METRES TO 3 METRES X 7.5 METRES; TO PERMIT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY AND PARKING AREA BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM SETBACK FROM THE SOUTHERLY SIDE LOT LINE BOUNDARY ABUTTING A RURAL SETTLEMENT (RS) ZONE FOR THE DRIVEWAY FROM 7.5 METRES TO 4 METRES, FOR THE PORTION OF THE DRIVEWAY AND PARKING AREA LOCATED EAST OF THE EXISTING REAR BUILDING LINE FROM 7.5 METRES TO 1.5 METRES AND FOR THE PORTION OF THE DRIVEWAY LOCATED WITHIN 5 METRES OF THE MUNICIPAL ROAD ALLOWANCE FROM 7.5 METRES TO 1.5 METRES (UNDER ZONING BY-LAW 2005-109) AND TO PERMIT THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A COMMERCIAL ENTRANCE BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM ,REQUIRED SETBACK FROM THE SOUTHERLY SIDE LOT LINE BOUNDARY OF A RESIDENTIAL ZONE FROM 7.5 METRES TO 1.5 METRES (UNDER ZONING BY-LAW 84-63) AS IT IS MINOR IN NATURE, MEETS THE INTENT OF THE ZONING BY-LAW AND BOTH OFFICIAL PLANS, AND IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE NEIGHBOURHOOD. DATE OF DECISION: LAST DAY OF APPEAL: July 9, 2009 July 29, 2009 880 CllJ!.mglOn PERIODIC REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICANT: OWNER: BRENDA ALGAR GRANT ALGAR PROPERTY LOCATION: 4327 FICES ROAD, DARLINGTON PART LOT 34, CONCESSION 4 FORMER TOWN(SHIP) OF DARLINGTON A2009-0020 FILE NO.: PURPOSE: TO PERMIT THE CONVERSION OF A SINGLE DETACHED DWELLING TO AN ACCESSORY BUILDING (STORAGE BUILDING) BY INCREASING THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED HEIGHT FROM 4.5 METRES TO 5.5 METRES AND BY INCREASING THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED FLOOR AREA FOR AN ACCESSORY BUILDING FROM 120 SQUARE METRES TO 144 SQUARE METRES. DECISION OF COMMITTEE: TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO PERMIT THE CONVERSION OF THE SINGLE DETACHED DWELLING TO AN ACCESSORY BUILDING (STORAGE BUILDING) BY INCREASING THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED HEIGHT FROM 4.5 METRES TO 5.5 METRES AND BY INCREASING THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED FLOOR AREA FOR AN ACCESSORY BUILDING FROM 120 M2 TO 144 M2, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: - THAT ALL FIXTURES AND EXPOSED PLUMBING BE REMOVED FROM THE FIRST AND SECOND FLOORS OF THE BUILDING, ALL FIXTURES AND ALL PLUMBING IN THE BASEMENT BE REMOVED FROM THE BUILDING AND KITCHEN FIXTURES AND APPLIANCES BE REMOVED FROM THE BUILDING, UPON OCCUPATION OF THE NEW DWELLING AND THAT IT BE DISCONNECTED FROM THE WELL AND SEPTIC SYSTEM AND - THAT A BUILlDNG PERMIT BE rSSUED, WHERE REQUIRED, FOR ALTERATIONS MADE IN CONVERTING THE DWELLING TO AN ACCESSORY BUILDING, AS IT IS MINOR IN NATURE, MEETS THE INTENT OF THE ZONING BY-LAW AND BOTH OFFICIAL PLANS, AND IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE NEIGHBOURHOOD DATE OF DECISION: July 9, 2009 LAST DAY OF APPEAL: July 29, 2009 881 Cl!Jl-mgron PERIODIC REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICANT: OWNER: DARWOOD HOMES AND RENOS JOHN SURRIER PROPERTY LOCATION: 32 ODELL STREET, BOWMANVILLE PART LOT 12, CONCESSION 2 FORMER TOWN(SHIP) OF BOWMANVILLE A2009-0021 FILE NO.: PURPOSE: TO PERMIT THE CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING UNENCLOSED PORCH INTO AN ENCLOSED PORCH BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 4.5 M TO 3 M & TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN UNENCLOSED ATTACHED DECK BY INCREASING THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED PROJECTION INTO THE REQUIRED REAR YARD FROM 1.5 M TO 3.25 M. DECISION OF COMMITTEE: TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO PERMIT THE CONVERSION OF AN EXISTING UNENCLOSED PORCH INTO AN ENCLOSED PORCH BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK FROM 4.5 METRES TO 3 METRES AND TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN UNENCLOSED ATTACHED DECK BY INCREASING THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED PROJECTION INTO THE REQUIRED REAR YARD FROM 1.5 METRES TO 3.25 METRES, AS IT IS MINOR IN NATURE, MEETS THE INTENT OF THE ZONING BY-LAW AND BOTH OFFICIAL PLANS, AND IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE NEIGHBOURHOOD. DATE OF DECISION: July 9,2009 LAST DAY OF APPEAL: July 29,2009 882 CIlJ!.mgron PERIODIC REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICANT: OWNER: TUNNEY PLANNING INC MORANDA JAMES VENTURES PROPERTY LOCATION: 181 CHURCH STREET, BOWMANVILLE PART LOT 1?, CONCESSION 1 FORMER TOWN(SHIP) OF BOWMANVILLE A2009-0022 FILE NO.: PURPOSE: TO PERMIT THE CREATION OF A NEW LOT BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM WIDTH OF THE LOADING SPACE DRIVE AISLE FROM 6 METRES TO 3.5 METRES AND BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM LANDSCAPE OPEN SPACE FROM 10% TO 8%. DECISION OF COMMITTEE: TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO PERMIT THE CREATION OF A NEW LOT BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM WIDTH OF THE LOADING SPACE DRIVE AISLE FROM 6 METRES TO 3.5 METRES AND BY REDUCING THE LANDSCAPED OPEN SPACE FROM 10% TO 8%, PROVIDING THAT THE GROSS COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA DOES NOT EXCEED 300 M2, AS IT IS MINOR IN NATURE, MEETS THE INTENT OF THE ZONING BY-LAW AND BOTH OFFICIAL PLANS AND IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE NEIGHBOURHOOD. DATE OF DECISION: July 9,2009 LAST DAY OF APPEAL: July 29, 2009 883 Clw:ilJglOn PERIODIC REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICANT: OWNER: TUNNEY PLANNING INC MORANDAJAMESVENTURES PROPERTY LOCATION: 14 SILVER STREET, BOWMANVILLE PART LOT 12, CONCESSION 1 FORMER TOWN(SHIP) OF BOWMANVILLE A2009-0023 FILE NO.: PURPOSE: TO PERMIT THE CREATION OF A NEW LOT BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM WIDTH OF A DRIVE AISLE FROM 6 METRES TO 4.2 METRES FOR ACCESS VIA THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND FROM 6 METRES TO 3.5 METRES FOR ACCESS VIA THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, AND BY ELIMINATING THE REQUIRED LOADING SPACE, AND BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM LANDSCAPED OPEN SPACE FROM 10% T02%. DECISION OF COMMITTEE: TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO PERMIT THE CREATION OF A NEW LOT BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM WIDTH OF A DRIVE AISLE FROM 6 METRES TO 4.2 METRES FOR ACCESS VIA THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND FROM 6 METRES TO 3.5 METRES FOR ACCESS VIA THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, AND BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM LANDSCAPED OPEN SPACE FROM 10% TO 2%, AND THAT THE VARIANCE TO ELIMINATE THE REQUIRED LOADING SPACE BE APPROVED SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT THE GROSS COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA SHALL NOT EXCEED 100 M2, AS IT IS MINOR IN NATURE, MEETS THE INTENT OF THE ZONING BY-LAW AND BOTH OFFICIAL PLANS, AND IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE NEIGHBOURHOOD. DATE OF DECISION: LAST DAY OF APPEAL: July 9, 2009 July 29, 2009 884 Cl!JlmglOn PERIODIC REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICANT: OWNER: TUNNEY PLANNING INC MORANDA JAMES VENTURES PROPERTY LOCATION: 12 SILVER STREET, BOWMANVILLE PART LOT 12, CONCESSION 1 FORMER TO,WN(SHIP) OF BOWMANVILLE A2009-0024 FILE NO.: PURPOSE: TO PERMIT THE CREATION OF A NEW LOT BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM WIDTH OF THE DRIVE AISLE FROM 6 METRES TO 4.5 METRES FOR ACCESS TO THE PARKING SPACES VIA THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND FROM 6 METRES TO 4 METRES FOR ACCESS TO THE LOADING SPACE VIA THE EAST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, AND BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM LANDSCAPE OPEN SPACE FROM 10% TO 6%. DECISION OF COMMITTEE: TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO PERMIT THE CREATION OF A NEW LOT BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM WIDTH OF THE DRIVE AISLE FROM 6 METRES TO 4.5 METRES FOR ACCESS TO THE PARKING SPACES VIA THE WEST PROPERTY LINE, AND FURTHER, TO PERMIT THE REDUCTION FROM 6 METRES TO 4 METRES FOR ACCESS TO THE LOADING SPACE VIA THE SILVER STREET ENTRANCE, AND BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM LANDSCAPED OPEN SPACE FROM 10% TO 6% SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: - THAT THE COMMERCIAL FLOOR AREA AVAILABLE ON-SITE DOES NOT EXCEED 300 M2 AND - THAT THE LANDSCAPING LOCATED IN THE FRONT YARD BE MAINTAINED AT A HEIGHT NO GREATER THAN 0.75 METRES, AS IT IS MINOR IN NATURE, MEETS THE INTENT OF THE ZONING BY-LAW AND BOTH OFFICIAL PLANS, AND IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE NEIGHBOURHOOD DATE OF DECISION: LAST DAY OF APPEAL: July 9, 2009 July 29, 2009 885 Attachment 2 To Report PSD-082-09 Cl!Jl-mglOn PERIODIC REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICANT: OWNER: MIKE LAWITZKI MIKE LAWITZKI PROPERTY LOCATION: 7245 CARSCADDEN ROAD, CLARKE PART LOT 14, CONCESSION 7 FORMER TOWN(SHIP) OF CLARKE FILE NO.: A2009-0025 PURPOSE: TO PERMIT THE ENLARGEMENT (SECOND STOREY ADDITION) OF A LEGAL NON- CONFORMING USE (SINGLE DETACHED DWELLING) IN AN "ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (EP) ZONE", DECISION OF COMMITTEE: TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO PERMIT THE ENLARGEMENT (SECOND STORY ADDITION) OF A LEGAL NON-CONFORMING USE (SINGLE DETACHED DWELLING) IN AN "ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (EP) ZONE", SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT NO ADDITIONAL BEDROOMS OR PLUMBING FIXTURES ARE ADDED AND THAT THE SIZE OF THE RESIDENCE DOES NOT EXCEED 200 M2 IN TOTAL FLOOR AREA AS IT MEETS THE INTENT OF THE ZONING BY-LAW AND OFFICIAL PLAN, IS MINOR IN NATURE AND NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE NEIGHBOURHOOD. DATE OF DECISION: July 30,2009 LAST DAY OF APPEAL: August 19, 2009 886 Clw:.mgron PERIODIC REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICANT: OWNER: MYLES MCCAUL MYLES MCCAUL PROPERTY LOCATION: 127 BALDWIN STREET, NEWCASTLE VILLAGE PART LOT 29, CONCESSION 1 FORMER TOWN(SHIP) OF CLARKE A2009-0026 ", FILE NO.: PURPOSE: TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED GARAGE BY INCREASING THE MAXIMUM PERMITTED HEIGHT FROM 4 METRES TO 4.5 METRES. DECISION OF COMMITTEE: TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A PROPOSED DETACHED GARAGE BY INCREASING THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE HEIGHT FROM 4 M TO 4.5 M SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT THE SITTING AREA ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE DETACHED GARAGE REMAIN OPEN AND UNOBSTRUCTED BY WALLS, WINDOWS OR DOORS, EXCLUDING THE WALL OF THE GARAGE TO WHICH THE SITTING AREA IS ATTACHED AS IT MEETS THE INTENT OF THE ZONING BY-LAW AND' OFFICIAL PLAN AND IS MINOR IN NATURE AND NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE NEIGHBOURHOOD. DATE OF DECISION: July 30, 2009' LAST DAY OF APPEAL: August 19, 2009 887 Attachment 3 To Report PSD-032-09 Cl!J!.mgron PERIODIC REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICANT: OWNER: ADOLF SCHLACHT ADOLF SCHLACHT PROPERTY LOCATION: 3625 CONCESSION RD 7, CLARKE PART LOT 26, CONCESSION 6 FORMER TOWN(SHIP) OF CLARKE FILE NO.: A2009-0027 PURPOSE: TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A LIVESTOCK BUILDING BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM REQUIRED AGRICULTURAL SETBACK FROM 300 METRES TO 232 METRES FROM THE NEAREST DWELLING AT 3624 CONCESSION ROAD 7, FROM 300 METRES TO 185 METRES FROM THE NEAREST DWELLING AT 3643 CONCESSION ROAD 7, FROM 300 METRES TO 224 METRES FROM THE NEAREST DWELLING AT 3649 CONCESSION ROAD 7 AND FROM 300 METRES TO 275 METRES TO THE NEAREST DWELLING AT 3653 CONCESSION ROAD 7. DECISION OF COMMITTEE: TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A LIVESTOCK BUILDING BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM REQUIRED AGRICULTURAL SETBACK FROM 300 METRES TO 232 METRES FROM THE NEAREST DWELLING AT 3624 CONCESSION ROAD 7, FROM 300 METRES TO 185 METRES FROM THE NEAREST DWELLING AT 3643 CONCESSION ROAD 7, FROM 300 METRES TO 224 METRES FROM THE NEAREST DWELLING AT 3649 CONCESSION ROAD 7 AND FROM 300 METRES TO 275 METRES TO THE NEAREST DWELLING AT 3653 CONCESSION ROAD 7, AS IT MEETS THE INTENT OF BOTH OFFICIAL PLANS AND THE ZONING BY-LAW, IS CONSIDERED MINOR IN NATURE AND IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE NEIGHBOURHOOD DATE OF DECISION: LAST DAY OF APPEAL: August 20, 2009 September 9., 2009 888 CllJ!.mglOn PERIODIC REPORT FOR THE COMMITTEE OF ADJUSTMENT APPLICANT: OWNER: MORGAN DONNERAL JAMES MILLSON PROPERTY LOCATION: 1886 CONCESSION RD 7, DARLINGTON PART LOT 25, CONCESSION 7 FORMER TOWN(SHIP) OF DARLINGTON A2009-0028 FILE NO.: PURPOSE: TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MANURE STORAGE FACILITY (CONCRETE LIQUID MANURE TANK) BY REDUCING THE MIN REQUIRED AGRICULTURAL SETBACK IN BY-LAW 84-63 FROM 300 M TO 190 M FROM THE DWELLING AT 1893 CONCESSION ROAD 7, AND FROM 300 M TO 240 M FROM THE DWELLING AT 1925 CONCESSION ROAD 7; TO PERMIT THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING LIVESTOCK FACILITY (DAIRY BARN) BY REDUCING THE MIN REQUIRED AGRICULTURAL SETBACK IN BY-LAW 84-63 FROM 300 M TO 125 M FROM THE DWELLING AT 1893 CONCESSION ROAD 7, AND FROM 300 M TO 175 M FROM THE DWELLING AT 1925 CONCESSION ROAD 7; AND TO PERMIT THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING LIVESTOCK FACILITY (DAIRY BARN) BY REDUCING THE MIN REQUIRED SEPARATION BETWEEN A LIVESTOCK FACILITY AND THE DWELLING AT 1893 CONCESSION ROAD 7 FROM 179 M TO 125 M, AND THE DWELLING AT 1925 CONCESSION ROAD 7 FROM 179 M TO 175 M REQUIRED IN BY- LAW 2005-109. DECISION OF COMMITTEE: TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION TO PERMIT THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MANURE STORAGE FACILITY (CONCRETE LIQUID MANURE TANK) BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM REQUIRED AGRICULTURAL SETBACK IN BY-LAW 84-63 FROM 300 METRES TO 190 METRES FROM THE DWELLING AT 1893 CONCESSION ROAD 7, AND FROM 300 METRES TO 240 METRES FROM THE DWELLING AT 1925 CONCESSION ROAD 7; TO PERMIT THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING LIVESTOCK FACILITY (DAIRY BARN) BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM REQUIRED AGRICULTURAL SETBACK IN BY-LAW 84-63 FROM 300 METRES TO 125 METRES FROM THE DWELLING AT 1893 CONCESSION ROAD 7, AND FROM 300 METRES TO 175 METRES FROM THE DWELLING AT 1925 CONCESSION ROAD 7; AND TO PERMIT THE EXPANSION OF AN EXISTING LIVESTOCK FACILITY (DAIRY BARN) BY REDUCING THE MINIMUM DISTANCE SEPARATION (MDS II) BETWEEN A LIVESTOCK FACILITY AND THE DWELLING AT 1893 CONCESSION ROAD 7 FROM 179 METRES TO 125 METRES, AND THE DWELLING AT 1925 CONCESSION ROAD 7 FROM 300 METRES TO 175 METRES REQUIRED IN BY-LAW 2005-109, SUBJECT TO THE CONDITION THAT THE OWNER OBTAIN BUILDING PERMITS FOR BUILDINGS 5 AND 6 AS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN AND CONSTRUCTED IN 2004 WITHOUT A PERMIT, WITHIN 180 DAYS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HOLDING SYMBOL BEING REMOVED, AS IT MEETS THE INTENT OF BOTH OFFICIAL PLANS AND THE ZONING BY- LAW, IS CONSIDERED MINOR IN NATURE AND IS NOT DETRIMENTAL TO THE NEIGHBOURHOOD. DATE OF DECISION: August 20,2009 LAST DAY OF APPEAL: September 9,2009 889 Cl![-!nglon REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: Date: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Monday, September 14, 2009 Report #: PSD-083-09 File #: ZBA 2008-0023 By-law #: Subject: APPLlCA liON FOR REMOVAL OF HOLDING OWNER: PRESlONVALE ROAD LAND CORPORTATION RECOMMENDA TIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-083-09 be received; 2. THAT the application submitted by Prestonvale Road Land Corporation, to remove the Holding (H) symbol on Lot 54, Plan 40M-2391 be APPROVED; 3. THAT the attached By-law to remove the Holding (H) symbol be PASSED and that the Region of Durham be forwarded a copy of this report; and 4. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: ~ Davi . Creme, MCIP, RPP Director, Planning Services ~\ /r~ Reviewed by;-/ ~~ ' . G'L Franklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer L T/df 26 August 2009 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 890 REPORT NO.: PSD-083-09 PAGE 2 1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Applicant: Prestonvale Road Land Corporation 1.2 Rezoning: Removal of Holding (H) symbol from "Holding - Urban Residential Exception (H) R2-63" 1.3 Location: Part Lot 33, Concession 2, former Township of Darlington (Schedule A to Attachment 1 ) 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 On October 6, 2008, Staff received an application from D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited for the Removal of the Holding (H) symbol for the lands within the limits of Draft Plan of Subdivision S-C-2007-0003 located on Part Lot 33, Concession 2, former Township of Darlington (Courtice). 2.2 Council, at their January12, 2009 meeting, endorsed the recommendation of Staff Report PSD-008-09 and approved the Zoning By-law Amendment to remove the Holding (H) symbol from the subject lands with the exception of Lots 39 to 41; Lots 50 to 52 and Blocks 56 and 57, all as shown on the Draft Plan of Subdivision S-C-2007 -0003. 2.3 Lots 39 to 41; 50 to 52 and Blocks 56 and 57, located on either side of Oke Road were proposed to be used temporarily as stormwater management facilities to deal with water quality and quantity. The stormwater created within the limits of the Draft Plan of Subdivision is ultimately dealt with in ponds to be constructed downstream south of the Draft Plan of Subdivision. The temporary use of the lots and/or blocks for Stormwater Management Facilities to the satisfaction of the Director of Engineering Services was acknowledged within the Subdivision Agreement registered on title. 2.4 The developer has subsequently provided additional information to Engineering Services staff confirming that Block 57 is not required in the design and use of said lands for the temporary facility. As such, a request was made to allow a building permit to be issued for the lands comprising Slock 57, now shown as Lot 54 on Plan 40M-2391. 2.5 Engineering Services staff are now satisfied with the supporting information provided and would have no objection to releasing Block 57 for the issuance of a building permit. 891 REPORT NO.: PSD-083-09 PAGE 3 3.0 STAFF COMMENTS 3.1 The removal of holding application is being brought forward by the applicant at this time, as a subdivision agreement (Subdivision File No.: S-C-2007-0003) has been executed for the subject lands and Authorization to Commence has been issued. 3.2 Building permits have been issued for the other lots within Plan 40M-2391 inasmuch as registration of the plan of subdivision has occurred and the Municipality is satisfied that all performance guarantees, cash-in-lieu of parkland and development charges have been received by the Municipality of Clarington. 3.3 Policies within the Municipality of Clarington's Official Plan permit the use of holding symbols to ensure that prior to development the following matters are addressed and approved to the satisfaction of the Municipality: · Services and municipal works including roads; . Submission of technical studies; · Measures to mitigate the impact of development; · Execution of appropriate agreements; and/or · Any other requirements as may be deemed necessary by Council including the implementation of the policies of this plan. The approval of a By-law to remove the Holding (H) symbol from Lot 54 on Plan 40M-2391 is appropriate at this time, as the provisions within the Municipality's Official Plan have been satisfied. 3.4 It is noted that pursuant to Section 36 of the Planning Act, a By-law Amendment to remove the "Holding (H)" symbol is not subject to the normal appeal period afforded to a standard rezoning application and accordingly shall be deemed final and binding upon Council's approval. 4.0 CONCLUSION 4.1 In consideration of the comments noted above, approval of the removal of the "Holding (H)" symbol as shown on the attached By-law and Schedule (Attachment 1) is recommended. Attachments: Attachment 1 - By-law for Removal of "Holding (H)" symbol List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Prestonvale Road Land Corporation 892 , H U.,A vi III ICI Il I To Report PSD-083-09 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW NO. 2009- being a By-law to amend By-law 84-63, the Comprehensive Zoning By-law 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 to implement ZBA 2008-0023; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. Schedule "4" to By-law 84-63, as amended, is hereby further amended by changing the zone designation from: "Holding - Urban Residential Exception ((H) R2-63) Zone" to "Urban Residential Exception (R2-63) Zone" as illustrated on the attached Schedule "A" hereto. 2. Schedule "A" hereto shall form part of the By-law. 3. This By-law shall come into effect on the date of the passing hereof, subject to the provisions of Sections 34 and 36 of the Planning Act. BY-LAW read a first time this day of 2009 BY-LAW read a second time this day of 2009 BY-LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of 2009 Jim Abernethy, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 893 _._.-.~_._-_._----_._-~_._-_._-_._--~_.._-_._--------~-~'---"--~-- This is Schedule "A" to By-law 2009- __, passed this __~ day of ____-' 2009 A.D. ---~_._.._~_._----~-.~._~-_._-_._._---_.~-_._--- ~ ~ I OKE ROAD __ ______ j09.9.2: --------_ 2C13:- t ) 2uOO :.ES17 - ._1 CD "" r- z ~ 0 "' G: " c- O L.' ~- C ^ ~ 0) ~ >- "" r, )> ~ C t; s ~~ lL ct , E (JOE CJ1 ~ L,' '-." 0- LT. (-!! C'. (r :'"'-) c r: C CJ1 N r I tl l..... C LT. c..~ c~, l.( C c- ". c ~. CJ1 tv 4C'f-- 1:.9': 12002 i 1 / 644 ~ Zoning Change From "(H)R2-63" To "R2-63" J Jim Abernethy, Mayor Potti L. Barrie. Municipal Clerk ~ ~ C:j 'Y J~ g; ct Courtice ZBA 2008-0023 894 Cl!J!ington REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, September 14, 2009 Report #: PSD-084-09 File #: COPA2007-0007, By-law #: ZBA2007-0026 & SPA2007-0021 Subject: ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD DECISION ON OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT AND SITE PLAN CONTROL APPLICATION, FILES COPA2007-0007, ZBA2007-0026, SPA2007-0021 APPELLANT: ADESA/IMPACT AUTO AUCTION CANADA CORP. RECOMMENDA TIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-084-09 be received for information. Submitted by: Da id . Crome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services Reviewed by: ~=) fu~C~ ~ (~~ Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer SA/CP/df 2 September 2009 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 895 REPORT NO.: PSD-084-09 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 On May 4, 2007, Adesa/lmpact Auto submitted applications to the Municipality of Clarington for the development of a motor vehicle auction at 1550 Trulls Road. As part of the proposed development they require extensive outdoor storage of the motor vehicles and thus requested an amendment to the policies of the General Industrial Area designation to increase the outdoor storage permitted from 50% to 70% of a 19 ha property. 1.2 A decision was made on April 7, 2008 by Clarington Council to deny the Official Plan amendment and Zoning By-law amendment applications. Council found the development to be inappropriate development for the Courtice Industrial Area; the applicant had not represented their applications accurately; and there is potential for environmental issues. 1.3 The applicant's subsequently appealed Council's decision on the Official Plan amendment and Zoning By-law amendment to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB). The applicant also appealed the site plan application, which did not require a Council decision, to the OMS and have requested the Board hold a consolidated hearing to hear all the applications as a whole. 2.0 ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD 2.1 At a pre-hearing conference in September 2008 an issues list, containing eight (8) issues was arbitrated by the Board. The main issues were: full disclosure of the use; stigmatization on future development in the Courtice Employment Area; the adverse impact on the timing and type of development; the intensity of the development with regard to the Provincial Policy Statement, Growth Plan and Official Plans; provision of collector roads; the impact on future servicing in the Courtice Employment Area; impacts of the lack long term environmental planning (due to lack of disclosure); and did the proposed development represent good planning. 2.2 The Ontario Municipal Board Hearing commenced on May 12, 2009, and sat two to three days each week, ending on June 17,2009 for a total of 13 days. The Municipality was represented by Nick Macos and Dennis Hefferon and were supported by a team of expert witnesses, including Municipal staff, Conservation Authority staff, and consultants. 2.3 Two local residents also attended the OMB hearing with participant status. As participants the residents were able to present statements to the Board on issues of importance to them regarding the case. Participant status may be given to persons who did not give an oral or written submission to Council previously. Decision: 2.4 The Board found, with respect to full disclosure on the application, that incorrect information was provided and that the applicant's environmental consultant took no 896 REPORT NO.: PSD-084-09 PAGE 3 steps to correct the assumptions used by the Municipality's environmental consultant in the Environmental Impact Study. 2.5 Further, the Board found that the low intensity use proposed would not be consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement, nor conform to the Growth Plan which promotes greater densities (for industrial uses also) in Greenfield Areas. The Board determined that this use may be more appropriately located in the outer ring of the Greater Golden Horseshoe (municipalities such as Barrie, Peterborough, Kawartha Lakes, etc.). The outer ring has less restrictive density targets. 2.6 On other issues the Board ruled that: As per the Municipality's Official Plan, if would be reasonable that the proposal proceed by plan of subdivision to accommodate the proposed collector roads; · The approval of this use would promote clustering of auto-related uses such as Dom's, Copart, Manheims etc., to the exclusion of other industrial uses; Approval of the development would have an adverse impact on the progression of municipal servicing of these lands. 2.7 The related site plan application was deferred at the start of the hearing, until the resolution of the Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments. As such, with the denial of the appeals by Impact Auto for the Official Plan and Zoning Amendments, the Board ordered the denial of the site plan application also. 2.8 The Board's ruling is important for Clarington and all Greater Golden Horseshoe municipalities in that it states that these types of uses, low intensity and land extensive, do not conform with the Growth Plan; 'Greenfield' policies the Province has set out for the inner ring municipalities. Industrial uses using extensive land areas and having low employment rates are not considered supportive of the Province's objectives expressed through the Growth Plan. A copy of the Board's decision is attached. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Key Map Attachment 2 - OMB Decision 897 MllcH..IIIIICIIl I To Report PSD-084-09 c:i. .. o U ca " - ca g c: ._ ca- U g c:< .g 0 - - u ~ :J< <- ca CJ en IV Q) C. " E <::::. - c: Q) E " c: ,... Q) o E 0< o c: I IV ~o. o '" N 'u <(IE ~O o c: o 0 - C) c: 'C .!! u t- Z W :E (CO NZ OW o:E 1< ,... g~ N..J . <e> mm Nt:) ~ Z o N CD u 1: ~ o o Q, III ~ c: o ; III U o ...J >. t:: II) Q, o ... Q. I- W W a:: I- U) a:: o g CD .... c: '" ,~ Q. D. < ~ ~ LOT 3 0 I TRU~AD 1-1- -- - ,--- =: Y!lffiMl~m;~ffiI.~~ -n'~ -- ".','..:' 't::,,'.. ~:-.- ir~~n~ ~~~/ijill~~IL~ ~~-:;~~~:~ ....~~~..-., =r\ll~~ --- _~~- . rTf'f'i'~~11 /C '''01, , -,.;;;.;r.;t;;j;. ~ " ""'.", I I OOOO~Hi1~~ s.,,:.s:.~B~lJ!! '~TL'" ~~ 00 00 1II!li 00 00 ~... .-. -.- · _. - "":f'"" .... . I \ ~ : I,ll I'II~J I .'k!"" ll.' .roo_mo : III -7 ~~1"'!- "" c: :''''i<uv ....'''". ' , . - . ~ if! I P- 1ST. N 1 II II 7 - :l,r. 0 i' , !.... I'D' 'j) [)a;7, '"",,', ft- ~~ ~ I:- ~ ~..: - ,,,,,,, ,,1Ill\Y'l/fIijl, " . . ~ I v ,..;;,::.-- . II II I, II . c . - ~ IE . . ; ~ . . ~ . . . m l- . . . ~ L_~ I I I +-J J N S T. "'. G, 1 . 1 :! "II - SIC 0 N II L Y L 0 1 3 1 CONCESSION J N 5 T. N o. 1 ~ I :I " e - T B r II II l Y LOT 3 2 898 Attachment 2 To Report PSD-084-09 ISSUE DATE: July 21, 2009 ~JM ~ Ontario Ontario Municipal Board Commission des affaires municipales de 1'0ntario MM080016 ADESA Auctions Canada Corporation and Impact Auto Auctions Ltd. have appealed to the Ontario Municipal Soard under subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, from Council's refusal or neglect to enact an Official Plan Amendment for an automotive remarketing, auction and logistics facility (Approval Authority File No. COPA2007. 007) OMS File No. PLOB0622 ADESA Auctions Canada Corporation and Impact Auto Auctions Ltd. have appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board under subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990. c. P.13. as amended, from Council's refusal or neglect to enact a proposed amendment to Zoning By-law 84-63 for the Municipality of Clarington to rezone lands respecting 1550 Trulls Road from Agricultural (A) to an appropriate zone to permit the proposed development OMS File No. PL080623 ADESA Auctions Canada Corporation and Impact Auto Auctions Ltd. have referred to the Ontario Municipal Board under subsection 41(12) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13. as amended, determination and settlement of details of a site plan for lands composed of 1550 Trulls Road, in the Municipality of Clarington OMB File No. MM080016 APPEARANCES: Parties Counsel ADESA Auctions Canada Corporation and Impact Auto Auctions Ltd. M. Flynn-Guglietti and A. Warman Municipality of Cia rington N. Macos, D. Hefferon and A. Artopoulo (student-at-Iaw) DECISION DELIVERED BY D. R. GRANGER AND J. G. WONG AND ORDER OF THE BOARD These are appeals by ADESA Auctions Canada Corporation and Impact Auto Auctions Ltd. (Applicant) from the Council of the Municipality of Clarington's (Municipality) refusal to approve amendments to the Municipal Official Plan (OP) and Zoning By-law 84-63 (By-law) and for the determination and settlement of the details of 899 - 2 . MM080016 a site plan to permit the development of a motor vehicle remarketing, auction and logistics facility, including the outdoor storage of motor vehicles, (Proposal) at 1550 Trulls Road (Subject Property). At the commencement of the hearing, the Parties agreed to have the Board primarily address the merits of the appeals as they relate to the proposed OP and By- law amendments and, if appropriate, withhold its Order pending final resolution of the site plan referral. In that regard, these Board Members would remain seized of any outstanding dispute of the site plan details. On behalf of the Applicant, and in support of the proposal, M. Goldberg and V. Cranmer provided expert land use planning evidence and opinion; T. Daniels, managing director of Impact Auto Auctions Ltd. provided operational evidence; D. MacGillivray provided expert hydrogeology and geotechnical evidence and opinion; M. Jozwik provided expert civil engineering evidence and opinion related to site servicing, grading and storm water management; G. Gaspardy provided expert natural heritage planning evidence and opinion; R. Hudson provided expert environmental engineering evidence and opinion related to the environmental impacts of the proposed use; A. Jacobs provided expert land economics and municipal financing evidence and opinion; and, T. Recoskie, branch manager for the London, Ontario, Impact Auto Auctions Ltd. site, provided evidence regarding its operation, including spill and leak protocols and practice. Area residents, David Jowitt and Richard Klawitter, presented evidence in opposition to the proposal. Their concerns, also raised with them by other neighbours, included reduced property values, increased truck traffic, noise, dust, light pollution, and concern for the potential negative, environmental effects of vehicles' leaking fluids on the Subject Property. Both residents acknowledged their understanding that their homes are located within the area designated as General Industrial, in the approved OP. On behalf of the Municipality and in opposition to the proposal, D. J. Crome and R. Palmer provided expert land use planning evidence and opinion; S. Ashton provided land use planning evidence regarding the subject application approval process; A. S. Cannella provided expert evidence and opinion regarding the municipal servicing of the 899001 - 3 - MM080016 proposal including proposed new roads; W. G. McCrae provided expert evidence and opinion regarding the sanitary sewer servicing of the area; J. N. Hooey provided expert automobile mechanical evidence and opinion regarding the impact of not draining vehicles; N. Mcilveen provided expert hydrogeology evidence and opinion; R. J. McNeice, a fish biologist with the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) provided expert fishery management evidence related to the Robinson Creek; R. P. Sisson, director of engineering and field operations with CLOCA, provided expert storm water management evidence and opinion; P. Niblett provided expert environmental impact study evidence and opinion; and, J. S. Climans provided expert industrial/commercial marketing and financial analysis and property valuation evidence and opinion. This was a 13-day hearing with 55 exhibits presented. The appeals were subject to a Board conducted pre-hearing conference process that resulted in the following agreed-issues-for-the hearing:- 1. Was the proposed development of the subject lands adequately disclosed to the Municipality of Clarington? 2. Are there physical and operational characteristics arising from, or associated with, businesses engaged in automobile storage and auction, that could adversely impact the development of the General Industrial Area and the adjacent Light Industrial lands? 3. Is the proposed development of the subject lands likely to have an adverse impact on the type and timing of development in the General Industrial and __uum~gjfi~eIlt ~Jgh!Jn_~_u~!~_~~~~js? __ _.. _ _.__ 4. Is the proposed development of the subject lands consistent with the intent of relevant policies of the Municipality of Clarington and Region of Durham Official Plans, the Provincial Planning Policy Statement, the Places to Grow Act and the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe, including on- going studies and decisions by the Province ana Region? ---- 5. Is the proposed development of the subject lands likely to have an adverse Irtlptrct---urlthFiiming-o,1lmding-of-the-provision of local sanitary sewers to 899002 - 4 - MM080016 serve businesses in the General Industrial Area and adjacent Ught Industrial lands? 6. Has adequate provIsion been made in the proposed development of the subject lands for the location and construction of the north-south and east- west collector roads shown in the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan, including the services that will be located in these roads, that will ensure orderly development of the adjacent lands? 7. Have adequate studies been prepared to identify, and has adequate provision been made to monitor and contrail the potential adverse environmental impacts from spills or leakage from damaged vehicles on ground water and surface water? 8. Does the proposed development of the subject lands represent good planning in the public interest? The Board has considered all of the evidence that was presented along with the qualified expert opinions and together with an analysis of the relevant portions of the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GP), the Region of Durham Official Plan (ROP) and the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan (OP). Our analysis and findings of these matters are set out below. There was no dispute that the approximate 19.1-hectare Subject Property has been designated as General Industrial and Environmental Protection Area in the approved OP since 1996. The Environmental Protection Area relates to a small portion of the Subject Property, with an intermittent upstream tributary of the Robinson Creek. The Subject Property has also been designated as Employment Area within the Urban Area of the Region of Durham Official Plan since 1993. The General Industrial Area according to OP Policy 11.7.3 permits outdoor storage covering up to 50 percent of the property. Specifically, OP Policy 11.7.3 states: "Outside storage will be permitted provided that it is properly screened from publiC view and shall generally not exceed 50% of the site area and a maximum height of 5 metres. Outside storage shall generally be located at the rear of the property." The Applicant is requesting 70 percent outdoor storage. 899003 - 5 - MM080016 The Applicant's proposal is for "re-marketing, auction and logistics of vehicles" with "outdoor storage to 70%", The proposed operation includes the receipt, inspection, staging and selling by auction of total loss vehicles and off.lease vehicles with a normal turn around on the property of approximately 30-45 days. Vehicles include automobiles, motorcycles, other recreational vehicles and some heavy equipment and other commercial vehicles. Vehicles are stored in an orderly fashion with aisles and setbacks to facilitate inspection by purchasers. Vehicles that are not roadworthy are moved by a large forklift vehicle. Total loss vehicles are primarily vehicles that have been damaged beyond reasonable repair cost but also include up to 25 percent roadworthy vehicles, such as stolen vehicles where insurance companies have already settled with clients. Off-lease vehicles are just that and they are usually roadworthy. There was no dispute that the Subject Property would be used primarily for total loss vehicles, the Applicant's confirming at least 70 percent in that regard and that the operation would begin as an Impact total loss vehicle facility with ADESA, adding to the operation over time. The only other dual operation cited by the Applicant was the Ottawa facility, although it was confirmed by the land use planner for the Municipality who visited the site to be an ADESA operation that is beside an Impact operation but is not fully integrated. ADESA operations generally include automotive repair facilities and fully paved site surfaces that are not present in this proposal. Fundamental to the dispute between the parties was a disagreement related to the use and operation proposed. It was acknowledged by the Applicant and its experts that a fundamental misunderstanding occurred related to whether or not vehicles coming onto the Subject Property were fully and purposefully drained of all fluids or not. The Applicant submits that regardless of the misunderstanding, its experts have confirmed that the proposal adequately addresses any potential for minor leaks and/or spills that may occur, finding the risk to be minimal. It was confirmed that a CertfHcate of Approval (C of A) from the Ministry of the Environment (MOE) would be required for the operation to proceed on the Subject Property~__ 899004 - 6 . MM080016 The Municipality and its experts submit that its analysis of the proposal was always premised on only fully drained total loss vehicles or other roadworthy vehicles being brought to the site, and that further analysis would be required to confirm that total loss vehicles that have not been fully drained of fluids would not have negative environmental effects on the Subject Property and downstream Robinson Creek, a recognized environmentally sensitive natural feature. The Board does find that the misunderstanding was promulgated by language in the Geotechnical Study (Exhibit 25(c)) undertaken by the Applicant. The language is clear in setting out the operational plan as removing all liquids under controlled conditions. Exhibit 25(c), page 16 states: liThe liquids would be removed from the vehicles under controlled conditions in a facility designed to collect and retain such harmful liquids in a secure fashion." - ..... --- ----- Themisunderstanding wasfurtnerTelntorced By the-rratarat"ileritage-planner-for the Applicant, not clarifying the matter in the "draft" environmental impact statement terms of reference prepared by him or raising the matter in his response to the draft environmental impact statement prepared by Niblett. He was forthright in his admission that he had not clarified the use nor whether or not vehicles would be purposefully drained as set out in the geo-technical report and that he knew the statement in the draft environmental impact statement prepared by Niblett specifically' stating: "even though the vehicles are supposed to be drained of all fluids before arrival on-site" to be wrong and took no action to correct it. The Board finds that any reasonable person or expert would have assumed that vehicles coming to the Subject Property, that were not roadworthy, were to be fully and purposefullyoraJried: _ _U ---------- This begs the question of whether or not this misinformation/confusion over the draining of the vehicles has resulted in an incomplete environmental impact study such that it cannot be relied upon to provide a complete and thorough analysis of the proposal's environmental impacts as intended in accordance with ROP section 2.3.17 and OP policy 4.4.35. ROP section 2.3.17 states: "In consideration of development applications in proximity to Elnvironmentally sensitive area, or development applications --whtch may I,ave l1,ajor en'v'iroftffieftt-al-tm~-tAe-~~nr-i-A--COL1sultatiolL.with the 899005 - 7 - MM080016 respective area municipality, shall select and retain a qualified environmental consultant to prepare an environmental impact study at the expense of the proponents ..." OP policy 4.4.35 states: "An Environmental Impact Study shall be undertaken for development applications located on lands within or adjacent to the Lake Iroquois Beach, any natural heritage feature identified on Map C, and any natural heritage feature which may exist but is not presently identified on Map C but on which notice is given in accordance with Section 4.4.9. The Municipality in consultation with the Region of Durham ..." OP policy 4.4.9 states: "The policies of the Plan shall also apply to any natural heritage feature which has been identified by the Municipality, the Region, a Conservation Authority or the Province, but which is not presently shown on Map C or Map D. ..." Both the ROP section 2.3.17 and OP policy 4.4.35 require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) when development occurs in proximity to environmentally sensitive area and the need to identify the resulting impacts from the proposed development and the requirement for any mitigation measures. The branch manager of the Impact London, Ontario operation was forthright in her admission that drips do occur on the gravelled portion of the site, guesstimating in the order of 20 reports for one year. She also confirmed that damaged engine areas are not routinely covered to protect them from weather. The Board notes that the proposed site is in the order of at least 2% times the site area and volume of vehicles of the London facility. It was the opinion of the director of engineering and fish biologist for CLOCA, that the risk from the potential leakage of the many chemicals found in vehicles that have not been drained has not been properly evaluated and could pose a threat to the Existing sensitive Robinson Creek cold water fishery located downstream from the subject property.- - - _h__ - - - _nn - --- The hydrogeology expert for the Municipality confirmed that the site evaluation had been primarily based on impacts from the proposed septic tank and tile bed proposed and not the potential from up to 5000 total loss vehicles that have not been purposefully drained of all fluids being parked on the gravelled site at any givenJime. It was the opinion of the environmental impact study expert for the Municipality, --who-undertook the EIS for the Subject Property, that had the fact that the vehicles were 899006 - 8 - MM080016 not to be drained of all fluids been known, he would have recommended further study to fully assess the risk posed by potential leakage of chemicals. It was his opinion, that further study would have included an independent storm water management evaluation, an impact assessment of all relevant automotive chemicals, a modelling of potential leakage volumes and flows and proposals for more stringent monitoring and contingency action plans. The Board also notes that with respect to the issue of environmental impacts, that the misunderstanding regarding the draining of vehicles to be sufficient to raise the potential for greater adverse impact on Robinson Creek. The Applicant submits that these risks can be addressed through the final site plan approval process, given the role of the MOE and CLOCA, to approve the final design of any storm water management plan. However, the Board is not satisfied that there-is a reasonable expeCtation Of the feaslDlllty of the storm WaltH IIlanagement system. The Board expects that the draining status of vehicles to be known and assessed at the time of the application and considered in the supporting studies undertaken by the Applicant. The Board finds that this analysis should have been completed as part of the required environmental impact study included with the proposal, to demonstrate that this use can proceed without adverse environmental impacts. The Board finds that the requirement in ROP section 2.3.17 and OP policy 4.4.35 for an EIS has not been satisfied, and therefore the proposal is premature. In addition, the protection and maintenance of natural features and resources is also referred to in Sections 2.1.2 and 2.2.1 of the Provincial Policy Statement and in Section 1.2.2 of the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe. The Board is not satisfied that the proposal is consistent with or conforms to these policies in light of the incomplete nature of the required EIS. Another fundamental issue of dispute in this matier relates to the intensity of use -thatis proposed onthesubject--propert-y-in the context of the policies ot the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) and Growth Plan for the Greater Golden Horseshoe (GP). The-'9mL!Jse eXQerts for the Municipality, while acknowledging that the General Industrial designation of the OP may be the most suitable designation for the use, as 899007 - 9 - MM080016 proposed, question the low intensity of that use, especially with the increased outdoor storage requested. They believe that it may conflict with the policies of the PPS, restated in the GP, that encourage the efficient use of existing infrastructure. In this case, a new sewage treatment facility has now been constructed to serve the area including the Subject Property. It was the opinion of the municipal servicing experts for the Municipality that the proposal represents an inefficient use of existing infrastructure specifically designed to encourage greater intensity of use in the area of the Subject Property. They noted that the Applicant's intent to service the Subject Property with private septic tank and tile bed together with the low intensity of the use proposed, would not encourage the extension of sanitary sewers into the area nor assist through the collection of development charges in the fair sharing of the costs incurred in providing those services. The Applicant on the other hand notes that the Subject Property has been designated for thirteen years without any take up of industrial use. The proposal would provide for some tax revenue and employment and according to the land use planner for the Applicant would commit to pay for sanitary sewers on a frontage basis upon arrival to the area. In addition, the Applicant will be extending water services to the area to the benefit of others. Up until 2007, industrial development had been exempt from development charges representing a municipal initiative to attract industry and confirming that industrial development had not been expected to pay its fair share of new growth infrastructure. This changed in 2007, to the phasing in of development charges for industrial development to 50 percent of the normal calculated value, by July 2010 still representing a less than fair share contribution. The Board is cognizant of the competing interests in the dispute before it. Should the Board favour the approval of a low intensity use in the context of a general lack of take up of industry in an area designated for heavier, less-attractive and often times less intensive general industrial uses in the light of recently developed infrastructure that provides the hope of greater employment densities and building area and thus, more efficient use of the infrastructure? 899008 - 10- MM080016 The Board notes that while no development has occurred over the past 13 years, the Subject Property designation was planned for within a 30-year planning horizon. In this respect, the lack of development to date, with no urban services available, is not unusual and it is reasonable to expect that full municipal services will be available well within the 30-year planning horizon, as confirmed by the servicing experts. Even without the proposed outdoor storage at 70 percent of the total area of the Subject Property, the use is uncontested to represent a low intensity development. The Board finds that any initiative that might further lower the potential intensity of use from the minimum standards specifically set out in OP policy runs counter to the Provincial policies to be cost-effective and efficient. To provide a policy, allowing for more less- intensive outdoor storage uses, prejudices the potential of the Subject Property and may dissuade other property owners in the vicinity from achieving a more efficient development over the life of the OP in conformity with the OP. While the Applicant relies to some degree on the General Industrial M2 Zoning in Section 24 of Zoning By-law 84-63 that permits 70% outdoor storage and the Board notes that the property is presently zoned Agricultural; both the existing zoning and By- law 84-83 predate the ROP and the OP. As such, the Board finds that the newer ROP and OP represent the more currently applicable local planning policy. The proposal represents a level of intensity far below the target to be achieved throughout the Municipality and Region of 50 jobs/persons per hectare as now specified in the applicable GP section 2.2.7 for Designated Greenfield Areas. The most recent proposed amendment for the ROP, Proposed Amendment 128 (Exhibit 43(c), Tab 3) dated May 19, 2009, re-iterated the target of 50 jobs/persons per hectare is unchanged. Furthermore, section 3.2.2 of Proposed Amendment 128 has listed a target ratio of jobs to population of 50% (1 job for every 2 persons) as a means of supporting a close work- live relationship for residents of the Region. This proposal represents a net density of 2.6 employees per hectare. To date, the site-specific allocation or employment density conformity exercise as referenced in the GP has not been done by the Region and Municipality. Ih~.Board. fi[l<:J~JhatJDcreasing.-!.he maximum outdoor storage area __from 50 percent to 70 percent does not represent a minor deviation from OP policy and this 899009 . 11 . MM080016 would not be consistent with the PPS nor conform to the GP as they all endeavour to ensure the efficient use of existing infrastructure. In this instance, the proposed 70 percent outdoor storage combined with other factors such as low employment density does not represent an efficient use of the land. PPS policies 1.1, 1.1.3, 1.6 and 1.7 speak to promoting efficient development, efficient use of infrastructure and service facilities, optimizing resources, the need for intensification and the promotion of a compact form. The GP policies 2.1, 2.2.2 and 2.2.7 call for compact communities, intensification and density targets. The potential lowering of density and intensity in the development of the Subject Property from the well-established existing policy runs counter to these overriding provincial policies. The Board finds that pursuant to subsection 3(5) of the Planning Act, this proposal fails to be consistent with or conform to these policies. -'---When asked, the Municipality's-Oirector of Planning Servieestestified that he believes that this proposal is better suited elsewhere and it is likely to be outside of the inner ring of the urban area. The Board notes that GP policy 2.2.7.5 refers to the consideration of an alterative density target for municipalities in the outer ring. The GP defines the "outer ring" as "The geographic area consisting of the cities of Barrie, Brantford, Guelph, Kawartha Lakes, Orillia, and Peterborough; the Counties of Brant, Dufferin, Haldimand, Northumberland, Pelerborough, Simcoe, and Wellington; and the Regions of Niagara and Waterloo." This would seem to suggest that this proposal may be more appropriately located in the outer ring as opposed to the inner ring of the Greater Golden Horseshoe. Another area of dispute involves the provision of a new collector road through the northerly half of the Subject Property as set out in Map 82, Transportation Courtice Urban Area from the OP. The Municipality contends that it is entitled to require the development to be subject to the approval of a Plan of Subdivision and have the proposed collector road dedicated -to the . Municipality.___.QP__RQliCy.. 11.8.2 ._sets_o~LJ~a~ __dev~~~p~ent of Employment Areas will generally occur by Plan of Subdivision, with the option of development by land severance in certain circumstances. 899010 - 12. MM080016 The Applicant asserts that there is no need for a Plan of Subdivision as it intends to maintain its property as one block. The Applicant has provided for a 120-metre swath to be kept free from any form of development that might prejudice the Municipality's right to acquire land for future road purposes. The Municipality acknowledges that the road may not be constructed for some time and this may facilitate the desire of the Applicant to utilize the proposed road allowance area for an interim period. Both parties acknowledged that there had been discussion that considered the possibility of the Applicant granting an option to the Municipality for the acquisition of lands for the future road. But any potential option that was discussed was subsequently not endorsed by the Municipality In this case, the Board finds that the OP clearly sets out the location for a proposed collector road through the Subject Property. This designation was never appealed. OP PoWcy'1 1".8.2 does set an expectation that development will generally occur by plan of subdivision from which roads would normally be dedicated. In this case, the Applicant questions the need for the road entirely but acknowledges that the Municipality may acquire the road through other means when necessary. No evidence of need for the said road was proffered, other than the OP designation. In light of the explicit existing OP policy and the absence of any transportation planning evidence to the contrary regarding proposed roads and development generally occurring by Plan of Subdivision, the Board finds it to be a reasonable requirement of the Municipality to require the Subject Property to be developed by a plan of subdivision~ - -.. .-----..----- --------- The Board will now address the remaining issues as set out in the Procedural Order Issues List, noting that Issues 1, 4, 6, and 7 have now been addressed. Issues 2 and 3 relate to the potential for adverse impacts on the adjacent Light Industrial lands'. The-Ap'plica-nt'sevidence'-is that th-e Generallndostrial-Are-a-is-part of a hierarchy of uses that planned to accommodate a range of heavier industrial uses that include the potential for waste processing facilities or concrete batching plants. Section ------_._--~-" 11.72 of the OP lists the predominafe---uses-'of-General Industrial Area as "... 899011 - 13 - MM080016 manufacturing, assembling, processing, fabricating, refining, warehousing, storage and repair and servicing operations. ..." It is the Applicant's evidence that there is already an existing cluster of auto related uses in the area. Among these current users is Dom's Auto Parts (Dom's), a prominent long time fixture in the area that the Municipality's Director of Planning Services admits is not going away, and it would not be permitted elsewhere in Clarington. Therefore, any perceived negative stigma to this area already exists and will likely remain as long as Dom's remains. The Board does however note that OP policy 16.6.1 has as a goal the relocation of Dom's in the future. The Municipality's evidence was that to permit an operation such as Impact would discourage higher order uses from locating in the area. An Impact type development will stigmatize the area because of its type of use, and its inventory conslS1lng.onorarlOSs-velllCtes or H.J la-rgeomotlnt-of-otjtside-sttlf-a~e;--+t-is-alsG..likely .to encourage similar auto industry and salvage related uses. The Municipality also notes that the proposed use is a "dry use" that does not require municipal services. The presence of this use will encourage similar dry uses, industries that do not require municipal services (Le. sewer and water) that typically include low employment density and low investment type uses. The Board recognizes that the presence of Dom's, Manheim's and Copart automotive facilities in proximity to the proposed development, creates a cluster of automotive related uses in the area. It is assumed that any sort of "negative stigma" attached to these respective uses already exists. However, permitting an additional ._ major Jike:use..s.uchas th~ APR.liql!1t'S p~OP(Jsed ope !?tion.. Cit 1~. he~_~~re~. would further promote and reinforce the existing clustering. This would also likely attract additional automotive like-users to the area to the exclusion of other industries and uses. The Board notes that municipal water service is being brought to the subject Jands and the Applicant intends to hook-up to the water service but will rely on an on- site septic system for sewage disposal. The Applicant's lack of need for full municipal services will very likely affect and possibly delay the development of adjacent industrial lands as municipal servicing is most effectively provided in a linear fashion from one area to the next. The presence of full municipal services is needed to attract higher 899012 - 14 - MM080016 intensity investment uses and higher employment intensity uses. The Board finds that the proposed use is likely to adversely affect the timing of the development of the adjacent industrial lands. Issue No.5 speaks to impact from the proposed development on the provision of local sanitary sewers to serve businesses in the General Industrial Area and adjacent Light Industrial lands. This issue is very closely related to Issues 2 and 3, and some of the earlier comments apply. According to the Applicant, the Municipality's expert on the sanitary sewer servicing of the area testified that trunk sewers are currently not available and that the proposed development can proceed on the basis of private services that involves an on- site septic system. In addition, he acknowledged that the trunk sewer location has not been decided and if it goes up Trulls Road this proposal would not hold up anything. Furthermore, tfie- Mu i1icl palitY' s Pia fWi ih1f Ae port\E-xh1bir2(at -TabI-3")-does--not-identify any specific concerns relating to servicing. It does state that the Applicant would be responsible for related water service connection charges. Because sanitary sewer services are not needed for their operations, there is no requirement to extend sanitary sewer services. The Municipality submits that the proposed development does not require sanitary sewers and therefore, it will attract similar dry uses that also do not require municipal services and that this reduced demand for services will delay or frustrate the expansion of local sanitary sewers into the area. This proposal will result in non- sequential development and impose additional servicing costs to by-pass the subject lands and extending the required services for developments located to the north and east: As a consequence of not requiring sewer service, this proposal will not contribute to the sanitary sewer cost and it will not provide the expected level of development charges (typically based on 25% lot coverage) because of the very low level of on-site construction. The evidence of the Municipality's-Directorof _Planning Services is_ 1hat th~ area is in the midst of an "Infrastructure Tsunami" with the imminent extension of GO train service to Bowmanville, with the proposed station in close proximity to the Subject Prope rty, immine nt~exte nsi0nu0f~ Highway 407, GOAstructionnofa norttl--s.outbJi ok Jhrough 899013 / - 16 - MM080016 THE BOARD ORDERS that the appeals are dismissed and the proposed Official Plan Amendment and corresponding Zoning By-law Amendment are not approved. In addition, in the circumstance, the Site Plan is not approved. This is the Order of the Board. liD. R. Granger" D. R. GRANGER VICE-CHAIR "J. G. Wong" J. G. WONG MEMBER 899015 ~l.iJ!iQglOI1 REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, September 14, 2009 Report #: PSD-085-09 File #: COPA2005-0010 By-law: ZBA 2005-0058 & SPA2003-0036 Subject: ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD DECISION ON OFFICIAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONING BY-LAW AMENDMENT AND SITE PLAN APPLlCA TIONS APPELANT: BOWMANVILLE CREEK DEVELOPMENTS INC. RECOMMENDA TIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-085-09 be received for information. Submitted by: Da Id J Creme, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services Reviewed by: / , '-I . J h-t.---Lk ~C ^--il.. Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer DJ/COS/df September 2, 2009 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 899016 REPORT NO.: PSD-085-09 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 On December 8, 2008 the Council through Resolution #GPA-669-08 approved Official Plan Amendment No. 54 to the Clarington Official Plan and an amendment to the Municipality of Clarington Zoning By-law 84-63, in order to: . provide a wider range of commercial uses and size formats; . allow the easterly expansion of the highway commercial designation; and . permit a private amenity space; on the lands owned by Bowmanville Creek Developments Inc., subject to certain conditions. 1.2 On January 9 and 13, 2009 the Municipality received letters of appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board from McMillan LLP, on behalf of Bowmanville Creek Developments Inc., on the Official Plan Amendment and the associated Zoning By-law Amendment respectively. 1.3 On June 10, 2009 McMillan LLP, on behalf of Bowmanville Creek Developments Inc. also submitted a letter of appeal to the Ontario Municipal Board (OMB) on the associated site plan approval application, on the same basis. The Official Plan and the Zoning By-law Amendment appeals and the Site Plan appeal were consolidated and set to be heard together at an OMB Hearing from August 10-14, 2009. 1.4 On June 15, 2009, following a confidential verbal report from the Municipal Solicitor regarding the appeals, Council passed a by-law authorizing the Mayor and Municipal Clerk to negotiate and execute Minutes of Settlement with Bowmanville Creek Developments Inc., provided that the Minutes of Settlement contained terms satisfactory to the Director of Planning Services and the Solicitor. 2.0 DISCUSSION 2.1 Following numerous "without prejudice" discussions and correspondence between Planning staff, the municipal solicitor, and the appellant during June and July this year, the parties have reached a settlement on the proposed Official Plan and Zoning By-law Amendments, which is summarized in the following paragraphs: · The condition that the hotel must be constructed within 6 years following the date on which the Zoning By-law comes into force, was amended to extend it to 10 years and a further condition has been added that if the hotel is not constructed within the time frame, the Council may amend the Zoning By-law by deleting the private open space amenity area zone designation. 899017 REPORT NO.: PSD-085-09 PAGE 3 · The prerequisite that the proposed private amenity space area be used in conjunction with the hotel use has been expanded to include other land uses, which in the discretion of Council, are appropriate for use in conjunction with the private amenity space area. · The hotel and assembly hall are permitted in any location on the site, not simply confined to the lands adjacent to the creek valley. · The following uses in the proposed Zoning By-law, which are permitted in the current C-5 Zone on the property, have been re-instated as permitted uses within the C5-14 zone: "building supply outlet" and "motor vehicle sales establishment, provided the primary use is restricted to new car sales". · The limitations on office space on the ground floor of buildings has been amended to allow office space on the ground floor to a maximum cumulative floor space of 500m2. · The limitations on the amount of smaller retail stores and store sizes within the C5- 14 zone designation has been amended to allow a maximum of 3 individual stores with a total floor area less than 250m2 but greater than 100m2, provided they each face onto Baseline Road. . A paragraph has been added to both the C5-14 and EP-16 zoning regulations that provides an explanation of the purpose of the Holding Symbol (on the portion of the application site sifuated east of the Spry Avenue Extension) and the conditions under which it can be removed. 2.2 Minor revisions to the proposed site plan were submitted during the "without prejudice" discussions. The settlement included conditions of Site Plan approval. The parties agreed to the approval of a master site plan and associated drawings showing the location of the buildings, landscaping, parking areas and underground services. It has not significantly changed from the site plan previously included with their OPA and Zoning submissions, and it includes the location of the proposed hotel. . Once the developers have secured tenants with definitive proposals, amending site plan applications will be submitted for each phase showing any minor changes to the building siting, proposed building elevations, architectural treatment and building materials. This is similar to the approach for Halloway Holdings lands in the Bowmanville West Town Centre, where build-out would occur over a number of years. 2.3 The Municipality and Bowmanville Creek Developments Inc. executed Minutes of Settlement on August 10, 2009. The Minutes include schedules setting out the agreed to Official Plan Amendment, Zoning By-law Amendment, and site plan drawings and conditions of site plan approval. 2.4 The Minutes of Settlement also contain an Option Agreement between the Municipality and Bowmanville Creek Developments Inc. to the effect that Council can exercise the option to purchase the private open space amenity area and remove the zoning that 899018 REPORT NO.: PSD-085-09 PAGE 4 permits the private amenity area use, if a building permit for the construction of a hotel or such other approved land use is not issued within 10 years following the approval of the Zoning By-law amendment by the O.M.B. 3.0 ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD 3.1 The executed Minutes of Settlement were presented to the OMB on August 10, 2009. The Board approved the Official Plan Amendment, the Zoning By-law Amendment, the site plan drawings with the associated conditions of site plan approval, and the Option Agreement, contained in the Minutes of Settlement. 3.2 The Board set September 30, 2009 as the deadline for the execution of the Site Plan Agreement by both parties. 3.3 A copy of the OMB decision is contained in Attachment 1. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Copy of OMB decision dated August 10, 2009 Attachment 2 - (Master) Site Plan approved by the OMB Attachment 3 - Final Zoning Map 899019 Aug. 13, 2009 '09 Attachment 1 OUG14 PN 1 :46 To Report PSD-085-09 "-10..1 ISSUE DATE: PL090085 ~ Ontario Ontario Municipal Board Commission des affaires municipales de l'Ontario Bowmanville Creek Developments Inc. has appealed to the Ontario Municipal Soard under subsection 22(7) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, C. P .13, as amended, from Council's refusal or neglect to enact a proposed site-specific amendment to the Official Plan for the Municipality of Clarington to redefine the limits of the "Highway Commercial" and "environmental Protection" destinations to provide for exceptions permitting a greater variety of retail uses, one financial institution and a private open space amenity area on Part of Lots 12 and 13, SF Cone., being lands located east of Waverly Road, south of Baseline Aoad, west of Spry Avenue COPA 2005-010 OMS File No: PL090085 Bowmanville Creek Developments Inc. has appealed to the Ontario Municipal Soard under subsection 34(11) of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, from Council's neglect to enact a proposed amendment to Zoning By-law 84-63 of the Municipality of Clarington to permit amendments and exceptions to the "Special Purpose Commercial (C5)", "Special Purpose Commercial Hold ([H] C5)", "Environmental Protection (EP)" and "Environmental Protection Exception (EP-2)" zones to accommodate a greater variety of retail uses, one financial institution and a private open space amenity area on Part of Lots 12 and 13, BF Cone., being lands located east of Waverly Road, south of Baseline Aoad, west of Spry Avenue t:~,q Z<l? s -C051! OMS File No: PL090062 Bowmanville Creek Developments Inc. has appealed to the Ontario Municipal Board under subsection 41 (12) of the Planning Act, A.S.O. 1990, c. P.13, as amended, for determination and settlement of details of a site plan for lands composed of Part of Lots 12 and 13, BF Cone., in the Municipality of Clarington SPA 2003-036 OMS File No: PL090487 DI.T~JN REVIEWED IV (..{ ~- OMIN.\L 'nil o COUM:I.~; i:J COUIlCI. . 0 FU ~ IfOMWION COI'Y TO: :'>', APPEARANCES: Parties Counsel 0 MAYOR . CI =. CI CAO C co.um CI COIlI'OMlE c BIBlIIIf;Y Mary Flynn-Gu Iiers ~ 18MB . '~CI"'" C~ . CLBn Dennis Heffer ClIOUCITOII C'TREANrr RJIIVaI I. . . 011 Bowmanville Creek Developments Inc. Municipality of Clarington 899020 - 2 - PL090085 Bowmanville Creek Developments Inc. (the Applicant) seeks to amend Municipality of Clarington Zoning By-law 84-63 in order to permit a greater variety of retail uses and size formats, one financial institution, redefined limits to the environmental protection areas and a private open space amenity area. The Applicant also seeks to amend the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan so as to include an exception to the Highway Commercial policies in order to permit additional uses within a proposed commercial development. ,The additional uses will consist of general retail uses, which have a minimum gross floor area of 929 square metres and one financial institution in the form of a credit union. The Parties have advised the Board that they have reached a settlement in the case at hand. Planner Paul 8tagl provided his expert land use planning evidence in support of the amendments. The Applicant's property is a 7.3-hectare sized parcel of land" already commercially designated and zoned and it surrounds an existing commercial parcel (the "Rona" site). Together, this commercial property comprises approximately 1 0 hectares in total. Mr. 8tagl gave evidence that the proposed Option Agreement provides the Municipality of Clarington with the right to acquire some of the green land zoned "EP" for passive use should the land fail to be developed within ten years. The Municipality M'(fj1 e t 0 similar use be located on the lands zoned (H) C5-14. Mr. Stagl also reviewerl,the C nditions for Site Plan Approval contained in Schedule 5 of the Y'!II'1W11~.w Minutes of SiftJM!~ (Exhibit 2) and attached as Attachment "1" to the Order. jJI; ,_ ;lJi." JO~: I':; ,nJllUQ~- It'!I.~1ftitlas 't91f."Sla '5 professional planning opinion that the proposed additional uses .'JT 'fCl(l;,) .~~ a~[iateJqt tl] site and the proposed Official Plan Amendment and Zoning By- jaw A~,',,~,~~dment ,aie~onsistent 'vvith the 2005 Provincial Policy Statement; there are no " )lIIjJ;!Ui L. :-.....r~IiC:; L ITI~' L.. n:~sues~: tff' re~~ , the Places to Grow Act, and the proposed implementing :'.I'.,\Aj;mslrume~s r~~ny issues of conformity. The proposed instruments also conform to 'lli~lhe' OUtffllrtl ~a Official Plan and the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan. In _---I.espe.cto1 the pl'ItJDOS d modifications, they reflect an appropriate range of uses for the _ ~Iev~nt ro . ry and are sensitive to the existing Rona site and work as a unified and comprehensive site. 899021 - 3 - PL090085 Mr. Stagl opined that the proposed site-specific implementing By-law provides clarity in respect of the permitted uses and performance standards. The proposed site plan details are presented in. a layout that is consistent with the approved policies of the Official Plan and present good site organization. He added that in his opinion, the proposed conditions are both reasonable and appropriate and collectively, the instruments and site plan represent good planning and should be approved. The Municipality's Planner, Mr. Jacobs, adopted the professional planning evidence and opinion of Mr. Stagl and also supported the proposed amendments and site plan. Having considered the uncontradicted evidence of the Applicant's planner and as supported by the Municipality's planner, the Board allows the appeals and amends the Municipality of Clarington Official Plan with Official Plan Amendment No. 54 and amends Municipality of Clarington Zoning By-law No. 84-63 with Zoning By-law Amendment No. 2009-16. In respect of the site plan appeal, the Board allows the appeal and approves, in - principle, the site plan as referenced in the drawings contained in Exhibit 7 and in the site plan agreement as presented and pursuant to Schedules 4 and 5 of the Minutes of Settlement (attached). The Board will issue its final Order on the site plan appeal once the Municipality and the Applicant advise the Board in writing that the site plan bgreement has been duly executed. The Parties have until 30 September 2009 to execute the site plan agreement. So orders the Board. "A. Rossi" A. ROSSI MEMBER 899022 , , 5 ATTACHMENT "1" Schedule 4 Site Plan _1.:1." .... Ij~9,a:~g.- 'b.i ' .' ^ ," Ui~.:::' "., .~~;'.,~ Po' e' 1;,.,;:&Ct'Bt.~, ;, .',,::-' '-'-1 ,'~. .:J~, .' ~ "'if" ........ .i' , j,~~,: i"., "'~~' ';' ..-.'." ;:~.l:;;~/it'~.,i!ii.,} . "'__ .,';.. 1to:.' ._:}.:,.;,4".J~-:".-.,:-, ":;., ,.;;.-.. .~i,~~~.:." 'Ii;.,' .'. ~. ~~(~ ;t.I;:;:l~.:;t;-.,~:~.;}.':.,,~:..: ~;~::/Thf~;}:\.~: ,d':~~~ir:~~~,:;'s$;;f~i'1>,~~:'~/~'i4' ; ~.. 8 ~ ::~!l~:,,-,.,:~~E;:~~~~': ~.li':~ '.;.;~ :,'~'1-:',::~;;:..~.~.t..:...~ )j., '~,;.-,'t;7'" . Site Plan SP-1 July, 2009 August 5. . D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited Part 1 & 2 2009 Landscape Plan L1 of 3 July 8, August 5. Strybos Barron King Landscape 2004 2009 Architect ure Channel Landscape Plan: L2 of 3 August 25, July 28. 2009 Strybos Barron King Landscape Sections & Construction 2005 Architecture Details Construction Details L3 of 3 August 25, July 29, 201)9 Strybos Barron King Landscape 2005 Architecture Site Plan Lighting Layout E-01 August July 27. 20')8 Leipciger Kaminker Mitelman 2005 & Partners Inc. Site Plan Lighting E-04 August July 27,20')6 Leipciger Kaminker Mitelman , Calculations-- ,- . 2005 & Partners Inc. Site Grading Plan SG-1 July 2009 August 5. D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited Part 1 2009 Site Grading Plan SG-2 July 2009 August 5, O.G. Biddle & Associates Limited Part 2 2009 Site Servicing Plan SS-1 July 2009 August 5, D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited Part 1 2009 Site Servicing Plan SS-2 July 2009 August 5, OG. Biddle & Associates Limited Part 2 2009 Storm Sewer Drainage SD-1 July 2009 August 5, D.G. Biddle & AssociateS Limited Scheme 2009 Sediment and Erosion E8-1 July 2009 August 5, D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited Control Plan Part 1 2009 Sediment and Erosion ES-2 July 2009 August 5, D.G. Biddle & Associates limited Control Plan Part 2 2009 Pavement Marking and P-1 July 2009 August 5, D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited Sionaoe Plan Part 1 2009 Pavement Marking and P-2 July 2009 August 5, D.G. Biddle & Associates Limited Slonaoe Plan Part 2 2009 899023 28 Schedule 5 Conditions of Site Plan ADpf'lz.n} CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL .The following are the conditions of approval of the Site Plan, Plans and Drawings: 1. The Owner shall enter into a development agreement with the Municipality of Clarington dealing with and ensuring the provision and of all the facilities, works and matters which either are shown on the approved Site Plan, Plans and Drawings or are referred to In these conditions. including the maintenance of them, as provided In Subsection 41 (7Xb) of the Planning Act. The agreement shall contain slandard/reasonable provisions by which performance guarantees to the satisfaction of the Munl.;ipality of Clarlngton will be provided by the Owner. Before any development takes place, applications will be made to emend the overall site plan for the subsequent approval of drawings for each tlUildlng, as stipulated in Section 41 of the Planning Act, R.S.O. 1990, c.P.13 as amended, and the owner also agrees to enter Into amending site plan agreements as required with the Mllnicipality of Clarington for any and all buildings to be constructed on site. 2,' 3. Garbage must be stored intemally for all builidngs ,jue to their visibility from adjacent roadways, A separate garbage building will be permited only for building D provided that It is architecturally designed to match the main building and for any other building that the Municipality of Clarington deems apropnate. The Owner shall transfer to the Municipality of Clarin, ton for a nominal consideration free and dear of encumbrances and restrictions, Part 2e on Reference Plan 40R-24250 for entrance feature purposes. as shown on the Landscape Plan (Drawing L 1 of 3). The Owner shall obtain an acceS6 permit from the Hegional Municipality o~ Durham for property access from Waverly Road for the developm 3nt of the site in accordance with the Site Plan (Drawing SP-1). 4. 5. 6. All works and services, except Regional Municipality 0" Durham works and services, shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the Mur icipality of Clarington Design Criteria and Standerd Drawings. ., / . The O\mer shall submit six (6) copies of the deta led Servicing/Grading Plans to the Regional Municipality of Durham for approval. The Owner shall make application and obtain pernission for connection to Regional Municipality of Dumam services and deposit monies r,!quired for the installation of Regional services to the site's property line. The Owner shall obtain written permission from the Central Lake Ontario Conservation AuthOrity ("CLOC") under Ontario Regulation 42/06, the Authority's Fill Construction and Alteration to Waterways Regulation, prior to commercing any filling or grading on site. 8. 9. 800024 r 29 10. The portion 01 the lands located east of the Spry Avenue extension shall not be developed until such time as the Director of Planning Services has 'ecelved written notification that the lands have been filled to an acceptable elevation to the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority and In accordance with the requirements of thll Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority Permit No. C08-039 dated April 7 I 2008. 11. The Owner shall obtain ClOC's approval of the Sf diment and Erosion Control Plan (Drawings ES-1 and ES-2) for the site to implement the ;tormwater management measures as described in the report titled "Bowmanville Creek Developments, Bowmanville Commercial Plaza, Baseline Road, Municipality of Clarillgton, Stormwater Management and Site Servicing Report" as prepared by D.G. Biddle & Associates limited, dated July 2004 and revised August 2005, as approved by CLOC, MinistlY of Transportation, and Municipality of Clarington's Director of Engineerlng Services. 12. The Owner agrees to install a 1.5 meter chain link fer ce on the easterly boundary of the Private Open Space Amenity Area zoned "(H) EP1S- in the Zoning By-law 84-63 of the Former Town of Newcastle. . 13. The Owner egrees to implement all development .3nd operational recommendations contained a report titled -Environmental Impact Study" prepared by AQuafor Beech, dated December 2005 as flnally_ approved by the Municipaity of Clarington and Central Lake Ontario Conservation. 14. The Owner agrees to install the approved full cut-off li!~hting as Indicated on the Site Plan lighting layout (Drawing E-01) dated August 2005 ilnd Site Plan Lighting Calculations (Drawing E-04) dated August 2005 as prepared by Leip::lger Kamlnker Mltelman & Partners Inc. and revised on July 27, 2008 and July 27,2006 respectively. Once all of the new site lighting has been installed on the subject lands, the Owner agrees to obtain a letter from the project's lighting engineer certifying that the lighting has been Installed in accordance with the Site Plan Lighting Layout (Drawing E-01) dated August 2005 and Site Plan lighting Calculations (Drawing E-04) dated August 2005 as prepared by Leipciger Kaminker Mitelmen & Partnel"$ Inc. and revised on July 27, 2008 and July :~7, 2006 respectively. 15. The Owner shall provide the necessary 2% parkland dedication as a cash payment to the Municipality of Clarington in lieu of pari<.land dedication pursuant to Clarington Municipal By- law no. 95-104. The market value of the lands for Pal126 on Reference Plan 40R-24250, shall be deducted from the Owner's cash in lieu payrr ent requirement 16. Prior to commencing any work on site, the Owner shall provide the Municipality of Clarington wiih a $10,000.00 icad damage depeei! fer worKs aSHociated with Baseline Road. 17. The Owner shall deliver a performance guarantee ~tisfactory to the Director of Planning Services for all landscaping wo~s associated with thE: storm water channel and with areas not associated with buildings. Additionally, the Owner shall deliver a performance guarantee to the Municipality for landscaping works associated w th each building approved by site plan amendment as referred to in condition 2. Final cos': estimates must be provided by the Owner to the Director of Planning Services for his approval. 18. The Owner agrees to install and maintain 011 grit se~larators to the satisfaction of Central 899025 30 Lake Ontario Conservation and the Director of Engineering Services. 19. The Owner agrees to obtain all necessary sign permits from the Municipality of Clarington and the Ministry of Transportation. 20. The Owner agrees to pay to the Municipality of Clarington the reasonable fees incurred after August 10, 2009 for the preparation and registration of the site plan agreement. 21. The Owner shall not release or abandon any of Its rights under the easement transferred to the Owner by Shell Canada limited by Instrument No. DR730124 registered in the Land Registry Office for the Land Titles Division of Durham (No. 40) on July 17, 2008. The Owner shall construct, reconstruct and maintain an access rOlld open to the public from Waverly Road as shown on the Site Plan (Drawing SP-1) datEd July, 2009 as prepared by D.G. Biddle & Associates and revised on August 5,2009. 899026 Klldl,;IIIIIt::11l ~ To Report PSD-085-09 \ I \ \ \ y, ~ I,! '" ~ I i \ \ I \ \ I \ \ \ \ \ I I :JnNlA ~ A&JS t 1 'I ......f _ ._ _ ~ .... _. '.m._._~_______~.. II1J~LilLr 1::-~-j:L~ Oo~ i ~ o 'I I (--.- \ " c~ I 'ti c z o IE: ; , . -. ~ -- I I i i i I I j ~ i i _.~~- ---____...1- "'~-...--.--.. 899027 r:: ~ a.. Q) ~ .- en U r:: - f/) ~ r:: Q) E Co o - Q) > Q) C .::tt. Q) Q) .... U Q) - - .- > r:: to E ~ o m \, \ ~ .Ll",,-" li<r;;;;;; ~ - c - (I I' ~ .' U) w 3: c cf 0 0:: W z ::i w U) cf -./ !Xl - >'/1)/:;07 - ~I ~'1 ~---, ~----_.- --- ,-- / \ '\. \'\'\ ''\\ () ~ 9~-d3 H 0J N~ I I I IIII '). ......-;::~ E <;:'.-::::: 1'---, \~-3 ,H, ONIOl"lll >- r ""lOll"" I \ I \ ''Ii :: J.- I " ~~ l- ~ WL.L. ~/IIIi~11I 11 "'-::-r-~ 1!lI~g ~ =:J ~ - ~ .11.1.1 I t I rJ\tk =nTi ~ :::\:::: ~ - \ - ,~~ I mm' I""'" 'fwo IIII ~ ~::.---J '- "-\gJ~ -~"""-"" 14 Jnll~ Itl ~- '"'\' ~ ~ I- '-hi 111f\)~ ':~ ~ () ...illll... III I~:: =-\ i 1l7J ',' "--li.., 00lll~ 1111", ;:. a..- -.....- ~ -Wl i r1lwn J ~~r~ ~ I~~' \\'\ Ilr ~ B qJJB ,I ~ ~ h A ~ iif~ :- r i "1J/IIIIIIIIITIYllIlllllTlllij!~ ~' All III H 11111 A II H 111111111 ~f Lr fi ~ IJIIIIIUlllllbfIIUlllllllllr~ Hi} /:.- ~~I;,,1I111111111111111111111 ; II f 1JTl~ ::.tJ ~ , Ylililllllllllllllllllllllllllll,k ! 1/1' .l \.. ~ '" I ,,1111 H 11111 A II H 111111111 ~ m ,0 b: : ralll/1I1 U IIIIIY II U 111111111 'l!j III ~ ~ j A,,~IIIIIIIIIIIAIIIIIIIIlIIII -g 1'JiflllllllllllTIYIIIIIIIITIIII pJj ~ A IIIIIIH III1I A II H 11111111 ill ~!I :: YlllllIUllIllYIIUllllllllm ~ ftlllllllllllll 111111111111111' lllllllllllllill1111111T 11111 ~ 'rt~~ III ~ flllllllnlllllllllnllllllll.J.11 11111111 /:... \" r-~~"'-~ / ~ rrrrrrrT :: nllllllll 1//111111111111 ~ ..... ~ 1~:1 UIIIIIIII illIIlIlIIlIlIIIIV, ;: ~ tf D ~IIIIII 1111I1I11If) 'J 1v1l1n '/~ ~ IJ ~llllfTlI[;I f/ /J rrrrrv- fj '-I .:; .. ~ /1 11 ~ 1-1111 D i ~ tt oJIWJl11 mv J I M = ~n V ~ .... -- L() -, ""C~~!~ 1IIIilIW ~ , Il/. l.w.a ~ == ~ i: () ~ '1/, ~==== ",I. ~ W = ~ rc; W ~ O~ ~ ~ II I II lilliii' " 111111 r'l J :On ~ I ::: ~Il. v ~\"\ '0 '~d , I~~ @J =1= r;- =:= / ~:n~:!:llwll :~~~_ ;:j == F= \<:; J ~. 1/ ~ I _,' .~ 8 I .-J I I 11 1'-. ~ ~ ~~ t/ .. ... I I~ '1 ;ell N\11IT)J2.H~ ~ ~ A1 ~ '- A ~ ~ (Ls a\fO~ w~ ~lna) a\fO~ A31~3^\fM ~ r\lIacnment 3 To Report PSD-085-09 en UJ o ~ UJ X LL o ~ ~ ~ ~ \ ~ o ~ ~ ~ C) ~ , \ \ 11 899028 C) t: .- t: o N - ra t: .- LL \ Cl!Jl#Jgton REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, September 14,2009 Report #: PSD-086-09 File #: ZBA2003-034 AND PLN 8.8 By-law #: Subject: MODIFICATION TO THE OAK RIDGES MORAINE ZONING BY-LAW 2005-109 RECOMMENDA TIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSD-086-09 be received; 2. THAT the Municipality of Clarington CONCURS with the modifications to the Oak Ridges Moraine Zoning By-law 2005-109, proposed by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing with the exception of modifications 18, 31, and the non-decisions contained in Attachment 1; 3. THAT the amendments to the Site Plan Control By-law contained in Attachment 4 be APPROVED in principle and brought forward for Council approval upon approval of Zoning By-law 2005-109 by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing; 4. THAT a copy of Report PSD-086-09 and Council's decision be forwarded to the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, the Durham Region Planning Department, the Durham Region Works Department, Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority, Kawartha Conservation Authority and the Otonabee Region Conservation Authority; and 5. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. 899029 REPORT NO.: PSD-086-09 PAGE 2 --------.-------- -.--.---...--.--. _.__._-----------~--- Submitted by: Davi . Crome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services Reviewed by: \r-a~.(" -=- ~~ Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer TW/CP/df/av September 8, 2009 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 899030 REPORT NO.: PSD-086-09 PAGE 3 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 On June 6, 2005, Council approved the Oak Ridges Moraine Zoning By-law 2005-109 which incorporates the policies of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan (ORMCP) and Amendment No. 33 to the Clarington Official Plan adopted in June 2004 and approved by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing (MMAH) on October 17, 2005. 1.2 On May 30, 2007, the MMAH released a draft decision with proposed modifications to the Oak Ridges Moraine Zoning By-law 2005-109. Staff entered into discussion with MMAH staff on the proposed modifications which were subsequently revised on April 2008, January 2009 and finally on June 16, 2009 (see Attachment 1). The MMAH would like Council to provide their position on the proposed modifications prior to releasing a final decision. Once the MMAH releases their decision, Zoning By-law 2005-109 will be in full force and effect from the date Council originally granted approval on June 6, 2005. 1.3 Through discussions with staff, ten of the original modifications and five definitions proposed by MMAH were eliminated. This was accomplished by providing an understanding of how the Oak Ridges Moraine Zoning By-law 2005-109 is implemented by staff. The definitions eliminated were primarily policy based and adequately addressed by Amendment No. 33 to the Clarington Official Plan. 1.4 Staff also had the opportunity to propose five modifications and four definitions. The definitions and three of the modifications are consistent with the recent Council adopted General Amendment to Zoning By-law 84-63 regarding Recreational Vehicle Parking and Accessory Buildings and Structures (ZBA2008-0004) approved on October 27, 2008. One modification was proposed to change the Environmental Holding (H) Symbol to an overlay zone identified as the Minimum Area of Influence Zone (MAOI) and the last modification was to introduce an exception zone that had not been carried over from Zoning By-law 84-63. 1.5 In addition to the modifications proposed by MMAH, the Ministry made non-decisions on eleven items contained in the Zoning By-law. For non-decisions, Zoning By-law 84-63 will remain in effect. Major modifications and non-decisions will be discussed further in Sections 2 and 3. 1.6 The MMAH had also proposed changes to the provisions of Site Plan Control By-law amended on June 27, 2005 to implement more encompassing controls on the Oak Ridges Moraine. Also the Ministry provided input to the Site Alteration By-law which was approved by Council on June 23, 2008. 2.0 MODIFICATIONS 2.1 The draft decision proposes thirty-eight modifications in total, many of which are minor or technical in nature. This section will outline the major modifications which are referred to by number and contained in Attachment 1. 899031 REPORT NO.: PSD-086-09 PAGE 4 2.2 Recreational Vehicle Parkinq and Accessory Buildinqs and Structures In order to be consistent with the recent General Amendment to Zoning By-law 84-63 approved by Council on October 27, 2008, Staff proposed definitions contained in modification 6 (see attachment 1) for "Recreational Vehicle Storage", "Shipping/Cargo Container", and "Garage". Modification 7 introduced Section 4.1.2. g) which prevents a shipping/cargo container from being used as an accessory structure. Modification 8 replaces Section 4.1.3, Table 4-1, Regulations - Accessory Buildings, Structures and Uses. The regulations for Rural Settlement Zones in regards to lot coverage, floor area and height were updated to be consistent with what is now permitted in Zoning By-law 84-63. Modification 19 introduced Section 6.7 Recreational Vehicle and Trailer Parking. This section is consistent with regulations contained in Zoning By-law 84-63 for rural residential and agricultural zones. 2.3 Minimum Area of Influence(MAOI)Zone The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan requires all development within 90 metres of a natural heritage and/or hydrologically sensitive feature and its associated minimum vegetation protection zone area to submit a natural heritage and/or hydrological evaluation. The evaluation must demonstrate that there will be no adverse effects on the feature or its related function. To secure the submission of an evaluation, a number of solutions were proposed that conform to the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. The Environmental Holding (H) symbol was selected in accordance with Section 36 of the Planning Act which provides municipalities the opportunity to require additional information prior to considering the appropriateness of a proposed development. Currently, property owners are required to lift the Environmental Holding (H) symbol and submit a site plan application in accordance with the Site Plan Control By-law. Those within the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone, which identifies areas that contain a natural heritage and/or hydrologically sensitive feature do not have to lift a holding symbol in conjunction with a site plan application. Another concern is that once an Environmental Holding (H) symbol is removed, the trigger for a site plan application and the completion of a natural heritage and or hydrological evaluation is lost. If a property owner has the Environmental Holding (H) symbol lifted and then plans further construction on their site, there is no mechanism to require the submission of site plan application or natural heritage/ hydrological evaluation as required by the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. 899032 REPORT NO.: PSD-086-09 PAGE 5 After careful consideration, Staff proposed modification 9 which replaces subsection 4.6.2 Environmental Holding (H) symbol with an overlay zone identified as the Minimum Area of Influence Zone (MAOI). This is another solution adopted by many other municipalities which is less cumbersome in its application. This zone identifies the area of influence and associated minimum vegetation protection zone area and will be identified in the Site Plan Control By-law to trigger the need for a site plan application. This alternative mechanism allows staff to implement all policies of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan and the Official Plan, including the submission of a natural heritage/ hydrological evaluation are met. This will accomplish the same purpose of the Environmental Holding (H) symbol wh ile eliminating an unnecessary step and cost for an applicant with lands outside of a feature. 2.4 Non-Conforminq Buildinqs, Structures and Uses Modification 10, introduced by the MMAH adds subsections 4.9.4 and 4.9.5. These sections allow for the expansion and reconstruction of legal non-conforming buildings or structures provided there is no change or intensification in use and an expansion will not further increase the non-compliance. Originally, there had been a more stringent interpretation provided on implementing the ORMCP. 2.5 Minimum Distance Separation The MMAH requires replacing Sections 4.12.7, 4.12.8 and 4.12.9 which speak to Minimum Distance Separation (MDS) requirements for new residences from building housing livestock or vice-versa (modification 11), and deleting Appendices A and B which contained the Minimum Distance Separation J and JJ formulas (modifications 32 and 33). The MMAH preferred an approach which defines the Minimum Distance Separation Formula provincial guideline and requiring reference to it (see modification 6). Essentially, the proposed sections accomplish regulating MDS in a similar manner. 2.6 Wayside Pits and Quarries Modification 18 relates to section 5.14 Wayside Pits and Quarries. The Zoning By-law currently permits these uses for up to 18 months. The MMAH is proposing to add the words "with possible extension". Staff has indicated a concern with the ability to enforce a timeframe that is not clear. It was suggested that an extension could be accommodated through Council approval, similarly to what is done for temporary living quarters under Section 3.24 of Zoning By-law 84-63. The MMAH has responded that the Aggregate Resources Act states that a wayside permit expires on the completion of the project or 18 months after the date of issue, whichever comes first. It is their opinion that the Minister of Natural Resources is responsible for extending the licence, therefore no permissions from the municipality is required. 899033 REPORT NO.: PSD-086-09 PAGE 6 2.7 Existinq Lots of Record - EP-1 and NC-1 Zones The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan allows single detached dwellings to be built on vacant lots of record. To this end, Zoning By-law 2005-109 established the EP-1 and NC-1 zones to identify these lots. When originally formulating Zoning By- law 2005-109, staff identified lots to be zoned EP-1 and NC-1 as ones with frontage on an improved public street that were zoned to permit the construction of a single detached dwelling under Zoning By-law 84-63. This task did not identify lots not located on an improved public street which may have legal access from a private right-of-way. Since the passing of Zoning By-law 2005-109, one property owner with a vacant lot of record that has legal access via private right-of-way has approached the Municipality with plans to construct a dwelling. This owner has been patiently awaiting this modification and final approval of Zoning By-law 2005-109 in order to proceed. Staff proposed deleting the exception zone categories EP-1 and NC-1 for existing lots of record (modifications 24 and 26). To replace these zone categories, Notation 3 for Table 12-1 has been modified to read "Applies to uses existing as of November 15, 2001 or if permission to construct a single detached dwelling existed on November 15, 2001 ". This will allow lots which have permission to construct which may have not been identified by an exception zone to proceed without the need for a zoning by-law amendment. 2.8 Residences for Farm EmlJlovees The definition of a bunkhouse has been modified to delete the reference to a building as the MMAH requires bunkhouses within the Oak Ridges Moraine to be temporary, portable or mobile structures (modification 6). Regulations for Residences for Farm Employees in the "NC" - Natural Core, "NL" - Natural Linkage and "A" - Prime Agricultural Zones have also been modified to specify a second dwelling, provided for farm employees must be temporary, mobile or portable. The reference to permitting a maximum of five bunkhouses has also been deleted as the policies in the Official Plan and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan permits only one such structure (modifications 22, 23 and 29). 2.9 Aqqreqate Extraction Zone Requlations At the request of the Ministry modification 31 reduces all yard setbacks for an aggregate pit from 30 metres to 15 metres. It also reduces the distance from 90 metres to 30 metres where mineral aggregate crushers, mineral aggregate processing or mineral aggregate stockpiles are not to be permitted when abutting a lot zoned or used for residential dwellings. A 15 metre setback was also added to abutting highways or water bodies. 899034 REPORT NO.: PSD-086-09 PAGE 7 The other part of the modification was the deletion of the 12 metre maximum height for aggregate pit structures. Staff expressed concern with eliminating this requirement, as a structure with an excessive height may negatively impact adjacent land uses. The MMAH responded that the Aggregate Resources Act does not provide any height restrictions to buildings or structures located within a licensed property. The ministry felt the maximum height was too restrictive and indicated that most of the structures would be located on the floor of the pit well below the surrounding surface elevations. However, there is no guarantee that a structure would be located below the surface elevations. 2.10 Schedules Modifications 34 to 38 calls for changes to the zoning by-law schedules which staff are in agreement with. These changes are directly related other modifications agreed to in the text of the Zoning By-law. The schedules include the proposed modifications, adjustments to the zone boundaries and site specific Zoning By-law Amendments Council has adopted since Zoning By-law 2005-109 was approved in June 2005. The schedules were not modified to recognize the non-decisions provided by the MMAH. The Ministry requested modifying Zoning By-law 2005-109 in accordance with the revised map schedules contained in attachment 2. 3.0 DEFERRALS 3.1 In addition to the modifications, the MMAH has proposed eleven non-decisions, or deferrals. Each of the non-decisions are related to zone categories which recognize existing uses and/or similar uses. The non-decisions include the Oshawa Ski Club, Mosport Speedway, Longsault Road Preservation Sanctuary Camp, and all commercially zoned properties on Highway 35/115 outside of the Hamlet of Kirby. In deferring a decision, the zoning of the properties under Zoning By-law 84-63 will remain in effect, and until such time as the Ministry makes a decision. 3.2 Staff requested the MMAH to consider utilizing section 6 of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, which permits uses existing as of November 15, 2001 to continue, expand and be converted to a similar use provided the similar use will be closer in conformity with the plan and will not adversely affect the ecological integrity of the Plan Area. Attachment 3 contains a chart of the commercial properties in question and identifies the zoning of the properties in both Zoning By-laws 84-63 and 2005- 109. Proposed zoning is also provided which provides similar uses in compliance with Section 6 of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. 4.0 SITE PLAN CONTROL BY-LAW AND THE SITE ALTERATION BY-LAW 4.1 Through discussions with the MMAH, the Province requested revisions to the Site Plan Control By-law to include Landform Conservation Areas. These are areas which possess significant landform features such as steep slopes, kames, kettles, ravines 899035 REPORT NO.: PSD-086-09 PAGE 8 and ridges. The Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan requires applications for development or site alteration within a Landform Conservation Area to identify planning, design and construction practices that will minimize the disturbance to the landform character. The Site Plan Control By-law will also need to be revised to reflect the deletion of the EP-1 and NC-1 zones, the Environmental (H) symbol and the creation of the Minimum Area of Influence Zone (MAOI). A draft Site Plan Control By-law is contained in Attachment 4. The addition of these lands will add substantially to the area of the Oak Ridges Moraine where site plan approval is required adding time and cost for both the applicant and the Municipality. 4.2 MMAH provided input into the creation of the Site Alteration By-law 2008-114 approved by Council on June 23, 2008. This by-law includes a provision which ensures that it will not conflict with Ontario Regulation 140/02 (Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan). It also enables the Director of Engineering to require any information, plans or studies required by the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan for the assessment of a site alteration application. The Planning Department has prepared a 'Summary of the Site Alteration Requirements in the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan' (attachment 5). This summary will accompany applications within the limits of the Oak Ridges Moraine to ensure compliance with the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. Planning staff will assist the Engineering Department in the review of applications within the limits of the Oak Ridges Moraine to ensure compliance with the plan. 5.0 NATURAL HERITAGE I HYDROLOGICAL I EARTH SCIENCES HERITAGE EVALUATIONS 5.1 Zoning By-law 2005-109 has recognized all natural heritage, hydrological and earth science (areas of natural and scientific interest) heritage resources by the Environmental Protection (EP) Zone. The current Environmental Holding (H) symbol and the proposed Minimum Area of Influence Zone (MAOI) depicts the 90 metre area of influence and the associated minimum vegetation protection zone for each feature. The MAOI zone triggers the need for site plan approval which ensures the completion of an evaluation when development is proposed. 5.2 It is current practice for an applicant to obtain an expert to complete an evaluation which is subsequently reviewed by the Planning Department and local conservation authority through the site plan approval process. The completion of such evaluations can substantially increase the cost of a relatively minor development proposal (eg. accessory structure, addition to a dwelling). In many instances, the proposed development is located in an already developed area but within the area of influence as described by the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. Staff consulted with the MMAH and local conservation authorities to determine how other municipalities are approaching the requirements for evaluations. Based on these discussions, staff has formulated new procedures for natural heritage, hydrological 899036 REPORT NO.: PSD-086-09 PAGE 9 and earth sciences heritage evaluations in the Oak Ridges Moraine (attachment 6). These procedures offer a common sense approach. Where proposed developments are likely to have significant impacts the appropriate studies would be prepared by an expert in the appropriate field. Proposals with the least amount of impact could be evaluated by Staff and the local conservation authority. 6.0 CONCLUSIONS 6.1 In consideration of the comments contained in this report, Staff respectively recommends the following: · that the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing be advised that the Municipality of Clarington concurs with the modifications to the Oak Ridges Moraine Zoning By-law 2006-109, with the exception of modifications 18, 31 and the non-decisions contained in Attachment 1; · that the revised Site Plan Control By-law contained in Attachment 4 be approved in principle and brought forward for Council for approval upon approval of Zoning By- law 2005-109 by the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, Final Draft Decision, June 16, 2009 Revised Zoning By-law Schedules Proposed Zoning for Commercial properties on Highway 35/115 Site Plan Control By-law Summary of the Site Alteration Requirements in the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan' Natural Heritage / Hydrological/Earth Sciences Heritage Evaluation Procedures in the Oak Ridges Moraine Attachment 2 - Attachment 3 - Attachment 4 - Attachment 5 - Attachment 6 - 899037 REPORT NO.: PSD-086-09 ._--_._~-~~-~_.._----_._-_._-,------------_._~--_._-_.---_..,.._----_.._-~-_..__..._---_._------ INTERESTED PARTIES LIST List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Preservation Sanctuary Camp Richard Rutherford Oshawa Ski Club 1288775 Ontario Limited, c/o Panoz Motor Sports Ltd. Frank Shane 762224 Ontario Ltd., c/o Noone's Restaurant 701655 Ontario Ltd. In Trust Sunoco Inc Attn Robert Tersigni Darek Gandera William Cheng The Norfinch Group Inc. Freskiw Farms Kawartha Inc Svjetlana Martinovic Jun & Son Investments Inc Zeljko Martinovic Ministry of Transportation, c/o Property Section Building D Jean Gable Alex Georgieff, Region of Durham Planning Department Libby Racansky Kerry Meydam Oak Ridges Trail Association James Parkin, MacNaughton Hermsen Britton Clarkson Joanne Kim Mark McMillan John Cartwright Steve Tinmouth Blain Moffat Rick Buller Tim and Frances Tufts Harry Schillings Gary Woodbeck Dwayne Day Jamie Davidson David Dietlein Kevin Waite Murray Yeo Jacqueline Vaneyk John Upton Lorna Ferguson Val Choloniuk Victor Suppan Adela and Guy Pugliese Ronald Robinson Brian Hancock, Ontario Federation of Agriculture David Veenstra Dave Roberts 899038 REPORT NO.: PSD-086-09 INTERESTED PARTIES LIST Jamie Davidson Mr. and Mrs. Barriage Lafarge North America Richard & Florence Stephenson Richard Ward PVNC R.C. Separate School Board Enbridge Gas Distribution, Area Records Co-ordinator Victor Suppan, LACAC Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority City of Oshawa, Clerk Township of Scugog, Clerk Municipal Office SAGA Save the Ganaraska Again, c/o Ms. Katherine Guselle Sandy Cook and Ted Kilpatrick Victor Doyle, Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing Louis Bitonti,Ministry of Municipal Affairs & Housing c/o Oak Ridges Moraine Trail Assoc. Bob Watson Karina Isert Gary Sunstrum Danny Stacheruk Wendy Partner Sheryl Greenham Bill McBride Irv Harrell Keith and Louis Harden Jeanne Burnside J. and J. Clark Doug Morgan Roy Morton Terry Holroyd Jack Fisher Kim Lilly Lisa Bianca Robert Chater Lyle McMahon Tony and Connie Pugliese Trudy Paterson, Skelton Brumwell & Associates Inc. Elva Reid Jim Reynaert William W. Griffin Mario Veltri Cameron and Marie Smail Dave Muira Gary Woodbeck Marianne McBride Dave Bortolazzo Regional Clerk, Regional Municipality of Durham Executive Vice President, Law & Development, Ontario Power Generation 899039 REPORT NO.: PSD-086-09 INTERESTED PARTIES LIST Otonobee Region Conservation Authority Clerk,Town of Port Hope Clerk, Cavan Township Linda Gasser Brian Buckles, S.T.O.R.M. Wayne Fairbrother 2,Templeman, Menninga Barristers and Solicitors Mark McMillan Bruce and Joanne Hannam Gord and Pat McMeekin Grant Greenwood Steven Heggie Stuart Wood D. Tinmouth Eric Atkins William Stapleton Bud Duguid Sharon Trudeau Julie and Ernie Csizmadia Jason Webb Donald Griffin Jacelyne Noel Herb Prescott Brenda and Jim Rowe Caroline Matthews Jack Syer Ewan Burke Ivan Krebelj Bob Watson Walter Gibson, Gibson & Associates Ltd. Mr. Tom Lupu Karen Yellowlees,Durham Federation of Agriculture Peter Grady,Graywood Developments Ltd. James Tosswill Dave Miura Velma & William Griffin Terry Souch, Oshawa Ski Club Paul Dockrill, Hydro One Networks Inc. Real Estate Services Enbridge Gas Distribution, Sales Development Co-ordinator Kawartha Pine Ridge Dist. School Central Lake Ontario Conservation Kawartha Region Conservation Authority Dr. David Caspari Clerk, City of Kawartha Lakes Gary Jeffery, Agricultural Advisory Committee Otonabee Region Conservation Authority 899040 Attachment 1 To Report PSD-086-09 DECISION With respect to Zoning By-law Amendment # 2005-109 Subsection 10(9) of the Oak RidQes Moraine Conservation Act, 2001 I hereby approve Zoning By-law Amendment # 2005-109 of the Municipality of Clarington, subject to the following modifications: 1. Section 1.2.1 b), Purpose, is ,modified by adding the words, ", as amended" at the end. 2. Section 1.3.1, Legislative Authority, is modified by'::deleting the words, "Oak Ridges Moraine Act" and replacing with thE?:wQrds, "Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Act, 2001 ". ,.:::::i}::::'::i;:. 3, . . ' . . Section 1.4.1, is modified by adding the"w6rd', "area" .~it~r the word, "shaded" in the third line, addiQg the .~ords, "and within the,oak Ridges Moraine Area as designated by Oqtario Regulatipn 01/02" anh~ end of the last sentence and adding the following.~ew s~.~~ection after sut*ection 1.4.1: ,. . ,>,",-,..,' ..;.;.;,>.::' <::<;::;:~.. ~<;::::%;:. "1.4.2 The boundary onrfQ~,~,.Ridges M9r9,ine Plan Area, as shown on Schedule E has::l;l~en':es!~t;>.lishedbY:!he Province of Ontario RegulatiqrlQ1/02. thi~ arE?ais<slJ.9WD 6'iithe Rural Area Index <.' '-, ',' . ',:'- , ,'.:'.: /"~.~.' , /:'.' .',', . map.sattach~d to anOfprr'ry',ng part''ofthis By-law and can only be ch~r1ged by thr:provinc~t .'. ' . . . . . . . -,", '.. 4. Section 1.8.1,ismo.d.i@~".:t;>Y.C3cjgingJbe words, "and no person shall undE::rtake deveiopij1eht or slt~ alt~ration with respect to land" after the words, "in WhClJe 6'f.i,o:part" in the second line and adding the words, ", the <<)Jak Ridges Mp!~ine';t~n.servation Plan and the Municipality of Clarington qJficial Plan, as'~:ry1endeqlrat the end. 5. SecHon1.8.3, is .modified by adding the words, "and within the Oa k Ridges MoraineArea" after the words, "the 245 metre contour" in the first line. 6. Section 3.1; Definitions, is modified as follows: a) Add the following new definitions in alphabetical order: "Agricultural Uses Means, a) growing crops, including nursery and horticultural crops, b) raising livestock and other animals, including poultry and fish, for food and fur, c) aquaculture, and d) agro-forestry and maple syrup production. Agriculture-Related Uses 899041 Means commercial and industrial uses that are, a) small-scale, b) directly related to a farm operation, and c) required in close proximity to the farm operation. Animal Agriculture Means growing, producing and raising farming animals including, without limitation, a) livestock, including equines, poultry and ratites, b) fur-bearing animals, c) bees, d) cultured fish, e) deer and elk, and f) game animals and birds. ,-.....',.....'., -.'..',.....,. ......' "','.'-".'. Development.; ., <. Means the creation of a new lot~A:ch~:lnge in lan(fH~r.' or the construction of buildings, an9,~tructures, any of whlcij:f~quire approval under the Plar:lningA~t, the Eny!rpnmental As~~~sment Act, or the Drainage Act, butdb~~ n otJh6i'U de , '<.;/ a) the construction of facilitiel:.f9.dM~hsportation, infrastructure and utilities uS:~$~:.~y'a pUblicb9.:9y'.. or b) for greater cert~\ritYP(<:::::..:::;t?:; (i) the reconstructi6hj}epair::9r.rn~Jnteh~pce of a drain approved unqer m~prainag~:)\~~.,~r.d'in:e.~1~J~nce on November 15, .?qQf;'o(:{;: \:;:!:;:;:::/ .....' (ii) , >.the carryin~:out of ag:tjpultural practices on land that was Q~.i.ng u~:(:~.;f~r ,agriC~lmr:1 uses on November 15, 2001. F~.rm Vacad9,h Home":;;:;::' Meahs~n esfaplishment that provides sleeping accommodation (includin~rpartiCip~tion in farm activities, meals, services, facilities and ameriHi~s for fhe exclusive use of guests) for the travelling or :,:;vacationinQPublic in up to three guest rooms within a single ;d,^,~lIing t~@is located on a farm and is the principal residence of tt1e(PL8R;9:etor of the establishment. Minimum Distance Separation Formulae A guideline established by the Province to minimize nuisance complaints due to odour and thereby reduce potentia/land use conflicts by determining appropriate separation between livestock and manure storage facilities and neighbouring non-agricultural uses, including residential, institutional, industrial, commercial, or recreational uses. Recreational Vehicle Storage A commercial establishment for the storage of licensed recreational vehicles and their trailers. Shipping/Cargo Container 2 899042 Shall mean a prefabricated metal container or box specifically constructed for transport of goods by rail, ship or transport truck. Site Alteration Means activities such as filling, grading and excavation that would change the landform and natural vegetative characteristics of land, but does not include, a) the construction of facilities for transportation, infrastructure and utilities uses, by a public body, or b) for greater certainty, (i) the reconstruction, repair or maintenance of a drain approved . ffi~ under the Drainage Act and in existe~~ph November 15, 2001 or ~%~~ (ii) the c~rrying out of agricultural ~~~~:~n land that was . . .....>>:':.. >>J.:.:~;.>-. being used for agricultural u~e,.s 'on Nover.n~r 15, 2001. ,.i;~~~!~~1~:~~ ";;~~~i;h.,. Tea Room and/or Tea Garde.n:~~'? '.:;::~::::.; .9.>>'VZ"~ ")<",,...:..~~. Tea room and/or tea garder:(~~:~1I mea~::~~~establishm:~~b serving tea and light refreshmeti!~: .::;;~~~~;q; " .,::;::.;..,' "::;;~~iii~~F?' Transport Depot <:;:::;;;:;?,:;:;.;>.. ">'~;::>.. An establishment wfi~r~~:gi5fUmr:r~ial rif~t~f:;..~ehicles are kept for rent or lease, or are parkeail~r a fe~i'~~tfem WQ~~h commercial motor vehicles9.HP;!.l~Ratched1:~~rd.;mijY=1heW~~:Jacilities for servicing and repairiB~~:l1i~;~~merciaf:m1)~~' vehicl~t~stored at the site as an acc~sS:cih use. ~m;: ~~~~:;. '::;i:[ji;hi:;::.. ,'ii1fu]~.;..;.:;.,;., ~~~~i~::. . .TranspqXl~!j<.gnr;Ir'l'fta:~~~y.~!~.rKand Utilities ..;;~:::::JtRt~n)ncIQ~~~e'ublic highway~;' transit lines, railways and related ..<&jt;;:. facmti~~~..ga'S::ahp oil pipelines, sewage and water service systems '~">" 'j..~'''. "....~.> <m:rt and line~j~~J.ld slQti.n~ater management facilities, power '';::;::~:::;:;: transmisil~n line>i~fecommunications lines and facilities, including "::;;:i::[:t:):)rOadcasti~~j:~owers, bridges, interchanges, stations, and other .':t~~itf;uctures,#~bve and below ground, that are required for the c:gh.$Jru.~t{~W::' operation of these uses and any rights of way required . ~ '.'::.~: .,~-~ '- '- '-/_. .. for tt1~~:e':facilities."; b) the definition name, "Minimum Vegetation Protection Area" is deleted and replaced with the name, "Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone area" and this term is replaced wherever referenced in the By-law; c) in the definition of "Bun~house", delete the words, "building or" in the first line; d) In the definition of "Conservation", add the following new sentence at the end: 3 899043 "This also includes the management of woodlands, including accessory uses such as the construction and maintenance of forest access roads and maple syrup production facilities."; e) Delete the following definitions in their entirety: "Farm; Fur Farm; Intensive Livestock Operation; 6'.. f) in the definition of "Mobile Home", delete th~~~rd, "permanent" and replace with the words, '''temporary, mobj!(~tportable" in the S d I" ". ..<.(~?'-Wi:::~~ econ Ine, .4,<-::::~., ,:~:?:'" .<:>;'~~~W '\lh:" g) the definition of "Garage" is del~}~~J~h its entiretY:~n9 replaced with . . ..::':'=x;::'> ........:~...>> the follOWing: .-:~:i.::::> ";M:;" '::.~~~f" ..::?;'::.. ,.;;;~~~~:~~ "Garage '::::;::;~'.. .::::::?z;;: .;. "';:-x";.. .~~df:, Shall mean a buildin,a, structure'1:)1;1~jtHhereof, including a carport, designed andlor us'~~jf~r.:Jhe parki~~~J,motor vehicles having adequate access to "~f~X-Wi~~~v,..and Wf.(,~;, household equipment incidental to the resid~ij\t~1 US~~~1!::;~~ s'tQ~." ~..:;~;~~$:;;;;.., ~~~~" ,~;~~~.,~.~~t~~.~. .l>":;.~<;~.:~i":~.'X'~,_ "i"_':;~'j, _ ,;$;~.~;~~, ..-..~..:>;~~> 7. Section 4.1.~::~$:moalij~g by adqlu~:the followrhg new subsection after . ....:.:.;.;... ":~X'~ "~:{'~" subsectlon-:t>>~::'. :::::~:"(.>;::, ~z1i~~&:;::. ~:i~t~fL..:,. . '::~~~*},. "g) No shrpR.it!9/~~t:9~:;:Co:rjt~Jn~f...~fiall be used as an accessory use." ~~~~*~#Jl~~~~;:::.. . ";:~~~~~~it.. ......:.>.>,::i;~i::.:>. 8. <;;:~;~ction 4:lr~~~;:!able:~l~~, Regulations - Accessory Buildings, ':;~~j~~ructures an'a;[~~es';:~:;qeleted in its entirety and replaced with a '<Magified Table 4~~~:attac'$Cl as Attachment "1". ~,)",J 9. Section 4:'6t!l~fding (H) Symbols, is modified as follows: ',:." .. a) Delete the title, "Holding (H) Symbols" and replace with the title, "Holding Symbols and Overlay Zones"; b) Subsection 4.6.2, is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following: "4.6.2 Where on a Sc~edule to this By-law a hatched area overlays a zone, the applicable provisions and regulations of the underlying zone shall continue to apply, however the hatched area denotes the Minimum Area of Influence Zone (MAOI) which depicts a 90 metre area of influence from a natural heritage feature andlor hydrologically sensitive 4 899044 feature and its associated minimum vegetation protection zone area. 4.6.3 Except in a case referred to in Section 4.6.2 of this By-law, where a zone symbol shown in a Schedule to this By-law is within the Minimum Area of Influence Zone (MAOI), a one time addition to -an aforesaid principal building or structure or anyone or all accessory buildings or structures for the same purpose for which it was used on November 15, 2001, provided that: 10. i) a minimum 5 metre yard setback t~pm the nearest Environmental ProtectiQn:1!tlne is .;:~ ,:t,.~.;....~ maintained; .:::::~~::;::., ii) the removal of any naturaltl~~tJ~~feature and/or hydrologically ~,fE:i:smve feififiii;.~;.. located on the lot d9~i:fi'bt exceed fS$:.9f the area of the lot; aQ~jA~' applicable regul~lj~Jls contained in this\B.~':law are ~mplied with:~~i~~::., <:~~:@:;i::., kl~~~~~i:~' ":::~7 Section 4.9, Non-Conforr1JJ.ng BUildi'ri;~~~~lfGctures and Uses, is modified by adding the foll.&Wn;lg.,new subs~6ti2ns after subsection 4.9.3: .'.'Vl. "-',. x~.,:~ ',.~..,< ~'. ',;:;:;", ';';';'5=z: -~~.:.;.. . .~(~~~.. "~;~.~~>~~h__ ~*J:::::;.~. "4.9.4 Nothing iri;~~i!3 BY~~W;~tJ.~1I p}f~~~Ilt an expansion of a -.j::' . '. "-j'.'. '. ~ ,'-", '. :. "..:, . . ~ ",- ," :{i~fj~l non-c6q'fprrp.!~ir15fjlli!llq.ft;pt structure on the same ..::::iM;:;;fof:6f:~xpansrbj~~Wlim existMg institutional use, provided ':',".'>~.':' ...'1'....:. '....."'> .l~(::::Y that S:g.~h expan:~Js>n does not represent a change in ":;<\:::. use.~;i~Q9..t.he exp;~Q~ion will not contravene any provision .::::t>;..9HijiS:gY~i~Yt;:R.r:~(drther increase the non-compliance. ..;::,~:::;::::;::::~:>;~..,> 'I.;.:,:}:; ::~::;::>" '~''': ';:;;;;~~r?:" ,,'.' " .;....-: "~.:'::i;" .~, .....~!::;::>, ' ,,;:;:}::;::: ":'<':~4:~>~.5 r,r<itl)!ng in this By-law shall prevent the reconstruction .{(? ":;;~[i:;:: witHlQi~lWenty-four (24) months, within the same location ":i.:,find dfffi~nsions of any legal non-conforming building or 'Wt,ructure or part thereof, that is damaged or destroyed ./~9Y causes beyond the owner's control, and the ;;::<:;/.:::;f??feconstructed building or structure shall be deemed to ". i.::,>:::-> be an existing building or structure if there is no change in use and no intensification of the use." ,'.'.....-. ~"::::~~>- 11. Section 4.0, GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PROVISIONS, is modified by deleting Sections 4.12.7,412.8 and 4.12.9 and replacing with the following: "4.12.7 No residential, institutional, industrial, commercial or recreational use, located on a separate lot otherwise permitted by this By-law shall be erected or enlarged unless it complies with the Minimum Distance Separation Formulae. 5 899045 4.12.8 Notwithstanding any other yard or setback provision in this By- law, no livestock facility shall be erected or enlarged unless it complies with the Minimum Distance Separation Formulae. 4.12.9 Sections 4.12.7 and 4.12.8 shall not apply to: a) a residential building constructed on an existing lot or a lot within a registered plan of subdivision; b) a livestock facilitY'located within the limits of a settlement area." 14. /~'" Section 5.2.2, is deleted in its entirety and the prC;l~iaing x.....~.' subsections are renumbered accordingly. b:4'.~.~. (.:::::'1'9' "~~*L Section 5.3, Crisis Care Facilities and Fi~'sl'Wentiar~l.lre Facilities, is . . .. ...;::~:-:%>~ ~~";~~:~':" modified as follows: ,.~f~:~:i::' "':::$f:$:L " ,.l~~j1~i:Y '::~~i~f~~::.; a) Add the following new subse~t1pn after slJ.p'section 5.3::~;;~Dd ""'^l.''I.'~' ~ . . ~"~"v~~~' -"':~V:' renumber the proceeding subs~~ti.ons..~~~brdingly: .: .'<~t~::t.4r' t:'h.. 'I.~>~.~' "5.3.2 A crisis'W.tft:l~..pility and~!:(jential care facility shall be p.l.{jffitt~~i:J.R.all dw~llw. types within all zones where resiij~(ltial1J~~~;i~(~ pe~~tted provided the facility ..~::::~QmElies wili$abt~~~~:2'~i~~::::;,.. .. ..:i@:::~::::'>>';~~~1b. '\tf~W.' "~~?' b) Ta~!~~~~r2, is mO~lf1ed by d~t~.!ing the first row dealing with sep~r~~j'pn dist~r:.1~es in its e'Al.lj~ty. ...::::~&::~.. b~~~~~a~~~~~i~~~~{::~o;>~*,. "~t?: S9.S!1~n;:~g~,.HoW~il~dustrie-;~'f~:~:odified by the following: ,,~;>o*;.i"-' V/l.~:*~ '\:';:~<<:>. .;,$:~;:""':~~@:::' '~:?'z.::'" <{~i!).. in SUbS13~~Rn 5~~~!:1f)' add the words, "in whole or in part" after the '~:~?~~::'. words, "camed on-l!i:m the second line; ':~~~i~:>. .~~:. ' b) "::::~~:~v::;~ubsec~~~::5.5.3 a), add the words, "or furniture stripping" after tn~J~K~~~%OdY shop". '''~~~~::3:~?' Section 5.6, Home Occupations, is modified as follows: 12. 13. 15. a) in subsection 5.6.1 c), delete the word, "primarily" in the third line and delete the last sentence in its entirety; , b) in subsection 5.6.2, delete the word, "secondary" and replace with the word, "accessory" in the third line; c) in subsection 5.6.4, add the following after part d) and renumber the proceeding subsections accordingly: "e) furniture stripping;". , 6 899046 16. Section 5.9, Portable Asphalt Plants, is modified as follows: a) in subsection 5.9.1, delete the words, "for a" after the word, "permitted" and delete the word, "the" after the words, "temporary basis in" in the third line; b) in subsection 5.9.1 b), delete the words, "50 metres from any dwelling" and replace with the words, "90 metres from any residential/of'. 17. Section 5.10.1, is deleted in it~ entirety and replaced with the following: "5.10.1 The provisions of this By-law shall not a~J?Jt~(j prohibit the use of land, or the use of buildings or structu!J{~lWfthin any part of the Municipality for the following purpo~~~t~~~~~i1i~~;, >.::~;,:.:;;~::;:.. >'~~li);~;c;. a) a fire station, a police statiQft~::ahlbulance station, commuter 1.:>:.'4:;;;; ~"'~'v" train station provided or:l.~~~1ialf of a public aufffifttity, except within the A, NC, NL, €>>r~nd P zOQes within th~"&a~ Ridges ~ ""...;;.:-:.:.. ..:....~~. ;I>>;:;...:~. Moraine' ':;;:~~;> ,.;~~::.:" , , ~~;::' -::'%;::9' b) sanitary sewer",or water faciftt:i~~:i~nd systems provided by or /.1."".. ........""('.... on behalf of ar!lAAlj~,f!luthoritY!::ij~*~,. c) a municipal or '~grii'm'iJtl.i.t?',~ervic';E!~i~J:l(;:luding a park and passive recreat{{{~~1 traft~~1:~r~;~.!?ed:'~the Municipality, a local bo~.r~.;~f:JQe MuniG1R.~lity.i~.t'a::tElf:i~B~ of the Municipality on l~dg;:Bt1'ii::~~~P.uildin~l~}fiiiructure aWned by or leased to the .,:::;:N"6'nicipalitt;~i!;Mun)cip~t:~:>r community service uses are limited ";<i~f3:passiv~;:p:~j~~ withiril&~ NC and NL zones; d) 2on~ery~H6~:?3H~::~nvjronmental education, including passive '"" ..'.'........~.'..>'......... ~...'.~..,../?..'.......'..._-.. .':::;;:?::;:::~::;;:::;;:.,:Jecre:~lrgnal trails,'otflands owned by or leased to a -:::.::;;:;:;::<. "-:"(~:::~oIJ/S(t1fj}"+I'on Authority' ....>,., ..~~ .~', t <~[i:~t:" e) tfi:~~:procJ~~tt;lg of heavy water, electricity generation and ,.;;:::::;::::;:; resJ~t:~h intiuoing but not limited to the production of nuclear "::;:'::..; energ:V.J~.and administration and consumer and public relations ';<::[::;:;. in cqr!i~~ection with electricity generation on land or in a building .,.. "" ~..4.., <. _ , "::;:::::'<:;,of:'sthicture owned by or leased to Ontario Power Generation; >,,',',',',/,',',',"',' f)'::\~ii:electricity transmission corridor, including towers and lines, en any land or structure owned by or leased to Veridian Corporation or the Hydro One Network Inc.; g) an oil or natural gas transmission corridor, including pipes and necessary pumping stations, inion land or in any building or structure owned by Hydro One Network Inc., Trans Canada Pipelines, TransN,orthern Pipeline or InterProvincial Pipeline, or successor companies; h) Publicly initiated Transportation, Infrastructure and Utilities. 18. Section 5.14, Wayside Pits and Quarries, is modified by the following: a) add the words, ", with possible extension" after the words, "permitted for a maximum of 18 months" in the second line and add 7 899047 the words, "and a Natural Core (NC) Zone after the words, "Rural Settlement (RS1) Zone" in the third line; b) in part b), delete the words, "50 metres from any dwelling" and replace with the words, ."30 metres from any residential/of'. 19. Section 6.0, Off-Street Parking and Loading, is modified by adding the following new section after Section 6.6: 20. "6.7 Recreational Vehicle and Trailer Parking 6.7.1 A recreational vehicle or trailer, and any load thereon, may be parked on a driveway. .;. 6.7.2 Storage or pa.rking ~f t~ailers or .f:{~ational vehicles shall be permitted Within a g~fi1~1 carport or other permitte~ acc~~so~ struc!i.Wi;n~~ith~n. a settlement area, as Identified In t~~:;;~la'flngtOriO~!c'al Plan, shall not be permitted wil11m~~tent, shelten~~!gopy, enclosure or similar structu~~f:9(jered with fabric, pq\t~.ster or similar covering~m.~.'~. e. rial. -<.::::::.'.' -.:'~~~::;>. ,~~;:-",,> . ^....>-.;..jo. ~"..;.. 6.7.3 The pa~king or s.tot'~~.~t.o!:ldWaximum of three (3) recreatl~g:~t V~hlcl~s'G.~lfilfersl and any load thereon, shall be:ip~'(m!.!Jed In anY':.:~1~,!3 yard or rear yard. 6.7.4 The owrii~:;rt~~~Rtstore '6t~ft~rk in the open more than three (3) ;~~~tatr6;~ili~~~~;~.le~:~::trailers, and any load '"'~b~f,eon on '~j:~ot "~:~:':Y"';$>.~~t.- . -::4fti:::,::::\th ' '::~@M1~f:~ .~ . , r:!t> Section 1.~~1~~(rable l'ij~, is m'~~jtied as follows: ";;;;.:::: }.:~ '';:~'>;- <'~*~~"- <:~:::.~:~ .. "~~~~~ a) underlffe.;:.fo~t~miijJ~Re.~jdt"tial Uses", add the following new ^~-:=~;i~;~BW:", _ '~~~;tjlf~:$:?'? ~.~~:;~::~~~~~~' ~:~..~~;..~.:1;;,;.,r...}~?<~.>. '>>"';:~;;';~ #;'~'{7". . <-*-$.-::::, '",<'Z~:-. ~~:>,,,,.;:<.:~y' ~- /.- ~~~;~:~x " ,'.' '-?~' FaF!iit:;/ -....;;r:?>. ..~~~~~~ vaclil.(W:., ".<..}}} %.~;:- - l~~) ~";>;~~-' ?~ P(2) P(2) ~ ':" Home'::~}::" )>~ ~~/~ 'i'>;<';'.. ~~::. "i"~"..:';, g..:~;-,.~ ~~~~;:~:" ~'<'~>:~;' '.VN, &~" irf:tft~l~~~tititled, "Bed and Breakfasf', under the NL column, del~t~Jp~'letter "P" and replace with "P(2)"; ,,/ b) in the row entitled "Bunkhouse", under the NC and NL columns, delete the letter "P" and replace with "P(1)"; c) in the row entitled, "Home Occupation", under the NL column, delete the letter "P" and replace with the letter "P(2)"; d) in the row entitled, "Sing/e Detached Dwellind', under the NL column, delete the letter "P" and replace with the letter "P(3)"; e) in the row entitled, "Flood, Erosion and Stormwater Control Structures", delete the name in its entirety and replace with the 8 899048 words, "Flood and Erosion Control Projects" and add the following new row after this row: I Stormwater Control Structures P P P f) in the row entitled, "Farm" delete the name, "Farm" and replace with the name, "Agricultural Uses" and replace wherever this name is referenced in the By-law and add the following new row after this row: I Animal . Agriculture P(3) I . Pi j'ff;~\J '.'.,',', g) Under the row entitled, "Park. 'AQti\:"e':,J~eiete the "P" under the NL column and replace with "-,, symb6r~B'd add the following new row after this row: ':::,.,::-<. "0 , '';';';', ""~<':';';'>.. ',x.:. "'''>>:';';.,'; :?<:.. '-~';;>:,:::;:': Transportation, Infrastructure, and Utilities Uses Pi4'\; >>,.:\ ._{::;:~ .':; p ......,......,.. . '.. - . . 21. . . ,.' . . . . , ... ..... ',. , . . . - , - . . . . . . . . , . . .,..".... .....,.',.. Notations f~>r Section 12.2.1, fable 12-1, is modified as follows: a) . . , . - . , . . ".', . ... .. -, under Notation('1tadd the words, "that is a temporary, mobile or portable unif after the words, "second dwelling"; b) :~qger No.t<=!tion (2), add the words, "or if permission to construct a sirigledetathed dwelling existed on November 15, 2001" at the end; c) under Notation (3), add the words, "or if permission to construct a single detached dwelling existed on November 15, 2001" at the end; d) add the following new Notation after Notation (3): "(4) With the exception of Stormwater Control Structures." 22. Section 12.3.2 f) i), is modified by deleting this subsection in its entirety and replacing with the following: "One second dwelling that is a temporary, mobile or portable unit where permitted provided it is used by persons employed on the farm having a minimum lot of area of 20 ha," 9 899049 23. Section 12.3.3 f), is modified by deleting this subsection in its entirety and replacing with the following: "One second dwelling that is a temporary, mobile or portable unit where permitted provided it is used by persons employed on the farm having a minimum lot of area of 20 ha." 24. Section 12.4.1.1 EP-1 Zone, is deleted in its entirety and the proceeding subsections are renumbered accordingly. 25. Section 12.4.1.3 EP-3 ZONE, is modified as follows.:~" a) und~r part a. ii), delete the word, "Farm.:;..~~Wi--eplace with the words, "Agncultural uses"; .::~{{:-' .:;::: '. ..... . b) under part a. iii), delete the word,~r~Flood erosioh an.d stormwater control structures" and replacewlfh the words, "FI06d~nd Erosion Control Projects";'. ., ',-, c) under part b. i), delete the word~;:~Afl:ijm" and replace with the words, "An AgricultqfEJI.H~~~" ',,<<.; ........':... .,"...... 26. Section 12.4.2. ~ NC-1 Zone;;)~.d.~j~'f~~:.:t?:}t~;~Atitety and replaced with the follo~~Jlg~:\:- '::":-.;:;:':!J"" "';'::;::<r}. '...'.-...,.....1 .. .. , , " ;:;::::~:.:., . "12.4.2 <..~C except'f;>n Zones[:~:::. "'1~.4.2.1 ./>>NC-1 Zonf a': :.., . P~.rmittecf'q~~s::. .il. Bed ahdBreakfast fi1>. Home Occupation iii) Single Detached Dwellina jv) " Parm Vacation Home \0 Conservation : Vi) Agricultural Uses vii) Flood and Erosion Control Projects viii) Passive Park ix) Reforestation x) Specialty store for the sale of antiques and crafts xi) Tea-room and/or tea garden, and business or administrative office ancillary to a permitted use b. Regulations: i) Lot Area 4ha ii) iii) Lot Frontage Yard Setback a) ,Front Yard setback b) Exterior Side Yard setback c) Interior Side Yard setback 45m 7.5m 15m 15m 10 899050 d) Rear Yard setback 15m iv) Lot Coverage (max) v) Only a Single Detached Dwellinq, Agricultural Use, Specialty store for the sale of antiques and crafts, Tea Room and/or Tea Garden that existed as of November 15, 2001 shall be permitted. c. Except as amended herein, all other provisions of this By-law, as amended, shall apply. 27. Section 13.2.1, Table 13-1, is modified as follows: a) under the row entitled, "Residential Uses",.~cjdthe following new row: I Farm Vacation Home p . ' . - , - . b) in the row entitled, "Farm", delete the name, "Farm" anclJeplace with the name, "Agricultura(U$es" and'N.Herever this term::is referenced in the By-law and adq}hf:3folibwing new rows after this row: ..:..... Animal Agriculture 'p. '. .. . . . . . . . . ' . . c) Add the followin~{!1ew rows"~tthe end of Table 13-1: Flood and Er9sion CO.l)~rol Proje'ds .:.. '. P .. T ra nsportation, lrifrastructLJre and P Utilities .. .. 28. Sectjon 13.2.1, N,plation for Table 13-1, is modified by adding the words, "that is Citempora,ry, mobile or portable unit" after the words, "second dwelling" in Notation (1). 29. Section 13.3.1 g) i), is modified by deleting this subsection in its entirety and replacing with the following: "One second dwelling that is a temporary, mobile or portable unit where permitted provided it is used by persons employed on the farm having a minimum lot of area of 20 ha," 30. Section 14.2.1, Table 14-1, is modified by deleting the term, "Farm" and replacing with the term, "Agricultural Uses" and wherever this term is referenced in the By-law. 31. Section 14.3.1, AE - Aggregate Extraction Zone Regulations, is modified by the following: ] ] 899051 a) under part a), delete the number "30 m" under the column entitled, "Pit" and replace with the number "15 m" in both instances; b) under part a) (1), delete the reference to "90 m" and replace with "30 mOl in both instances and add the words, "and not permitted within 15 m of any abutting highway or waterbody" at the end; c) delete part d) in its entirety. 32. APPENDIX A - MINIMUM DISTANCE SEPARATION I, is deleted in its entirety. ..,,-.. 33. APPENDIX 8 - MINIMUM DISTANCE SEPARATION II, is deleted in its entirety. .. ,.::;,,-. ... .. Schedules: ...-, 34. Schedule 'E15' is deleted in its entirety and replaced by a new:. Schedule 'E 15' attached as Attachme~;:~~:;~'.:~:;~::{~~~;::::: '';. 35. Schedule 'E23' is deleted in its entirety and replaced by a new Schedule 'E23' attached as Attachment "3". 36. The 'EP-1' Zone is deleted in its entirety on Schedules 'E2', 'E3', 'E4', 'E5', 'E6', 'E7', 'Ea', 'E11', 'E,2', 'E13', 'E14', 'E15', 'E16', 'E20', 'E22', 'E23' and replaced with an 'EP' Zone. (Note: All schedules will need to be deleted and replaced to reflect removal of the EP-1 Zone from the By-law. As per discussion with Clarington staff they will provide revised schedules). .. 37.Tt1~ 'NC-1' Zone'~~ delet~d in its entirety on Schedules 'E3', 'E4', 'E7', 'E'8';.'~15', 'E16',.~E23' and r~placed with an 'NC' Zone. 38. The terrri, 'llEnvironmental Holding (H) Zone" is deleted and replaced with the term, "MAol" on Schedules 'E1' to 'E23' inclusive. A Decision is not being made on the following zones and schedules: 1. Section 17.0 Major Recreational Zone Category. 2. Section 12.4.1.2 EP-2 Zone. 3. 'MR-1' Zone (Kirby Ski Resort) on Schedules E14, E15, E22 and E23. 4. 'MR-2' Zone (Mosport Speedway) on Schedules E4 and E5. 5. 'C7-1' Zone on Schedule E6. ]2 899052 6. 'C8' Zone on Schedule E6. 7. 'C8-1' Zone on Schedule E6. 8. 'C7-1' Zones on Schedule E14. 9. 'C8' Zone on Schedule E14. 10. 'C8-1' Zone on Schedule E14. 11. 'EP-2' Zone (Club house) on Schedule E4. 13 899053 Attachment "1" TABLE 4 -1 REGULATIONS - ACCESSORY BUILDINGS, STRUCTURES AND USES Legend * Not applicable Total Lot Total Height ZR Zone coverage accessory (max) regulation (max) Floor Area (II) Notation (max) ':~t~:1i;\:i'." ",';:,'.''}~:~;.({>/.; ,.' Detached garage 4.5m Antenna * Communications 90 m2 for receiver lots less 3.7 m than 2 Play equipment; hectares Diving board; 3m Pool slide 10% of lot area 120 m2 for lots with Climate control a * device minimum lot area of 3 m if 2 hectares the floor area is Other uses less than 10m2 Yard Setbacks Front Rear Interior Side Exterior Side ZR 1.2 m(1) 1.2 m(2) ZR ZR 0,6 m measured from edge ZR of antenna ZR 0.6 m measured from edge ZR of communications receiver ZR 1.2 m 1.2 m ZR ZR ZR less 1.2 m ZR less 1 m 1m ZR 1.2 m 1.2 m ZR 4.5m "C" ,.f " '. Commercial and Industrial Zones: 60 m2 5m ZR t _. , ,Institutional and lItilityZories' 60 m2 Agricullur..1 and Open Space Zones 90 m for lots less than 2 hectares 1.2 m ZR (. - ;:' t':~:\:':f._':~ f.t'r r.\}~.: ~~:f:~t,(;';~; ,.~:~;."~{}t.~'t~;: Accessory to , dwelling 1 0% of lot area 120 m2 for lots with a minimum lot area of 2 hectares 5 m ZR 1.2 m(3) 1.2 m(3) ZR ~ 'n'n 899054 Notations for Table 4-1 (1) Rear yard setback where the rear yard abuts a lane - 2m (2) Interior side yard setback where there is a common wall with a detached garage on an abutting lot - 0 m (3) Yard setback for parking commercial motor vehicle and recreational vehicle - 5 m; where abutting a Rural Settlement Zone or a lot with a dwelling located within 15 m of the common lot line - 10m 899055 1 I \ J__L_ .... .-.. r __~C===.= II ~- I ' -'I, ~ _ GO <: o "iij 8 l5 () ~ r- . .... . I I I \ Refer To I ZoningBy"'law m .L.__I[~~~-6~_1~IL__ _ G=~~__ 11:.r 'T-- Irr.-~tll=.=. I I . ~~t&IJ '" m o '" ~ ~ E 2 ~ Lot 16 Lot 15 Lot 14 Lot 13 Lot 12 Lot 11 Lot 10 Lot 9 LoIS URS OA ON UEP ~C Dp U NC _ MR >>'://_ Minimum Area ,,,.;,./ NL _ AE // /// of Influence Scale 120000 . By-Jaw 2005-109 .June 6, 2005 E7 ~ E15 ~ E23 899056 J\UC::H.,IIIIICIIl 4 To Report PSD-086-0! 101 "ONOOI e HOISSil::>ftCX) 'NOlSS3:>HO:> I J. NCllSSilONOO I fi~SS30NO:) I S NCllSSiiONOO 1 tHOlSS30HCY.l I s: NOlSS30HCX:l I ,NCllSS3:lNO:) I NOISS3:>NOO I lal'" a NOISS30MO:>II'l'hl9 0"<<.)0 : ~ ~~ ;;;tr-- v-~ -- ~-""'J -L~o . \C 'IIII- ~/----.~ CO ~ I"~ "--~~--- , '--" . r :~A ~ Jp- ;V__<1' I ~?\".:r ~~. . w U!~ -? 1, , ;' -- 3~1 J J ~S" - ~ 7'-' · 04 ;\ : ~ ;; \.u: -~ : ,--~I -::j ~ r. -';:. ----.:;, ~"l;, . ~~-), \ I" . I >>"',.CO ~ iI", a.--I I'----___~ __ i.i . --n"'" I - W f-t~ f J ~~~~~ ~ '~ ~, <1ffiO/ ~.. ........ ~~\--R _..~ en ~'~~r . - ~- "~ I, -[CO>"" 1_ II '.:; \~~ ~.~ ;: 0.",",,~ ~ - a~ ~ II -t~- CJ ""f-"""~) >-:;; ~J > ~~ ~"".. ~---o..J~ ~)- ~ -lfrJr - ." . "'\ ~ -"'".. 11::- -." )I /" I) -~ -U''''-l" ,0 I~:';: if ~ v ~n ~ ; T:; --0;: .. -?ij'/~ ~~~-:~ -j!="'~~'~ ~~. --..6'r" .1 l __ I J~ ~I..."-- ::::/ . -I _1 ~.. ~--=-~ ;.:. /i i ~-: -~'-f I~ ~ l~ i .i~_~ c--.,- ,-i -_- -: /~-' ~:J- -, I ~f.=- ,I-~ .,..~ llil&~ Jh k~ -:/1 . \ - -----..--1-- m-....-- t-orrrn-i l j C~T\'1l~r, II-t~\~if -1- OJ }- c.--+--' --"-l~~ ,fl!!,-~, ,. ~ "'~' ~~j -_. --H-/ e=-~::JiJti;~ 71~~\r'1t ~- -- -""'"""'~' '\ \6/ /--;'-r--fm - -- ,~ y-k'i~ ~~ <--. ~-/,,-~~.l ~ : Ii Lj - ~;~ l~-~l_ T ~ __ . _~'_ .. =-=4-- ~ ..... I . -I;'i< ~~_FrJ__md__- -71-~~_~:J ~ 11;-11 f---~ ~_ c- . : ~ ~ -~ ,r-. .r~~~=~ --..-~ \ ~m ~';'~~~J- ~-- ~ aii---- ._~ ~ ']GT -I!~~~'''-I,-~ ~-&'-._~~ ~J : ( -~ --..~ M- ~~~''''-' ~ ~~ ~\t\:'~nrn-~' ~ i~ -I" ~---e.=u I---- ~~. '1,3 li:ril- llih"1lJllt= .I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ R ~ Ion W .- N - M . ~ ~ III . - , . . . - = ~I-- .... ~ JCj~ : I : ~ y- ;~ I:n 000:::1 IS tKlIS'H:)NO:I ,. ., "IOISS30"K':> I L NOISS~ I i NOISS3:>NO:l I !lIKllSS3:1NOO I "NOlSS3~NOO tNOlSSi~ ,NOlSSiONOO I I NOlSS3:1NOO lo:! 90NeO \ -~d "~"~I Q) c 'm L- a :2: Vl Q) OJ "0 iY -'<:: ro o D en o t""f I in 0- 0)( NCU ~"tJ fa C -..... I fa >CU CO a- cne c- .- fa C a- o ::s N~ <~ 899057 BOUNDARY ROAD ~t\l \~;" }~J:0'/a'C:'.'(d.'~~Off' .. ~'~6~'o.Q:t:iOIi~' 6~~' , flf~fjP:<:jQ. .......... . . .~iJI:S<O' ~W?~.Wj~~fl~Q~. ~~~~~ ;!Y~~Q:~~~\~~~ ~ ~ ~ .~~~0~~:.>>...:.~.~ ~ ~ -~ .JRym.;~\)Q:~ ~~f;ic, t ~ ?f ~ ~ ~: ~~~~~~~~~:: )..~ :;../1 ~ 'Ii ~ ~~~!4:;1oii~:.. ~ v~ ~~~~ ~d. '"; ~.f ~~ V __ ~ ~ > ~ Fa - c ~~~ ~ ~~ ~.. A ~~2--7~ ~ ., ~ ? /~~ f:;f;; ~ //; %J?::: ~ ~ 1 . ~ ~ ="- '" ~, ~t~ )~ A ~~ ~ ~ ~ ffi<~4J, 6' 11 ~ ~ ~ ^ C~~~- ~ ~ ~;, .~ Ii "" ~ ~ \,' ~..ftL /-"- ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~~ \ " t~ ~ ~1 ;; L fl 1\Ia-, '-.' , ~ [~, "- ~~ ~~ ~~~ d~:;: ~~~, ~"J I ~- ~-:: ~ ~ % Refer To-' ~~~ ~~ :;;~. ~ ~ ~>... ~ 84-63 ::\. ....... ~~ '. q :-~~~ ;;Jjl ~& ~ ~-% "'1\/ I - ~ U I Oa Ridges / e::\ L.....-. J ~ Mor IneLlmltl ?'~ ... ~~~ ~ W-------'l'-3 lIJ? "'Y""~""-:::; ::/. -A. .AI -~@ \\ o <:: o Iii '" ., " <:: o U u o <( ~ w Z :J Z :;; o I- ~ ~"'G -,~ ~ ~~ rl ~~ -:;"., ~(J) <:: ~~ ~ ~ ~ :;:-;..- ~ u l. ~ v U#::: '" <:: o 'Iii '" ., " <:: o U ///- Lol35 Lol33 Lot 34 Lol32 Lol31 Lol30 Lol29 Lol28 Lol27 [=:J RS L:l A L:l EP .. C r:=J NC .. MR l~~.l NL ~ AE LJN c::J P W/./.: MAOI (Minimum //~ Area of Influence) Zoning By-law 2005-109 Scale tv 1:20000 A] ~ Scugog ~ El :;:: III o E9 June 6, 2005 899058 ~ . .. ~ ~~ t:---- ~ - - .::: :::::::=- 111\\ 1i'"j~mo 0 c: o en '" Q) " c: o C,) 7R ~ ~ R 1-1 ~ . .~" \ 1;.. ~ fl r:d I [RS1l)1f rhN'''ESSI NRD1b J:ta l~iX ~ F\IIIIIIr .~ L-~\ I~I V RS1 ~~ ~ J;" -~~. -..p'" V ~ f ~ ~ - ~ ~~, - ~A~~~ t::1f ~ ~ ~ ~~I ~ ~ ' A ~ ~_""%,\,k, . ;;.-' ~ t{l ~/~, ~~,_ I~ 1\:8 i" ,~~ ~i .r~/ '~I ~} II~ ~ll :. ') . J~ - I\.. A ~t - ~ J [ OakRldg~s r ~ ~'~I:t--Izon,~~e~:~a~ r~ . ~ I h ~84-63 --Y'/'~ I I IIIL, r-- r ~~... .". en ., c: o .en 0] .L-__ I f- 1 - ~,:; I) f-- )) ~ ~ <\ ( \." rJ l~ ) IL .~ I I; jj A~~ . IIrj ~Xt I ~p ;jMi~1 ~ /%f ~~..t \\ "l'~ .- vl-l= ri '1 =--~ !IHI ~ (H ~s1l '''L~_ N / c ~ s /"' J_ .. <Xl c: o .en '" Q) " c: o C,) Lot 26 LOl25 Lot 24 Lot 23 Lot 22 Lot 21 Lol20 Lot 19 Lol18 June 6, 2005 Sea Ie tv 1:20000 J1 Scugog iil E2 f3 El0 c::J RS CJ A c:J EP IIIi C c::J NC ~ MR c:JNL ~AE CJN c:Jp ~ MAOI (Minimum / Area of Influence) Zoning By-law 2005-109 899059 ~ c: o .Vi '" Q) u c: o U co c: o 'Vi '" Q) u c: o U Lot 18 Lot 16 Lot 11 Lot 10 Scale N 1:20000 J1 Scugog ~ E3 ~ Ell C]RS C]A C]EP ~C C]NC "MR 1'+1 NL ~ AE (III N CJp W//- MAOI (Minimum ://~ Area of Influence) Zoning By-law 2005-109 June 6, 2005 899060 BOUNDARY ROAD BOUNDARY ROAD ~ ~ c: o "w <J) OJ U c: o o ~ '" c: o "w <J) OJ U c: o o Lot 4 Lot 3 Lot 2 Lot 1 Scale AI 1:20000 A Scugog 13 E4 :3 El2 c:J RS c:J EP c:J NC [:::J NL CJA I!!II C "MR ~AE CJN CJp ~ MAOI (Minimum /0 Area of Influence) Zoning By-law 2005-109 June 6, 2005 899061 ~ RS r::::J A [:::J EP IIIJ C [:::J NC .. MR EI!] NL ~ AE t~~-l N CJp W//- MAOI (Minimum '//~ Area of Influence) Zoning By-law 2005-109 June 6, 2005 Scale tv 1:20000 ~ .,. Manvers w a ES ~ w E13 899062 O~ ~ Q) c o 'iii '" '" o c o o '" c o 'iii '" '" o c o o Lot 23 Lot 22 Lot 20 Lot 19 Lol18 June 6, 2005 Scale tv 1:20000 ~ Manvers In E6 [;J E14 [=:J RS CJ A CJ EP lI!II C [=:J NC .. MR c::::l NL ~;;'Yi:g AE CJN CJp w//- MAOl (Minimum /'/~ Area of Influence) Zoning By-law 2005-109 899063 Lot 17 Lot 16 CJRS CJA CJEP IIIc c:J NC .. MR 1"7" I NL ~ AE BOUNDARY ROAD Lot 15 Lot 14 Lot 13 CJN c:JP W/- MAOI (Minimum '/ //:- Area of Influence) ~ c o "in VJ '" " c: o U 0) c: o "in VJ '" " c: o U J '" I Lot 12 co c o "in VJ '" " c: o U ~ Lot 10 Lot9 Lot 8 Scale ^' 1:20000 A1 Manvers :fl E7 ffi E15 Zoning By-law 2005-109 June 6, 2005 899064 BOUNDARY ROAD s c: o "en <n Q) '-' c: o o <J) c: o "in <n Q) '-' c: o o L co c: o "in <n Q) '-' c: o o Lot 8 Lot6 \ Refer To Zoning By-law f~~~- Lot 2 Lot 1 June 6, 2005 Scale ^' 1:20000 A Manvers QI Q. o ::J: c::::J RS c:J EP c::::J NC c::::J NL CIA III!IJ C "MR ~~~q AE c::l N CJp ~ MAOI (Minimum / Area of Influence) Zoning By-law 2005-109 ~ ES E16 899065 C-_ ~~ ~ r rt~ .~ ~.....~ :::%.. /- /:%/'/"'..-i I :;/"~a ~-~ ~~- '~~ ~ ~~ %Jrr ~~1'JlI\.. ~ ~ ~ :A'L :;/".....1 I~ ' ~ ~~ ~ (~ ~ · ""'" k- ""-~'" ~iJ, ~/ " -, ~ i ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ II (' ~~ 8 ~ J ~ T .~ /'.. ffJ ~ '" ~ ' / "" ~~~, / i v "'if ~ I'> ~) I L - V~ I /f Refer-TO-r--- , / tV ~ l - J~ ~ ,If :Zor1i~lg By-law [ 7 l -=-[]= -, 7LLs4-63. L ~ ~~ L " r f ~~JOakUgL,LLlrlr=--::~ ~ r~V ~_r- - I I I II I I I -----1 >11_ ,_ --- Lot 35 Lot 34 Lot 33 Lot 32 Lot 31 Lot 30 Lot 29 ~ ~~~ ~ ~~ ^ ~~~~ ~ ~h.~~ -~~ ~ ~~,,~ r 1l0"'/m, r L 1'lli:!1 ~ ~,,~ . ~/"'~ ~ / r1~~ ~ ," "-... . ~ ~.......-~~ /:': ~~. %1 @ jJ.,: H ~~n --.~ ~~ ~ ~/ ~~I \ '~L ~~ ~"~_\ ~ ~ J ~~ ~~l '<W ~ ~~~ -;i ~~ ~ ~ 8 ~~ ,. ~-'_ ~ ~031 ~ ~ ~~ ~} ,~ ~ ~<~ ~ /'" ~ r;.----./"~ ~ ? n :;/" Dn. c:;..---./".........-./"~ ~ :.-: .~ 77""......-:/ -,-.... i L ~ ] ~.....g'-_.- ;... ~~~ ~ }j Lot 28 Lot 27 Lot 26 CJ RS [=:J A CJ EP I!II C CJNC "MR L!J NL ~;;'tfffJ AE c::J N CJp W//- MAOI (Minimum Y/~ Area of Influence) Zoning By-law 2005-109 June 6, 2005 Scale tv 1 :20000 AI III El I E9 ~ o E17 899066 ~./ /"" .// =:~;~ 'r&: J I' U ':[ ~ ~ I fl ~ "..... l~ ? q ~ ~y 0 ~~. ~ ' ~ I ~~ ---Izo~:~:~aw ~ ~ l~ J'il~j bS4-63 ~ ~/'-fg I 1. ~ ---:/~ ~ I~' 1- I (H 51l ~d~B-1~ r'J . -:J'3:-5 > -1l:- I \., ~t - ~~ , i ,,\, I{~ RM~ > UiS1 . .~ ~ ~ _:Q ~ "" ~ 'ij ~~ ~l:' (H)RS1 ~ ~) Oak Ridges M~ralne Limit c::l--r. ~Illi~l '_ rpl b-.x-........h;..-:: ~~./-'"' V I L_ II IR~1-~ .~ ~:::?11 ""r.~~ V~_~_~OL r I ~.;r. l: cIrC6"- ~~~; ~_I<:: T--t-l--LIL_: -TP _~~C ~ ;;~~ ~~ __.I IV~~~ ~ J:k'L I ~:t': 'l::: ~~ - ~"--~ (H)R51 (" '" - ::1 f-- ~ _ --; /"........-:~ ~ 0 BlsIA: IE--- ~ ~~ T~~ ~ ~~ \ Il ~ - <'~~ ~ .~ ':2~ \ L\ ~ ~.1!1! :_-~_j-~ r--- __ _ -LI~_ ........~~.47 _ D.. -j-:-/t-( L c a~~ I/A .--/>-; ~ , :; ~ .~~ ~ ~ ,-o_CAM_k,^"",^,= __ - .., ~~ /~ 8 ~ ~- /' i ~ J -' 1]__- - ------ ~~ - r--- ,--- - --- - I ~ I I I [-::; i no I I I r-: 'll ' ~ ~ "'- ~ ~ ? c ( \ r -- 0::; /'/ i0-1- ~ :;::- ;; ~ . E::3... 4 a 11. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ -- -~ " ~ =~I ~ ~ /""' Lot 27 Lot 26 Lot 25 Lol24 Lol23 Lot 22 Lot 21 Lot 20 Lot 19 Lot 18 June 6, 2005 Scale IV 1:20000 JJ E2 IDE10a E18 c:J RS c::J A [:J EP II!!I C [:J NC .. MR r::::J NL ~ AE CJN CJp w// MAOI (Minimum /'//h Area of Influence) Zoning By-law 2005-109 899067 u_~_ __I~_U Ref T:-l J I-~\~J- Zoning By-law 84-63 -~I -I -~ uS ---l I r-- c o ";;; '" OJ U C -- 0 u ~ _J I U[" -__L\\__I~J I~-- --~- JL_~ "jl-"9~~' ~_ r--- --- Lot 18 LotH Lot 16 Lot 15 Lot 14 Lot 13 Lot 12 Lot 11 Lot 10 Scale IV 1:20000 )j E3 ~Ella E19 [=:J RS c::J A [=:J EP II!II C c::J NC .. MR r <"~G~1 NL ~ AE CJN CJp W//- MAOI (Minimum //~ Area of Influence) Zoning By-law 2005-109 June 6, 2005 899068 <0 C o "u; <f) Q} o c o U .r . __J Oak Ridges Moraine Limit - --I n_ --!:;J __ L ___ _ _ o cr: Refer To C'i I l/l _ _\ Zoning IBy-law ~ _ - -84-63 aJ JI r I~J~I~fL- . ....J..~.. Il=rI1 lrlllnJSl[clJ Fr3J~t N RQLI ] [rj1LLnK~~~rm!" t -m g-, f.2J~1 ? I- I ~ tTlT f1~~- U" r --1M _.J ::J ~1 -1 U 0<: o c5 cr: l/l lD _______ ~ _ __I=L --1----1 ----[ \ --I I Lot 9 Lot8 Lot? Lot 6 Lot 5 Lot 4 Lot 3 Lot2 Lot 1 June 6, 2005 Scale tv 1:20000 JJ E4 2E12E E20 CJ RS c::J A CJ EP ~ C CJNC ~MR Cl NL ~~~:~ AE L:lN Clp w/./.: MAOI (Minimum //~ Area of Influence) Zoning By-law 2005-109 899069 --\ a C3 a: w z ::J i a <( o a: z ;: ~ llJ a <( o a: t- ..~~OO",L 1- .. nil I I z o t- el z ::J a: <( a Lot 35 Lol34 LOl33 Lol31 Lol30 Lol29 Lol28 Lol27 c::J RS CJ A C:JEP IIIIc c::J NC .. MR c::J NL ~ AE c:JN CJp w//- MAGI (Minimum :///~ Area of Influence) Zoning By-law 2005-109 June 6, 2005 Scale tv 1:20000 A1 E5 EE13~ E21 899070 Refer To Zoning By~law 84-63 i Lot 26 Lot 25 Lot 18 Lot 17 Scale IV 1:20000 ~ E6 EE14~ E22 (=:J RS (=:J EP c:J NC r::::::J N L CJN CJp ~ MAOI (Minimum ;0 Area of Influence) CJA III!II C ~MR ~AE Zoning By-law 2005-109 June 6, 2005 899071 <0 " o 'u; Vl Q) " " o o .... " o 'u; Vl Q) " " o o <X) c: o 'in '" OJ I.> c: o o ----r r-- -- - __ _J,___ ~ ~ ~ Refer To ' J Zoning'By-law I 'JI 84-63 I J L__~__~J ~ u -r-- I-C. " B cr ~ g r:. Lot 16 Lot 15 Lol14 Lot 13 Lot 12 Lol11 Lot 10 Lot 9 Lol8 CJRS L:lA CJ EP ~ C CJNC "MR ClNL ~AE CJN c::J P W//, MAOI (Minimum ///",;. Area of Influence) Zoning By-law 2005-109 June 6, 2005 Scale tv 1:20000 A1 E7 ~E15~ E23 899072 00 c: o "Uj '" OJ U c: o U --:---, I ~--j J -~ , 1--- - ~! 84~63_ _ j & 1- -- - - --- 1 !/) ~NARAS~JD____J L __~U__tJ_ tr_ _ ___ La j L__ ___~L_ \ .. 'Tr .... .--1J~1 I \\ I ~ Oak Ridges Moraine Limit ~ z ~ 0.. :;; o ~ Lol9 Lol2 LOl1 Lot 8 Lol? Lot 4 Lot 3 [=:lRS CJA c::J EP l1li C [=:l NC .. MR c:J NL ~;;~CJ AE c:::J N r::J P w//- MAOI (Minimum ///~ Area of Influence) Zoning By-law 2005-109 June 6, 2005 Scale tv 1:20000 A E8 ~E16! E24 899073 ] J o <i o (( en z w ;:, ! ---1-- d n -- -1_ ~rl-TI~ 11 ! ___Jl ---- J n. r - -- ---.- 1----- - 1- --- ~--- - I J ---} -- \'\ " '- '""-. i --I I _J_ -IT 1- I ~-J 'J I I JJ JL -Ll _Jl__ _T@NT -1_ _ [lJW1Tl- r----f-ur- T Lot 9 Lot 7 Lot 8 Lot 6 Lot 2 LJRS c:JA LJ EP ~ C LJNC "MR CJNL ~AE r::J N CJp W//- MAOI (Minimum /'/~ Area of Infiuence) l___ --- o <i o (( Cf) o .. li! Oak Rldgos Moraine Limit en w 0: -- - - o <i -LLlJ ~-J~~r-I-l [0 o --. ---- Refer To Zoning By-law 84-63 mJL_ o <i -- fi? -- Cf) w (( o <i T- 1 Lot 5 Lot4 Lot 3 (( w -' o o (( w Z :J Z :i: o f- W '" (( :) on " o .;;; "' OJ u " o o z o f- l!) z :J (( <i o Scale 11 tv 1:20000 ~ E12 ::: ffiE20~ E28 iil June 6, 2005 Zoning By-law 2005-109 899074 ~ /~(r/ ~ l I_#~/^' _ __ 0 _1_~-~1 '4fr-- r- T ~;;:{ _ L _. Refer Tr _ __{------ Zoning By-law ~ __J - _~-_ -~-~ -~ 84-163 I' ~ --- f. u__ .__. .. ~ ~ -\ I I~~ I i I __J L _ _ to c: o -Vi Ul '" <.) c: o <.l o ~ o <r z @ <r w f-- l-rl-lCi1r ~_ _ 1Ft ,~j,~ '0- -- I I Il -- j _lIJ__bcj _~SSION RQli - ----I -Ll-~ - - Lot 26 Lot 25 Lot 18 Lot 17 CJ RS c:::JA CJEP IImc c:::J NC .. MR c:::J NL ~i~5f AE CJN c:::::J P ~ MAOI (Minimum / Area of Influence) Zoning By-law 2005-109 Scale N 1:2.0000 ~ E14 aE228 E30 June 6, 2005 899075 \ I "L_~ T---/ Lot1? Lot 16 Lot 15 Lot 14 Lot 13 Lot 9 C]RS CJA C]EP ..C CJNC "MR CJNL ~AE c::J N CJp W/- MAOI (Minimum /'/h Area of Influence) SKARDA I:-~~--. ~~ <0 c: o -- '(i.i Ul Q) U c: o t.) -8_--1-= Tl Refer ~~- ---l I' --- -Zoning By-law --J- 84-63 ~ lO c: o ".. Ul Q) U __ c: o t.) :I Oak Ridges Moraine Limit :::::1 [L _____il__ ___ b -- '-r-i- I (-I Zoning By-law 2005-109 June 6, 2005 Scale IV 1:20000 AJ E15 aE23~ E31 899076 0 eoo - - Address Use OP Designation Zoning 84-63 Zoning 2005-109 Proposed Zoning 2005- 109 3730 Concession Boat and Trailer Prime Agricultural C4-7 C7-1 C7 -2 copy uses Road 8 Sales (Boatland Area permitted in C4-7 (84- Canada) 63) - sales and service for recreational vehicles, sales outlet for automobiles, stoves, furnaces and fireplaces 8207 Hwy 35/115 Retail/Warehouse Prime Agricultural C4 C7-1 C7 -3 Home I (Sun Windows) Area Improvement Store i I I 8235 Hwy 35/115 Vacant Prime Agricultural C4 C7-1 C7 -4 Restaurant Area I 8271 Hwy 35/115 Produce/Garden Prime Agricultural C4 C7-1 C7 -5 Garden & Nursery ! I Centre (Freskiw Area Centre I I j I Farm s) I I I 8335 Hwy 35/115 Motor Vehicle Prime Agricultural C4 C7-1 C7 -6 Motor Vehicle RepairfT owing/ Area Repair Garage I i Vehicle Sales i I I (Collision Centre) I 8230 Hwy 35/115 Decommissioned Prime Agricultural C6 C8 C8 I Gas Station Area I I I 8246 & 8262 Hwy Gas Prime Agricultural C4-1 0 C8 C8 35/115 Station/Convenience Area I Store/Restaurant i i (Tim Hortons) ! 8786 Hwy 35/115 Gas Natural Linkage C6-4 C8-1 C8-1 i I Station/Convenienc Area I I e Store/Restaurant i 8848 Hwy 35/115 Towing Yard Natural Linkage C6-4 C8-1 C8-2 Towing Yard I Area I 8874 Hwy 35/115 Vacant Restaurant Natural Linkage C6-4 C8-1 C8-3 - Restaurant I i Area I I AUacmnem " T R rt PSD 089 09 CD ill ill o -..J -..J Attachment 4 To Report PSD-086-09 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW NO. 2009- being a By-law to repeal By-law 2005-135, and replace it with a By-law to designate the Municipality of Clarington as a site plan control area, to define classes of development that may be undertaken without the approval of certain plans and drawings, and to delegate the approval authority to the Director of Planning Services and the Director of Engineering Services WHEREAS, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to repeal By-law 2005-135, of the Corporation of the former Town of Newcastle and rIO-enact a by-law with respect to site plan control in the Municipality of Clarington; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. By-law 2005-135 is hereby repealed. 2. All lands located within the corporate limits of the Municipality of Clarington are hereby designated as a site plan control area pursuant to Section 41 (2) of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, as amended. 3. The following are hereby defined as classes of development that may be undertaken without the approval of plans and drawings otherwise required under Section 41(4) and (5) of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, as amended; a) any building or structure owned or operated by the Municipality, the Region of Durham, a Conservation Authority, the Government of Ontario or Canada; b) any structure erected for the purpose of flood or erosion control; c) any agricultural building or structure; d) any temporary structure as defined by the Ontario Building Code; e) a residential building containing less that three (3) dwelling units; f) alterations to buildings or structures which do not alter the nature of the existing use: g) aggregate extraction activities which do not include permanent buildings or structures; and h) any expansion or enlargement of a building or structure that is less than 20 square metres or less than 10% of the total floor area of the building, whichever is less 4. Notwithstanding Subsection 3 above, in the Oak Ridges Moraine Area the approval of plans and drawings is required under Section 41(4) and (5) of the Planning Act RS.O. 1990, as amended, for the following a) any agricultural building or structure and any residential building or accessory structure in any "Environmental Protection (EP) Zone",and the "Minimum Area of Influence Zone (MAOI)" in the Municipality's Zoning By-law; and in an Oak Ridges Moraine Landform Conservation 899078 Area, shown on Map E of the Municipality's Official Plan with the exception that a one time expansion of any building and structure existing as of November 15, 2001 shall not require such approval, provided: i) the expansion does not exceed 50% of the gross floor area of the existing building or structure; ii) in the case of a principal building, it does not exceed 50 m2;and iii) in the case of an anyone or all accessory buildings and structures it does not exceed 20 m2 in total. 5. For the purpose of this By-law, Oak Ridges Moraine Area shall mean the portion of the Municipality of Clarington within the Oak Ridges Moraine Boundary established by Ontario Regulation 01/02 or its successor. 6. Pursuant to Section 41(13)(b) of the Act, the powers and authority of the Council of the Municipality of Clarington under Section 41 of the Act, except the authority to define any class or classes of development as mentioned in Section 41 (13)(a) are hereby delegated to the Director of Planning Services and the Director of Engineering Services of the Municipality of Clarington. 7. The Mayor and Clerk of the Municipality of Clarington are hereby authorized to execute any agreement with the Municipality dealing with ensuring the provision of any or all of the facilities, works or matters referred to in Section 41 (7)(a) and the maintenance thereof referred to in Section 41 (7)(b), or with the provision and approval of the plans and drawings pursuant to Section 41 (4) of the Planning Act, as may be required to be made by the owner of the land with the Municipality as a condition of the approval of the plans and drawings referred to in Section 41(4) of the Planning Act R.S.O. 1990, as amended. 8. This By-law shall come into full force and effect on the date of the passing hereof. BY-LAW read a first time this day of 2009 BY-LAW read a second time this day of 2009 BY-LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of 2009 Jim Abernethy, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, MuniCipal Clerk 899079 Attachment 5 To Report PSD-086-09 SUMMARY OF THE SITE ALTERATION REQUIREMENTS IN THE OAK RIDGES MORAINE CONSERVATION PLAN "site alteration" means activities such as filling, grading, and excavation that would change the landform and natural vegetative characteristics of land, but does not include, a) the construction of facilities for transportation, infrastructure and utility uses, as described in section 41, by a public body, or b) for greater certainty, · the reconstruction, repair or maintenance of a drain approved under the Drainage Act and in existence on November 15, 2001, or · the carrying out of agricultural practices on land that was being used for agricultural uses on November 15, 2001. 1. Every application must identify planning, design and construction practices that ensure that no buildings or other site alterations impede the movement of plants and animals among key natural heritage features, hydrologically sensitive features and adjacent land within Natural Core Areas and Natural Linkage Areas. 2. Site alteration is prohibited in key natural heritage features and hydrologically sensitive features and the related minimum vegetation protection zone except for the following: . Forest, fish and wildlife management Conservation and flood or erosion control projects, but only if they have been demonstrated to be necessary in the public interest after all alternatives have been considered. Transportation, infrastructure, and utilities as described in section 41, but only if the need for the project has been demonstrated and there is no reasonable alternative. · Low-intensity recreational uses as described in section 37. An application for site alteration within the minimum area of influence of a key natural heritage feature but outside the key natural heritage feature itself and the related minimum vegetation protection zone shall be accompanied by a natural heritage evaluation under section 23. An application for site alteration within the minimum area of influence of a hydrologically sensitive feature but outside the hydrologically sensitive feature itself and the related minimum vegetation protection zone shall be accompanied by a hydrological evaluation under section 26(4). 899080 3. An application for site alteration within a landform conservation area (Category 1) shall identify plaoning, design and construction practices that will keep disturbance to landform character to a minimum, including, a) maintaining significant landform features 'such as steep slopes, kames, kettles, ravines and ridges in their natural undisturbed form; b) limiting the portion of the net developable area of the site that is disturbed to not more than 25 per cent of the total area of the site; and c) limiting the portion of the net developable area of the site that has impervious surfaces to not more than 15 per cent of the total area of the site. An application for site alteration within a landform conservation area (Category 2) shall identify planning, design and construction practices that will keep disturbance to landform character to a minimum, including, a) maintaining significant landform features such as steep slopes, kames, kettles, ravines and ridges in their natural undisturbed form; b) limiting the portion of the net developable area of the site that is disturbed to not more than 50 per cent of the total area of the site; and c) limiting the portion of the net developable area of the site that has impervious surfaces to not more than 20 per cent of the total area of the site. . An application for major development with respect to land in a landform conservation area of either category shall be accompanied by a landform conservation plan that shows, on one or more maps, a) elevation contours in sufficient detail to show the basic topographic character of the site, with an interval of not more than two metres; b) analysis of the site by slope type (for example, moderate or steep); c) significant landform features such as kames, kettles, ravines and ridges; and d) all water bodies including intermittent streams and ponds. The landform conservation plan shall also include a development strategy that identifies appropriate planning, design and construction practices to minimize disruption to landform character, including, a) retention of significant landform features in an open, undisturbed form; b) road alignment and building placement to minimize grading requirements; c) concentration of development on portions of the site that are not significant; d) use of innovative building design to minimize grading requirements; and 899081 e) use of selective grading techniques. An application that does not constitute major development within a landform conservation area of either category shall be accompanied by a site plan that, a) identifies the areas within which all building, grading and related construction will occur; b) demonstrates that buildings and structures will be located within the areas referred to in clause (a) so as to minimize the amount of site alteration required; and c) provides for the protection of areas of natural and scientific interest (earth science) The above requirements do not apply in respect to mineral aggregate operations. In considering site alteration applications within Settlement Areas within either landform conservation area, the approval authority shall consider the importance of adopting planning, design and construction practices that will keep disturbance to landform character to a minimum, so as to satisfy the requirements of 30 (5) to (11) if possible. 4. Except within a Settlement Area, an application for site alteration within a subwatershed is prohibited if they would cause the total percentage of the area of the subwatershed that has impervious surfaces to exceed, a) 10 per cent; or b) any lower percentage specified in the applicable watershed plan. In considering applications, the approval authority shall take into account the desirability of ensuring that at least 30 per cent of the area of the subwatershed has self-sustaining vegetation. The approval authority shall consider the importance of the following for site alteration applications in a Settlement Area that are within a subwatershed a) Ensuring that the natural vegetation is maintained, and where possible improved or restored; and b) Keeping to a minimum impervious surfaces and their impact on water quality and quantity. 5. An application within an area of natural and scientific interest (earth science) or the related minimum area of influence shall be accompanied by an earth science heritage evaluation that, 899082 a) Identifies planning, design and construction practices that will ensure protection of the geological or geomorphological attributes for which the area of natural and scientific interest was identified; and b) Determine whether a IT)inimum vegetation protection zone is required, and if so specifies the dimensions of that zone and provides for the maintenance and, where possible, improvement or restoration of natural self-sustaining vegetation within it. 6. An application for site alteration and Stormwater management shall demonstrate that planning, design and construction practices that protect water resources will be used, including, a) Keeping the removal of vegetation, grading and soil compaction to a minimum; b) Keeping all sediment that is eroded during construction within the site; c) Seeding or sodding exposed soils as soon as possible after construction; and d) Keeping chemical applications to suppress dust and control pests and vegetation to a minimum The municipality shall seek to reduce areas with impervious surfaces and increase areas retained in a natural undisturbed state, in order to minimize stormwater volumes and contaminant loads. 899083 IT '"' ~ ,f7 ~ /-,;(:'.A ~-".< ~:':::2~ \ ;- f? -f~~~~,"~\ ~~ 9UMcMQtlrr~.. __Y~~:~<:'~ ,. ~t..~;~~~ ~_:': '-;I~~~~ ~~~:-:"--;j":~' .~:5'~':::{~\~~ ~l:J ~<,\ '~;/, ;I~~<:,:~~ ' '1". ;l1\~),:'j~::;'~~t ::\'. .' ~~~..~~-~. ! ~ "1 s ')'-':-.J. '" . " . '" ,\; ~ ~ crwcrs___>< ^ II \ ~. I _ I 1 ~'... I , ...... - \ ... __ :J :> 1 (O"l6.~w-'" ,/ I~~ ..~! n ,~t.~~>~_" i. rr /. ~~:7h /!t~,~.. l ":;{':';;:"""':'~'.:':__""":'-.'::':',.>-jl "~':"~:-;~~"':':.s-;, -: :'.0 ..'.:~' :'!~'J-~';' \ 7'~ ;"~.~~?~;:;/ :, .__ -~. ";~:"': 4/ . . ~=;~::.;;;::\::';';:.X"':~~~~;:~~"" '~~, "~_L'-"~", I L.::: r:.::~ v: ,',,,: ',;0':."'" ,- - -'~.,~~_.. ~... -./,'/ . c.o," -",C' _""-""','.'.. J'.:' ~T".~LI ',:,-,'-8/'-::S1 ~:'- :.>,:....,::.{::..- ?'-''-''~:P""''''':I~''''_'''."J~... ..-......,........:, ;';'.!-" " . ; _ -........-\.....I-......:h;','~::..,...I':......:'-....'..,<\ ~, ~- ,.,_',c., 'I II"'. ,~,,"'-'-- '-"-':~--' ..','.-'., ,'- '. .... ,-'. -. d" '-'~'_"_'-'-""""'" \ ~~.. t \-"'-:~' C" i ~:\ ~~-~ .... ~t"~ ""'\'~I<~~~\'~-:'l,-: '~-:-;~l~\"'..' '.-:~~' /.' ':' "\'~';\~~~f-~"4L~;"'-;''''~'~:'''''\,''t,,:::~',:'.:':.H i' ...1...>~~I:'~~"'/"'.?~'':\'1'''..I_-;,'..'''\~','2\''':' o "-~.. Ennis'" r \'-'~'I~. ~ . '''''~'"',,-._~_.,~~. -',,', ,-,-'-"','1I-,-"',",-,--,-_,,~-\,; ,J" >-___,.,.: -.-,_1,,' : I '.)r _ '. ~-.\:." ~ '!.'}':,;~~,-:: r:':~',~,:::: '/:Y'~"~~;,: ,~::~:~',~::"":-;'f:~'~':,:~,::~,~~~~~,~~-~;,,,,~;,:,~:''::-,~':::'S (:> 6~':-':~"-_:2,~;~:-::,~-{.":'_' ~ .' ' I II nj...., ~,:;.. '-'~d..".,l~it.,-._, ":"~iw..\'-"~"'l'<-'-"'-"-"'\"'-"""";"~-:--'-""_",._ i'( "c.'~' ,,~, ~ "TMF!'''r-:T C'""64 ~ ~ ~)A!i,.:-J/i5.:..""':"" ',~,~::"...' c' Fi:~:' '~,-::~{,!: ?:'-:';~,.::~,~~.;;--~,~,,~~:~:.;/:_-;~,:.,~~,~: 2 ~'::\~'.~~f;ri; :~,~'~::.:'~: I '- r r ..,- :~.- ~ -.. "::.'.'j [_;:;/ ...... ,... .,...\, ..... 1-"" 1 .' ........ '... -..... -, ,...1_ ...\... ." ...y W1- _\..._ '\" ~,\'.,-I 1".:.'.....\.;. ~ ,...1....... <.:'-t-.:,-;. .,'-~1Ji~ ....\...I.":.~~'\......':...;:.....--;......I~\...,-,'....~I~..\;...:I~~_;It....l\I,.....-,\~:.l- '1"';'" \.. ~t\, -.... !: Q ~~I ti/')~;-".";~~ ~~'o ~ -... -:....::-1,:( l'''''-~''''I::'''',,~,.''<~I:~'''':'I~-_,l;''-~'~':''''''~'.'\-:'''''''I_I -,\,~.~ ... l-...~: fA /.':,>:." . ~ ~i'\ .~c ,I II 1 ~ ....~;;.J., ~ :.- 'I, .:\<~l, ~-,J-(:-_c""~'-"~"__'__':"';',':;'_'.-.'~~~ -~"" '~',-r\ oJl ; . LiJ).Jl '1/1 'i3 i 11 I ~, ' ':;":NiJ"1 i (Jj . , f flJ. ,'!..' : 0!' )11 ;: l::j}:.{~i.:c~~ ~:(~: ~:~R0j:'lt.~ I" (:0:T: lj- '~r'1 ~ ~ " '=>,.!-"I- 'I<$V ',LO.Skam ~~~ rSj-g~~>~~.~~?iKt~~/i:~~~",:~';;~ NJ1~l~ ; "ii' 2! ~lso"n. ~:'"o"~1 ~~ " ! 9 i~! '~' , ~t~ Y'}'-;I~): \~M'-~';" ~- ~ '.,:~~:c.o ~ -' , lj ; 1:1 0 - 1;;1 ~"I i ~ < ; ~,_ ~,; e l ~ ~ ~ ~ II it! 1 ~ I ' '!I ~ '~I ~ 2 ~ ",my. (') ~ Ij'l~--~ 1" ~ , " ~ '~..-J '.~i I I c~''"o"'~~. ~,,~. _c' ~ ;;1;- 0 - .'c;~.n~.,\ ".,..,.- '.' f ~ f \ I i I_t1.1 " ~ I 1 · ~ .~ ~ ~::~'~~~~:__ K.nd~1J .J II ~ ~!. ~!I "or-)on I" I ~J j' 1 /8) 1~~)',:,,;,~;:..r-~.'- 1\ ~! i;! Mlltho" Jl ~! I \ :,11 I ~I ' ~. j ~,'" \! / :"k.:'0 c ~ '~/~'(: ~~ ' ~1-1~~;~"~.!!. :1 11 ! ' II !\i~J II ,].~::::~".;,-:,,~ ~ .... 'r ~~::;::: 'L'~~~ ~~:N ~~,:;S\;~~~;' ~: ,~o, ~\ j~ I "'.... I \. ..?...~,:.~ ~!..'.. ~l!. -~ ~ .~;;ono t '4 S~~.K,J '..r. ':.;.~ -- ~!i I ~; I ~.~ :r , I ~ ,ll~~ ii ~ /'i ".., " ~i$1 tl - ~ :; 10 <'h., '. "1,~. 0,11 1:.__.'.1 I 0 I ,,': , 'I ').i r ,-' ~" . 0 I 0" .; l"~"''''~''" " ~., 'I \ -, c~,,_ .1'0'0' c'",,,=, .~" I ttl" ~:j / " ~ \ . 'II, 11 :' 1.i: I I j I. i ~ 31 ( I c~,,~. '0'0' ::;- / -TY1 m~."~, I - I ;1 i i " I' i~ . ~~;"'~ 1 I. ~. ! I I r 1'1"'" <'~V I _ d. I ~ 'II',. ."''';;'ti'''",'j-'''' \ '1'\ L!.Y ! r I ~~uf'- I L4_J I I ." ce." ..."", -r'!t---..... t 3 . -:t.. I ' !h--~ ~ ==-'r:r' ' I ! c" 1-" " .' " ; ".~n' I ~ I , l ~g ; ii r I ! \ o,";,w,~;, ':; ~ ~ j i ; ~ir;;-"'.I ~ ijl~ ':~,~i Ikti >or ".JJ!':.' .- - ~ I' (r~' =,'.l! I 0__" .... . ._~ 0 _. 0 Ii, iii' ,! ii, .., y'_.._'" 'I .~ w,~. ,. ':Ji/- --~ 'I (i ~~i. ~ ~jt .~~ ,i o' I w -1T~Ff::l-f ~ ~ ~"'~...JJ I ~ io~ .~ ~~ I ~ I ~ i~-" ~\I ,,; ~".I ~ ' 0 ~: "I.:-~ ~I , ~ lL ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i1 ~ ~ ~il ~ " ol G'OY.~ }f;.,I-U~ ,,~ "'"'" "- '~'l~'~" ~I' , "'"""~. ,~,," . - J:il ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ . ~I~ ~ : i .......... h ~~. , . ~:' ~ : ':" ~ :~L= k6 "'" /, <D <D o ()) ~ - - - URBAN BOUNDARY - - - - - HAMLET BOUNDARY ORM LANDFORM CONSERVATION AREAS k."o-r';j CATEGORY 1 h::{\/j~;:l CATEGORY 2 OAK RIDGES MORAINE LIMIT ) ~ Attachment 6 To Report PSD-086-09 NATURAL HERITAGE I HYDROLOGICAL I EARTH SCIENCES HERITAGE EVALUATION PROCEDURES IN THE OAK RIDGES MORAINE 1. If the proposed development is within an undisturbed portion of the feature the required evaluation must be conducted by a professional Biologist, Hydrologist, Hydrogeologist, Ecologist or Geoscientist. 2. If the proposed development is within a feature that has already been disturbed by a related development, or is within a Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone the Planner will contact the relevant Conservation Authority to arrange a site visit to determine the need and scope of the evaluation and whether it needs to be conducted by a professional Biologist, Ecologist or Geoscientist. . 3. If the proposed development is within a Minimum Area of Influence the Planner will review the aerial photos of the property and consult with the relevant Conservation Authority to determine the need for a site visit and the scope of the required evaluation. Note: These procedures do not apply to proposals deemed to be "major development" as defined in the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan 899085 Cl~!ilJglon REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, September 14, 2009 Report #: PSO-087-09 File #: PLN 34.2.4.5 By-law #: Subject: HERITAGE CONSERVATION DISTRICT REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report PSO-087-09 be received for information; and 2. THAT any interested parties or delegation be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Oavid Crome, MCIP, RPP Oirector of Planning Services " Reviewed by: <.:=) ~~tZ-~Lc.. Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer I L/F L/sh August 28, 2009 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 899086 REPORT NO.: PSD-087-09 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 On September 30, 2002 Council approved initiation of a study pursuant to Section 40 (1) of the Ontario Heritage Act for a heritage conservation district (HCD). A study area By-law 2002-150 was passed. The study was to proceed in two phases, the first being the preparation of a HCD Background Study, and the second being the preparation of a HCD Plan. 1.2 In May of 2004 Council accepted the Phase 1 Study, which detailed the heritage character of the area on a street by street basis, and approved proceeding with Phase 2 of the study which was the development of the HCD Plan and accompanying architectural guidelines. 1.3 The recommendation brought forward by staff in January of 2006 was based on the input from a number of stakeholder groups, numerous comments from residents of the area and a request from the residents of the Beech Avenue block that their block be designated with a three year timeframe for evaluation. 1.4 On February 13, 2006, Council approved the following resolution: THA T no further financial resources be spent on the Heritage Conservation District Plan through consultants; THA T the draft Bowmanville Heritage Conservation District Plan be adopted as the Old Bowmanville (North Ward) Heritage Guidelines for use as a resource document by residents,' THA T a Beech A venue Heritage Conservation District Plan be drafted to reflect the request of the Beech A venue residents for designation of a Heritage Conservation District under Part V of the Ontario Heritage Act and that no further Heritage Conservation Plans be considered until the three year review of Beech A venue has been completed; THA T the Beech A venue Heritage Conservation District By-law be adopted when the specific Beech A venue Heritage Conservation District Plan has been drafted; THA T, upon reconstruction of Beech A venue, no further dollars be spent beyond traditional road construction; and THA T the Beech A venue Heritage Conservation District be reviewed approximately three years after it comes into force. 1.5 The Heritage Conservation District Plan was prepared for Beech Avenue and on May 15th, 2006 the District Plan and District By-law were adopted by Council. 899087 REPORT NO.: PSD-087-09 PAGE 3 The District designation by-law was registered on the titles of each property on October 1 yth, 2006. The Council resolution directed that the Beech Avenue Heritage Conservation District be reviewed with input from the residents three years after it comes into force. 2.0 HERITAGE PERMIT REVIEW 2.1 A Heritage Conservation District Advisory Committee was established to review applications for major projects within the District area. The Committee is composed of a Clarington Heritage Committee member, a building industry/design professional, a property owner from the street, and the Executive Director of the Clarington Older Adult Association. The Committee reviews the following types of applications: . construction of new buildings . additions to buildings . demolition of a portion of a building . demolition of an entire building . removal of a building or structure . relocation of a building on a property . relocation of a building from outside the district . site and park function alterations at Clarington Beech Centre . streetscape improvements including road and/or utility reco nst ruction/i n s ta Ilatio n The Ontario Heritage Act requires that the Clarington Heritage Committee also review applications for the removal of a building or structure and applications to demolish a building. The approval of heritage permits for minor applications, such as the installation of a front fayade awning, has been delegated to the Director of Planning Services. 2.2 Heritage Permit Applications There have been four heritage permit applications processed since the Heritage Conservation District was approved. Two were minor applications and were approved by staff. One application was for a building addition so it was reviewed by the Heritage Conservation District Advisory Committee and approved. The applicants have noted that the heritage permit process was easy to follow and did not cause any delay in their project's timing. The fourth permit was filed for the reconstruction of Beech Avenue in 2008. The Ontario Heritage Act requires that any public works within the district are to maintain the objectives of the Heritage Conservation District Plan. The HCD Advisory Committee met with members of staff and the chair of the Clarington Heritage Committee on May 5, 2008. An overview of the project and the 899088 REPORT NO.: PSD-087-09 PAGE 4 anticipated construction process showed that the design drawings that had been prepared were sensitive to the heritage character of the street. On June 9, 2008 Council approved the heritage permit for the road's reconstruction. The Engineering Services Department have noted that the Heritage Conservation District Plan gave Municipal staff and the road reconstruction project contractor a clear mandate with regard to design priorities. The residents were concerned as to how the reconstruction project would affect the character of the street. One resident was appointed as a representative for all residents and Engineering Services staff have commented that the Beech Avenue project was easier to deal with than other projects as the message from residents was consistent and united through-out the process, which was probably a result of these residents having been through the HCD process. In addition to these specific permits staff have been contacted by residents about other potential works such as roof replacement and exterior painting. These projects do not require a heritage permit, therefore they can be completed at the owners discretion. 3.0 THE HCD EV ALA TION PROCESS 3.1 HCD Advisory Committee Review On June 8, 2009 a meeting was held with the members of the HCD Advisory Committee to discuss how to proceed with the District evaluation process. A draft questionnaire, which had been prepared based on the goals and objectives contained within the District Plan, was presented to the Committee for comment. The questionnaire contained a section on property ownership, tenancy, heritage permit applications, and Committee membership, and requested comments be provided on how the HCD could be approved (Attachment 1). A few suggestions were made and the questionnaire was revised accordingly. 3.2 Residents Review On June 18, 2009 a meeting was held with the residents of Beech Avenue. Six people attended representing five properties. Staff provided an overview of the process that led to the request from the street residents to become a Heritage Conservation District. A review of the heritage permits received to date was provided. It was noted that many people have done maintenance work on their homes and that being in a designated District does not seem to have impinged on any home owners' plans. The residents were provided with the questionnaire and copies were taken for distribution to those property owners not in attendance. 899089 REPORT NO.: PSD-087-09 PAGE 5 There are thirteen residential properties on the street and eight questionnaires were returned to staff for evaluation. A copy of the questionnaire and the responses provided is included as Attachment 1. The responses from the residents indicate that the goals and objectives of the Heritage Conservation District Plan are being met. When specifically asked "does it seem worthwhile to have Beech Avenue as a HCD", each respondent answered yes. The questionnaire asked if the property owners were "content with what is designated". The respondents answered yes in every case. Additional comments were provided such as the HCD should be expanded to help preserve other properties, being in a District is good for property value, the District boundary should remain intact with no properties removed, the front lawn of the Beech Centre should remain as a lawn so that it blends in with the residential properties on the street, and clarification should be provided to the tenants of the Beech Centre in regards to what being in a HCD means. When the residents were asked as to how the Heritage Conservation District could be improved the following comments were provided: . A sign should be posted to identify the District . The success of the District designation should be promoted . Additional surveys should be conducted as time passes . Any future street trees that are to be replaced should be replaced with the same kind of tree . The District should be expanded . The District boundary should remain intact There have not been any comments from the Heritage Conservation District residents that might inqicate that the District designation has had a negative impact on their property and no one has suggested that the designation should be removed and the By-law be repealed. 3.3 Tenants of 26 Beech Avenue Review Staff provided two presentations for the tenants of 26 Beech Avenue. A presentation was provided for the Board Members of the COM in response to a letter that had been received from them and numerous questions that were raised. The presentation outlined the process that was followed to prepare the Heritage Conservation District Study, the acceptance of the Heritage Guidelines for the entire neighbourhood, and the approval of the Beech Avenue HCD Plan. The major concern of the COM is in regards to having additional parking. It was explained that an increase in parking facilities would be visible from the street so a heritage permit application would be required. The application would be reviewed by the HCD Advisory Committee. As this would be considered a major application, Council approval would be required. The Beech Centre property is 899090 REPORT NO.: PSD-087-09 PAGE 6 owned by the Municipality of Clarington, therefore, not only would Council review the heritage permit, they would also have to review the financial impacts of any request for additional parking. The Board of the COM have provided a letter (Attachment 2) noting their understanding that Council will have the final approval of any additional parking. The second presentation was held on July 9, 2009 with representatives of the tennis club, the COM, the Lions Club and Community Care attending. Staff provided an overview of the process leading to the district designation and the process being followed now in regards to the District evaluation. The tenants were invited to provide any comments to staff and/or Council. 3.4 Impact on Property Sales One of the issues raised during the heritage conservation district study process was the potential negative impact on the sale of properties a heritage district may impose. There have been two properties sold since the District was approved and one is currently for sale. Staff have spoken to the former owner of 17 Beech Avenue and to the real estate agent who sold the property. Both confirmed that being in a Heritage Conservation District did not have any negative impact on the marketing of the home or the selling price of the property (Attachment 3). The listing agent for 40 Beech Avenue stated that the District designation did not have any impact on the sale of the home. The property at 5 Beech Avenue has been for sale for several months. The real estate agents for the property have both stated that the house has not sold for reasons other than being in a HCD. The owner considers being in a designated District to be an asset stating that it makes the property more marketable and on par with homes of the designated areas of Port Hope and Coboug. In addition, they noted that the road reconstruction has added to the curb appeal and would not in their opinion have been as well done if the street was not designated. 3.5 Insurance One of the issues that was raised during the preparation of the Heritage Conservation District background study was that being in a Heritage District might affect property insurance. There was a concern expressed by certain property owners within the study area boundary that if the area became a designated Heritage Conservation District property insurance would increase or that property owners would not be able to obtain insurance. The fear seems to have been unfounded as the issue of property insurance has not been raised by any of the owners along Beech Avenue since the street was designated in 2006. Staff are aware that there are certain insurance companies that will not insure older homes. In staffs discussions with these companies it has been confirmed that the company's decision on whether or not to insure a property is based on a variety of factors, such as the age of the building itself, or if it has up-to-date 899091 REPORT NO.: PSD-087-09 PAGE 7 wiring or knob and tube. Being in a designated Heritage District has not been identified as a reason to refuse or increase property insurance. 4.0 CONCLUSION The evaluation of the Beech Avenue HCD Plan with the residents is now complete. From the comments of the property owners/residents, having analyzed the questionnaire results, and in review of the other inputs we have received, there have been no issues identified that would require modification of the Heritage Conservation District designation at this time. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Questionnaire Attachment 2 - COM letter dated July 8, 2009 Attachment 3 - Letter on 17 Beech Avenue Interested parties to be notified of Council's decision: Bill Humber Angie Darlison Andrew Kozak Linda Duffy Ken Majid Steve Simic Art Short Brock MacArthur & Amy Anderson Don & Pat Mac Arthur Anna & AI Strike Paul Kiss David Young Lois Cattran Tanya & Jeff Wills Laurie & Wanda Cook Dietrich & April Wunderlich Betty Smith Marjoire Couch Jennifer & Fred Horne Ken & Sheila Majid Stephen & Jane Brickell Clarington Heritage Committee Heritage Conservation District Advisory Committee Old Bowmanville Neighbourhood Association Clarington Older Adult Association Bowmanville Tennis Club Clarington Community Care Bowmanville Lions Club Bowmanville Nursery School 899092 Beech Avenue, Bowmanville Heritage Conservation District ""dl.ollll'~11l I III' " ... ,~' ,'.:,~.... '_,~l~',~~'}'~J \To Re.p, ort PSD, ,,-',087-09 ~-\.. ~,''''''< i,l" . '.,0' ...~~ -j: .", 11,< 7 , Y-:;;~F'-;~'.~, /~~:._ - '" , .:' .' .- . rg ta ''=' . - r.~}~ .' .. BII.I. ._ , . Purpose of the Beech Avenue Heritage Conservation District Plan The Bowmanville Heritage Conservation District Study concluded that despite the rapid growth of the Bowmanville urban area, this particular neighbourhood has retained its special character due to the exceptional care taken by its residents to maintain and improve their properties in a manner that allows change where appropriate but respects the values of the past. It is this special character that the Beech Avenue Heritage Conservation District Plan is designed to assist in maintaining for that specific block (Page 3 of the Plan). Goals of the Beech Avenue Heritage Conservation District Plan To promote the conservation of the block's architectural, historical, and contextual character by providing guidance to priv4'lte and public property owners that will work to stabilize the block's special character for existing residents and future generations (Page 24). To evaluate whether the Heritage conservation District has met it's objectives or not the objectives of the Plan are set out below. Please take a few minutes to reflect on the past 3 years (since May 2006) and answer whether the objectives have been met, or not or has not been applicable during this time (N/A). Objectives: Heritage Resource Structures To conserve and maintain the heritage resources existing In the neighbourhood 8 Yes 0 No 0 N/A To support the continuing care, conservation and restoration of heritage resources by providing guidance on sound conservation and maintenance practices 8 Yes 0 No 0 N/A To encourage the restoration of the exterior of heritage resources based on pictorial documentation and/or physical evidence that is uncovered 7 Yes 1 No 0 N/A To prevent the removal or alteration of distinguishing architectural features and building materials 7 Yes 0 No 1 N/A To prevent the demolition of heritage resources 7 Yes 0 No 1 N/A 8 Yes 0 No 0 N/A To promote the adaptive reuse of heritage resources (e.g. No. 26, Rathskamony Estate) G:\Foye\2009\8eech Ave HCD Survey 2 June 172009. ANSWERS. doc 899093 Beech Avenue, Bowmanville Heritage Conservation District .' :,,~~. 1"~";:r ;I::\~' fa J",;",ii~~ Landscape/Streetscape To encourage public streetscape, landscape, and infrastructure improvements which enhance the neighbourhood's heritage character and are in keeping with the Old Bowmanville Streetscape and Infrastructure Implementation Plan, adopted by Council April 2001 To encourage the preservation of landscape treatments and the conservation of landmark features in both public and private ownership (e.g. King carriage step at 5 Beech) To encourage the planting of species historically grown in the area To preserve the existing street width To encourage the retention of historic fences, garden walks and respect for historic design influences when new garden features are introduced Land Use To encourage the maintenance of the existing heritage environment To support existing land uses and adaptive re-use of existing residential building stock for residential purposes To discourage those land uses that are out of keeping with, or have detrimental effects upon, the neighbourhood's character New Development To provide guidance for infill construction and building additions by encouraging architectural designs that are sympathetic to, and compatible with, the character of the existing heritage properties and the historic character and scale of the area To support new technologies and new safety standards that assist in conserving the heritage fabric To discourage attempts to restore a building to an artificially established architectural era Community To promote a sense of place, community pride, and public support for the conservation of the block including the residential buildings, the Clarington Beech Centre and the streetscape To promote the involvement of Clarington Heritage Committee, Clarington Museums & Archives and other local heritage groups/agencies G\faye\2009\Beech Ave HCO Survey 2 June 172009, ANSWERS,doc ~ .' '~!' H,tu~ . i " _..,~ ' - h;,.,,, :iIIl." ~~~., - .... ... ..,...... ... .. ~ : -. 8 Yes D No 0 N/A 8 Yes D No 0 N/A 7 Yes 1 No D N/A 8 Yes D No D N/A 6 Yes D No, 2 N/A 8 Yes D No D N/A 7 Yes D No 1 N/A 8 Yes D No D N/A 3 Yes D No 5 N/A 7 Yes D No 1 N/A 3 Yes D No 5 N/A 8 Yes D No D N/A 8 Yes D No 0 N/A 899094 Beech Avenue, Bowmanville Heritage Conservation District .1' ..1 '." .' " Please provide us with some addition information. Are you a property owner of Beech Avenue? 8 Yes 0 No o Yes 8 No Are you a tenant living on Beech Avenue? Have you applied for a Heritage Permit? 1 Yes 7 No If yes, was the process 1 Easy to follow 0 Long 0 Complicated o Confusing Are you a member of the District Steering Committee? 1 Yes 7 No Does it seem worth while to have Beech Avenue as a HCD? 8 Yes 0 No (please print clearly) Are you content with what is designated? . Yes · To the extent of my limited knowledge - yes · Yes - however, it would be beneficial to clarify the District's ramification for the Beech Centre · More than content. I believe. this is progressive and necessary culturally, environmental and for property value. · Absolutely!!!! The integrity of the HCD for Beech Avenue (et al) be maintained as presently defined to be meaningful, integrated and exemplary · Yes. No part of the HCD should be permitted to be excluded regardless of private or public property, unless the entire HCD approves the exclusion by public vote. · Yes we are content with what is' designated and would like to see the heritage district expanded to help preserve other properties and to promote a sense of community pride about the history of Bowmanville. · Yes, but it is vital to keep lobbying to have the front lawn of the Beech Centre remain intact. Then it will "blend in" with the existing streetscape of the other residential properties, G\Foye\2009\Beech Ave HCD Survey 2 June 17 2009, ANSWERS.doc 899095 Beech Avenue, Bowmanville Heritage Conservation District 'I\, j. .~ . II~." If''h~ . j \ f........, I _ .~~'~~. - ~ ~~..,... ....,i'!A._. .oj{ fl/4'. Please provide us with other comments as to how the Heritage Conservation District could be improved. . The dominant tree species in a Carolinian forest (into which category this area belongs) are American beech, sugar maple, walnut, chestnut, ash oaks (2 or 3 subspecies). There are 4 trees on the street - 1 maple, 1 ash, 2 chestnuts that are near or at the end of their life cycle - IMHO (in my humble opinion) they should have been replaced with similar species during the reconstruction. The midget imported species should not be used. . Promote it within Clarington sho~ing the success of the past 3 years. . Identify the block so people realize they are in a special space. . It should be expanded . It must continue to include the entire street . We could do periodic updates; info on what other areas are doing. . Appropriate street signage of quality consistent with other heritage districts. . Although we are not sure of some items in the survey the HCD functions well and is not intrusive at all. Nevertheless, "three years" is not a sufficiently long period to allow any reliable experience to evolve. This sort of feedback/survey should be continued at reasonable intervals to look for consistency. We suspect that the HCD will continue to be highly successful over the long term. . A major area of concern is the lack of value and respect for the heritage of this area by the tenants of 26 Beech Ave. The tenants seem to forget that this is a residential area with historical significance that should not be turned into a major commercial throughfare with tour buses and excessive traffic coming to and from the centre. A tremendous lack of appreciation for the neighbourhood has been demonstrated in a number of way including: o parking on the front lawn of the centre - damaging the turf and greenspace o moving the garbage dumpster into a position where it is visible to the street o excessive noise from hall rentals, tour buses and their "greetings" with car horns o the lack of maintenance of gardens and landscaping and thereby allowing the building to develop an appearance of neglect o frequent illegal parking over driveways, by hydrants and in prohibited areas o disregard for the historical setting of the tennis club and nursery school Perhaps a residential neighbour~ood that is attempting to preserve the heritage of Bowmanville's historical structures is not an appropriate location for an organization that fails to respect this environment. G:\Faye\2009\Beech Ave HCO Survey 2 June 172009. ANSWERS. doc 899096 Beech Avenue, Bowmanville Heritage Conservation District \ ~ / It. ltt:u~ . , \ ~~- .I~ ~~~ ...". ~ . - la) ;,:"1-...,\" ... .....A . . Re: Clarington Beech Centre: o Encourage the departure and arrival of bus tours to a more appropriate location e.g. Rickard Complex. Damage has been done to curbs and lawn by the buses. o Encourage the use of smaller delivery trucks to prevent above damage as well to the Beech Centre o Idling buses is not environmentally friendly o Possible solution to keep tennis court and prove a "sense of ownership": offer lessons to the seniors! GoIFoye\2009\Beech Ave HCO Survey 2 June 172009 - ANSWERS. doc 899097 Attachment 2 To Report PSD-087-09 'fi/I!;< JE(CiTI'~-;0':nfJl. n ,i )l.7 '~''J<'l ~ '\ P "~, ~ . JUL . 0 2009 Wednesday July 8,2009 , MUfJ!ClPALiTV c~ CU;Fi![,JGTOi'J PLAf~NIi'JG DEPp,RTiViENT Faye Langmaid Assistant Director of Planning Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance St. Bowmanville, ON LiC 3A6 CLARINGTON OLDER ADULT ASSOCIATION Dear Faye; 1,'UI,'dh ill, (IJIIII",lnn (ild.'1 AJIIII(C'lllll' 1:j,'Jr,1 Our Board of Directors would like to thank you for attending our recent board meeting. The presentation you made to us on the Beech Avenue Heritage District Designation clarified many points that board members had previously been unclear on. The discussion that followed was helpful, too. It allowed us to explain our main concern with the Beech Avenue Heritage District Designation - mainly, how it may negatively impact us on our current need for additional on-site parking. As you explained the process, you indicated that the Advisory Committee would be involved in evaluating the formal, technical proposal and would submit their recommendation to Council. Council, however, has the final decision and can override anything recommended by the Committee. The Board found this reassuring and felt we should inform the Municipality accordingly. This is in light of our previous letter dated Thursday June 4th, 2009. Please feel free to contact us if you need further information on this matter. Sinc~r Iy, , , \ ,~, J ~/ -.\.....\.........-l 1-_:;/:.'--/ Angie Darlison Executive Director 1 ,~Jtt ( ~ J t'vl- L Peter Evans President ccl Isabel Little, Planning Services Department Municipality of Clarlngton Mary Novak, Councillor Representative Clarlngton Older Adult Centre Board Ron Hooper, Councillor Representative Clarington Older Adult Centre Board Jim Abernethy, Mayor Municipality of Clarlngton Skip Crosby. Municipal Representative Clarington Older Adult Centre Board DaVid Crome, Director of Planning Municipality of Clarlngton CliHlngton Older Adult Centre Board of Dtrectors 26 Beech Avenue, Bowmanville, ON L 1 C 3A2 905.697.2856 Fox: 905,697,0739 cOCJo@6ellnelco vvwwclaringtonolderadults co 899098 Attachment 3 To Report PSD-087-09 bus: 905-697-1900 toll free: 1-888-372-4140 fox: 905-697-1927 ~-"':"~:- Rgy A~ S~~YI_~_~ REAL ESTATE INC. 104 King Street East Bowmanville, ON L1C 1 N5 Betty Smith Soles Representative Royal Service Real Estate July 24, 2009 Isabelle Little Municipality of Clarington Planning Department 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville Ontario L 1 C 3A6 Dear Isabelle, Enclosed, please find a copy of the listing for 17 Beech Avenue, Bowmanville, which sold in October 2008 for 98% of the asking price. I did not find that being located in a Heritage Conservation District had any negative impact on my marketing of the home or on the selling price of the property. Sincerely, Betty Smith Salesperson Royal Service Real Estate : ~~,~J~',l~-f~i:s ;~:;i~~~~~~:;'~~)'~~" 899099 CI~mgron REPORT ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, September 14, 2009 Resolution #: Report #: EGD-026-09 File#: By-law #: Subject: MONTHLY REPORT ON BUILDING PERMIT ACTIVITY FOR JUNE, 2009. Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report EGD-026-09 be received for information. dQ: 1'-........---..... . I Submitted by: /i'i<':'~ A. S. Cannella, C.E.T. Director of Engineering Services /\~.-- ~ / I . L/ \ Reviewed by: - Franklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer ASC*RP*bb July 16, 2009 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-1824 901 REPORT NO.: EGD-026-09 PAGE 2 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 With respect to the Building Permit Activity for the month of JUNE 2009, Staff wish to highlight the following statistics for the information of Committee and Council. MONTH OF JUNE 2009 2008 BUILDING NUMBER OF VALUE OF NUMBER OF VALUE OF % CHANGE OF CATEGORY PERMITS CONSTRUCTION PERMITS CONSTRUCTION VALUE 2009-2008 Residential 44 $4,789,380 123 $20,069,259 -76.1% Industrial 0 $0 3 $15,305,000 N/A Government 0 $0 1 $1,500,000 N/A Commercial 7 $162, 1 00 4 $186,000 -12.8% Institutional 0 $0 0 $0 N/A Agricultural 0 $0 0 $0 N/A Demolition 3 $0 9 $0 N/A TOTAL 54 $4,951,480 140 $37,060,259 -86.6% YEAR TO DATE 2009 2008 BUILDING NUMBER OF VALUE OF NUMBER OF VALUE OF % CHANGE OF CATEGORY PERMITS CONSTRUCTION PERMITS CONSTRUCTION VALUE 2009-2008 Residential 225 $29,578,292 390 $63,888,735 -53.7% Industrial 1 $120,000 4 $16,520,056 -99.3% Government 0 $0 3 $3,175,000 N/A Commercial 27 $2,241,024 26 $2,303,151 -2.7% Institutional 3 $13,737,560 7 $3,115,000 341.0% Agricultural 6 $1,685,830 14 $5,533,960 -69.5% Demolition 16 $0 19 $0 N/A TOTAL 278 $47,362,706 463 $94,535,902 -49.9% 902 REPORT NO.: EGD-026-09 PAGE 3 1.2 With respect to building permit activities (over $250,000) and large residential building permit activities, the details are provided as follows: Owner I Applicant Construction Type Location Value 903 REPORT NO.: EGD-026-09 PAGE 4 The following is a comparison of the types of dwelling units issued for the month of "JUNE" and "YEAR TO DATE". o Townhouse 0% o Semi- Detached 0% Dwelling Unit TJPe "JUNE" 2009 14 Single Detached 93% I:J Single Detached 14 . Semi-Detached 0 I:J Townhouse 0 t:I Apartment 1 D....elling Unit TJPe ''VEAR TO DATE 2009" o 7 Townhous Apartment 7% e 0% 20 Semi- Detached 20% 72 Single Detached 73% I:J Single Detached 72 . Semi-Detached 20 I:JTownhouse 0 t:I Apartment 7 The following is a historical comparison of the building permits issued for the month of "JUNE" and "YEAR TO DATE" for a three year period. $40,000,000 $30,000,000 $20,000,000 $1 0,000,000 Historical Data for Month of "JUNE" $0 2009 2008 2007 1:1 Value $4,951 ,480 $37,060,259 $20,517,908 $1 20,000,000 $1 00,000,000 $80,000,000 $60,000,000 $40,000,000 $20,000,000 Historical Data 'YEAR TO DATE" $0 2009 2008 2007 I:IValue $47,362,706 $94,535,902 $100,478,599 904 REPORT NO.: EGD-026-09 PAGE 5 PERMIT REVENUES 2009 2008 June Year to Date June Year to Date I PERMIT FEES $35,237 $320,894 $188,785 $592,461 INSPECTION SERVICES 2009 2008 June Year to Date June Year to Date Building Inspections 604 2,708 561 2,530 Plumbing & Heating Inspections 540 3,063 556 3,061 Pool Enclosure Inspections 14 26 20 33 TOTAL 1,158 5,797 1,137 5,624 NUMBER OF NEW RESIDENTIAL UNITS 2009 2008 June Year to Date June Year to Date Single Detached 14 72 75 203 Semi-Detached 0 20 8 36 Townhouse 0 0 0 25 Apartments 1 7 1 4 TOTAL 15 99 84 268 905 REPORT NO.: EGD-026-09 PAGE 6 RESIDENTIAL UNITS HISTORICAL COMPARISON YEAR: 2009 (to end of 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 AREA June) Bowmanville 30 340 451 609 307 587 468 345 312 188 184 Courtice 48 134 82 126 241 173 180 133 129 231 296 Newcastle 12 60 77 84 202 191 123 131 76 110 78 Wilmot Creek 1 30 16 15 15 25 29 38 24 19 21 Orono 0 2 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 0 1 Darlington 2 10 6 7 14 15 13 17 47 102 31 Clarke 4 5 11 12 13 10 16 15 9 17 17 Burketon 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 Enfield 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Enniskillen 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 2 5 7 6 Hampton 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 Haydon 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Kendal 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 3 2 0 1 Kirby 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Leskard 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 Maple Grove 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Mitchell Corners 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Newtonville 0 7 2 2 4 5 3 3 0 3 1 Solina 1 0 6 3 3 3 3 1 1 0 0 Tyrone 0 5 0 0 0 0 3 9 3 0 0 TOTALS 99 593 655 861 802 1,015 843 701 609 679 640 906 Cl!ll-ilJglon REPORT ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, September 14, 2009 Resolution #: Report #: EGD-027-09 File#: By-law #: Subject: MONTHLY REPORT ON BUILDING PERMIT ACTIVITY FOR JULY, 2009. Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report EGD-027-09 be received for information. Submitted by: ~~1Q A. S. Cannella, C.E.T. Director of Engineering Services ( ) ~.. _ /) 17" If.... Reviewed by:',_J ~- ~'\k.. Franklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer ASC*RP*bb August 25, 2009 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-1824 907 REPORT NO.: EGD-027-09 PAGE 2 1. BACKGROUND 1.1 With respect to the Building Permit Activity for the month of JULY 2009, Staff wish to highlight the following statistics for the information of Committee and Council. MONTH OF JULY 2009 2008 BUILDING NUMBER OF VALUE OF NUMBER OF VALUE OF % CHANGE OF CATEGORY PERMITS CONSTRUCTION PERMITS CONSTRUCTION VALUE 2009-2008 Residential 52 $7,699,533 130 $29,033,479 -73.5% Industrial 1 $125,000 1 $20,000 525.0% Government 0 $0 0 $0 N/A Commercial 6 $1,776,500 2 $160,000 1,010.3% Institutional 2 $130,200 2 $15,000 768.0% Agricultural 0 $0 1 $20,000 N/A Demolition 1 $0 1 $0 N/A TOTAL 62 $9,731,233 137 $29,248,479 -66.7% YEAR TO DATE 2009 2008 BUILDING NUMBER OF VALUE OF NUMBER OF VALUE OF % CHANGE OF CATEGORY PERMITS CONSTRUCTION PERMITS CONSTRUCTION VALUE 2009-2008 Residential 277 $37,277 ,825 520 $92,922,214 -59.9% Industrial 2 $245,000 5 $16,540,056 -98.5% Government 0 $0 3 $3,175,000 N/A Commercial 33 $4,017,524 28 $2,463,151 63.1% Institutional 5 $13,867,760 9 $3,130,000 343.1% Agricultural 6 $1,685,830 15 $5,553,960 -69.6% Demolition 17 $0 20 $0 N/A TOTAL 340 $57,093,939 600 $123,784,381 -53.9% 908 REPORT NO.: EGD-027-09 PAGE 3 1.2 With respect to building permit activities (over $250,000) and large residential building permit activities, the details are provided as follows: Owner I Applicant OUNBURYOEVELOPMENTS (COURTICE) L TO Construction Type Location Restaurant Shoeless Joe's 1 ,419 HIGHWAY 2, COURTICE Value $1,700,000 909 REPORT NO.: EGD-027-09 PAGE 4 The following is a comparison of the types of dwelling units issued for the month of "JULY" and "YEAR TO DATE". Dwelling Unit Type "JULY" 2009 o Townhouse 0% 4 Semi- Detached 14% 23 Single Detached 79% IiiI Single Detached 23 . Semi-Detached 4 IiiI Townhouse 0 Iiil Apartment 2 Dwelling Unit Type "YEAR TO DATE 2009" o 9 T ownhous Apartment 7% e 95 Single Detached 74% 0% 24 Semi- Detached 19% Ii Single Detached 95 . Semi-Detached 24 IiiI Townhouse 0 IiiI Apartment 9 The following is a historical comparison of the building permits issued for the month of "JULY" and "YEAR TO DATE" for a three year period. Historical Data for Month of "JULY" $35,000,000 $30,000,000 $25,000,000 $20,000,000 $15,000,000 $1 0,000,000 $5,000,000 $0 2009 2008 2007 Iii! Value $9,731,233 $29,248,479 $15,788,960 Historical Data "YEAR TO DATE" $140,000,000 $120,000,000 $100,000,000 $80,000,000 $60,000,000 $40,000,000 $20,000,000 $0 2009 2007 2008 Ii Value $57,093,939 $123,784,381 $116,376,598 910 REPORT NO.: EGD-027-09 PAGE 5 PERMIT REVENUES 2009 2008 July Year to Date July Year to Date I PERMIT FEES $63,412 $384,728 $223,146 $819,058 INSPECTION SERVICES 2009 2008 July Year to Date July Year to Date Building Inspections 520 3,235 459 2,989 Plumbing & Heating Inspections 603 3,667 605 3,668 Pool Enclosure Inspections 12 38 23 56 TOTAL 1,135 6,940 1,087 6,713 NUMBER OF NEW RESIDENTIAL UNITS 2009 2008 July Year to Date July Year to Date Single Detached 23 95 69 272 Semi-Detached 4 24 26 62 Townhouse 0 0 24 49 Apartments 2 9 0 4 TOTAL 29 128 119 387 911 REPORT NO.: EGD-027-09 PAGE 6 RESIDENTIAL UNITS HISTORICAL COMPARISON YEAR: 2009 (to end of 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 AREA July) Bowmanville 40 340 451 609 307 587 468 345 312 188 184 Courtice 61 134 82 126 241 173 180 133 129 231 296 Newcastle 13 60 77 84 202 191 123 131 76 110 78 Wilmot Creek 2 30 16 15 15 25 29 38 24 19 21 Orono 0 2 1 1 1 2 0 1 0 0 1 Darlington 3 10 6 7 14 15 13 17 47 102 31 Clarke 5 5 11 12 13 10 16 15 9 17 17 Burketon 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 Enfield 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Enniskillen 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 2 5 7 6 Hampton 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 Haydon 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Kendal 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 3 2 0 1 Kirby 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Leskard 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 Maple Grove 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 Mitchell Corners 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 Newtonville 2 7 2 2 4 5 3 3 0 3 1 Solina 1 0 6 3 3 3 3 1 1 0 0 Tyrone 0 5 0 0 0 0 3 9 3 0 0 TOTALS 128 593 655 861 802 1,015 843 701 609 679 640 912 ~1.fJ!.mgron REPORT EMERGENCY AND FIRE SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: September 14, 2009 Resolution #: Report #: ESD-010-09 File# By-law # Subject: MONTHLY RESPONSE REPORT....; JUNE, JULY & AUGUST 2009 Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report ESD-010-09 be received for information. Submitted by: l", /1-; I t .--~ L ,~JL- J rdon Weir, AMCT, CMM111 Director Emergency & Fire Services Reviewed by: C) (~..::. ~ Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer GW*tw CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T(905)623-3379 F 905)623-6506 11 01 REPORT NO: ESD-010-09 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 Our report covers the months June, July and August. It is our intent to provide Council with information relevant to this Department, in a timely manner. 2.0 COMMENT 2.1 The Department responded to 913 calls during this period and recorded total fire losses of $798,050.00. A breakdown of calls responded to follows in the attached table (Attachment #1). Attachment #2 is an explanation of the different types of responses. Attachment #1 : Activity Report Attachment #2: Description of Types of Responses 1102 Attachment #1 to ESD-010-09 CLARINGTON EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT REPORT PERIOD: JUNE 1, 2009 OO:OO:OOhrs - AUGUST 31, 2009 23:59:59hrs RESPONSE TYPE REPORT FIRE STATIONS 2009 2008 RESPONSE STATION STATION STATION STATION STATION THIS TO TO SAME TO TYPE 1 2 3 4 5 PERIOD DATE DATE % PERIOD DATE FIRES I 20 7 2 19 1 49 133 5.8% 37 111 EXPLOSIONS OVERPRESSURE RUTURE 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 0.1% 0 1 EXPLOSIONS PRE FIRE 7 2 1 2 1 13 40 1.7% 9 27 CONDITIONS BURNING 11 4 5 9 3 32 62 2.7% 44 91 (controlled) FALSE FIRE 70 16 6 19 6 117 275 12.0% 120 278 CALLS CO FALSE 34 5 0 11 0 50 155 6.8% 61 183 CALLS PUBLIC HAZARD 20 5 3 6 4 38 105 4.6% 46 81 CALLS RESCUE CALLS 34 15 13 24 10 96 271 11.8% 105 309 MEDICAL CALLS 201 44 9 120 22 396 1125 49.1% 406 1102 OTHER 12 10 3 13 2 40 124 5.4% 85 206 RESPONSES TOTALS THIS PERIOD 410 108 42 223 49 832 2292 100.0% 913 2389 TO DATE 1166 282 149 600 95 2292 THIS PERIOD 481 102 52 238 40 913 LAST YEAR TO DATE LAST 1244 293 147 600 105 2389 YEAR 1103 CLARINGTON EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT DOLLAR LOSS REPORT THIS PERIOD $798,050 2009 TO DATE $2,177 ,350 THIS PERIOD $828,100 2008 TO DATE $8,278,300 APPARATUS RESPONSE REPORT FOR THIS PERIOD STATION 1 PUMPER SCAT PUMPER TANKER UTILITY AERIAL RESCUE 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 THIS PERIOD 726 463 184 25 7 4 34 9 TO DATE 2224 1173 814 97 20 15 65 40 STATION 2 PUMPER TANKER 2 2 THIS PERIOD 130 110 20 TO DATE 376 298 78 STATION 3 PUMPER TANKER UTILITY ATV 3 3 3 THIS PERIOD 75 52 16 5 2 TO DATE 224 156 56 9 3 STATION 4 PUMPER PUMPER TANKER Aerial 4 44 4 4 THIS PERIOD 349 323 17 8 1 TO DATE 953 860 61 24 8 STATION 5 PUMPER TANKER 5 5 THIS PERIOD 64 50 14 TO DATE 133 96 37 1344 TOTAL VEHICLE MOVEMENTS FOR THIS PERIOD 3910 TOTAL VEHICLE MOVEMENTS TO DATE - 2009 1104 Attachment #2 to ESD-010-09 CLARINGTON EMERGENCY & FIRE SERVICES MONTHLY ACTIVITY REPORT DESCRIPTION OF RESPONSE TYPES Fires and Explosions: Instance of destructive and uncontrolled burning involving structures, vehicles and open area fires, including explosion of combustible solids, liquids or gases which mayor may not have resulted in a dollar loss. Overpressure Rupture/Explosion: An explosion or rupture as a result of pressure, no fire. Pre Fire Conditions: Incidents with no fire that involve heat or potential pre-fire conditions e.g. pot on stove, cooking - smoke or steam, lightning, fireworks. Burning (controlled): Complaint call related to outdoor controlled burning, authorized or . unauthorized. Fire Department did not take suppression action. False Fire Calls: Alarm activation or fire call that when investigated, is determined to be as a result of equipment failure, malicious/prank, perceived emergency or accidental activation of alarm by person. CO (carbon monoxide) False Calls: A call where it is determined that the detection equipment malfunctioned or there was a perceived emergency - no CO leak. Public Hazard Calls: Includes a response for spills and leaks of a hazardous product such as natural gas, propane, refrigerant, miscellaneous/unknown, gasoline or fuel, toxic chemical, radio-active material, power lines down, arcing, bomb, explosive removal, standby, CO (carbon monoxide) or other public hazard. Rescue Calls: A call for a person in danger due to their proximity to the occurrence and who is unable to self evacuate and is assisted by Fire Department personnel i.e. Vehicle Accident, Building Collapse, Commercial/lndustrial Accident, Home/Residential Accident, Persons Trapped in Elevator, Water Rescue, or Water/lce Rescue. Medical/Resuscitator Call: Includes a response to a patient(s) suffering from Asphyxia, Respiratory Condition, Convulsions, Epileptic, Diabetic Seizure, Electric Shock, Traumatic Shock, Heart Attack, Stroke, Drug Related, Alcohol Related, Cuts, Abrasions, Fracture, Burns, Person Fainted, Nausea and pre-hospital care such as administering oxygen, CPR, Defibrillation, or First Aid. Other Response: Assistance to other Fire Departments, call cancelled on route, non fire incidents where an illegal grow operation or drug operation was discovered. 1105 CI~mglOn REPORT COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: September 14, 2009 Resolution #: Report #: CSD-014-09 File #: By-law #: Subject: GRADE 5 ACTION PASS Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CSD-014-09 be received for information. ~/"I! , , 'l/' /v1 f/ I Submitted by: /f~V/'-..( cJij' /-o./Joseph P. Caruana /' Director of Community Services Reviewed bQ~"":- ,2...J ~ Franklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer JPC/SM/lw CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-5506 1201 REPORT NO.: CSD-014-09 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 Durham Lives!, with the support of municipalities across the Durham Region, implemented a region-wide "Grade 5 Action Pass" program during the 2008/09 school year, to target grade 5 school children to help address rising obesity and inactivity levels currently being experienced in this age group. 1.2 In Clarington, the Grade 5 Action Pass provided all students free access to public swimming and skating for the year they were in grade 5. 1.3 Durham Lives! initially provided $4,000 in funding to assist municipalities in implementing the Grade 5 Action Pass Program in the fall of 2008. This funding was used to promote the program and the costs associated with providing a membership card to each participant. Membership cards purchased with this funding are sufficient to run the program for the next three to four years. 1.4 In Clarington there were 330 grade 5 students who actively participated in the Grade 5 Action Pas~ Program. Of this total, 88 students also registered for instructional recreation programs. There were no direct costs to the Municipality to implement this program. 1.5 With the noted success of this program, the Durham Lives! Grade 5 Action Pass will continue to be offered on an annual basis. 2.0 DURHAM LIVES! PARTNERSHIP 2.1 Durham Lives! is a coalition of community agencies and individuals who promote physical activity, healthy eating and smoke-free communities to reduce cardiovascular disease, stroke, Type II Diabetes and some forms of cancer. The coalition was initiated in 1998 as a result of funding from the Ministry of Health and Long Term Care. 2.2 Durham Lives!-Physical Activity Working Group . Town of Ajax · Municipality of Clarington · City of Pickering . Town of Whitby . Oshawa YMCA · Region of Durham Health Department · Heart and Stroke · Oshawa Senior Citizen's Centre · Metroland News Group 1202 REPORT NO.: CSD-014-09 PAGE 3 3.0 ANALYSIS Grade 5 Action Pass Durham Region Participation for 2008/2009 School Year Municipality Number of Grade 5 Number of registered Percentage of students participants participants Clarington 1,200 330 28% Ajax 1,301 264 20% Oshawa 1,650 223 14% Whitby 1,559 188 12.4% Pickering 1,100 118 11% 4.0 BENEFITS OF THE DURHAM LIVES! GRADE 5 ACTION PASS . Assisting in getting inactive kids active and into municipal facilities creating a healthier community . Changing lifestyle behaviours in children at an age whereby they may choose to invest and maintain active lifestyles once they have moved beyond the program . Providing parents of a grade 5 student, for which fees may be a barrier to particip'ation, an avenue for their children to participate in municipal facilities and activities . Encouraging families to become more active by encouraging participation in municipal facilities and programs with their grade 5 child 5.0 COMMUNICATION AND PROMOTION 5.1 Durham Lives! will again coordinate the distribution of a letter to every school in the Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board and the Peterborough Victoria Northumberland and Clarington Catholic District School Board informing them of the program and providing simple directions for grade 5 students to acquire an Action Pass. 5.2 In addition to the letter, the pass will be promoted in the Community Services Department Winter Recreation & Leisure Guide, on the Municipal website and also the Durham Lives! website. 5.3 The Action Pass will be offered to all students in grade 5, providing free access to a Youth Swim/Skate Membership for the duration the student is in grade 5 with a membership expiry date at the end of August each year. 1203 REPORT NO.: CSD-014-09 PAGE 4 5.4 CLASS membership software enables staff to determine the number of students who take out a Grade 5 Action Pass and their level of participation in this program. 5.5 Staff will continue to monitor and evaluate this program 6.0 FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 6.1 There are no direct costs to the Municipality related to the implementation of the Grade 5 Action Pass, as Durham Lives! Steering Committee has provided funding of $4,000 for its implementation. This is enough to support the purchase of membership cards for the next three to four year period. The Durham Lives! funds received for the fall 2009 program will be used for promotion and marketing of the program. 7.0 RESPONSE TO THE CORPORATE STRATEGIC BUSINESS PLAN 7.1 The Grade 5 Action Pass assists the Municipality of Clarington in meeting two strategies from our Corporate Strategic Business Plan i. To enhance passive and active recreation activities. ii. Explore public/private partnership opportunities. 8.0 CONCLUSION 8.1 The Durham Region Grade 5 Action Pass Program is based on best practices of an existing successful program in the Kingston Area. The Durham Lives! Steering Committee believes the program experienced a successful first year across the region and hopes to build on this success in future years. 1204 CI!Jl-lllgtnn REPORT CLERK'S DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: September 14, 2009 Report #: CLD-014-09 File #: By-law #: Subject: ANIMAL SERVICES QUARTERLY REPORT - April - June, 2009 RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CLD-014-09 be received for information; and 2. THAT a copy of Report CLD-014-09 be forwarded to the Animal Alliance of Canada and the Animal Advisory Committee. Submitted by: d~~.~ Reviewed by: Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer PLB*cag CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1 C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 F 905-623-6506 1301 REPORT NO.: CLD-014-09 PAGE 2 BACKGROUND AND COMMENT Animal Services activities will be reported to Council on a quarterly basis. The attachment to this report summarize the activities and revenues pertaining to Animal Services for the months April to June 2009. Attachments 1. Quarterly & Year-To-Date Statistics Interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Ms. Liz White, Animal Alliance of Canada Animal Advisory Committee 1302 Attachment 1 2nd Quarter & YTO Statistics 2009 Dispatch Summary highlighted means it's the 2nd quarter table Issue Types Issue Type 2nd Quarter 2nd Quarter VTD VTD 2009 2008 2009 2008 Animal Control 223 201 352 291 Cruelty Complaint 0 1 1 3 General Dispatch 45 3 49 7 Routine Inspection 16 4 26 5 Total 284 209 428 306 Animal Control Issues Outcome 2nd Quarter 2nd Quarter YTD YTD 2009 2008 2009 2008 Animal Not Found 27 25 44 38 .---.--- Animal Picked Up 60 87 103 115 Animal Returned To Owner 14 10 19 20 Charges Laid 3 0 3 3 Finalized 83 46 136 68 Warning Issued 67 62 117 91 Grand Total: 254 230 422 335 1303 Total By G/L Code Attachment 1 2nd Quarter & YTO Statistics 2009 . . 2nn Quarter 2M Quarter Descnptlon 2009 2008 100-19-190-30705-6400 - Animal Service 29 $1,695 43 $1,731 68 $3,772.06 74 $3,339.89 Impound/Surrender Fee 100-19-190-30715-6401 - Animal Trap Rentals 3 $28.56 0 0 3 $28.56 0 0 100-19-190-30720-6400 - Disposal of Animals 3 $180 0 6 $385 0 0 100-19-190-35525-6500 - Dog/Cat Licences 1137 $29, 335 1243 $27,540 ! 1384 $36,783.50 1459 $32,932.50 $1,471.89 $255.59 I $2120.54 6 $255.59 523-00-000-00000-6760 - Donations 19 6 I 33 I 100-00-000-02033-2003 - GST 59 $277.34 471 $231.75 T 119 $573.98 81 $372.88 100-00-000-02034-2003 - PST 40.01 47 $371.20 114 $902.52 81 $597.14 100-19-190-30710-6400 - Sale of Animals 55 $5,411.39 49 $4897.05 111 $11,083.83 108 $10,454.98 Totals 1361 $38,839.19 1435 $35,026.59 1838 $55,649.99 1809 $47.952.98 Shelter Statistics - Outgoing by Animal Type Status ..11 Total Total Mammal 2nd 2nd YTO YTO Quarter Quarter 2009 2008 2009 2008 Adopted 4 i 0 i Adopted Altered 4 i 0 : u"rr_" co. .~ _,.'_n,',_ <~"""rr__""_"'m"'_"'" ., ~ u~..''''~m~'~w, Adopted Offsite 0 ; 0 l Adopted Offsite(Altered) 0 0 Adopted Offsite(Unaltered) 0 Adopted Unaltered 0 Bite Quarintine (home) 0 [ 0 DOA 3 0 . DOA - Final Disposition 1 . 0 . Euthanized 1. 0 Euthanized by Offsite Vet 2 : 0 Interred Reclaimed o 36 · Redemption (Offsite) Released Stolen Transfer Out Unassisted Death o o 4 0 0 0: 0 0 58 Other Total o 9 9 0 0 13 6 31 17 C"',.WU_^ ,.,.."._..~,....~._._<<,., 0 0 0 2 12 0 0 12 6 30 21 0 I 3 0 3 5; 1 I .... 'y._ .......w.w,~~w.., ",,,_,",w:,,,,,,w,~,,,~~~w"'~"~"i:""_~'~'~'~"'_________A_~,.^~~,.' 0 ; 14 0 16 12 26 14 . 0 0 0 0 2 19 30 30 35 0 0 2 2 2 2 4 0 0 5 9 7 14 4 0 0 6 6 10 ; 15 0 0 0 0 0 ! 1 2 0 0 39 42 82 63 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 "mm'n^'n_~^=~'c' 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 ""~~'~"'"",.,~v_, 0 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 56 20 2 137 149 0: 01 o 1304 Attachment 1 2nd Quarter & YTO Statistics 2009 Shelter Statistics - Identification Comparison Cat Do Kitten Pu o 12 o 1 43 43 50 o 43 55 50 1 o 15 o o 37 38 22 1 37 53 22 1 83 107 62 2 102 81 39 1 Total Length of Stay "- Number of 0 58 56 18 2 0 0 134 (1) Animals 1:: lU ;:, Number of Days 0 2810 955 550 0 0 0 4315 Om '" 0 r: 0 Average 0 48 17 30 0 0 0 NN "- Number of 5 69 49 5 66 0 3 192 (1) 1:: Animals lU ;:, Number of Days 0 3097 429 159 0 0 44 3729 OCX) "C 0 r: 0 Average 0 44 8 31 0 0 14 N N Number of 0 124 106 18 3 2 0 253 en Animals 0 0 Number of 0 2678 550 0 2 0 12184 N 8954 c Da s I- >- Avera e 0 72 25 30 0 1 0 Number of 5 132 81 7 6 0 3 234 co Animals 0 0 Number of 6843 N 0 5907 722 170 0 0 44 C Da s I- >- Average 0 44 8 24 0 0 14 1305 Attachment 1 2nd Quarter & YTO Statistics 2009 Shelter Statistics - Incoming (including transfers) Dog 28 ' 3 0: 1 u""w"_ch"', Puppy 0 0 0; 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cat 4 11 1 2 3 0; 38 0 0 60 Kitten 10 0 0 0 0 2 38 0 0 51 Mammal 0 2 0 0 0 0 0; 0 0 0 2 Total 43 17 3i 6 2 2i 102 0 0 176 YTD 2009 ..1..... : - .,.' ,! ,I ,... .'1. ,I, I,." 'I o o 55 o 0 o 73 2 51 0' 0 2 179 Dog Puppy Cat Kitten "j, Mammal : Total 49 3 2 8 20 o o 0' 2 8 5 5 o o o 2 o o o o o o o 117 o 8 o 110 10 o ".. -""" ~.~m'''cm__ 0: 0 o o 3 .~...,.~w~.._~,,'c.__~.._,_ 69 i 28. 1 : 3 0: 18 ' o o o 64 3 302 Dog 33 0 0 0 57 m,W"WAm.'n..^.n.'W~.,.u~" ^,',"^',W'~"""W' ""'A_""m.'w'^~'m_v_,'_'", Puppy 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Cat 24 1 4 l 0 3 0 0 59 m."n"""T~ Kitten 0 0; 0 0 8 15 0 0 24 ,__w__,~_,." "~~'w.','_'W.'_'__,~_, _~"""'w"~m_'''w~""_,, Bird (wildlife) 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 Mammal 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 w'r. u.... .. "'v'mn' Rabbit 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Total 69 4 1 5 8 0 155 1306 YTD 2008 ...., I"" . . . I '," ,I · '" I . Dog 48 0 0 Puppy 0 0 0 Cat 28 4 Kitten 4 0 0 Bird (wildlife) 4 0 0 Mammal 6 0 0 Rabbit 0 0 Total 91 4 Attachment 1 2nd Quarter & YTO Statistics 2009 ..11111' . , " :' ~ ~ ~ : .:. .. : : ... ; i" ..r ... ... .....r.. . ..... .... .r . ...... ... ... ',Ii o o o 3 0 0 37 0 0 89 0 0 0 0 2 4 3 2 88 0 0 130 0 20 22 0 0 47 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 -~'y..-, 0 0 : 0 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 3 0 0 4 9 3 22 151 0 0 283 , o o 2 1307 Clf;[f!Jgton REPORT CLERK'S DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: September 14, 2009 Report #: CLD-015-09 File #: By-law #: Subject: 2ND QUARTER PARKING REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report CLD-015-09 be received; and 2. THAT a copy of Report CLD-015-09 be forwarded to the Bowmanville Business Centre for their information. Submitted by: ...., ) ! "9).\ lA'li/ / . J i f V \..,'--.' Patti ~a tie " Municipal Clerk o~~~ Reviewed by: Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer PLB*kb CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 F 905-623-6506 1308 REPORT NO.: CLD-015-09 PAGE 2 of 2 BACKGROUND The following pertinent statistical information relates to Parking Enforcement activities for the months of April, May and June 2009 and is provided herein for the information of Committee and Council. Attachments: Attachment 1 - Parking Report for the 2ND Quarter of 2009 1309 PARKING ENFORCEMENT QUARTERLY REPORT #2 - 2009 ATTACHMENT #2 to Quarterly Parking Financial Report Tickets issued ilGENCY '^ Quarter 2, ~ Year to date 'Year to date Year to date' ': P.E. Officers 1,534 3,160 3,071 1,287 Police 10 24 10 9 Public Works 0 0 3 0 Group Four 27 49 57 30 Aspen Springs 11 17 31 31 243 King St. 0 0 0 0 Securitas 0 0 0 0 ProSecurity 8 17 8 39 Fire Services 0 0 0 0 CLOCA 17 23 0 0 TOTAL 1,607 3,290 3,180 1,396 , , REVENUE ~ \, Meters $22,096.00 $38,013.00 $39,007.50 $32,966.00 Permits $1,898.40 $2,412.55 $2,096.15 $1,795.50 Fines $17,021.00 $37,934.00 $37,347.00 $18,474.00 MTO Chargeback $3,027.00 $5,997.75 $2,623.50 $3,316.00 TOTAL REVENUE $37,988.40 $72,361.80 $75,827.15 $49,919.50 1ST APPEARANCES Total conducted 63 103 54 34 # Tickets disputed 66 111 59 36 # Tickets cancelled 49 84 42 30 # Requests for trial 2 4 0 0 # Tickets upheld 17 27 17 6 1310 Clw:.-mgron REPORT CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: September 14th, 2009 Report #: COD-052-09 File# By-law # Subject: CONTRACT AWARDS, SUMMER COUNCIL RECESS Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report COD-052-09 be received; and 2. THAT the attached By-law, marked Attachment 2 authorizing the Mayor and Clerk to enter into the necessary agreement be approved; Submitted by: Reviewed bD~~~ Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer MM\JB\km Attachments: Attachment 1 - Schedule "A", Memo, RE: T-11-2009, Supply & Delivery of Culvert Schedule "B", Memo, RE: CL2009-32, One (1) Class 7 Motor Grader Schedule "C", Memo, RE: CL2009-27, Snow Clearing - Winter Maintenance of Municipal Property, Sidewalks & Parking Lots Schedule "0", Memo, RE: CL2009-18, Concession Road 6 & 7 Road & Bridge Rehabilitation Attachment 2 - By-law CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-4169 1401 REPORT NO.: COD-052-09 PAGE 2 BACKGROUND AND COMMENT In accordance with Purchasing By-law 2006-127, Section 4, the following contracts were awarded during the July I August Council Break: 1. T-11-2009, Supply & Delivery of Culvert (Co-operative Tender) 2. CL2009-32, One (1) Class 7 Motor Grader 3. CL2009-27, Snow Clearing - Winter Maintenance of Municipal Property, Sidewalks & Parking Lots 4. CL2009-18, Concession Road 6 & 7 Road & Bridge Rehabilitation A copy of the recommending memo's for the above noted tenders are attached as Schedule A to D respectively. 1402 SCHEDULE" A" Clw:il1gton MEMO To: Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer From: Jerry Barber, C.P.P.O., Purchasing Manager Date: Thursday, July 23, 2009 RE: CO-OPERATIVE TENDER T-11-2009 CULVERTS In view of the fact there are no Council meetings scheduled until September 14, 2009, authorization is requested to award the above noted contract to Atlantic Industries Limited, London, Ontario for an approximate annual value of $32,239.28 plus GST. The memo sent to the Operations Department summarizing the bid analysis and recommending the award is attached as Schedule "A". The e-mail from the Operations Department indicating concurrence with the recommendation is attached as Schedule "B". Tenders were publicly advertised and issued with bids being submitted as per Schedule "A" attached. Atlantic Industries Limited, London, being the lowest responsible bidder meeting all terms, conditions, and specifications be awarded the Municipality of Clarington requirements for Co- operative Tender T-11-2009 Supply and Delivery of Culverts for a three year term. Funding is to be provided from the current year's Operations Department Operating Budget. Written authorization is requested for this contract. r-- J ry Barber, C.P.P.O., urchasing Manager JB/bh 1403 SCHEDULE" A" T-11-2009 PAGE 2 APPROVED BY: /J ~~SC'CMO' Director of Corporate Services :i).d<; ;23-/ b 'i d~~ ~ . i'l 0;;(.. U ) U . Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer RETURN APPROVAL 'fa PIJRCHASING 1404 SCHEDULE "A" SCHEDULE "A" Cl!Jl-WglOn MEMO TO: Frank Wu, Chief Administrative Officer Larry Postill, Roads Supervisor FROM: Brigitta Harris, Buyer 1 DATE: Monday, July 20,2009 RE: CO-OPERATIVE TENDER T -11-2009 SUPPLY AND DELIVERY OF CULVERTS A tender for the Supply and Delivery of Culverts was issued on a Co-operative basis with the Municipality of Clarington, City of Pickering, Town of Whitby, City of Oshawa and the Region of Durham participating. The host agency for the tender call was the City of Pickering. The tender was publicly advertised and called for bids for the Supply and Delivery of Culverts as required by the co-operative agencies. The contract resulting from this tender will cover the supply and delivery of culverts on an as required basis for a three year term. A total of three (3) bids were received. The bid for Clarington's requirements was received and tabulated as follows BIDDER Municipality of Clarington Municipality of Clarington Annual Estimated Requirements Estimated 3 Year Requirements TOTAL BID TOTAL BID (excluding GST) (excludina GST) Atlantic Industries Limited $32,239.28 $96,717.84 London, ON Canada Culvert $33,310.68 $99,932.04 Orangeville, ON Armtec Limited Partnership $42,071.39 $126,214.17 Peterborough, ON 1405 SCHE DULE "A" - 2 - Funding will be provided from the current year's respective departments Operating Budgets. After review and analysis of the bids by Purchasing, the Operations Department and the Durham Purchasing Co-operative, it is recommended that Atlantic Industries Limited be awarded the contract. The contract value will exceed $75,000.00. Therefore, Council approval to proceed will be required. Please provide me with your written concurrence of this recommendation as soon as possible and then the report to Council will be prepared for the General Purpose and Administration Committee meeting. If you have any questions, please give me a call at 905 623-3379, Ext. 250. Yours truly, bj ri Yc-..-' /..jc-.:<.o..~ Brigitta Harris, C.P.P. Buyer 1 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905) 623-3379 F (905) 623-3330 1406 SCHEDULE "A" Harris, Brigitta From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Postill, Larry Wednesday, July 22, 20097:16 AM Harris, Brigitta Benson, Leslie; Devitt, Murray; Peters, Clint FW: T-11-2009 Culverts Brigitta H: Many thanks for the information. We are not in a position to consider paying 30-40% more for riveted pipe. We will not be changing our specifications although I believe our specifications now indicate aluminized pipe instead of galvanized. This was changed to increase the life of the pipe at a price increase of 10%. At the time of the tender the specification was changed to accommodate the spiral pipe instead of the riveted pipe as Armtec had stated that they were no longer going to make riveted pipe. Trust this captures our position. The report has been reviewed and we concur. Please proceed with approval of the report. Larry Postill C.E.T. , a.Tech. From: Harris, Brigitta Sent: July 21, 20092:13 PM To: Postill, Larry Subject: T-11-2009 Culverts Larry, Atlantic Industries is capable of making riveted piping. Price is estimated at 30 - 40% higher that the helical piping. Pricing has been requested and will be forwarded once received. Do we plan on changing our specifications? A report for approval has been drafted to Frank based on the spiral pricing. Please advise. Thanks. ~ ~ T-11-2009 Culverts T-11-2009 - Report to... lMMENDATION MEt> Brigitta Harris, c.P.P. Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, ON L1C 3A6 T: 905 623 3379 ext. 250 F: 905 623 3330 1 1407 I' ., SCHEDULE "B" Clfllpn MEMO To: Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer. From: Jerry Barber, C.P.P.O., Purchasing Manager Date: Thursday, July 23, 2009 RE: TENDER CL2009-32 ONE (1) CLASS 7 MOTOR GRADER In view of the fact there are no Council meetings scheduled until September 14, 2009, authorization is requested to award the above noted contract to Nortrax, Peterborough, Ontario for a total bid amount of $247,179.60 plus GST. The memo sent to the Operations Department summarizing the bid analysis and recommending the award is attached as Schedule "A". Tenders were publicly advertised and issued with bids being submitted as per Schedule "A" attached. The total project cost is $248,031.72 (Le. $247,179.60 plus air cab cleaner option at $852.12). The Operations Department has accepted the trade-in price of $54,000.00 for Unit 97534. Funding for this project in the amount of $248,031.72 is provided in Capital Account #110-36- 388-83642-7401 (Fleet Replacement Roads) leaving a surplus of $81,968.28. The low bidder has provided satisfactory service to the Municipality of Clarington in recent years. Written authorization is requested for this contract. rry Barber, C.P.P.O., Purchasing Manager JB/bh 1408 SCHEDULE "B" CL2009-32 PAGE 2 APPROVED BY: ~b~ Mari arano, H.B.Sc., C.M.a., Director ot;Corporate Services / // . I % //. It; Nancy Taylor . .A., lA., Director of F nancelTr asurer o ~~ Q.sl... SF~4 ,2!>J2 2 Jd') Z3/o1 Date ( Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer M l.'-f, 0) Dat RETURN APPROVAL TO PlJRCHASING 1409 . ' SCHEDULE "B" SCHEDULE "A" CJJJl-4Jglon MEMO TO: Frank Wu, Chief Administrative Officer Lockie Longhurst, Fleet Supervisor FROM: Brigitta Harris, Buyer 1 DATE: Tuesday, July 21, 2009 RE: CL2009-32 ONE (1) CLASS 7 MOTOR GRADER With respect to the above noted tender, the following bids were received. BIDDER TOTAL BID TOTAL BID (without trade-in & (with trade-in & excludina GST) excluding GST) Nortrax $305,499.60 $247,179.60 Peterborough, ON Strongco $310,141.44 $261,541.44 Mississauga, ON Toromont CAT $366,120.00 $339,120.00 Peterborough, ON Please find attached a copy of each of the bids submitted and a spreadsheet summarizing the bid results. Representatives from Operations and Purchasing met to discuss the bid submissions and specifications. Nortrax, Peterborough, Ontario submitted the low bid. The low bid meets the specifications outlined in the tender and therefore the recommendation is to award the contract to Nortrax. 1410 SCHEDULE "B" I - 2 - Nortrax, Peterborough, Ontario has previously supplied vehicles to the Municipality of Clarington and has provided satisfactory service. The Operations Department has requested that an air cleaner filter be added to the grader as an option in the amount of $852.12 plus G.S.T. The contract value will exceed $75,000.00. Therefore, Council approval to proceed will be required. Please provide me with your written concurrence of this recommendation as soon as possible and then the report to Council will be prepared for the General Purpose and Administration Committee meeting. If you have any questions, please give me a call at 905 623-3379, Ext. 250. Yours truly, '&';]-<- f:--/c,-, j-/n. ( <- {V Brigitta Harris, C.P.P. Buyer 1 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905) 623-3379 F (905) 623-3330 1411 Schedule "C" CJ!J!.-!!lgron MUNICIPAI.ITY OF CLARINGTON ~~MINISTRATOR'S OFFICE MEMO To: Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer From: Jerry Barber, C.P.P.O., Purchasing Manager Date: Tuesday, August 11, 2009 RE: Cl2009.27 SNOW CLEARING & WINTER MAINTENANCE OF MUNICIPAL PROPERTY, SIDEWALKS & PARKING lOTS In view of the fact there are no Council meetings scheduled until September 14, 2009, authorization is requested to award the above noted contract (Le., Section 1 and Section 2) to BJ Flint & Sons, Bowmanville, Ontario for an approximate annual value of $228,564.00 plus GST. Tenders were publicly advertised and issued with bids being submitted as per Schedule "A" attached. The memo sent to the Operations Department summarizing the bid analysis and recommending the award is attached as Schedule "A". The e-mail from Operations Department approving the recommendation is attached as Schedule "B". BJ Flint & Sons, Bowmanville, with an approximate annual value of $228,564.00, being the lowest responsible bidder meeting all terms, conditions, and specifications be awarded the Municipality of Clarington requirements for Tender CL2009-27 Snow Clearing & Winter Maintenance of Municipal Property, Sidewalks & Parking Lots (Le., Section 1 and Section 2) for a three year term. The bid received from D&F Snow Removal, Bowmanville is not being considered for this contract because of service issues on previous contracts and in accordance with the resolution of Council. Section 3 Newcastle and Surrounding Areas will be re-tendered splitting Newcastle and the Surrounding Areas to encourage competitive bids. Funding is to be provided from the current year's Operations Department Operating Budgets. Written authorization is requested for this contract. rry Barber, CP'.P.O., Purchasing Manager JB/bh 1412 ~chedule "C" CL2009-27 PAGE 2 APPROVED BY: ~1 II ~a:Jf Da e / [ a ano, H.B.Sc., C.M.a., Director of Corporate Services Oc--zQ ~ ~~ Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer h IY--r ro 7. Date RETURN APPROVAL TO PURCHASING 1413 )chedule "e" Qw:ilJglOn MEMO TO: Kaye Rand, Operations Co-ordinator FROM: Brigitta Harris, Buyer 1 DATE: RE: Monday, August 10, 2009 CL2009-27 SNOW CLEARING & WINTER MAINTENANCE OF MUNICIPAL PROPERTY, SIDEWALKs & PARKING LOTS With respect to the above noted tender, the following bids were received. BIDDER SECTION 1 - SECTION 2 - SECTION 3 - COURTICE BOWMANVILLE NEWCASTLE & TOTAL BID TOTAL BID SURROUNDING AREAS TOTAL BID BJ Flint & Sons Bowmanville, ON $82,173.00 $146,391.00 No Bid Tom's Landscaping & Maintenance $138,520.62 No Bid No Bid Courtice, ON Birds Property Management and Grounds Control $265,335.42 $416,815.14 $188,934.48 Hamoton, ON Regional Property Services $546,290.64 $1,917,048.00 No Bid Hampton, ON "D & F Snow Removal $68,544.00 $130,788.00 $48,636.00 Bowmanville, ON reiected reiected reiected ....Forest Ridge Landscaping Sharon, ON $426,793.08 No Bid No Bid Clarington Property Maintenance No Bid No Bid No Bid Bowmanville, ON Sun Up Corp No Bid No Bid No Bid Oshawa, ON RT J Property Services inc Pontypool, ON No Bid No Bid No Bid Tender award pendinQ "rejected - Council Resolution ....non-compliant bid 1414 Schedule "C" - 2 - Please find attached a copy of each of the bids submitted and a spreadsheet summarizing the bid results. D&F Snow Removal submitted the low bid for all three sections. Council has advised that D&F Snow Removal's bid submission for service programs, is to be rejected on the basis unacceptable past service, until such time as there is proof that the service meets acceptable Municipal standards. The bid submission from Forest Ridge Landscaping is non-compliant as the bid submission was not signed. Based on the snow fall data collected by the Operations Department in 2007 and 2008, it is estimated that forty (40) snow removal requests will be required during the winter season. The bid submission noted in the above table is the cost to clear the section for forty (40) call outs. The recommendation is to award Section 1 Courtice and Section 2 Bowmanville to the compliant low bid BJ Flint & Sons, Bowmanville, Ontario. The references for BJ Flint & Sons have been checked and are satisfactory. The Operations Department has verified the equipment and staffing requirements outlined in the bid submission are adequate for the contract requirements. Two bids were received for Newcastle and Surrounding Areas. The bid submission from D&F Snow Removal cannot be considered due to the Council Resolution. The compliant bid received for this location was from Birds Property Management and Grounds Control in the amount of $188,934.48 which is significantly higher than the budget anticipated. Newcastle and Surrounding Areas snow removal expenditure for the 2008-2009 winter season was $54,901.95 which implies that the compliant bid submission may not be competitive. Therefore, it is recommended to re-tender this location splitting Newcastle and the Surrounding Areas to encourage competitive bids. In view of the fact there are no Council meetings scheduled until September 14, 2009, authorization will be requested from the Chief Administrative Officer in the form of an internal memo and Council will be advised of the award decision upon their return. If you have any questions, please give me a call at 905 623-3379, Ext. 250. Yours truly, 1i'<'.J'/~ 'tt~ ;-10..<. ( <. ~ Brigitta Harris Buyer 1 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1 C 3A6 T (905) 623-3379 F (905) 623-3330 1415 Schedule lie" .. Harris, Brigitta From: Sent: To: Subject: Rand, Kaye Tuesday, August 11, 2009 9: 31 AM Harris, Brigitta RE: CL2009-27 Snow Clearing & Winter Maintenance of Municipal Property, Sidewalks & Parking Lots Hi Brigitta I agree with your recommendation to re-tender Section #3 splitting Newcastle and the Surrounding Areas to encourage competitive bids. The bid amount received is far greater than we have anticipated. Although B.l Flint & Sons are somewhat higher than D&F, their bid for Section #1 and Section #2 is still reasonable and I agree with awarding these areas to them. Thanbou, 7(p,ye '.M... ~na "'ICT Operations Coordinator Telephone: 905-263-2291 Ext. 536 Fax: 905-263-4433 EmaiJ: krandrwc1arington.net From: Harris, Brigitta Sent: Tuesday, August 11, 20099:24 AM To: Rand, Kaye Cc: Arends, Susan Subject: CL2009-27 Snow Clearing & Winter Maintenance of Municipal Property, Sidewalks & Parking Lots Kaye, Please review that attached recommendation memo. The bid tabulation and bid submissions have been saved in the j: drive. Sue and Lockie visited BJ Flint & Sons to review the equipment on August 7, 2009. Ownerships have been requested and are forthcoming. Also, some new equipment will be purchased for the contract. The response for the Newcastle & Surrounding Areas was poor (please refer to the recommendation memo for details). If we re-tender this area it will need to be done quickly. Please review and advise of your comments and/or concerns. Thank you. << File: CL2009-27 RECOMMENDATION MEMO WITH SUBMISSIONS.doc>> 1 1416 Schedule lie" . · "Brigitta Harris, c.P.P. " Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street Bowmanville, ON LiC 3A6 T: 90S 623 3379 ext. 250 F: 90S 623 3330 2 1417 Schedule "0" Clw:.-ilJgtDn MEMO To: franklin Wu, M.C.I.P., R.P.P., Chief Administrative Officer from: Jerry D. Barber, C.P.P.O., Purchasing Manager Date: August 12, 2009 CL2009-18, CONC. RD. 6 & CONC. RD. 7 ROAD & BRIDGE REHABILITATION. RE: In view of the fact there are no Council meetings scheduled until September 21, 2009 authorization. is requested to award the above noted contract to Coco Paving Inc., Oshawa, Ontario. The total project amount is $2,383,794.00 (excluding GST), which includes $2,067,092.50 contracted services, contract administration, material testing and contingencies. A copy of the recommending memo provided by the Engineering Department accompanied by the reporting memo of AECOM is attached for information. Tenders were advertised on the Clarington and OPBA Website and advertised in the Canadian Statesman and the Daily Commercial News. A tabulation of the bid received on the above noted tender is as follows: BIDDER TOTAL BID EXCLUDING G.S.T. Coco Paving Inc. Oshawa, ON Clearwater Structures Inc. Aax, ON r Paving Limited ham, ON $2,067,092.50 $2,365,982.00 $3,022,631.33 The attached memo from the Engineering Department and the AECOM attachment provides details with respect to funding for this project. To summarize, funding in the amount of $1,913,794.00 was received from the Province of Ontario in 2008 for reconstruction of municipal infrastructure and the balance of the funds required to complete the project are available in the 2009 Pavement Rehabilitation Program Account. After review and analysis of the bid by AECOM, Engineering and Purchasing Services, it is mutually agreed that the low bidder, Coco Paving Inc., Oshawa, be recommended for the provision of construction services required for road and bridge rehabilitation on Concession Roads 6 and 7 as required by the Municipality of Clarington. Coco Paving Inc. (formerly Lafarge Paving Inc.) has performed satisfactory work for the Municipality of Clarington in the past. Coco Paving has also completed work for the Region of Durham and the work was completed to specification and to their satisfaction. . . . continued page 2 1418 Schedule /10" Memo Re: CL2009-18 Page 2 of 2 The Director of Finance has reviewed the funding requirements and concurs with the recommendation. Written authorization is requested for this contract. JDB APPROVED BY: ~ ~ ~Jcrr-. Nancy aylor, B.B.A., C.A., If\. TreasurerlDirector of Finance Ih.{~ qh7 Date I QG~-eQ~ l~, Franklin Wu, M.C.I.P., R.P.P. Chief Administrative Officer JJl,~ (). 07 '. Date 1419 Schedule "0" Cl~J!ilJglon MEMO TO: Jerry Barber, Purchasing Manager FROM: Bruno Bianco, P. Eng., Manager, Infrastructure & Capital Works DATE: July 28, 2009 SUBJECT: PAVEMENT REHABILITATION - CONC. RD 6 & CONC. RD 7 2008 MUNICIPAL ROAD AND BRIDGE INFRASTRUCTURE INVESTMENT CL2009-18, CPR.2008.3 The Engineering Services Department has reviewed the recommendation provided by AECOM Canada Ltd. ("AECOM") and offers the following comments. In 2008 the Municipality received $1,913,794.00 for the reconstruction of municipal infrastructure by the Provincial Government and in 2009 council approved the 2009 Pavement Rehabilitation Program that allocates funds to various roads. The 2009 Pavement Rehabilitation Program is also funded at the Provincial level through our Gas Tax Reserve fund. We concur with the recommendation to award the contract to Coco Paving Inc. (formerly Lafarge Paving Inc.) in the amount of $2,067,092.50 exclusive of G.S.T. for the road reconstruction project. As recommended by AECOM, a contingency amount of approximately 4% is carried forward. Therefore, including design and tender fees as well as contract administration fees, and permit fees, the Engineering Department advises the following Municipal breakdown for the above referenced project: 2008 Municipal Road and Bridge 2009 Pavement Infrastructure Investment Rehabilitation Program Account 110 32 330 Account 11032 330 Account 110 32 330 833377401 833397401 832127401 (Cone. Rd6) (Cone. Rd7) (Cone. Rd7 BridQe) Total Project Value $579,879.58 $1,333,914.42 $470,000.00 Budget Amount $ 579,879.58 $1,333,914.42 $470,000.00 Estimated Budget $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Surplus/Deficit 1420 Schedule "0" 2 We recommend staff award for CL2009-18 move forward based on the above apportionments. Attached for your files is the recommendation provided by AECOM. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact the undersigned. Regards, ----:;> ./\ . ~- ~ (~.~.__.._, ) ,-"=-- .=~~-- Bruno'"1Vf Bia --- Manager, Infrastructure & Capital Works BMB/jo Attachment Cc: A.S. Cannella, Director of Engineering Services William McCrae, P. Eng., AECOM Nancy Taylor, Director of Finance Frank Wu, CAO CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T(905)623-3379 1421 . , Schedule "0" I AECOM AECOM 513 Division Street, Cobourg, ON, Canada K9A 5G6 T 905.372.2121 F 905.372.3621 www.aecom.com July 29, 2009 Project Number: 12-29754 Mr. A. S. Cannella, C.E.T. Director, Engineering Services The Municipality of Clarington 40 Temperance Street BOWMANVILLE, Ontario L 1C 3A6 Dear Sir: Re: Concession Roads 6 & 7 Road and Bridge Rehabilitation Contract No. CL2009-18 (the "Contract"), Municipality of Clarington Tenders for the above project were opened at the Municipal Offices on Tuesday, July 7, 2009 at 2:15 p.m. A list of the bids received is provided in the table below. All numbers are exclusive of GST. BIDDER TOT AL BID Coco Paving Inc. $2,067,092.50 Oshawa, ON Clearwater Structures Inc. $2,365,982.00 Ajax, ON Miller Paving Limited $3,022,631.33 Markham, ON The Municipality of Clarington's Purchasing Department (the "Purchasing Department") reviewed all bids to confirm compliance with the Clarington Purchasing By-Law and all bids were deemed compliant. AECOM Canada Ltd. ("AECOM") has reviewed all bids and confirmed the bid values noted above. Coco Paving Inc. is the lowest bidder. Its submitted tender has been reviewed and is compliant. Coco Paving Inc. (formerly Lafarge Paving Inc.) has completed several projects for the Municipality of Clarington in recent years in which AECOM has provided Contract Administration, including CL2007- 40 (Asphalt Re-surfacing, Various Streets, 2007) and CL2006-33 (Asphalt Re-surfacing, Various Streets, 2006). Quality of work and adherence to standards was satisfactory for these projects. As. requested by the Purchasing Department, references were checked only for the lowest bidder. Coco Paving Inc. has completed a number of similar scope projects including work for the Region of Durham. Staff contacted at the Region stated that Coco Paving Inc. has completed the work to specification and to their satisfaction. Estimated costs for various project components, based on Coco Paving Inc. 's bid are summarized on the attached cost apportionment. (P:\Depi12\12-29754\CorrespICl2009-18 Tender Award letter IDraft-Rev3)me) 1422 Schedule "0" Page 2 Municipality of Clarington July 27, 2009 The low bid from Coco Paving Inc. is above the project budget for Concession Road 7 due to a number of factors: · The scope of the project was expanded from strictly a road rehabilitation to include improvements to roadside safety and, keeping public perception in mind, maintenance work adjacent to the roadway that would have to be done in the near future. · Areas of inadequate subgrade material were revealed by the geotechnical report, which was undertaken as part of the detailed design after applications for project funding had been made. As a result of the poor soils, the scope of this work is considerably more than accounted for in the preliminary estimate prepared for the funding application. If funds are available it is our opinion, based on the references contacted regarding performance on previous projects, that the tender in the amount of $2,067,092.50 (exclusive of GST) may be awarded to Coco Paving Inc. of Oshawa, Ontario, sUbject to all provisions of the Clarington Purchasing Bylaw being met. Bid Cheques or Bid Bonds shall be retained for Coco Paving Inc. and Clearwater Structures Inc., the second low bidder, until the Contract has been executed. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact the undersigned. Ron Albright, P.Eng. Project Manager, Community Infrastructure ron. albrig ht@aecom.com SB:cs cc: Mr. Bruno Bianco, P. Eng., Manager, Infrastructure and Capital Works, Municipality of Clarington 1423 (C\Oocuments and Setlingslbb03\J..ocal Settings\Temporary Inteme1 FUes\OLK112\C1200Q-18 Tender Award Lensr lOran-Rev3).doc) .. Municipality of Clarington Concession Roads 6 & 7 Road and Bridge Rehabilitation Cost Apportionment for Low Bid Contract CL2009-18 July 28, 2009 AECOM Project # 108396 (12-29754) Clarington Description Total Comments Cone. Rd. 6 Cone. Rd. 7 Gas Tax Funding Account Number 110-32-330-83337 110-32-330-83339- 110-32-330-83212- 7401 7401 7401 Construction Costs Contract CL2009-7 Part A Concession Road 6 $ 510,359.00 $ 510,359.00 Part B Concession Road 7 $ 1,096,266.00 $ 1,096,266.00 Part C Concession Road 7 Structure Rehabilitation $ 409,567.50 $ 409,567.50 Part D General Items $ 50,900.00 $ - $ 50,900.00 $ - Total Construction $ 2,067,092.50 $ 510,359.00 $ 1,147,166.00 $ 409,567.50 Detailed Design, Approvals and Tendering (To May 29,2009) $ 88,054.00 $ 10,277.66 $ 59,901.38 $ 17,874.96 Construction Administration and Materials Testing $ 148,000.00 $ 37,000.00 $ 82,000.00 $ 29,000.00 Sub-Total Estimated Project Costs $2,303,146.50 $557,636.66 $1,289,067.38 $456,442.46 Contingencies (@4Ok) $80,647.50 $22,242.92 $44,847.04 $13,557.54 Total Estimated Project Costs $2,383,794.00 $579,879.58 $1,333,914.42 $470,000.00 Budget Amount $2,383,794.00 $579,879.58 $1,333,914.42 $470,000.00 Over/Under Budget Amount VI n ':T All costs exdude G.ST III a. c III q ~ I'\) ~ C:\Documents and Seltingslbb03\Desktopllow Bid Cost Apportionment - July 28. 2009.xls AECOM Attachment 2 THE CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW 2009- Being a By-law to authorize a contract between the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington and Coco Paving, Oshawa, Ontario, to enter into . an agreement for the Concession 7 & 8 Road and Bridge Rehabilitation, Municipality of Clarington. THE COPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON HEREBY ENACTS AS FOllOWS: 1. THAT the Mayor and Clerk are hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington and seal with the Corporation Seal, a contract between Coco Paving, Oshawa, Ontario and said Corporation; and 2. THAT the contract attached hereto as Schedule "A" form part of this By-law. By-law read a first and second time this day of ,2009. By-law read a third time and finally passed this day of ,2009. Jim Abernethy, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk 1425 Clillpn REPORT CORPORATE SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, September 14,2009 .Report #: COD-053-09 File#_ By-law # Subject: TENDER CL2009-40, SNOW CLEARING & WINTER MAINTENANCE OF MUNICIPAL PROPERTY, SIDEWALKS & PARKING LOTS FOR NEWCASTLE & SURROUNDING AREAS Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report COD-053-09 be received; 2. THAT Birds Property Management and Grounds Control, Hampton, ON with a total bid price of $56,979.60 (excluding G.S.T.), being the lowest responsible bidder meeting all terms, conditions and specifications of Tender CL2009-40, be awarded the contract for the Snow Clearing & Winter Maintenance of Municipal Property, Sidewalks & Parking Lots for Newcastle & Surrounding Areas; 3. THAT pending satisfactoiy pricing and service the contract be extended for a second and third year; and 4. THAT the funds expended be drawn from the Operations, Emergency Services, and Clerks Department(s), 2009 Operating Budget(s). Reviewed by: ~-.:. ~ Submitted by: arie Marano, H.B.Sc., C.M.O., Director of Corporate Services Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer MM\JDB\BH CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T(905)623-3379 F (905)623-4169 1426 REPORT NO.: COD-053-09 PAGE 2 1. BACKGROUND AND COMMENT 1.1 Tenders were publicly advertised and called for the Snow Clearing & Winter Maintenance of Municipal Property, Sidewalks & Parking Lots for Newcastle & Surrounding Areas as required by the Operations Department. Subsequently, one tender was received and tabulated as per Schedule "A" attached. 2. ANALYSIS 2.1 The compliant bid was submitted by Birds Property Management and Grounds Control, Hampton, Ontario. 2.2 Contractors are unwilling to service the Newcastle and Surrounding Areas due to the distance span and remote locations. The previous snow tender for all locations received bid submissions from six bidders, however only two bids were received for the Newcastle and Surrounding Areas. One of the bids was rejected and the second was exceptionally high. 3. FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS 3.1 The total funds required for Tender CL2009-40 Snow Clearing & Winter Maintenance of Municipal Property, Sidewalks & Parking Lots for Newcastle & Surrounding Areas are included in the Operations, Emergency Services, Community Services and Clerks Department(s), 2009 Operating Budget(s). 3.2 For the information of Council, the cost .to remove snow in Newcastle and the Surrounding Areas has increased approximately by 3.8% from the previous year. 3.3 Queries with respect to department needs, specifications, etc., should be referred to the Director of Operations. 1427 REPORT NO.: COD-053-09 PAGE 3 4. CONCLUSION 4.1 After review and analysis of the bids by Purchasing and Operations, it was mutually agreed that the bid from Birds Property Management and Grounds Control, Hampton, Ontario be recommended for the contract for Snow Clearing & Winter Maintenance of Municipal Property, Sidewalks & Parking Lots for Newcastle & Surrounding Areas 4.2 The references for Birds Property Management and Grounds Control have been contacted and are satisfactory. 5. INPUT FROM OTHER SOURCES 5.1 This report has been reviewed for recommendation by the Purchasing Manager with the appropriate departments and circulated as follows. Concurrence: Operations Co-Ordinator Attachments: Attachment 1 - Schedule "A", Bid Summary 1428 REPORT NO.: COD-053-09 PAGE 4 Schedule "A" Bid Summary Tender CL2009-40 BIDDER TOTAL BID (Excluding GST) Birds Property Management and Grounds Control $56,979.60 Hampton" ON 1429 C~ (. . gl 'f(JIm. " T-01T 1\'/JClgiziJ/g Olltario REPORT FINANCE DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday September 14th, 2009 Report #: FND-019-09 File #: Resolution #: By-law #: Subject: REPORT ON REVENUE SENSITIVE TO ECONOMIC CONDITIONS - JUNE 2009 Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report FND-019-09 be received for information. NT/LG/hjl Reviewed bQ ~:..~ Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer. 1 501 REPORT NO.: FND-019-09 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND: 1.1 At the meeting held on January 12, 2009, Council requested staff to provide by department on a monthly reporting basis a report to Council on the variable growth related revenue and the variable economic related revenues which could have an adverse effect on achieving the 2009 municipal capital and current budget. 2.0 CURRENT: 2.1 This report is for the month of June 2009 including the year-to-date amounts along with prior year's amounts for comparison. 2.2 This report will look at the Building Division's revenues of the Engineering Services department such as municipal development charges and building permit fees revenue paid, the total of Planning Services Department's revenues such as site plans, rezoning, condominium application fees and subdivision applications fees revenues and the total of Community Services Department's revenues. 2.3 The revenue amounts reported monthly in this report are reflected in the municipality's general ledger when paid to the municipality, ie. on a cash basis. There will be some differences between this report and the monthly Report on Building Permit Activity from Engineering Department due to this timing difference. 3.0 ENGINEERING SERVICES - BUILDING DIVISION REVENUE STATUS MUNI CI PAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES MONTH OF JUNE 2009 2008 MUNICIPAL NUMBER MUNICIPAL NUMBER % CHANGE OF UNITTYPE DEV. CHARGES PAID OF UNITS DEV. CHARGES PAID OF UNITS DEV.CHGS 2009-2008 Single/Semi- Detached ; -New construction $ 203,294.00 14 $ 887,713.00 91 -Additions $ - 0 $ 39,844.00 4 Townhouse $ - 0 $ - 0 Apartment $ - 0 $ - 0 Commercial $ 1,453.68 2 $ 128,488.61 3 Agricultural $ - 0 $ - 0 Go\€rnment $ - 0 $ - 0 Institutional $ - 0 $ - 0 Industrial $ - 0 $ - 0 TOTAL $ 204,747.68 16 $ 1,056,045.61 98 -80.0% 1502 REPORT NO.: FND-019-09 PAGE 3 3.1 In the 2008 Development Charges Amendment Study, it is forecasted that the municipality would be collecting approximately 82 residential units on a monthly basis for 2009 and approximately 79 residential units on a monthly basis for 2008. For the month of June 2009, there were only 16 units of the forecasted residential units of 82 being issued which equates to 19.5%. For the month of June 2008, there were 98 units of the forecasted residential units of 79 being issued which equates to 124.1 %. Comparing the number of units issued in 2009 to 2008, shows that June 2009 has collected 16% of the units issued in June 2008. MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES JANUARY TO JUNE - YEAR TO DATE 2009 2008 MUNICIPAL NUMBER MUNICIPAL NUMBER % CHANGE OF I UNIT TYPE DEV. CHARGES PAID OF UNITS DEV. CHARGES PAID OF UNITS DEV.CHGS 2009-2008 Single/Semi- Detached -New construction $ 1,305,381.00 98 $ 2,422,313 .00 246 -Additions $ - 0 $ 258,219.00 29 Townhouse $ - 0 $ - 0 Apartment $ (6,307.00) -1 $ - 0 Commercial $ 14,864.90 4 $ 172,929.41 5 I Agricultural $ - 0 $ 16,040.67 0 t Government $ - 0 $ - 0 I Institutional $ - 0 $ - 0 Industrial $ - 0 $ - 0 TOTAL $ 1,313,938.90 101 $ 2,869,502.08 280 -54.2% NOTE:Apartment unit in April 2009 is a negative value as permit was changed from 2 apartments to 1 apartment. 3.2 Comparing the number of units issued in 2009 to 2008, shows that 2009 YTD has collected 36% of the units issued in 2008 YTD. For the 2009 YTD, there are 101 units of the forecasted residential units of 492 being issued which equates to 20.5%. Per the 2008 DC Amendment Study, 983 residential units are forecasted for 2009. For the 2008 YTD, there were only 280 units of the forecasted residential units of 476 being issued which equates to 58.8%. Per the 2008 DC Amendment Study, 951 residential units are forecasted for 2008. 4.0 BUILDING PERMIT FEES REVENUE STATUS 4.1 The line graph below on building permit fees illustrates on a monthly basis the permit fees collected for the years 2007,2008 and year-to-date with the 2009 budget per month. The line from July 2009 to December 2009 is flat lined as the revenues have not been received. This line graph accents the fluctuations on a monthly and yearly basis for the building permit fees collected in any given year. As you will note on the chart, the March 2007 and the June 2008 building permit fees collected were over $400,000. 1503 REPORT NO.: FND-019-09 PAGE 4 4.2 For the month of June 2009, $51,455 was paid for building permit fees which represents 44% of the 2009 budget (monthly budget is $116,666). For comparison purposes, for June 2008, $415,870 was paid for building permit fees which represented 333% of the 2008 budget (monthly budget was $125,000). BUILDING PERMIT FEES PER MONTH $500,000 $450,000 $400,000 $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $0 (~ ".,:4. (J' ~'b S" _~~ ,~~ ~, ~. ) <<,q, ~~ 'i?-~ ~~-4. ~q, \V ~-4. '.;; ~c} q,' q,' ~, q,' ~ ~ (f ~ ~ 'i?-v q, <7 q, c,~ ,?fl,~~ 0 ~o..!i. <;)fl, - 2007 Actual - 2008 Actual - 2009 Actual - 2009 Budget 4.3 The following line graph illustrates the building permit fees on an accumulated monthly basis for the years 2007,2008 and year-to-date with the 2009 YTD budget. The line from July 2009 to December 2009 is flat lined as the revenues have not been received. This line graph also illustrates that 2007 year had the highest permit fees revenue. The total building permit fees revenues were as follows for the years: .2007 - $1,685,290; 2008 - $1,348,198; and as at June 2009 - $214,847. For comparison purposes, the 2007 permit fees of $1,685,290 was 112% of the 2007 annual budget of $1 ,500,000; the 2008 permit fees of $1,348,198 was 90% of the 2008 annual budget of $1,500,000 and as of June 30, 2009 permit fees of $214,847 is 15% of 2009 annual budget of $1 ,400,000. 1504 REPORT NO.: FND-019-09 PAGE 5 BUILDING PERMIT FEES CUMULATIVE YTD $1,800,000 $1,600,000 $1,400,000 $1,200,000 $1,000,000 $800,000 $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 $0 (~ ~..:", (J' ~~ v'l> v'l> q} "?-~ ,,'l)~ :-0' ~ ) <<,e ~~ ~e ...,.::> ~..:", v~ e' e' e' e' '-) vQO <f> ....;s> <f> <f> ~ ~e 0<- ,::,.e <-e ,?e~ ~o Qe - 2007 YTD Actual - 2008 YTD Actual - 2009 YTD Actual - 2009 YTD Budget 5.0 COMMUNITY SERVICES REVENUE STATUS 5.1 Community Services revenues overall are in line with the same period last year. 5.2 Community Services revenues have been divided into 4 major divisions: Facilities, Aquatic Programs, Fitness Programs and Recreation Programs. Facilities revenues includes ice rentals, pool rentals, multi-purpose room rentals, soccer rentals, lacrosse rentals, skating and hockey rentals, concession sales and pros hop merchandise sales. Aquatic Program revenues include all pool facilities memberships and swimming activities. Fitness Program revenues include the fitness programs and memberships offered at the Courtice Community Complex and Newcastle and District Recreation Complex facilities. Recreation Program revenues include various recreational activities that are of interest to the pre-teens, teenagers for after school and during school holidays such as day camps, drama club, pre-teen dances, etc. 5.3 The below bar graph illustrates Community Services 4 major revenue groups for the month of June and the monthly budget value with the same period last year for comparison purposes. Comparing Community Services revenues on a monthly basis is not a true indicator of how well its performing as its revenue is more seasonal in nature. 5.4 The graph below shows the Fitness Program revenues is fairly consistent in the same monthly period to last year. The Facilities and Aquatic Program revenue in 2009 is slightly higher than 2008 due to the opening of the Newcastle and District Recreation Complex. It is too early to see how well the Recreation Program revenue is performing as most of its activities occur during summer months. 1505 REPORT NO.: FND-019-09 PAGE 6 COMMUNITY SERVICES MONTHLY REVENUE & BUDGET $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $0 . FACILITIES . AQUATIC PROGRAMS . FITNESS PROGRAMS . RECREATION PROGRAMS 2009June 2008June 2009 2008 BUDGET BUDGET 5.5 The following comparison table illustrates the monthly revenue received as a percentage of the monthly budget used in the graph. MONTHLY MONTHLY % OF BUDGET % OF BUDGET COMMUNITY SERVICES 2009June 2008 June 2009 BUDGET 2008 BUDGET 2009 2008 FACI L1TI ES $89,771 $83,184 $241,756 $230,223 37.13% 36.13% AQUATIC PROGRAMS $45,214 $41,710 $65,710 $62,4 76 68.81% 66.76% FITNESS PROGRAMS $31,101 $32,4-38 $47,748 $42,750 65.14% 75.88% RECREATION PROGRAMS $69,121 $82,432 $31,875 $34,113 216.85% 241.64% 5.6 The following bar graph illustrates the accumulated Community Services 4 major revenue groups for year-to-date values as of June along with the accumulated monthly budget values with the same period last year for comparison purposes. This YTD graph emphasizes more how well Community Services revenues are performing in a YTD and Budget comparison aswell as a year-to-year comparison. COMMUNITY SERVICES-ACCUMULATED REVENUE & BUDGET $1,600,000 $1,400,000 $1,200,000 $1,000,000 $800,000 $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 $0 1 '. . FACILITIES . AQUATIC PROGRAMS . FITNESS PROGRAMS . RECREATION PROGRAMS 2009 2008 2009 2008 June June BUDGET BUDGET 1506 REPORT NO.: FND-019-09 PAGE 7 5.7 The following comparison table illustrates the accumulated revenue received as a percentage of the YTD budget used in the graph. YTD YTD YTD YTD % of BUDGET % of BUDGET COMMUNITY SERVICES 2009 June 2008 June 2009 BUDGET 2008 BUDGET 2009 2008 FACILITIES $1,356,735 $1,300,622 $1,450,537 $1,381,340 93.50% 94.20% AQUATIC PROGRAMS $394,109 $324,275 $394,263 $374,859 100.00% 86.50% FITNESS PROGRAMS $254,216 $274,782 $286,488 $256,500 88.70% 107.10% RECREATION PROGRAMS $184,329 $199,663 $191,250 $204,680 96.40% 97.50% 5.8 The Fitness Program revenue YTD for June 2009 is less than 2008 is attributable to a decline in the memberships. Staff will continue with ongoing member recruitment and retention efforts. 5.9 Community Services staff noticed during the 2008 year that some of the programs offered in the Recreation Program were not performing as well as in the past such as its summer trip and day camps. During the 2009 budget process, the camp revenues were reduced in recognition of this. This reduction in revenue was done prior to the economic downturn. Community Services staff has found a similar trend with other Regional Municipalities in addition to other local service providers (ie. Museum). Community Services staff will continue to monitor and market the 2009 line up of summer day camps and hopefully participatory numbers will increase over the next few weeks to be reflected in a future report. 6.0 PLANNING SERVICES REVENUE STATUS 6.1 Planning Services individual revenue sources have been consolidated. Planning Services revenues include Official Plan amendment fees, rezoning fees, site plan fees, subdivision application fees and subdivision/consent application fees. Planning fees do not reflect full cost recovery rates in contrast to those done under Building Fee Legislation. They have been consolidated since the sum total of fees is the key revenue number and individual types of application are difficult to predict. 1507 REPORT NO.: FND-019-09 PAGE 8 6.2 The graph below illustrates for the monthly revenue and budget for June that 2009 revenue is below 2008 year's revenue. $45,000 $40,000 $35,000 $30,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $0 PLANNING - MONTHLY REVENUE & BUDGET 2009June 2009 2008June 2008 BUDGET BUDGET .2009 June .2009 BUDGET .2008 June .2008 BUDGET 6.3 Planning Services 2009 budget for the overall revenues is $346,000 and for 2008 budget the overall revenues were $500,000. This equates to a reduction of $154,000 or 31 % decrease from 2008 to 2009 budget. The Planning Services revenue actuals for June 2009 are $16,821 and for June 2008 were $28,812. The June revenues as a percentage of each year's monthly budget values: 2009 - 58.3% and 2008 - 69.2%. $300,000 PLANNING-ACCUMULATED REVENUE & BUDGET $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $0 2009 June 2009 2008 June 2008 BUDGET BUDGET .2009 June .2009 BUDGET .2008 June . 2008 BUDGET 1508 REPORT NO.: FND-019-09 PAGE 9 6.4 The Planning Services accumulated revenues year-to-date as of June 2009 are $76,110 and as of June 2008 were $128,978. The accumulated revenues as a percentage of each year's annual budget values: 2009.- 22% and 2008 - 26%. This reflects the overall economic activity and the surplus of subdivision applications in the draft approved or processing stages. While fees were paid several years ago, plan review and implementation activities are ongoing. 7.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS: 7.1 In comparing current year's month and previous year's month values several aspects need to be considered such as the time of year/season, economic conditions, weather conditions, investors long term plans, pending legislation and appeals. It is important to keep in mind that Planning fees and Community Services fees are applied to the overall general fund rather than departmental. The development plan review and implementation process involves staff from many departments who play various roles in the process to generate the revenues identified. 7.2 This report is submitted for information purposes. The revenue shortfall as of June 30th and forecasted to the end of 2009 has been addressed in Council report CAO-004-09 on August 31,2009. The budget values in this report have not been adjusted based on revised forecasts. CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-4169 1509 Clarin!JfOH B/Je.I'l~iziJJg O/J/.11';O ~ () REPORT FINANCE DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday September 14th, 2009 Resolution #: Report #: FND-020-09 File#: By-law #: Subject: REPORT ON REVENUE SENSITIVE TO ECONOMIC CONDITIONS - JULY 2009 Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report FND-020-09 be received for information. Reviewed bYU~ ~ Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer. NT/LG/hjl 1510 REPORT NO.: FND-020-09 PAGE 2 1.0 BACKGROUND: 1.1 At the meeting held on January 12, 2009, Council requested staff to provide by department on a monthly reporting basis a report to Council on the variable growth related revenue and the variable economic related revenues which could have an adverse effect on achieving the 2009 municipal capital and current budget. 2.0 CURRENT: 2.1 This report is for the month of July 2009 including the year-to-date amounts along with prior year's amounts for comparison. 2.2 This report will look at the Building Division's revenues of the Engineering Services department such as municipal development charges and building permit fees revenue paid, the total of Planning Services Department's revenues such as site plans, rezoning, condominium application fees and subdivision applications fees revenues and the total of Community Services Department's revenues. 2.3 The revenue amounts reported monthly in this report are reflected in the municipality's general ledger when paid to the municipality, ie. on a cash basis. There will be some differences between this report and the monthly Report on Building Permit Activity from Engineering Department due to this timing difference. 3.0 ENGINEERING SERVICES - BUILDING DIVISION REVENUE STATUS MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES MONTH OF JULY 2009 2008 MUNICIPAL NUMBER MUNICIPAL NUMBER % CHANGE.OF I UNIT TYPE DEV. CHARGES PAID OF UNITS DEV. CHARGES PAID OF UNITS DEV.CHGS 2009-2008 Single/Semi- Detached -New construction $ 392,067.00 27 $ 878,685.00 122 -Additions $ - 0 $ - 0 Townhouse $ - 0 $ 209,640.00 37 Apartment $ - 0 $ - 0 Commercial $ 1,379.75 3 $ 1,393.67 7 Agricultural $ - 0 $ - 0 Government $ - 0 $ - 0 Institutional $ - 0 $ - 0 Industrial $ 7,079.01 1 $ - 0 TOTAL $ 400,525.76 31 $ 1,089,718.67 166 -63.2%1 1511 REPORT NO.: FND-020-09 PAGE 3 3.1 In the 2008 Development Charges Amendment Study, it is forecasted that the municipality would be collecting approximately 82 residential units on a monthly basis for 2009 and approximately 79 residential units on a monthly basis for 2008. For the month of July 2009, there were only 31 units of the forecasted residential units of 82 being issued which equates to 37.8%. For the month of July 2008, there were 166 units of the forecasted residential units of 79 being issued which equates to 210.1 %. Comparing the number of units issued in 2009 to 2008, shows that July 2009 has collected 18.7% of the units issued in July 2008. MUNICIPAL DEVELOPMENT CHARGES JANUARY TO JULY - YEAR TO DATE 2009 2008 MUNICIPAL NUMBER MUNICIPAL NUMBER % CHANGE OF UNIT TYPE DEV. CHARGES PAID OF UNITS DEV. CHARGES PAID OF UNITS DEV.CHGS 2009-2008 Single/Semi- Detached -New construction $ 1,697,448.00 125 $ 3,300,998.00 368 -Additions $ - 0 $ 258,219.00 29 Townhouse $ - 0 $ 209,640.00 37 Apartment $ (6,307.00) -1 $ - 0 Commercial $ 16,244.65 7 $ 174,323.08 12 Agricultural $ - 0 $ 16,040.67 0 Government $ - 0 $ - 0 Institutional $ - 0 $ - 0 Industrial $ 7,079.01 1 $ - 0 TOTAL $ 1,714,464.66 132 $ 3,959,220.75 446 -56.7% 3.2 4.0 4.1 NOTE:Apartment unit in April 2009 is a negative value as permit was changed from 2 apartments to 1. Comparing the number of units issued in 2009 to 2008, shows that 2009 YTD has collected 30% of the units issued in 2008 YTD. For the 2009 YTD, there are 132 units of the forecasted residential units of 574 being issued which equates to 23%. Per the 2008 DC Amendment Study, 983 residential units are forecasted for 2009. For the 2008 YTD, there were only 446 units of the forecasted residential units of 553 being issued which equates to 81 %. Per the 2008 DC Amendment Study, 951 residential units are forecasted for 2008. BUILDING PERMIT FEES REVENUE STATUS The line graph below on building permit fees illustrates on a monthly basis the permit fees collected for the years 2007,2008 and year-to-date with the 2009 budget per month. The line from August 2009 to December 2009 is flat lined as the revenues have not been received. This line graph accents the fluctuations on a monthly and yearly basis for the building permit fees collected in any given year. As you will note on the chart, the March 2007 and the July 2008 building permit fees collected were over $400,000. 1512 REPORT NO.: FND-020-09 PAGE 4 4.2 For the month of July 2009, $78,702 was paid for building permit fees which represents 67.5% of the 2009 budget (monthly budget is $116,666). For comparison purposes, for July 2008, $133,189 was paid for building permit fees which represented 106.6% of the 2008 budget (monthly budget was $125,000). BUILDING PERMIT FEES PER MONTH $500,000 $450,000 $400,000 $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $0 ~:~ I>.'~ C5' v~ v" _"'~ ,7><:' ~, ~. ) <<,~ ~~ '?'~ ~7>~ :<:'~ ,;~ ~~ ~ v(} ~, ~, rz,' ~, ~~~~~ '?'v rz, c'J ~ (;~ c.,~~><:) 0 ~o..:o. <:)rz, -2007 Actual - 2008 Actual - 2009 Actual - 2009 Budget 4.3 The following line graph illustrates the building permit fees on an accumulated monthly basis for the years 2007, 2008 and year-to-date with the 2009 YTD budget. The line from August 2009 to December 2009 is flat lined as the revenues have not been received. This line graph also illustrates that 2007 year had the highest permit fees revenue. The total building permit fees revenues were as follows for the years: 2007 - $1,685,290; 2008 - $1,348,198; and as at July 2009 - $293,549. For comparison purposes, the 2007 permit fees of $1,685,290 was 112% of the 2007 annual budget of $1 ,500,000; the 2008 permit fees of $1,348,198 was 90% of the 2008 annual budget of $1 ,500,000 and as of July 31, 2009 permit fees of $293,549 is 21 % of 2009 annual budget of $1 ,400,000. 1513 REPORT NO.: FND-020-09 PAGE 5 BUILDING PERMIT FEES CUMULATIVE YTO $1,800,000 $1,600,000 $1,400,000 $1,200,000 $1,000,000 $800,000 $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 $0 ~~ ~~ f,.(J' ~ f,.~ _t...~ \'b~ <<.~ ~. ~~ '?'~ ~~ <;:-e \~ ~~ v~ e' e' e' e' ') v~ ~ ...(5) ~ ~ '?' ~e 0<" ~e <., e c.,e~. ~o ()e - 2007 YTD Actual ----: 2008 YTD Actual - 2009 YTD Actual - 2009 YTD Budget 5.0 COMMUNITY SERVICES REVENUE STATUS 5.1 Community Services revenues overall are down for the month of July by $17,000 compared to the same period last year. Whereas the revenues on a overall accumulated year to date basis are up by $73,000 compared to 2008. This can be attributed to the opening of the Newcastle and District Recreation Complex. 5.2 Community Services revenues have been divided into 4 major divisions: Facilities, Aquatic Programs, Fitness Programs and Recreation Programs. Facilities revenues includes ice rentals, pool rentals, multi-purpose room rentals, soccer rentals, lacrosse rentals, skating and hockey rentals, concession sales and proshop merchandise sales. Aquatic. Program revenues include all pool facilities memberships and swimming activities. Fitness Program revenues include the fitness programs and memberships offered at the Courtice Community Complex and Newcastle and District Recreation Complex facilities. Recreation Program revenues include various recreational activities that are of interest to the pre-teens, teenagers for after school and during school holidays such as day camps, drama club, pre-teen dances, etc. 5.3 The below bar graph illustrates Community Services 4 major revenue groups for the month of July and the monthly budget value with the same period last year for comparison purposes. Comparing Community Services revenues on a monthly basis is not a true indicator of how well its performing as its revenue is more seasonal in nature. 5.4 The graph below shows the Facilities, Aquatic Programs and Fitness Program revenues are slightly lower for 2009 compared to the same monthly period to last year. The Recreation Program revenue is not comparable on a monthly basis as the total revenue is received through 4 registration periods. 1514 REPORT NO.: FND-020-09 PAGE 6 COMMUNITY SERVICES MONTHLY REVENUE & BUDGET $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $0 . FACILITIES . AQUATIC PROGRAMS . FITNESS PROGRAMS . RECREATION PROGRAMS 2009 July 2008 July 2009 2008 BUDGET BUDGET 5.5 The following comparison table illustrates the monthly revenue received as a percentage of the monthly budget used in the graph. %OF %OF MONTHLY MONTHLY BUDGET BUDGET 2009 2008 COMMUNITY SERVICES 2009 July 2008 July BUDGET BUDGET 2009 2008 FACI L1TI ES $79,858 $80,854 $241,756 $230,223 33.03% 35.12% AQUATIC PROGRAMS $28,474 $31,328 $65,710 $62,476 43.33% 50.14% FITNESS PROGRAMS $34,609 $36,650 $47,748 $42,750 72.48% 85.73% RECREATION PROGRAMS $43,010 $54,223 $31,875 $34,113 134.93% 158.95% TOTAL $185,951 $203,054 1515 REPORT NO.: FND-020-09 PAGE 7 5.6 The following bar graph illustrates the accumulated Community Services 4 major revenue groups for year-to-date values as of July along with the accumulated monthly budget values with the same period last year for comparison purposes. This YTD graph emphasizes more how well Community Services revenues are performing in a YTD and Budget comparison as well as a year-to-year comparison. COMMUNITY SERVICES-ACCUMULATED REVENUE & BUDGET $1,800,000 $1,600,000 $1,400,000 $1,200,000 $1,000,000 $800,000 $600,000 $400,000 $200,000 $0 I . . FACILITIES . AQUATIC PROGRAMS . FITNESS PROGRAMS . RECREATION PROGRAMS 2009 July 2008 July 2009 2008 BUDGET BUDGET 5.7 The following comparison table illustrates the accumulated revenue received as a percentage of the YTD budget used in the graph. %of %of YTD YTD YTD YTD BUDGET BUDGET COMMUNITY 2009 2008 SERVICES 2009 July 2008 July BUDGET BUDGET 2009 2008 FACILITIES $1,436,592 $1,381,475 $1,692,293 $1,611,563 84.9% 85.7% AQUATIC PROGRAMS $422,583 $355,603 $459,973 $437,335 91.9% 81.3% FITNESS PROGRAMS $288,825 $311,432 $334,235 $299,250 86.4% 104.1% RECREATION PROGRAMS $227,339 $253,886 $223,125 $238,793 101.9% 106.3% TOTAL $2,375,339 $2,302,396 5.8 The Fitness Program revenue YTD for July 2009 is less than 2008 is attributable to a decline in the memberships. Staff will continue with ongoing member recruitment and retention efforts. 5.9 Community Services staff noticed during the 2008 year that some of the programs offered in the Recreation Program were not performing as well as in the past such as its summer trip and day camps. During the 2009 budget process, the camp revenues were reduced in recognition of this. This reduction in revenue was done prior to the economic downturn. Community Services staff has found a similar trend with other Regional Municipalities in addition to other local service providers 1516 REPORT NO.: FND-020-09. PAGE 8 (ie. Museum). Community Services staff have monitored and marketed the 2009 summer day camps; however, the participatory numbers are down. 6.0 PLANNING SERVICES REVENUE STATUS 6.1 Planning Services individual revenue sources have been consolidated. Planning Services revenues include Official Plan amendment fees, rezoning fees, site plan fees, subdivision application fees and subdivision/consent application fees. Planning fees do not reflect full cost recovery rates in contrast to those done under Building Fee Legislation. They have been consolidated since the sum total of fees is the key revenue number and individual types of application are difficult to predict. 6.2 The graph below illustrates for the monthly revenue and budget for July that 2009 revenue is below 2008 year's revenue. PLANNING - MONTHLY REVENUE & BUDGET $45,000 $40,000 $35,000 $30,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $0 .2009 July .2009 BUDGET .2008 July .2008 BUDGET 2009 July 2009 2008 July 2008 BUDGET BUDGET 6.3 Planning Services 2009 budget for the overall revenues is $346,000 and for 2008 budget the overall revenues were $500,000. This equates to a reduction of $154,000 or 31% decrease from 2008 to 2009 budget. The Planning Services revenue actuals for July 2009 are $24,205 and for July 2008 were $21,976. The July revenues as a percentage of each year's monthly budget values: 2009 - 83.9% and 2008 - 52.7%. 1517 REPORT NO.: FND-020-09 PAGE 9 PLANNING-ACCUMULATED REVENUE & BUDGET $350,000 $300,000 $250,000 $200,000 $150,000 $100,000 $50,000 $0 .2009 July .2009 BUDGET .2008July . 2008 BUDGET 2009 July 2009 2008 July 2008 BUDGET BUDGET 6.4 The Planning Services accumulated revenues year-to-date as of July 2009 is $100,215 and as of July 2008 were $150,954. The accumulated revenues as a percentage of each year's annual budget values: 2009 - 29% and 2008 - 30%. This reflects the overall economic activity and the surplus of subdivision applications in the draft approved or processing stages. While fees were paid several years ago, plan review and implementation activities are ongoing. 7.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS: 7.1 In comparing current year's month and previous year's month values several aspects need to be considered such as the time of year/season, economic conditions, weather conditions, investors long term plans, pending legislation and appeals. It is important to keep in mind that Planning fees and Community Services fees are applied to the overall general fund rather than departmental. The development plan review and implementation process involves staff from many departments who play various roles in the process to generate the revenues identified. 7.2 This report is submitted for information purposes. The revenue shortfall forecasted to the end of 2009 has been addressed in the Council report CAO-004-09 on August 31, 2009. The budget values in this report have not been adjusted based on revised forecasts. CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-4169 1518 ff1.! t~.?[)lrm~... 'gOO. . '.;.....1"..... \uliui ' , ~i : EIl'CrgiZjn~ OJI~rjo ~ ~ ! REPORT FINANCE DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday September 14th, 2009 Resolution #: Report #: FND-021-09 File#: By-law #: Subject: FINANCIAL UPDATE AS AT JUNE 30TH, 2009 Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report FND-021-09 be received for information. ,/ Reviewed bd~:::., ~ Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer. NT /LB/hjl 1519 REPORT NO.: FND-021-09 PAGE 2 BACKGROUND AND COMMENT: 1.0 The Financial Update report has been designed to focus on overall budget variance reporting. The format and layout of this report is consistent with report FND-014-09 presented previously to Council. Due to timing, the 2009 Budget column has not yet been amended to reflect changes approved by Council on August 31, 2009 through report CAO-004-09. 2.0 Second Quarter of 2009 Results 2.1 Attachment "A", the Summary of Operating Expenditures and Revenue statement compares the Municipality's budget to actual posted expenditures and revenue as of June 30, 2009, The statement reflects the Municipality's operating budget only and excludes year to date expenditures for the consolidated hall/arena boards. Net expenditures to June 30, 2009 total $21,921,904.79 which represents 56.50% of the net operating budget. This includes annual grants and debentures that occur at the beginning of the year. If this was prorated over the year, the percent of the operating budget expended drops to 51.11 %. 2.2 Attachment "A" is intended to provide an indication of the status of the Municipality's operating accounts compared to the approved budget as at June 30, 2009. However, many departments are affected by high levels of activity during specific times of the year. For example, some activities are seasonal in nature, such as ice rentals and winter control which result in a fluctuation of the timing of recognition of revenues and expenses. Due to these timing differences, this statement cannot be used in isolation. 2.3 Engineering revenues and Planning revenues are below target as discussed in FND-019-09 and FND-020-09, included in this committee agenda. 2.4 Included in the non-departmental revenue is $4,976,011 in budgeted transfers from the reserve fund. These transfers are done annually, traditionally in the second quarter. This affects the total non-departmental revenue earned to-date when compared to budget. Likewise, in the non-departmental expenditures, the majority of funds are paid out by the second quarter to cover BIA levies, along with the approved operating grants for the Clarington Library, Clarington Museums and Archives and the Visual Arts Centre. 2.5 Attachment "B", Continuity of Taxes Receivable for the three months ending June 30,2009 provides the status of the taxes billed and collected by the Municipality of Clarington during the second quarter of 2009. A total of $29,064,030 in interim tax bills and $26,856,249 in final bills were issued to property owners in the Municipality during this period. At the end of June, a total of $14,705,011 remains unpaid. However, currently on hand are prepaid taxes through the pre- authorized payment system and prepaid taxes for the June 2009 instalment of $407,210. The net balance of$14,297,801 is $1,515,216 higher than the prior 1520 REPORT NO.: FND-021-09 PAGE 3 year at this time. This balance will continue to be closely monitored throughout the balance of 2009. Generally this is the high point of the year because three installments have been billed. From this point forward there is a steady decline in the arrears balance. 2.5 Attachment "C", Outstanding Investments as at June 30, 2009 provides the status of the Municipality's general, capital and reserve fund investment holdings at the end of the second quarter of 2009. The Municipality at June 30 holds $0 in general fund investments, $0 in capital fund investments, and $35,527,337.15 in reserve fund investments to fund future commitments. General fund investments are short term in nature and timed to mature when funds will be required. Investments held in the Municipality's portfolio are reviewed on an ongoing basis to ensure they meet the requirement of Section 418 of the Ontario Municipal Act and the Municipality's investment policy. Currently, our preferred interest rate through our municipal banking contract on the Municipality's main bank account exceeds the short term money market rates and therefore is currently the primary vehicle for short term cash reserves so would not be reflected on this statement. CONCLUSION: 3.0 The report is provided as information to Council. Ongoing reports will be provided quarterly. Attachments: Attachment "A": Attachment "B": Attachment "C": Summary of Operating and Expenditures and Revenue Continuity of Taxes Receivable Investments Outstanding CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-4169 1521 ATTACHMENT "A" THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON SUMMARY OF OPERATING EXPENDITURES & REVENUES TO JUNE 30, 2009 2009 EXPENDED % DEPARTMENT BUDGET TO JUNE 30 SPENT NON-Departmental: Expenditures (including Ubrary) 3,305,410.00 3,238,582.80 97.98 Revenues/Recoveries (excluding tax) (7,233,203.00) (5,615,654.85) 77.64 Net Non-Departmental (3,927,793.00) (2,377 ,072.05) 60.52 Office of the Mavor & Council: Net Office of the Mayor & Council 783,358.00 430,014.88 54.89 Office of the CAO: Net Office of the CAO 419,608.00 224,822.04 53.58 Corporate Services: Expenditures 3,646,618.00 1,791,093.56 49.12 Revenues/Recoveries (161,500.00) (105,058.09) 65.05 Net Corporate Services 3,485,118.00 1,686,035.47 48.38 Clerks: Expenditures 2,218,827.00 1,118,371.81 50.40 Revenues/Recoveries (437,100.00) (267,483.96) 61.20 Net Clerks 1,781,727.00 850,887.85 47.76 Finance: Unclassified admin & Board of Trade 2,322,451.00 896,195.89 38.59 Operating Expenditures 1,748,892.00 845.789.24 48.36 Expenditures 4,071,343.00 1,741,985.13 42.79 Revenues/Recoveries (1,172,000.00) (788,408.97) 67.27 Net Finance 2,899,343.00 953,576.16 32.89 Emeraencv Services: Expenditures 7,467,269,00 3,853,173,25 51.60 Revenues/Recoveries (9,250.00) (19,006.42) 205.47 Net Emergency Services 7,458,019.00 3,834,166,83 51.41 Enaineerina: Expenditures 4,185,070.00 2,767,755.30 66.13 Revenues/Recoveries (1,452,450.00) (260,119.04) 17,91 Net Engineering 2,732,620.00 2,507,636.26 91,77 Operation: Fleet & Debenture Pmts 1,752,573,00 1,301,730.49 74.28 Operating Expenditures 11,046,631,00 5,886,729.07 53.29 Expenditures 12,799,204.00 7,188,459.56 56.16 Revenues/Recoveries (460,000.00) (128,374.19) 27.91 Net Operations 12,339,204,00 7,060,085.37 57.22 Community Services: Annual Grants & Debenture Pmts 3,230,579.00 2,736,929.19 84.72 Operating Expenditures 8,751,562.00 3,843,958.10 43.92 Expenditures 11,982,141.00 6,580,887.29 54.92 Revenues/Recoveries (4,702,173,00) (2,187,411.79) 46.52 Net Community Services 7,279,968.00 4,393,475.50 60.35 Plannlna Services: Expenditures 3,976,550.00 2,456,909.85 61.78 Revenues/Recoveries (427,500.00) (98,633.37) 23.07 Net Planning Services 3,549,050.00 2,358,276.48 66.45 TOTAL OPERATING: Expenditures 54,855,398.00 31,392,055.47 57.23 Revenues/Recoveries (16,055,176.00) (9,470,150,68) 58.99 NET OPERATING EXPENDITURES 38,800,222,00 21,921,904.79 56.50 1522 Attachment "B" : CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON Continuity ofTaxes Receivable or the Second Quarter of the Year 2009 March 31,2009 JUNE JUNE. BEGINNING BALANCE INTEREST TAXES PAYMENTS/ 2009 2008 RECEIVABLE ADDED BILLED BALANCE I ADJUSr:" I I i I ! I I I CURRENT YEAR TAXES (3,201,760) 55,920,279 52,718,519 (45,264,170) 7,454,348 6,778,235 PENAL TY AND INTEREST 27,683 169,876 197.559 (89,186' 108 373 97 046 FIRST PRIOR YEAR TAXES 4,211,964 4,211,964 (744,335) 3,467,630 2,935,245 PENAL TY AND INTEREST 313,039 148,563 461,602 1128,556) 333,046 267,739 SECOND PRIOR YEAR TAXES 1,557,406 1,557,406 (253,538) 1,303,868 1,120,107 PENAL TY AND INTEREST 218,959 55,573 274,532 162,091\ 212,441 183 843 HIRD & PRIOR YEARS TAXES 1,088,288 1,088,288 (135,649) 952,639 976,345 PENAL TY AND INTEREST 482,631 38,849 521,480 (56,024 465,456 424,025 ITOTAL 4.698,210 412,860 55.920,279 61,031,349 146,733,548' 14,297,801 12,782,585 ... Includes refunds, write-ofts, 357's, etc. NOTE 1: 2009 Interim Instalment mo~ths: February and April 2009 Final Instalment months: June and September for non-capped classes 1523 ATTACHMENT "C" CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON INVESTMENTS OUTSTANDING AS AT JUNE 30, 2009 I I FINANCIAL INVESTMENT INTEREST MATURITY MA TURITY INSTITUTION COST RATE VALUE DATE GENERAL FUND TOTAL GENERAL FUND 0.00 CAPITAL FUND TOTAL CAPITAL FUND 0.00 RESERVE FUND Bond-Canada RBC 3,796,000.00 4.10% 3,949,738.00 29-Jul-2009 GIC-Royal Bank RBC 664,993.00 4.25% 753,434.00 29-Aug-2009 Banker Acceptance HBSC 3,205,273.20 0.64% 3,208,000.00 9-Sep-2009 BfA-RBC RBC 617,721.90 0,18% 618,000.00 22-Sep-2009 Bond-Canada RBC 739,938.86 3.55% 869,800.00 1-0ct-2009 BfA-BMO RBC 1,787,409,00 2.70% 1,835,669.04 2-Dec-2009 GIC-BNS RBC 461,911.53 0.70% 465,144.91 28-May-2010 Bond-Ontario RBC 733,772.63 3.85% 900,445.00 2-Jun-2010 Bond-Canada RBC 5,094,062.47 4.10% 6,058,590.00 1-0ct-20 10 GIC-National Bank RBC * 1,500,000.00 4.10% .1,833,770,00 6-Dec-20 1 0 GIC-National Bank RBC 1,681,851.79 4,35% 2,080,894.41 6-Mar-2011 GIC-BMO RBC 2,221,742.00 4.30% 2,742,301.29 18-Sep-20 11 Bond-Quebec RBC 776,152,23 4,35% 986,467.00 1-Dec-2011 Bond-Ontario RBC 999,999,54 4.20% 1,244,090,00 2-Dec~2011 GIC-Royal Bank RBC 2,000,000,00 4,05% 2,439,161.00 16-Mar-2012 BfA-TO RBC 1,471,061.00 4.80% 1,859,675.00 30-0ct-20 12 BfA-Royal Bank RBC 1,503,357.00 4.80% 1,900,502.92 8-Jan-2013 GIC-BNS RBC 1,546,695.00 4.50% 1,927,463.38 12-Feb-2013 GIC-BNS RBC 599,161.00 4.35% 741,320.00 4-Mar-2013 GIC TO 1,009,028.00 4.45% 1,254,427.00 25-Mar-2013 GIC TO 257,495.00 4.51% 321,039.00 13-May-2013 GIC-Royal Bank RBC 946,770.00 4.40% 1,174,213.00 30-Sep-2013 Bond-Ontario RBC 574,200.00 4.30% 598,890.60 14-0ct-20 13 GIC-BNS RBC 1,338,742.00 4.15% 1,640,564.30 16-Dec-2013 TOTAL RESERVE FUND 35,527,337.15 ITOTAL INVESTMENTS 35,527,337.15 I * Investment interest paid on a monthlyfsemi-annualfannual basis 1524 Cl · 'mn i EnYll!1~u)n REPORT FINANCE DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 14,2009 Resolution #: Report #: FND-023-09 File #: By-law #: Subject: SALES TAX REFORM - 2010 HST UPDATE Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report FND-023-09 be received for information. >'7 .>1 Reviewed byQ ~~~ Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer. NT /LB/cd 1525 REPORT NO.: FND-023-09 PAGE 2 BACKGROUND: 1.0 As part of the 2009 Ontario Budget the government announced a comprehensive tax reform package that will include the introduction of the Harmonized Sales Tax (HST) effective July 1, 2010. The Provincial Government has stated that this single sales tax would be treated the same as under the current GST rules. Items that are currently exempt or zero rated will remain exempt or zero rated and items that are currently subject to GST will be subject to the 13% HST. 1.1 The Province anticipates that all business organizations will benefit from reduced compliance costs. Municipal staff will be required to file one set of forms, make one payment and have one point of contact for audits, appeals and taxpayer services. 1.2 Under the single sales tax, the Province anticipates that the impact will be fiscally neutral municipally relative to the Retail Sales Tax (RST) that is currently paid. This will be achieved through each Municipality's ability to claim 100% Input Tax Credits (ITC) for the Provincial share of the HST paid to provide zero rated or taxable services and the additional claim of a 78% Rebates for the Provincial share of the HST paid to provide exempt services. 1.3 The Municipality can claim lTC's when items are purchased in the process of earning taxable income. For items that are purchased in the process of providing services that are exempt, the Municipality will be entitled to a rebate. IMPACT ON CLARINGTON: 2.0 The Municipality currently files monthly GST returns and semi annual RST returns. Under the new system, more detailed HST returns would be filed on a monthly basis in place of the current GST returns. 2.1 During the past five years the Municipality has received over $7,000 in direct compensation from the Province to cover the cost of compliance with the RST process. This funding will no longer be available when the tax is harmonized. 2.2 All services that are currently subject to GST will be subject to the new combined HST. This will require the Municipality to update all current financial software programs, including the reprogramming of any cash registers used. 2.3 The computer programs directly affected by this change that have been identified to date include our main financial "Great Plains" software, Recreation "Class" Software, Animal Services "Shelter Buddy" Software, Building and Engineering LDO Software. 1526 REPORT NO.: FND-023-09 PAGE 3 2.4 We have multiple cash registers located at various facilities that will need to be reprogrammed for the tax change. 2.5 The cost of programming changes will be dependent on the customization required. Our financial and recreational software programs are the same ones used by many other Municipalities across Ontario. All users will require the same basic HST changes. For these programs, our primary cost should be associated with the updating of customized reports for the printing of receipts, contracts, invoices, and purchase orders. 2.6 Specialized software will require the same updating of the customized reports; however we will also have to pay the cost for any changes in the programming if we are the only Ontario user of the software. 2.7 At this time, the Municipality is not eligible to claim any part of the Small Business Transition Credit offered by the Province to assist with any costs incurred to become compliant. 2.8 During 2008 the Municipality of Clarington was directly invoiced for more than $358,000 in RST on just under $4.5 million in purchases. Under the new harmonized HST, these purchases would qualify for either 100% ITC or 78% rebate treatment. Similar expenditures in future could result in refunds to the Municipality of between $279,240 and $358,000. 2.9 During 2008 the Municipality of Clarington had more than $27.5 million in purchases that were invoiced for GST. With the implementation of the tax reform, these invoices would be subject to the new harmonized HST increasing the rate from 5% to 13%. The existing 5% Federal will continue to qualify for either 100% ITC or 100% rebate treatment. The 8% Provincial will qualify for either 100% ITC or 78% rebate treatment. The additional 8% tax could cost the Municipality an additional $484,000, representing the 22% non-rebateable share on this mix of purchases in future. 2.10 The net impact of the above Provincial treatment cou.ld cost the Municipality an additional $126,000 to $204,760 if the purchasing volumes and patterns in future remain consistent with those in 2008. 2.11 Included in the 27.5 million dollars of purchases above, are a number of capital projects that may include RST that is embedded in the contract price and therefore not reported or invoiced separately. Under the new HST, this type of embedded RST will no longer be permitted. Contract wording needs to be adjusted to reflect the requirement to have pricing separate the RST component in all quotes. 2,12 Business with annual taxable sales in excess of $10 million will be restricted from claiming the 'input tax credits on energy for the first five years. The Municipality 1527 REPORT NO.: FND-023-09 PAGE 4 of Clarington currently reports annual taxable sales of just over $5 million. As long as the transitional rules are not written to specifically restrict Municipalities from claiming the credit or rebate for HST on energy, the Municipality of Clarington will continue to claim it. The Municipality spent more than $1,675,000 on hydro alone in 2008. These charges will be subject to an additional 8% tax with the implementation of the HST. How much of an impact the additional $134,000 will have on the annual municipal budget will depend on the HST Transitional Rules due to be issued shortly. CONCLUSION: 3.0 Based on a review of the information available at the time this report was prepared, it is estimated that the proposed implementation of the HST will not be fiscally neutral municipally relative to the Retail Sales Tax (RST) that is currently paid by the Municipality of Clarington. This situation may change depending on the timing of significant capital projects and further legislative adjustments in future years as the full impact of the harmonized HST is realized. The 2010 budget will be adjusted to reflect the impact based on the information available at that time. 3.1 It is recommended that this Sales Tax Reform - 2010 HST Update report be received for information. Further reports will be provided as information becomes available. CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-4169 1528 Cl!Jl-!l1gtnn REPORT CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, September 14, 2009 Report #: CAO-005-09 File: By-law #: Subject: 2009 LONG TERM SERVICE EVENT Recommendation It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1 , THAT Report CAO-005-09 be received; 2. THAT Council approve the Long Term Service event as described herein for 2009 with a cost not to exceed $5,000. Submitted by: oc~~ Franklin Wu M.A.O,M Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-5717 1601 REPORT NO.: CAO-005-09 PAGE 2 1. REPORT: At the Special Meeting of Council on August 31, 2009, there were a number of reductions to the budget in order to meet the 2009 budget shortfall. As a result Council passed the following resolution: "THAT Item #1 of Appendix # 3 to Report CAO-004-09 - Program Specifics - Staff Recognition/Long Term Service Program and Staff Appreciation be amended as follows: "WHEREAS the Mayor and Council wish to continue to recognize the Employee Service Award Program; THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Chief Administrative Officer and Directors be directed to create a proper and special presentation event prior to November 1, 2009, for Council's approval, at a maximum cost of $5000." 2. COMMENT: In the past, based on a longstanding policy, staff have been recognized for their 5, 10, 15,20, 25 and 30 years or more of service with the Municipality of Clarington. For the past number of years, the staff long term service awards have been combined with the staff recognition program and an annual Christmas party held in November of each year. To meet the 2009 Budget shortfall, this event has been cancelled. This year there are 61 employees to receive long term service awards. In order to recognize these employees for their contribution to the Municipality, the CAO's Office will organize an event to present the employee with a certificate and a gift of appreciation. This is proposed to take place at the GPA Meeting on October 19, 2009. The staff being recognized will be invited to a continental breakfast in the lunchroom of the MAC building immediately prior to the meeting in order to show appreciation for their accomplishments. 4. CONCLUSION It is recommended that Council approve the 2009 Long Term Service event. It will be organized by the CAO's Office and be part of the General Purpose and Administration Committee meeting on October 19, 2009 under the "Presentations" section of the agenda at a cost not to exceed $5,000. It is also recommended that 1602 REPORT NO.: CAO-005-09 PAGE 3 the employees receiving long term service awards be invited to a continental breakfast held in the lunchroom prior to the presentation. 1603 Unfinished Business CliJlmgtnn REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE Date: Monday, September 14, 2009 Report #: Addendum 1 to PSD-067 -09 File #'8: COPA 2005-008, By-law #: PLN 31.5.10, ZBA 2005-042, ZBA 2005-043, S-C 2005-0003 and S-C 2005-0004 Subject: STATUS REPORT: APPEAL TO THE ONTARIO MUNICIPAL BOARD BY SMOOTH RUN DEVELOPMENTS INC. (METRUS DEVELOPMENTS INC.) BROOKFIELD HOMES (ONTARIO) LIMITED ON APPLICATIONS IN THE VILLAGE NORTH NEIGHBOURHOOD IN NEWCASTLE RECOMMENDA TIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Addendum 1 to report PSD-067-09 be received; 2. THAT report PSD-067 -09 be tabled until the October 19th meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegation be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Reviewed by:d~ ~ Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer DJC 10 September 2009 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 1701 REPORT NO.: Addendum to PSD-067-09 PAGE 2 1. At the meeting held on June 29, 2009, Council tabled report PSD-067-09 to September 14, 2009. The report recommended that the Municipality take the position that the Neighbourhood Design Plan and the related development applications must incorporate "a restored, naturalized northerly tributary of the Foster Creek within the Newcastle Village North Neighbourhood". 2. Staff of the Municipality and the Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority subsequently met with the Smooth Run Developments Inc. and Brookfield Homes Limited to clarify the possibilities for day-lighting and incorporating a naturalized and restored tributary into the subdivision plan. It is my understanding that the developer's engineers are reviewing this matter. 3. At the same meeting, we were advised that the priority for the Metrus Developments (Smooth Run) was the completion and approval of their Brookhill plan of subdivision in Bowmanville. Subsequently, the focus of the efforts on behalf of Metrus Developments has been on resolving the outstanding issues related to the Bowmanville subdivision application, including the external services and the joint development arrangements with other developers in the neighbourhood. As a result no further meetings have been held with respect to the Village North project. 4. The Ontario Municipal Board held a pre-hearing conference on the Village North applications on August 4, 2009, The Board has set a timetable for the appeals of the Village North development proposals as follows: . Pre-Hearing Conference on October 30,2009 . Hearing commencing February 5, 2010 5. In recognition of the efforts to prioritize the Bowmanville development applications, it is recommended that report PSD-067 -09 be further tabled until to the October 19th meeting of the General Purpose and Administration Committee. This recommendation is supported by the developers. List of interested parties to be notified of Council's decision: Bryce Jordan, Sernas Associates Smooth Run Developments Brookfield Homes (Ontario) Limited Hugh Allin Steve Wilson Cory Geddes Robert Macdonald Robert Fassen Helen Jones Rev. Robert Brouwer Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority Robert Craunstown. Jerry Reffosco Joanne Raymond Steve Holliday Doug Rombough 1702 HANDOUTS/CIRCULA TIONS GPA Cl!J!jP,gron MEMO CLERK'S DEPARTMENT To: From: Date: Subject: Mayor Abernethy and Members of Council Anne Greentree, Deputy Clerk September 11, 2009 GENERAL PURPOSE & ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA -SEPTEMBER 14, 2009 - UPDATE Please be advised of the following amendments to the GPA agenda for the meeting to be held on Monday, September 14, 2009: 6. DELEGATIONS See attached Final List. (Attachment 1) 18. UNFINISHED BUSINESS Delete: Confidential Verbal Report - Please be advised that Mr. Hefferon will not be in attendance to resent his confidential verbal report regarding an expropriation. This r art '11 be -scheduled for a future meeting. AG/mea Enc. cc: F. Wu, Chief Administrative Officer Department Heads CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, E\OWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L 1 C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 F 905-623-6506 FINAL LIST OF DELEGATIONS GPA Meeting: September 14, 2009 (a) Richard Ward, Regarding Report PSD-086-09, Modification to the Oak Ridges Moraine Zoning By-law 2005-109 (b) Richard Ward, Regarding Cost Cutting Measures (c) Richard Ward, Regarding his Personal Property Standards Issue (d) Lloyd Elliott, Regarding Report PSD-079-09, Clarington Sign By-law