Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/07/2010 Special• ~~ n Energizing Ontario SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING DATE: TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2010 TIME: 9:30 A.M. PLACE: COUNCIL CHAMBERS MEETING CALLED TO ORDER INVOCATION DISCLOSURE OF PECUNIARY INTEREST DELEGATIONS (List as of Time of Publication) There are no delegations scheduled as of the time of publication. COMMUNICATIONS Receive for Direction D - 1 Faye Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning Services, writing to Jim Chan, Project Manager, 407 East Transportation Corridor Project, providing the Municipality of Clarington's Comments on the Comprehensive Study Guidelines for the 407 East Transportation Corridor Project. (Copy attached) (Motion to confirm the correspondence as the Municipality of Clarington's comments on the Comprehensive Study Guidelines for the 407 East Transportation Corridor Project) STAFF REPORT(S) 1. Confidential Report LGL-003-10 -Ian Hanna v. Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Ontario Judicial Review Application - O.Reg. 359/09 Motion Seeking Leave to Intervene 2. Report PSD-092-10 -Application for Removal of Part Lot Control Applicant: Tyler Smith/BRN Investments Ltd. - 40M-2038 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 Special Council Agenda - 2 - September 7, 2010 3. Report PSD-093-10 -Application for Removal of Part Lot Control Applicant: Halminen Building Corporation - 40M-2265 4. Addendum to Report PSD-117-09 -Revision to Request to Remove 49 & 63 Beaver Street South from the Municipal Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest UNFINISHED BUSINESS Report EGD-021-10 -Kendal Drainage Review (Tabled by Council on July 12, 2010) BY-LAWS CONFIRMING BY-LAW ADJOURNMENT ® - D-1 Energfzirtg Ontario .~_ •; .'°k Vii. "' ~~ ~ y'~; u August 18, 2010 - AUG 1 ~ "LGiu 407 East Transportation Corridor Project Jim Chan, Project Manager -~ m"-,v- ' -~'- `--~ "` ~_`-~ "',;,.y= Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency = ~ ~~*~~`~'~`~ ~`="` _ ~~.~: - 55 St. Clair Avenue East, Suite 907 Toronto, ON M4T 1 M2 Dear Mr. Chan: RE: MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON COMMENTS -COMPREHENSIVE STUDY GUIDELINES FOR THE 407 EAST TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR PROJECT FILE NO.: PLN 23.14 This letter is being submitted to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency as the Municipality of Clarington's comments on the Comprehensive Study Guidelines for the 407 East Transportation Corridor Project. Approximately 43% of the total length of the proposed 407 Corridor will be located within Clarington, including 20 kms of the Corridor Mainline and the entire 10.5 km length of the East Durham Link. Because of the significant effect that the Corridor will have on our community, the Municipality of Clarington has been very involved with the Provincial Environmental Assessment process for the 407 East Project since its inception in 2002. The Municipality has provided comments to the Ministry of Transportation at every stage of the EA process and most recently to the Ministry of Environment. All of these comments have been endorsed by Council and form part of the public comment record of the Provincial EA. Clarington's comments did not address either the phased construction of the corridor or the implications of the recent announcement by the Province to truncate the initial phase of the 407 at Simcoe Street. This is not an oversight on Staff or Council's part; indeed, the question of phasing and staging was posed mar}y times to the 407 EA project team. Each time the response was that the Province would be adhering to its commitments in the federal/provincial FLOW agreement of March 2007, which committed $4.5 billion to public transit and highway infrastructure projects in the Greater Toronto Area and included specific reference to the extension of the Highway 407 east to Highway 35/115 by 2013: An Environmental Assessment is intended to address the impacts associated with a project, not just for the final build out, but also during the construction and staging of the project. The staged implementation of the 407 project that was recently announced by CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 the provincial government should have been, but was not, addressed in the Provincial EA. It is the Municipality's opinion that this staged implementation approach does not meet the intent of the Ontario Environmental Assessment Act, and that, as a result both the Provincial EA and the comprehensive study submitted for the Federal EA are deficient. We trust that the guidelines for the completion of the Federal EA will require that the phased implementation of the 407 project will be addressed, including an analysis of the impacts and the identification of appropriate mitigation measures satisfactory to affected municipalities. The Municipality acknowledges that the Federal EA will be more concerned with the impacts to fisheries and federal lands. The EA should therefore also recognize that the increased traffic on the local road network that will result from the termination of the 407 corridor at.Simcoe Street could have fisheries impacts resulting from the construction, reconstruction, refurbishment and maintenance of these roads. The FLOW announcement in March 2007 provided assurances to the eastern GTA communities that the Province was committed to the 2013 timeframe for the full construction of Highway 407. All of the municipalities understood that this was an ambitious timeline but were repeatedly assured by the provincial government and the 407 project team that 2013 was the target for the expected completion of the 407 to Highway 35/115. Based on this information, Clarington and. other Durham Region municipalities have undertaken their planning and capital projects to dovetail with the implementation of the 407. to Highway 35/115 within the committed timeframe. The Municipality of Clarington has already spent in excess of $10 million, including federal stimulus funding, to ensure that the roads in the northern portion of Clarington would be sufficient to carry the local traffic accessing and leaving the 407. These works were not undertaken, nor were they designed, to alleviate the additional traffic loading on these roads that can be anticipated because of the 407 staging. Rather it addresses the current impacts of the 407 corridor termination at Brock Road in Pickering. Between 1994 and 2007, Concession Roads 7 and 8 in Clarington realized increased traffic volume ranging from 65% to 200%, with the majority of this increase directly attributable to the. influence of Highway 407 at Brock Road. The failure to construct Highway 407 in one phase will also have a significant impact on . the ability of the existing road network in Clarington to properly handle the traffic related to several large projects that will occur in our community over the next several years. These include the Darlington New Nuclear Development Project, the refurbishment of the~existing Darlington Nuclear Station, the extension of GO Rail service to Bowmanville, and other anticipated developments and opportunities for the energy and technology sectors in Clarington. A map of the southern and western portion of Clarington and the anticipated timeframes for these and other projects has been .included with this letter to help illustrate the impacts that will be experienced by the local transportation network as the result of these projects. The map also highlights the importance of the 407 to these and. other economic development initiatives that are important.to the federal, provincial, regional and local governments. Clarington Council is currently in recess and as such we are unable to receive Council approval of these comments prior to the August 20, 2010 deadline. This letter will be presented to Council for endorsement at their first meeting in September. Should you have any questions regarding the comments contained in this letter please do not hesitate to contact me.. Yours truly, L /`~-~' a Langmai Acting Director of Planning FL:sn cc: Mayor and Council Members Franklin Wu, Chief Administrative Officer Tony Cannella,. Director of Engineering Services •V W O a Q L~L 1"~ V `~ r tea/ I..I~ O S~ G v N O N - - M N O N • N N O N ei N O N _ -- - O N O N '. - = 01 N O N ei O N _ n ~ 0 N , - t0 ei 0 N N . ei O N O N M eel C N r ` - N N a e~i o N ~_ O ei O N ~ C O h~0 L U 'y ~'+ C ~ v ~ ~ ~_ •f0 LL •~ i-+ 3 v - U 4J ~ Y a~i ~ ~j f0 c C o ~ Y~.. d d0 _ L ~ w i d ~ ~ w •+•.' N •Lp ~ fC ~ v u a. H ~0 ~ 3 ~ ~ Q ~ .O ~ r-I O ~ ~ U Z t .L N ~ w ~ Z z m Q .C N ~ ~ ~ Q d U O U O N d O U v _v ~ L,L ~ w O ~ ~ a~i _! ~ ~ F- a LL :r O ~ >- 3 °D V O ~ >. 3 ° ° L d ~ m ~° c c O O 0'~'D O'~''A C C .L ~~ o 0 a a c O 0~'0 C ~~ 0 a ~~ OJ +, w '~ ~ W Q ~ a o ~ O ~ d ~ z ~ ~ O ~OD 4J ~ ~ ~ 3 ~ ~.. ~ ~ ~ Z = _ _ o = O O O ~ ~ O ~ a° Works along Concession Road 6 and 7/8 that have been completed to date to address increased deterioration of Roads resulting from increased traffic from 407 and General Growth. CL2005-22 ~ $230,000.00 Concession Road 6 -East Limit of Solina to Old Scugog Road CL2006-50 $400,000.00 Concession Road 6 -Townline Road to Enfield Road Concession Road 6 -Enfield Road to 400 m west of Solina Road & CL2009-18 $2,383,794.00 Concession Road 7 - Vannest Road to 400 m west of Old Scugog Road CL2009-22 $4,770,000.00 Concession Road 7/8 -Townline Road to,Vannest Road & 400 m west of Old Scugog Road to Hwy. 35/115 CL2009-38 $2.480.001.00 Concession Road 6 -Old Scugog Road to Cole Road $10,263,795.00 It is estimated that the remaining section of Conc. Rd6/7 from Cole Road to Hwy. 35/115 will cost roughly $2.OM to $2:2M Staff Report # 2 lar.~n n Leading the Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING Date: Report #: Subject: September 7, 2010 PSD-092-10 Resolution #: File #: ZBA 2010-0024 By-lavv#: APPLICATION FOR REMOVAL OF PART LOT CONTROL APPLICANT: TYLER SMITH /BRN INVESTMENTS LTD. - 40M-2038 RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended: THAT Report PSD-092-10 be received; 2. THAT the request for Removal of Part Lot Control by Tyler Smith /BRN Investments Ltd. with respect to Lot 105 on Plan 40M-2038, be approved and that the attached Part Lot Control By-law be passed pursuant to Section 50 (7.1) of the Planning Act and a copy forwarded to the Regional Municipality of Durham Planning Department; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-092-10 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. Submitted by: Lam, Reviewed by: l F La ` m , FCSLA, MCIP Franklin Wu cting Directo ,Planning Services Chief Administrative Officer MM/CP/df 26August 2010 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 REPORT NO.: PSD-092-10 PAGE 2 1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Owner/Applicant: Tyler Smith/ BRN Investments Ltd. 1.2 Location: Part Lot 26, Concession 1, former Township of Clarke (Newcastle Village) -Lot 105 on Plan 40M-2038 (Attachment 1) 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 On August 24, 2010, staff received a request from Tyler Smith / BRN Investments Ltd. for the removal of Part Lot Control with respect to Lot 105 on Plan 40M-2038. 2.2 Part Lot Control By-laws effecting all of the semi-detached/link lots within Plan 40M-2038 were previously granted approval by Council on two (2) separate occasions; May 14, 2001 and then on May 24, 2004. Each By-law contained a three (3) year period within which the by-law remained in full force and effect, the first by-law expiring on May 14, 2004, the second on May 31, 2007. In addition, Council granted approval for the removal of Part Lot Control with respect to Lot 105 on Plan 40M-2038 in the spring of 2009 to expire on April 27, 2010. 2.3 Clarnew Developments Incorporated, the developer of the draft plan of subdivision, sold both 105E and 105R lots to one purchaser who wished to build a single detached dwelling on the semi-detached/link lot. The property is zoned '`R1-43" which permits asemi-detached/link lot with a minimum frontage of 18 m and asingle-detached dwelling on a minimum 15 m frontage. A building permit was issued in September of 2008 for one single detached dwelling. on lot 105. The dwelling was never built, and more recently a permit was applied for and issued to build semi-detached units, as per the original plans. In order to permit the transfer of ownership of the semi-detached dwelling units, the applicant submitted the current application to exempt the lot from Part Lot Control. This application is necessary since the exemption granted in 2009 has expired. 3.0 STAFF COMMENTS 3.1 Staff has no objection to the approval of a by-law exempting the subject lands from Part Lot Control. Attached is a by-law (Attachment 2) to exempt the subject lands from Section 50(5) of the Planning Act. 3.2 The Finance Department advises that the taxes have been paid in full. 3.3 In accordance with the procedures established in the delegation of Part Lot Control By-laws, a copy of the "Unit Type and Number Summary Table" REPORT NO.: PSD-092-10 PAGE 3 (Attachment 3), along with a copy of the Part Lot Control By-law will be forwarded to the Regional Planning Department. 3.4 Staff recommends that the by-law be in force for a one (1) year period following Council approval, ending. September 20, 2011. 4.0 RECOMMENDATION 4.1 It is recommended that Council approve this. application and adopt the attached Part Lot Control By-law for Lot 105 on Plan 40M-2038. Staff Contact: Mitch Morawetz Attachments: Attachment 1 -Site Location Key Map and Lands Affected by Part Lot Control Removal Attachment 2 - By-law for Removal of Part Lot Control Attachment 3 -Unit Type and Number Summary Table for 40M-2038 List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Region of Durham Planning Department Tyler Smith Attachment 1 To Report PSD-092-10 ., d N d Z a as 0 v J d a 0 a ~ ~ w ~ N ~ o U ~ ~ ~ w ~ o ~~ 0 Z ~. 0 0 W Q ~ J _ ~ 3niaa 3snoH~ooaa ~, z_ w Y w a N ~~ Q U ~ ~ Y~ 0 ~ ~ ~~ m m 3niaa 3snoH~ooaa lav ~~ o o 0 0 o~ ~ ~ li LO'EZ 0 r 0 L C y O C N O o ~ O J ~ y ~ ~ o > .O a -~ c N m ' o ~ Q ~ N m N ~ °~ _ 3 a ~ ~ 0 J 0 00 0 ~ ° (U N~.~ ~D ~--+ ~D `D ~ . o o cU d- c~ o ~ ~,-~ c~ o cv C1 J c~ o d- Cr-) o ~ ~ ~ ~ z ~ ~ d- z z II~O, 88t~'l ' ~ 8S8'T8 9SS' Sl 880'9 9S0'8Z 8l 8L0 M„08,91o8~N M„08,8t~otiZN 000'OOZ =~ lano~ 3sor wdiwnn 000'081-~ 8~boti~N M„08,9~o81N ~ M„08~ 2~ 8Ll'88 L88'L S8~'Sti 9~ti'8Z ~L9'l C C 0 O ~~ W o ~ C`7 ~ O ~ ~ ° ~ C'~ !~ ~ z 100'8 6 6 8' Z 8 -~-~~ O 8 008'8 M„08,91o81N 0 CZJ S98'68 998'88 M„08;9Zo8lN w ~ o v- o o~ z w Ltd ~ ~ II ~ ~ W - Q d C~ . ~ O J o m 0 0 0 o~ ~ II ~ ~ 0 ClJ Attachment 2 To Report PSD-092-10 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW NO. 2010- being a By-law to exempt certain portions of Registered Plan 40M-2038 from Part Lot Control WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to exempt from Part Lot Control, Lot 105 on Plan 40M-2038, registered at the Land Titles Division of Whitby; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. That Subsection 5 of Section 50 of the Planning Act shall not apply to those lands described in paragraph 2 within the By-law. 2. That this By-law shall come into effect upon being approved by the_Municipality of Clarington and thereafter Subsection •5 of Section 50 shall cease to apply to the following lands: a) Lot 105 on'Plan 40M-2038 3. Pursuant to Subsection 7.3 of Section 50 of the Planning Act; this By-law shall be in force for a period of one (1) year ending on September 20, 2011. BY-LAW read a first time this day of 2010 BY-LAW read a second time this day of 2010 BY-LAW read a third time and finally passed this day.bf 2010 Jim Abernethy, Mayor Patti L. Barrie,. Municipal Clerk Attachment 3 To Report PSD-092-10 PART LOT CONTROL EXEMPTION BY-LAW Unit Type and Number Summary Table Registered Plan #: 40M-2038 By-law: TOTAL UNITS I - 2 No Change Staff Report # 3 lar' n Leading the Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING Date: September 7, 2010 Report #: PSD-093-10 Resolution #: File #: ZBA 2010-0023 Subject: APPLICATION FOR REMOVAL OF PART LOT CONTROL Applicant: HALMINEN BUILDING CORPORATION - 40M-2265 By-law #: RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended to Council the following: THAT Report PSD-093-10 be received; 2. THAT the request for removal of Part Lot Control with respect to Lots 16 and 24 of 40M- 2265 be approved and that the attached Part Lot Control By-law be passed pursuant to Section 50 (7.1) of the Planning Act and a copy forwarded to the Regional Municipality of Durham Planning Department; and 3. THAT all interested parties listed in Report PSD-093-10 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. . Submitted by: ~ `nor-~/~" Reviewed by: ~' ,A~ =- y Lang aid CSLA, MCIP Franklin Wu c ing Director, tanning Services Chief Administrative Officer RH/CP/DF 27August 2010 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 REPORT NO.: PSD-093-10 PAGE 2 1.0 APPLICATION DETAILS 1.1 Applicant: Halminen Building Corporation 1.2 Location: 309, 313, 360 and 364 Bons Avenue, Part Lots 13 and 14, Concession 2, former Town of Bowmanville (Attachment 1) 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 On August 20, 2010, Staff received a request from Halminen Building Corporation for the removal of Part Lot Control with respect to Lots 16 and 24 of 40M-2265 (Attachment 1). 2.2 The Plan of Subdivision 18T-87085, which encompasses the area of this application, received Draft Approval for 25 single detached dwellings and 24 semi-detached dwelling lots (48 units). Registration of Phase I of 40M-2265 was completed on August 19, 2005. An application for removal of Part Lot Control was originally considered and approved in December 2005. By-law 2005-232, as per typical procedure and in accordance with the Planning Act, was approved with an expiry period of three (3) years and expired in December 2008. 2.3 Halminen Building Corporation has a closing scheduled for the link unit on Lot 16L within 40M-2265 on August 31, 2010. Although the scheduled closing has to be adjusted to after the Council meeting, a new by-law allowing for exemption from Part Lot Control is required in order to facilitate said closing. 3.0 LAND CHARACTERISTICS AND SURROUNDING USES 3.1 Staff has no objection to the approval of a by-law exempting the subject lands from Part Lot Control. Attached is a by-law (Attachment 2) to exempt the subject lands from Section 50(5) of the Planning Act. 3.2 In accordance with the procedures established in the delegation of Part Lot Control By- laws, Planning Staff will forward to the Regional Planning Department the "Unit Type and Number Summary Table" (Attachment 3), along with a copy of the Part Lot Control By-law. 3.3 The Finance Department advises that the taxes have been paid in full. 3.4 Staff recommends that the by-law be in force for a two (2) year period following Council approval, ending September 7, 2012. REPORT NO.: PSD-093-10 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS PAGE 3 4.1 It is recommended that Council approve this application and adopt the attached Part Lot Control By-law for Lots 16 and 24 of 40M-2265. Staff Contact: Robin Heathcote Attachments: Attachment 1 - Site Location Key Map and Lands Affected by Part Lot Control Removal Attachment 2 - By-law for Removal of Part Lot Control Attachment 3 - Unit Type and Number Summary Table for 40M-2265 List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Halminen Building Corporation (Clarington) George L. Smith Brian Bridgeman, Durham Regional Planning Department Attachment 1 To Report PSD-093-1 d ~ 2 ~ ~ o u3NOOao c p .~ ~ ~ ~ OL ~ i 0 Q. 133a1S SNJIN ~ O V N o m ~'~a O J Rs C ~ j 1N3~S3aJ ~ o ~ y~(y Oj ` ~ - 'a o t ~ ~', y dad ~ ~°~ T N ++ m J 7 m V ~ a ~~ ~ Q m ~ ~ ~ J N V N ~ ~ a 3NV7 `JO`Jfl'JS 1S3M - R O y ~' a` ° .~ c 3 O ~ 1~~~IlS S~i~IN ~ W O ~N ~~ w 1N~OS~2~~ 2 ~ ~ z w ~~, Q ~ cn p ~ m U OJ ~ 2J~dl~d .~ 0 ~Nd~ JOJfI~S 1S~M Attachment 2 To Report PSD-093-10 CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON BY-LAW NO.2010- being a By-law to exempt certain portions of Registered Plans 40M-2265 from Part Lot Control WHEREAS the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington deems it advisable to exempt from Part Lot Control, Lots 16 and 24 of 40M-2265, registered at the Land Titles Division of Whitby; NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Council of the Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington enacts as follows: 1. That Subsection 5 of Section 50 of the Planning Act shall not apply to those lands described in paragraph 2 within the By-law. 2. That this By-law shall come into effect upon being approved by the Municipality of Clarington and thereafter Subsection 5 of Section 50 shall cease to apply to the following lands: a) Lots 16 and 24 of 40M-2265 3. Pursuant to Subsection 7.3 of Section 50 of the Planning Act, this By-law shall be in force for a period of two (2) years ending on September 7, 2012. BY-LAW read a first time this day of 2010 BY-LAW read a second time this day of 2010 BY-LAW read a third time and finally passed this day of 2010 Jim Abernethy, Mayor Patti L. Barrie, Municipal Clerk Attachment 3 To Report PSD-093=10 PART LOT CONTROL EXEMPTION BY-LAW Unit Type and Number Summary Table Registered Plan #: 40M-2265 By-law: t ~" , . ~ Y ROVES Result of Part Lot Control ~-°' ` ~~~ ~ `APP , . ~~~ ~N `Ex_emption on Unif:Type'and ~Nuniber ~'~~-~ ,_ ,. Lots/Blocks Affec ted Unit Tvpeand Number - _. - 16 and 24 Semi-detached/link No increase in units Total: 2 4 No increase in units Staff Report # 4 • ~~ 11 Leading the Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: SPECIAL COUNCIL MEETING Date: September 7, 2010 Resolution #: By-law #: Addendum to Report#: PSD-117-09 File #: PLN 34.5.4.44 ,Subject: REVISION TO REQUEST TO REMOVE 49 ~ 63 BEAVER STREET SOUTH FROM THE MUNICIPAL REGISTER OF PROPERTIES OF CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUE OR INTEREST RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended; THAT the Addendum Report to PSD-117-09 be received; 2. THAT the Municipality authorize the relocation of the heritage homes at 49 and 63 Beaver Street South; 3. THAT prior to moving the dwellings at 49 and 63 Beaver Street South the Applicant submit and receive approval of Building Permits to erect the dwellings on alternative sites within the Village of Newcastle; 4. THAT the cement block dwellings located at 49 and 63 Beaver Street South be removed from the Municipal Register of properties of cultural heritage value or interest immediately prior to their relocation; 5. THAT upon relocation, the cement block dwellings originally located at 49 and 63 Beaver Street South be placed on the Municipal Register of properties of cultural heritage value or interest; and 6. THAT all interested parties listed in Addendum to Report PSD-117-09 and any delegations be advised of Council's decision. CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 ADDENDUM TO REPORT NO,: PSD-117-09 PAGE 2 Submitted by: f~-~~ Reviewed by: Langmaid cf g Director o Planning Services ~~ ~, Franklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer PW/COS/df August 24, 2010 ADDENDUM TO REPORT NO.: PSD-117-09 PAGE 3 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 On December 14th, 2009, Council passed a Resolution permitting the removal of the dwellings, located at 49 and 63 Beaver Street South, from the Municipal Register for the purpose of the relocating them to 45 Edward Street East and 111 George Street East, respectively. The Resolution included conditions to be met prior to Staffs authorization of Building Permits necessary to undertake this process. 1.2 In the intervening period, the Applicant has identified alternative sites for both of the dwellings. The new locations are 106 & 107 Beaver Street South. These properties are closer to the originating sites (49 & 63 Beaver Street South) than the previously proposed locations. 1.3 The intention of Addendum Report to PSD-117-09 is to amend the Council Resolution to identify revised destination properties for the relocated dwellings and to clarify the approval process required by the Applicant to proceed with the relocation. 2.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 2.1 Staff recommend that the cement block dwellings, located at 49 and 63 Beaver Street South, be removed from the Municipal Register of non-designated properties of cultural heritage value or interest immediately prior to their relocation. Once relocated, it is recommended that the dwellings be added to the Municipal Register at their new locations. Staff Contact: Paul Wirch Attachments: Attachment 1 -PSD-117-09 List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Bertrand Declos, Heritage Outreach Consultant, Cultural Service Units, Ministry of Culture Sean Fraser, Ontario Heritage Trust Norman Gyaltsan Tenzin Gyaltsan Glenn Genge, D.G. Biddle & Associates Ltd, Alan J. McMackin, Barrister and Solicitor Clarington Museum and Archives, c/o Martha Rutherford-Conrad Clarington Architectural Conservancy Ontario, c/o Martha Rutherford-Conrad Isabel Little, Clarington, Heritage Committee Faye Langmaid, Manager of Special Projects Attachment 1 To Addendum Report PSD-117-09 1' ar.~ ~ Leading the Way REPORT PLANNING SERVICES Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMNISTRATION COMMITTEE MEETING Date: Monday, December 7, 2009 Report #: PSD-117=09 File #: PLN 34.5.4.44 By-law #: Subject: REQUEST FOR PERMIT TO REMOVE 49 BEAVER STREET SOUTH, NEWCASTLE VILLAGE, FROM THE MUNICIPAL REGISTER OF PROPERTIES OF CULTURAL HERITAGE VALUE OR INTEREST RECOMMENDATIONS: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: ~ . 1. THAT Report PSD-117-09 be received; . 2. THAT the Municipality authorize in principle the relocation of the heritage home at 49 Beaver Street South to 45 Edward Street East; 3. THAT prior to moving the building at 49 Beaver Street South, the applicant: a. File a building permit for and construct the foundation for the relocated house after the building has been moved to 45 Edward Street East; b. Enter into a site plan agreement for the expanded mixed use development site incorporating 97 and 131 King Street East and 49 Beaver Street South containing appropriate conditions with respect to relocating the house at 49 .Beaver Street South; and c. Obtain the approval of Engineering Services and any relevant agency for moving the house; 4. THAT the cement block house located at 49 Beaver Street South, be REMOVED from the Municipal Register of properties of cultural heritage value or interest on the day prior to the move; 5. THAT staff be authorized to issue the building permit to allow the building to be MOVED to 45 Edward Street East at the~time that recommeridations 2 and 3 have been fulfilled; REPORT NO.: PSD-117-09 PAGE 2 6. THAT the cement block house relocated to 45 Edward Street East be placed on the Municipal Register of properties of cultural and heritage interest on the day subsequent to the move; and . 7. THAT all interested parties listed in this report and any delegation be advised of Council's direction. Submitted by: Davfc{~J. Crome, MCIP, RPP Director of Planning Services IUFUdf 2 December 2009 Reuiewed by: ~ ~~~''~. ~~ Franklin~Wu, Chief Administrative Officer CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T (905)623-3379 F (905)623-0830 . REPORT NO.: PSD-117-09 PAGE 3 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 The Planning Services Department is in the process of reviewing an application for rezoning of the properties located at 49 and 63 Beaver Street South, Newcastle Village. . The application proposes to rezone these lands to permit an expansion of the existing IGA parking. A Public Meeting was held on May 25, 2009 in regard to the proposed rezoning and Staff Report PSD-046-09 noted that.Sobeys Inc., the parent company and franchisor of IGA supermarkets in Ontario, has chosen to rebrand most of the current IGA stores as Sobeys stores. Sobeys corporate policy requires parking ratios greater .than those required by the Zoning By-law in order to serve the overFlow needs of its supermarket clientele. The Planning Justification Report submitted with. the application indicated that the two houses on the area proposed for parking would be relocated. 1.2 On June 29, 2009 Council approved adding 49 and •63 Beaver .Street South to the Municipal Register as non-designated properties of cultural heritage value or interest based on the recommendation of the Clarington Heritage Committee (CHC) and Staff Report PSD-055-09. The heritage merits are outlined in Attachment 1. 1.3 On October 5, 2009 staff met with the property owners, Norman Gyaltsan and Tenzin Gyaltsan, and their solicitor with respect to the proposed relocation of the buildings: The owners indicated they had located properties in the immediate area that could accommodate the buildings. Sobeys had asked the owners to provide confirmation from the Municipality that the buildings could be moved before proceeding with their parking expansion proposal and rezoning. 1.4 As 49 Beaver Street South is recorded on the Municipal Register, the Ontario Heritage Act provides Council with sixty (60) days from the date of Council receiving the request to remove the building in which to address the submission. The owner's request will be officially received by Council on December 14, 2009. Council has the option of either removing the property from the Municipal Register so that a permit can be issued to _ move the building; or not responding to the. submission, in.which case they would be deemed to. have consented to the application; or initiating the heritage designation process. 1.5 On December 2, 2009 building staff reviewed the process and requirements for the relocation of the house with the applicant. 2.0 CLARINGTON HERITAGE COMMITTEE REVIEW 2.1 The Ontario Heritage Act requires Council consult with the heritage committee prior to a property being removed from the Municipal Register. The Clarington Heritage Committee held a special meeting on November 10, 2009 to meet with the Gyaltsans to discuss a relocation proposal. The Gyaltsans indicatedthat they had purchased a vacant parcel at 45 Edward Street East (Attachment 2), which is scheduled to close in January of 2010. They are negotiating to purchase a second property which will be the topic of a subsequent report on 63 Beaver Street South. REPORT NO.: PSD-117-09. PAGE 4 2.2 The owners ~ have retained Laurie McCulloch, who specializes in moving heritage buildings, to inspect the building and the proposed location. Mr. McCulloch has determined that the building at 49 Beaver Street South can be moved, however hydro lines would need to be adjusted and tree trimming would be required. The Gyaltsans have confirmed that the house would be sited so that it fronts on Beaver Street South. 2.3 The property owners were asked if they would consider designating 49 Beaver Street South under the Ontario Heritage Act once it is moved to the new location. They will give the matter consideration if they obtain permission to move the building: 2.4 After giving consideration to the owners' proposal, the Clarington Heritage Committee passed a motion agreeing to the relocation. They request that a landscape strip similar to what is currently along the King Avenue East road frontage, with additional trees, be provided. In addition the relocation of the building should have minimal' impact on the existing street trees. The CHC encourage the property owner proceed with designation of the building upon relocation. 3.0' STAFF COMMENTS 3.1 Wherever possible, heritage structures. should be retained for the original use and in their original location. Where the original use cannot be retained, adaptive reuse of the structure is encouraged. This heritage building abuts a street related commercial use in the Newcastle Village Centre and is a single family residence. The property owners are not seeking to demolish the building but to move it to another site and .retain its use as a single family residence. 3.2 Should both cement block houses be moved to new locations there will be a void in the street fabric of Beaver Street South near the existing entry to the IGA parking lot and the terminal vista at the east end of Emily Street. An increase in general landscape requirements in this area would help soften the view of the proposed expanded parking area from the street. The landscape strip along the King Avenue East road frontage contains decorative iron. fencing separated by brick posts and a variety of shrubs and trees. A similar type of landscape strip, with increased foliage that includes some coniferous trees, can be required along the Beaver Street South road frontage as part of the site plan process for the Sobeys project. 3.3 The building mover is aware of the importance of protecting trees when moving a building. Engineering Services and Operations will be involved in any. street tree pruning that is necessary for the moving ~of the building. The property owners are confident that the move can be conducted with the minimal amount of impact possible on the existing tree canopy. However, on site consultations with the Municipality's arborist and approval of any tree trimming will be necessary. 3.4 Information on the designation process has been provided to the owners. Lot development charges are applicable to 45,Edward Street East. Section 23(1j of the Lot Development Charges By-law 2005-108 states that the municipal portion of the lot development charge can be refunded if a heritage building. is relocated to another site REPORT NO.: PSD-117=09 PAGE 5 and designated at .its new location under the Ontario Heritage Act. The current municipal portion is $14,521.00 per single detached dwelling. The owners have been advised of this provision. In addition, it is anticipated that the owners would receive a credit for their. commercial development charges with respect the ~ Regional and Educational development charge for the floorspace. 3.5 Appropriate arrangements are to be made with Engineering Services Department and other agencies impacted by the moving. It is also recommended. that the site plan agreement for the commercial site contain appropriate provisions with respect the the arrangements for the relocation of the house. This should all occur prior to the removal of the property from the heritage register. It is also recommended that once moved, the property and relocated building be added, to the municipal register of properties of ,cultural heritage value or interest. The owner can subsequently pursue designation under the Ontario Heritage Act. 3.6 On November 26, 2009 .the owner advised that ~ although a location for the second building had not been secured, he would like to proceed with the move of 49 Beaver Street South to 45 Edward Street East and has submitted a written request (Attachment 3). When a second property is secured for the second cement block home the proposal will be reviewed by the Clarington Heritage Committee and a further report presented to Council for consideration. 4.0 CONCLUSION 4.1 Staff are recommending that the cement block house located at 49 Beaver Street South be removed from the Municipal Register of non-designated .properties of cultural heritage value or Interest immediately prior to the anticipated move and that staff be authorized to issue. the permit to allow the building to be moved to 45 Edward Street East. Once relocated, it is recommended that the new property be added to the Municipal Register. 4.2 Staff and the Clarington Heritage Committee are' in support of removing 49 Beaver Street South from the Municipal Register so that it can be moved to 45 Edward Street East. Council is. requested to authorize staff to issue the permit to remove the building from the lot subsequent to~the filing of a permit and the construction of a foundation for the new house, incorporation of appropriate conditions in the site plan agreement and approval of Engineering Services and any other relevant agency for the move. Attachments: Attachment 1 -Cultural Heritage Attributes Attachment 2 -Location Map Attachment 3 -Property Owners' Submission REPORT NO.: PSD-117-09 PAGE 6 List of interested parties to be advised of Council's decision: Ontario Heritage Trust Clarington Heritage Committee Ministry of Culture Clarington ACO Clarington Museum and Archives Norman Gyaltsan Tenzin Gyaltsan Alan McMackin Glenn Genge Attachment 1 To Report PSD-117=09 Cultural Heritacte Attributes The two cement block houses located at 49 and 63 Beaver Street South were built around 1905 by John Hall, a prominent builder and contractor originally from Orono, Ontario. Hall was born in 1869 and died in 1926. It appears that he moved from Orono to Newcastle around 1905. The April, 1905 edition of the Orono Times advises that he purchased the property on the east side of Beaver Streit, south of the old Massey factory "from R. Warren for $1500 and intends to erect two residences on the property." These two houses are very early examples of the use of cement block for residential building purposes. John Hall built most, if not all, of the early cement block houses in Newcastle, Orono and in the former Township of Clarke. The blocks were usually made on site. In order to make them more attractive, Hall and his brother Frank experimented with making coloured blocks, but apparently this was not successful. The ornamental pieces over the windows were also made by Hall. These are the only two known remaining cement block houses in Newcastle. There are two similar cement block houses in Orono Village, also built by Hall circa 1919 (Main Street South, east side, and Sommerville Road, north side -last house). There is one similar cement block house in Bowmanville on Lowe Street, however,, it is not known if Hall built the home: Other examples of cement block construction may exist but these homes on Beaver Street are some of the finest examples. 49 Beaver Street South 63 Beaver Street South Attachment 2 To Report PSD-117-09 KING AVENUE EAST N N O~7 1 r (co 46 57 m NN aa 94 OHO 68 N M f�f _ _ 90 EMILY STREET EAST r0 s6 84 = a3 �i 82 W 78 65 ez 87 74 OC 46 S' �' 70 108 W 107 106 ; Attachment To Report PSD-117-0 - Municipality of Clarington 1 40 Temperance. Street, Bowmanville, On L1C 3A6 . . NOV~G2009~ November 27, 2009 ~ ~"'~`'"'ti -«'~ ~E~'~1RTPJiENr To the Municipality of Clarington Council: Please remove the cement block house located at 49 Beaver Street South from the Municipal Register of Properties of Cultural Heritage Value or Interest as we would like to move the building to an empty lot located at 45 Edwazd Street East, Newcastle Village. Yours truly, ,~'~ ._.~.- TenzLp[ G ~~~ Leading the Way Unfinished Business REPORT ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT Meeting: GENERAL PURPOSE AND ADMINISTRATION COMMITTEE r; PA -~//- is Date: Monday July 5, 2010 Resolution #: C' 3~~-/O Report #: EGD-021-10 File #: By-law #: Subject: KENDAL DRAINAGE REVIEW Recommendations: It is respectfully recommended that the General Purpose and Administration Committee recommend to Council the following: 1. THAT Report EGD-021-10 be received; 2. .THAT Engineering Services recommend the implementation of the preferred Option #3 contained in report EGD-021-10, Construction of a ditch on the south side of Regional Road 9, directing flow easterly to the watercourse immediately east of Regional Road 18; 3. THAT Engineering Services complete the detailed design for Option #3 and conduct a Public Information Centre for this project and obtain input from area residents and stakeholders; 4. THAT construction of the recommended. option be completed in 2010 construction season; 5. THAT funding for the works be reallocated from the Bowmanville Creek Erosion Protection budget item, account no. 110-32-340-83234-7401; and 6. THAT remaining funds from the Bowmanville Creek Erosion Protection account be carried over to the 2011 Budget and additional funding to complete the work be considered as part of the 2011 Budget. CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON 40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 T 905-623-3379 F 905-623-9282 REPORT NO.: EGD-021-10 PAGE 2 Respectfully by, ..-~~ ~~ _._ SL fitted by: A.S. Cannella Director of Engineering Services ~~~ Reviewed by: Franklin Wu Chief Administrative Officer ASC/bb/jb/dv June 28, 2010 REPORT NO.:.EGD-021-10 PAGE 3 1.0 BACKGROUND 1.1 The Hamlet of Kendal is home to approximately 65 residential properties ranging from 0.1 to 1.0 hectares in size, a local public school, recreational facilities, and a general store. stormwater management is currently provided by a system of swales, open ditches and culverts that draw overland flow east to Regional Road 18 and south to outlet at the Smiths Creek tributary of the Ganaraska River. Due to a relatively flat topography, recurrent flooding has occurred at various locations within the hamlet during spring run-off and high-intensity rainfall events. 1.2 In 1990, TSH (currently AECOM) was directed by the Municipality to develop a proposal to improve drainage within the hamlet. A plan was prepared to construct a comprehensive storm sewer system in three phases at a cost of $1.0 million (1990 dollars); however, further work was deferred due to financial constraints and the need to pursue projects with higher priority. 1.3 In 1994, the unresolved drainage issues were brought to the attention of Council by local residents and TSH was advised to revisit the original project design and investigate the feasibility of discharging all or part of Kendal's storm drainage to the north-south drainage course which is located on the west side of Regional Road 18. A preliminary survey was conducted on Regional Road 18 and concerns were raised that the depth of ditching required to support proper drainage of the hamlet would be cost prohibitive. 1.4 To further investigate the feasibility of both the original three-phased stormwater drainage plan and the Regional Road 18 stormwater drainage concept, the Report on Soil Conditions for Hamlet of Kendal Storm Sewer & Road Reconstruction (June 6, 1994) was commissioned and prepared by Site Investigation Services Limited. Report findings concluded that a high groundwater table would render proposed design alternatives cost prohibitive and cited concerns over the probable disturbance of the groundwater table and the potential adverse effects on domestic wells that would result from installation of REPORT NO.: EGD-021-10 PAGE 4 the storm sewers. At this time, a petition signed by 38 residents in opposition of the proposed sewer construction was also received by Municipal staff and a mutually agreeable decision was made between residents and the Municipality not to proceed with construction of a storm sewer system. 1.5 At the November 9, 2009 Council meeting the Engineering Services department was requested to research drainage issues along Regional Road 9 from Kendal Church Street to Regional Road 18 as they relate to the overall drainage of Kendal. Due to both current and historical concerns, the Municipality requested AECOM to renew efforts and find an amenable solution that would address the hamlet of Kendal's most pressing drainage needs. 1.6 In the spring of 2010, complaints were received by the Municipality from the owner of 43 Kendal Church Street regarding poor drainage from the property through the informal swale system that exists on the block bounded by Kendal Church Street, Monck Street, and Regional Roads 9 & 18 (see Attachment 1- Existing Conditions drawing). As part of their ongoing work associated with the preparation of their report AECOM investigated these complaints and photographed the situation to document the concerns. 1.7 Subsequent study of the project's pre-history and current conditions revealed three alternative solutions: 1. Do nothing 2. Comprehensive Shallow-Pipe/Ditching System 3. Ditching Improvements Ditching Improvements was evaluated as the preferred solution due to previous concerns regarding high groundwater table conditions and the hamlet's flat topography which would render a Comprehensive Shallow-Pipe/Ditching System largely unfeasible. REPORT NO.: EGD-021-10 PAGE 5 1.8 Four ditching options were then developed under the preferred solution, based on mitigation of drainage concerns, impact on the environment, impact on property owners and financial cost. These four options are graphically represented in Attachments 2 through 5 as follows: • Option 1: Formalize Existing Back Yard Swale-Preliminary estimated cost: $180, 000 o Advantages -follows existing drainage patterns o Disadvantages - reliance on individual property owners to keep swale maintained and unaltered - uncertainty of subsurface existing conditions and environmental impacts (i.e. septic beds) - perceived or actual damage to private septic systems caused by swale construction - legal easements should be procured to ensure future access - does not address road runoff from Regional Road 9 • Option 2: Improve Ditch: Kendal Church Street and Monck Street- Preliminary estimated cost: $150,000 o Advantages -within existing Right of Way o Disadvantages - Right of Way is narrow thus requiring the shallow sewers - sewer slopes would be less than desired but are constrained due to existing condition of inlet and outlet -does not address road runoff from Regional Road 9 • Option 3: Construct New Ditch: Regional Road 9 (South Side) directing flow easterly-Preliminary estimated cost: $110,000 o Advantages REPORT NO.: EGD-021-10 PAGE 6 -within existing Right of Way -directs flow from Kendal Church Street culvert away from rear. yard drainage swale -captures road runoff and directs it away from private property - provides potential well draining outlet for sump pumps o Disadvantages - impact to existing entrances off of Regional Road 9 - minor grading required on private property to provide flatter ditch side slopes to allow for easier maintenance - relocation of utilities required • Option 4: Improve Ditch: Regional Road 9 (North Side) flows easterly - Preliminary estimated cost: $90,000 o Advantages -within existing Right of Way -directs flow from Kendal Church Street culvert away from rear yard drainage. swale -minimal impact to existing residents o Disadvantages -does not capture road runoff and direct it away from private property - does not provide potential outlet for sump pumps -relocation of utilities required 1.9 Study findings were subsequently documented in the Kendal Stormwater Drainage Review (AECOM, June 2010) with a recommendation to proceed forward under Options 3 which is briefly evaluated below: • Option 3 proposes new ditch construction on the south side of Regional Road 9 with a significant improvement of overall drainage for adjacent properties while having a marginally higher cost due to affected private drive entrances and utility relocation cost. • In addition to conveying flows from the cross culvert just south of Regional REPORT NO.: EGD-021-10 PAGE 7 Road 9 on Kendal Church Street it also captures road run off and directs flows away from the properties towards an outlet to the east. • This option also provides property owners with an alternative location for discharging their sump pumps where the flows will be directed away from their property. 2.0 PROPOSED APPROACH 2.1 Further effort is required to proceed to construction and provide timely relief for residents who have been struggling with this long-standing issue. Public consultation will offer a step forward by providing interested residents with an opportunity to understand the complexities involved, review the preferred option as noted and provide their input. To this end, detailed design of the preferred option should proceed for presentation at a Public Information Centre (PIC) with construction following shortly thereafter taking into consideration the input of the residents and stakeholders. 3.0 FUNDING 3.1 Opportunity exists to move forward in the current budget year through reallocation of funding for the Bowmanville Creek Erosion Protection works. Estimates for the Bowmanville Creek project were initially made on the basis of a conceptual design and, upon the completion of detailed design, were found to be significantly higher than the budgeted amount of $200,000. As such, Engineering Services was planning to defer works for the project to the 2011 budget year, provided that additional funding could be committed during 2011 budget deliberations, and has reviewed financing possibilities for the Kendal drainage works by utilizing the Bowmanville erosion protection funding from account number 110-32-340-83234-7401. 3.2 The Municipality could also benefit from delay of the Bowmanville Creek Erosion Protection project due to the recently passed Development Charge By-law. REPORT NO.: EGD-021-10 PAGE 8 update and staff will review potential to fund a portion of the work with Development Charge reserves as the work has a growth related component to it. 4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS 4.1 Given the above, Engineering Services concurs that Bowmanville Creek funding should be utilized for the Kendal drainage works and that additional funding should be sought for the Bowmanville erosion protection project as part of the 2011 budget. It is further recommended that: 1. Detailed design of Option 3 as described above and defined in the Kendal Stormwater Drainage Review proceed to completion; 2. A Public Information. Centre be conducted for Kendal residents and stakeholders to review the preferred option; and 3. Construction of the preferred option be tendered and constructed in the 20.10 construction season. Attachments: Attachment 1 -Existing Conditions Attachment 2 -Design Option 1 Attachment 3 -Design Option 2 Attachment 4 -Design Option 3 Attachment 5 -Design Option 4 a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ f ~~ Q W ~ ~ ~ yI q~ 3 w t ~a~~ }#i~~~ O ~ap~ a o~ c°~ z c ~ t9 i• 7V~ ~9~ ~ pg 1 S F F ~~ tg~~~ 4y~~~if ~ ~~ ~ ~ Q H S ppp ~ E p ~ ~ L•S * 3 3 /~g~ jrl ~i(11y7! ~ ~~ Y O ~ L g &m ~ •7 1 i ~ ~ ~ff9lll~~3 ~il~,i = ~ ~ ~ S j~ e"~ ~1 .. ~_ ,! ~ r OVOa~NOSdWOHl i, .,,(f.. i', i I ~g i~'Kbakl!bN010.3aIf01/.Oat3llIANO'1M3N - _ - - - ~. _.._._... +I .... ..r I / ~,r•'•' ~ ~ 7 '1 ~°ug S~ ~ Y 8 I • ;,~ _.. I ~ i~ 4 I _. _.. _ "~ ~o ~' i _. I f. I " _.... _, _. _ I ~ I • Q ~ I - I sw __ _ _. ~ ~_ I ~ __ ' Zpw of i i... ~I ~ G-_. I ~ _. i~ <_ .... I - ~ . .... iNN ua I ~.. ... I I W: t ~ - , _._~ W. __..._.. _. IC; I ~ 3 I ~ 1 ._. 1332115 A331010 • % _. W ~ I.. I ...__..._. __. W ` ~ . I a __.... I •_ : I I i _. '. I I. 3'00 '~ I y ~~ ~~ I w io 6w ~ • m ~f __.... - 4 i __- _.... I _ ~ I • i i _ _ , ~ ~ ~ - ~~ _. ~ ~ ~. I *, • ; • I ~ i • E I sy i ~ ~~ ~C ... I _. _-- -.__ - _..., w , i i ~ `c ~ ~ W y~~j wx a [___....... ~ .. 1C i~ I ~U U • a # __ i ~g ~ F -.__ ~_ ,• , I i s i ~ -. S<H2lalIHJ lb(1('1.3N 1~ ._. • • ~ ~ ~ ~~ ' ~ ' 'x ~ '-`.. I ~, um~V ( g ' O y ~~ VY ewe i u~i I x I I 4F i I w ~ u"I I ~ ~ x ~ I ~ Jl • t I -._.... ._' I ~1~ I ~ ) ._.. Z i ~~ C 1 I i i aboa 3LHnn ~ __. 1 • •,: .~ _ __. _____ Attachment 1 ~' ~~~ ~~=~~j ~ ~ ~ <~ ~; ; $ 3 Sri {3y ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~dg j~=~,3 V ~ a o~ opt e ' tt~ z~ 6 ES * z a g ~! i~~~ i a ~ ~~ w o LL ~' ~ i ~~d~~ ~SYpe1 ~ ~ ~ Y ~~ ~~ ~ ~, :' • ~._,.r !, f I O'dOa NOSdWOHl,' i ~~~ !i ~ - ._ ........._ _..__ ~ i t i I i I i 1 I ~ ~ ~~ S 1 ~ ~ !. ~ i (B OUaM6lV O ~J'3'M)fd'KON[3'IHIIAN©'LJHN J _ _ _ _ ._._ 1 ,, •~ f ~•- p (1 p y 1 1 _.... I ~ ~~S ! ~ ~ II ~ ~pw\ ~ it 1 (~ ~1 f,l 1 L '--- -.. r. ... 110 ~, g i I x- -_m - a~ -- 1 1 ~ a U 1 _.. 3W ~_. ,1 ; _._ ; i r; ; ; a ~ i o $ Iii , ~ ,, ~ ~ / 1 0~ ~ _ .. ~ I J .. ... u 1. ..._ ~ 1 7 .. _... W ~ i o~ ' i aY (' y ! ~! ._ j'~~ `~ 1 s ~ 1 1 ~ i , I M s"@ ~ fl ~~ ) tl I z r_. Wi ~ I aN y J 1 ~1 N U I gg Q O ~I I ._.... 1 1 _...._ 111•1~~~' 4 3alS,i y i 3N010 1 '; F;~ 1 , f Q ~- - ......_ ., .._ - -~ ~ i y11~~ , gg - ! i l Z ~ _.._.____.__.... '1 ~ i 1 W ....._.. _.-~_. ~ W! 1 ~ ! 3 ~ ~ ii ii yi ~ i j ,' I' ~ ~ o ~ m; ~W ~ r. _ __ ,g v~ .. - ...._._ ~ . 1 r^~ _? i 1 0 T~ ~ Pi 1 ~ _...._ _ $ ~_` ___ ' r _. __. ___ u `r _ . -- _ ~ ~ 1 _ II ~; i '. i~ ~ 1 _ i a°w it-. r"------ ~ ~ - ~ a1SAOH -~~ 1 ~ ....._ ... i -- 1 , ~ ~ ; _ _ _7 "~ 1 __.. ~ _ ~~ ' .~ __.. o w i W~ W i z rc ~ 1 t._.. y ~ t._._,.,... '~ ~~ ~; f .. s.... - - `9 _~ / --. c r - ._. _ _... _ l -.. ._.~. iaaai ~ - _ r r I ~ z ~I '. ...l_ ._L..3 N~~~ ON3 ~ - 1 ~ ~g ~ ~ ! i i t1 ~ - , _..... ' ~~~ i t ', i. U W ~ i ~ u ~ 1 f..: tf i ~ i b° ! i ! ~ li I ~ ' ~ ail )( * 1i .~ ~ - i >£k /r 1 -- ~ ~ 1 i 1 i---- ._._ I ly ~ r ___ ~ r : fi t f~~I •, - ____ ~ _ ___.. ~_----- 1 . ___,_ ~ 1 1 ! t {mil ~ ''" , 1 !' j I` 1 ii i i i - - ---- T ... ~avoa 311HM ` 1 ,~ - ----1. r i rU` r --`mil ~ ~ 1 ~r~ I Attachment 2 2 U U y u 2~ o ~ i O ~- y a u - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O F' F F _ O ~`` u~ u~ u~ ~ 3 F % 1 ~/ t IA ~/ 1~ ~(/ OVOtl NOSdWOHl i /J I ii i ~5 So ~ ~ ~ _ _ _ _ _ I i -- - ~'7f~e !~I '~ ~ N ~ ~~ O ~ I ~ W3 3> ~w w ~~~ N~q~ ~8 ~'! ~~ ~5 V ~ ~ ~~3' K~ pW Hp ZtVy Oom~ Fwiz I ~ ~ ~ i ! R .5 i k~ a ~ r GQ JZ 0~~~ i i E ~ '~ ~ z° as c w ` k ~ Y Y x i 3 'r n ~~ ~ y{ R u (~~ 1 f--- _-- _--- i ,r--' U r.. ~ ~ ~ ~la i ~~g ~' x _1 I q~ ~ 7~ ; j ---- I -- °a ~ I i ~ ~~ „~j t. ~ _ ;t t t ; ---~__ _ _-1- - -- - , t ~ ~, ~-. ~ J ~ f. , _ _ _ w ;. ~ i ~; i 3~~ ~, u"` ~ 1~*-~ ~ _ ~ - 133tl1S.13H0\I ~ q ~ ; ~ .. , ~ ~ ~ ~~ - .. • ~-- _ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ _ ~ ~ ~ ,. ; i _ _ _ .-. , ~, t ~ ~ ,~ -._ ._ ' „' 1~~~.._._ ~.._ _.._.- --. ~~--yt~ I(3 133~11S,~pH !. " ~ __ r -1 'I ~ -- - ! ~/-. ' ~ on ' j ~ ~ ~ _ ~ - ~ ~ A yr -~. -`~ i _._. __--_ .. s F .. t i t Y,_ ..~ w ~ ~ ,- ; ~ K ' ! a r ~ wx ~ _ - z~ I F `. _. ~ ~ o -. __. ~ , 4 _ ~ - + 0 1 ~ 1 I i ~, -- .~ ~, .i._- 1 ..-_ 133815 H~H`~bON3 ~ .. j. N .._. ~ .-.. - .~ 'r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ tl --~-( i j i ; ~. i i ! ~ I - ~, _.._ ; -_ , tg . --- ~ ~ ~ ~py-~ ~' '~-/ r L t ~ ~- .. ,~ ,~ Otl0?13LHM - ~ ~ ~ ; - -- i t _ = ~ ~~~~ ~.~ ... / ~ ~ l __ ~ ~ _.. ----_ ~ , - ~,: Attachment 3 !~I M ~b [ ~ "-i w 8 w =`~b 4i~ll O ~~ ~ ~~ M O $p$ x ff ~ o 3 8~K i~j~' ~~h • yQ a~3 ! b ~ ~ r ~ ~ ~b~g~ t;~ ~ ~~ 3 O w O 99s i p c ~ d L~ 'Y-^ 34 Oda 2 YY ~ ry{a Q ~ w yg ~ ~ _ ~ @tp r ~lj q~ * ~~ ~Is~Sp •`~~ ~ Y 8 ~ 9 1 6 x II ~ ~~~~~ ~LE:e2 e I~ I ~s 1 I ~ z - F I ? .. li ~/ ~S is I j . _ ..,.- --, _--- i i f V 1 ~ I 11 ~ I, i t ; Z 1~ -__ __ _. 1 4 a o -' 1 { ~ I ~ ~ I,Q I I ~ ~ m Ail I Z (il ~ ~ 1 .... . .._ , 1. ......._._ I v :u .I I _ .. _... __._...~ o w 9 z .. _ ,_._ -. ~ 1 ~ - . ~a y 1 1 y~ H ids w~ o~ +1 _.._ ~~I! _.. w I 1 i ~ .. o ~ ~ t f I ~ ..._ ~ L I 133M1S A3H910V~ W~ ~ i :..._ ao ~ ~ i - I I __ 1 O K C S ~ I I ... ~3 1 ~ ` nn __ O 1,... _. ._.._ 1 ._._ 3u x ~ , ~~ __' ..._.. ~ , ~ ! ~ 1 , I ,. _ ~~ , 1 .. __ ~, , ^~ - 4 $ J _~ ___._.. w ~', I.. ,- stioH ij 1 '- ... ~ _i_- ._. -- '} L w i. ~ ~ I~-.... ,p ~ _ Z VI ~ _ I YU =" ~U 1 ~ ~ p- ~ n l I ~' - J _.... _. 4---~~( ~~ f+ `haw i ... ...~ i ~,9 __ `7 _- ~ ~ o ~ i ~ _ ~ x ~'~I (~ -.. ~ -.~. _ 133H1S HO IIHp _ ~ ~ .-` .__ - j I ~ r ~ ___.... So ~ ~ i _. -- ,., I r . 1 I I y ti I j ~ ~ r 1 ~ r-- ~ -'-1i _ r I ` I ~ i ! I, b ~ t ' ' `cif: , I i i r i .._._ ~ i. 1 i _~ r , ._ 1 ...._- 1f ._ • ~ ....~ p-~_ _. 1 ... .. 1 __~ __ ~`~'.r i i ` -~ 14i(1 f ~~ 1 ~ _- 1 li i 3LHM. ~ /' 1 i ~~. S Attachment 4 i ~ "g ~ 8 y o ~'~ w° ~ o 0 0 ~' ~ g c ~ k' g ~ ~ ~f ~ ~ I ~ ~ a /~ l I Ii .. OtlOb NOSdWOHl i ..._..4. i i I, 1 ~Q ~~~ _, Z i .......... .... o y , ~• V : ~ ~ H d ~~ ! Y - w j C 2 N v~ N Sus ' Cl0 _ , l7 KA c ~° ..I ~~'^ s~&~ v ~'~i 11 l ~; ~ K O S a aw ~ ~ a N 3> ~ ~W p° ~ I V ~ F 3 ~ (nQ 9 ~~a t F 1~1 ~~~ ~ e <Q JZ °~~ ~ s K ~ 8 ^ W u t~ , a yy J-- ~- T I ;ru r t i Y ~ qq _ .. _....r _..~.... ~ ._. __ • 1 ..____... .. ., .., _.__ I I i pa~ ? ; l _. I ~...__y1 ( Z~ it 1 ~ _~_ ~ ~i ~ 1 f 1 i , i 1 ~ _ Jk$ 1 ~ ~ 1. 71. 1 ~E / r !i q 1 ~ ~ _, 1 v l ~~ ~ 1 ^ 1 F': ~g 1 'j n .... _., rc 71 1 ~ ...~ ,( .. _. 133b1S A3AJ10~ y , 1 ~ 1 ... 1 1 FW. .__._ ~ i.. ._.. ... ~-~ r~ x: ~~ -, __ .._. ' U' ~ i .__ +. O p 1 1 - --~.. ~ ~.. __ 1 __ ~ ~ !~ -.._.. i 1 1 j ~- ~-µ ! __ . ~ ~1 r ~w ( 1 Ij .} ~ ~ j J _ _.. 1 - r _..__ ,_ i ~ _.__ ~ .- Y ' ..,~ ZH GH ~ I ~ + ~ 1~ 't O ~ ~ YU ~ ~u ~ ow r _........ __... r ~~ i i r i mU U ! ~ - w - a 1 M ~ .._..... .. _ r a= 1. .. ° _ _ .'~S + 133 -, _ "" . r~ ~ ~ i .. ~ _._ -• b1S H~a~HJVON3N ~ _ _ /. ~g i z ~ ~' r. , - lll ~ w ! ~! y t ~ -f ; %~ i ~ ~ o • 'w ~ ~ ~ j ~ ~ ' !t l1 j! ~F I i -........._... 1_, - ....._ ~ _ ! L.~ OtlOb 3LHM Itl Attachment 5