HomeMy WebLinkAbout09/30/2019
Planning and Development Committee
Revised Agenda
Date:September 30, 2019
Time:7:00 PM
Location:Council Chambers, 2nd Floor
Municipal Administrative Centre
40 Temperance Street
Bowmanville, Ontario
Inquiries & Accommodations: For inquiries about this agenda, or to make arrangements for
accessibility accommodations for persons attending, please contact: Samantha Gray, Committee
Coordinator, at 905-623-3379, ext. 2106 or by email at sgray@clarington.net.
Alternate Format: If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the
Accessibility Coordinator, at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Audio Record: The Municipality of Clarington makes an audio record of General Government
Committee meetings. If you make a delegation or presentation at a General Government
Committee meeting, the Municipality will be audio recording you and will make the recording public
by publishing the recording on the Municipality’s website.
Noon Recess: Please be advised that, as per the Municipality of Clarington’s Procedural By-law,
this meeting will recess at 12:00 noon, for a one hour lunch break, unless otherwise determined by
the Committee.
Cell Phones: Please ensure all cell phones, mobile and other electronic devices are turned off or
placed on non-audible mode during the meeting.
Copies of Reports are available at www.clarington.net
*Late Item added after the Agenda was published.
Pages
1.Call to Order
2.New Business – Introduction
Members of Committee are encouraged to provide the Clerk’s Department, in
advance of the meeting, a copy of any motion the Member is intending to
introduce, (preferably electronic) such that staff could have sufficient time to
share the motion with all Members prior to the
meeting.
3.Adopt the Agenda
4.Declaration of Interest
*4.1 Councillor Zwart declared an in direct interest
A family member lives in the area.
*4.2 Councillor Zwart declared an in direct interest
A family member lives in the area.
5.Announcements
6.Adoption of Minutes of Previous Meeting
There are no minutes of previous meetings to be adopted, as the previous
meeting was the Joint General Government and Planning and Development
Committee meeting of September 9, 2019 and the minutes have been
approved.
7.Public Meetings
No Public Meetings
8.Delegations
8.1 Libby Racansky, Regarding Report PSD-040-19, Next Steps on Zone
Clarington
8.2 Gord Robinson, Regarding Report PSD-040-19, Next Steps on Zone
Clarington
*8.3 Julia Perry, Regarding Report PSD-040-19, Next Steps on Zone
Planning and Development Committee
September 30, 2019
Page 2
Clarington
Planning and Development Committee
September 30, 2019
Page 3
*8.4 Doug Sirrs, Regarding Report PSD-040-19, Next Steps on Zone
Clarington
*8.5 Steven Chandler, Regarding Report PSD-040-19, Next Steps on Zone
Clarington
*8.6 Bev Oda, Regarding Report PSD-040-19, Next Steps on Zone Clarington
*8.7 Jeungsoon Shin, Regarding Report PSD-040-19, Next Steps on Zone
Clarington
8.8 Marilyn Morawetz, Jury Lands Foundation, Regarding Report PSD-041-
19, Jury Lands Official Plan Amendment
*8.9 Emma West, Bousfields Inc., Regarding Report PSD-041-19, Jury Lands
Official Plan Amendment
*8.10 Bob Schickedanz, Far Sight Homes, Regarding Report PSD-041-19, Jury
Lands Official Plan Amendment
*8.11 Ryan Guetter, Weston Consulting, Regarding PSD-036-19, Application
by National Homes (Prestonvale) Inc. to permit a 112 Unit Townhouse
Development at the Northeast Corner of Prestonvale Road and Bloor
Street, Courtice
*8.12 Enzo Bertucci, Far Sight Homes, Regarding Report PSD-041-19, Jury
Lands Official Plan Amendment
9.Communications – Receive for Information
No Communications for Information
10.Communications – Direction
10.1 Memo from Anne Greentree, Municipal Clerk, Regarding the October
21, 2019 Planning and Development Committee Meeting
6
11.Presentations
No Presentations
12.Planning Services Department Reports
12.1 PSD-040-19 Next Steps on Zone Clarington 8
12.2 PSD-041-19 Community Vision for Jury Lands, Urban Design Master 55
Planning and Development Committee
September 30, 2019
Page 4
Plan + Design Guidelines for Former Ontario Boys Training School and
WWII Prison of War Camp 30 – Amendment No 121 to the Clarington
Official Plan
Tabled to Oct 22 PDC
13.New Business – Consideration
14.Unfinished Business
*14.1 PSD-036-19 Application by National Homes (Prestonvale) Inc. to permit
a 112 unit townhouse development at the northeast corner of
Prestonvale Road and Bloor Street, Courtice [Referred from the
September 9, 2019 Joint Committee meeting]
178
Link to Report PSD-036-19
(Memo from the Director of Engineering regarding Highway 2 and
Prestonvale Road Traffic Signal Operations Included)
14.2 PSD-039-19 Exemption Request for 10 Victoria Street from Interim
Control By-law [Referred from the September 9, 2019 Joint Committee
meeting]
182
Referred to Oct 22 PDC
Link to Report PSD-039-19
(Memo from Faye Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning Services
included)
14.3 Paragraph Three of Resolution #C-247-19 - Recommendation to Add
Two (2) Properties to the Municipal Register [Tabled from the
September 16, 2019 Council Meeting]
183
Referred to Nov 12 PDC
(Memo from Faye Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning Services
included)
15.Confidential Reports
15.1 LGL-010-19 Zone Clarington – Requirement for Official Plan Conformity
15.2 LGL-013-19 10 Victoria Street – Exemption from Part Lot Control
Referred to Oct 22 PDC
16.Adjournment
Planning and Development Committee
September 30, 2019
Page 5
Memo
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the
Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
To: Mayor and Members of Council
From: Anne Greentree, Municipal Clerk
Date: September 25, 2019
Re: Public Meetings Scheduled for the October 21, 2019 Planning and
Development Committee Meeting
File Number: PG.25.01
As you may know, the Federal Election is on Monday, October 21, 2019. Currently the
Planning and Development Committee meeting is scheduled on that date which
includes three Public Meetings. Two of the Public Meeting notices have already been
sent to the interested parties. At the time that the possible perceived conflict (of Public
Meeting and Voting) was brought to our attention, the notice for the third Public Meeting
had not been sent. As such, staff have held off sending it out pending the outcome of
Committee’s position at the September 30th Planning and Development Committee
meeting.
Voting hours run between 9:30 AM and 9:30 PM on voting day, in addition to the
advance voting opportunities on October 11, 12, 13 and 14.
Staff do not recommend moving the three Public Meetings to a later date to
accommodate the election. However, it may be prudent for staff to issue a further
notice (in addition to those already issued) to remind residents/interested parties that
the Public Meeting will be conducted during voting hours and encourage them to vote
earlier or to encourage them to submit their comments in writing should they not be able
to attend the Public Meeting. Alternatively, they may also register to speak to the matter
at the October 28, 2019 Council Meeting.
Should Committee wish to actually reschedule the Public Meetings, new notices would
be required to be submitted and any site specific signage would need to be updated.
Page 6
Memo
Staff have drafted the following resolution should Committee wish to recommend to
Council:
That Planning Services staff be directed to provide further notice, by mail, to the
Interested Parties listed for the three public meetings scheduled for October 21,
2019 Planning Public Meetings, to remind them to take advantage of earlier
voting opportunities; and
That staff be directed to provide further notice on the Municipal website.
Yours Truly,
_______________________
C. Anne Greentree, B.A., CMO
Municipal Clerk
CAG/sg
c. A. Allison, CAO
F. Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning Services
Page 7
Staff Report
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility
Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Report To: Planning and Development Committee
Date of Meeting: September 30, 2019 Report Number: PSD-040-19
Submitted By: Faye Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning Services
Reviewed By: Andrew C. Allison, CAO By-law Number:
File Number: PLN 40 Resolution#:
Report Subject: Next Steps on Zone Clarington
Recommendations:
1. That Report PSD-040-19 be received;
2. That Planning notify all property owners and residents regarding the zoning by-law
review project (ZONE Clarington) by Canada Post through non-addressed direct mail
services (by postal code) for those living in Clarington and addressed notification to
owners outside the Municipality;
3. That in accordance with the Budget Policy, Staff are authorized to reallocate budget
allocations to fund the communication with residents;
4. That all interested parties listed in Report PSD-040-19 and any delegations be advised
of Council’s decision; and
5. That Council’s decision and a copy of Report PSD-040-19 be forwarded to the Region
of Durham, the Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority, the Ganaraska Region
Conservation Authority and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing.
Page 8
Municipality of Clarington Page 2
Report PSD-040-19
1. Introduction
1.1. The ZONE Clarington project, a comprehensive review of the Municipality’s zoning by-
laws, was launched in September 2017. The Planning Act, sets out the ground rules for
land use planning in Ontario. It requires municipalities review and update their
municipal zoning by-law(s) to conform to their Official Plan no later than three years
after the Official Plan comes into effect. Amendment 107 to the Clarington Official Plan
was adopted by Council on November 1, 2016 and was approved by the Region of
Durham on June 19, 2017.
1.2. On November 14, 2018, a proposed first draft zoning by-law was released for public
comment. The first draft zoning by-law contains general regulations and definitions that
apply to all of Clarington. It also includes the zone categories and mapping for
Clarington’s rural areas. This is the first of three draft versions planned to be released
for public comment prior to the recommendation of a new, consolidated zoning by-law
for Council to approve.
Report Overview
Planning Services staff have prepared this report to respond to several issues identified by
Council members regarding Clarington’s comprehensive Zoning By-law review. Council
wishes to improve communications with residents regarding the review, specifically, to
address concerns generated over new mapping and Environmental Protection (EP)
provisions outlined in the first draft of the new consolidated by-law. This first draft is one of
three versions that will be presented to the public and is by no means complete.
To ensure adequate public notification, staff are recommending that Council allocate
$13,327 to cover the cost of notices to all residents and property owners affected by the
review. Staff will send unaddressed mail using postal codes to all property owners, tenants
and taxpayers within Clarington. A separate addressed mail notice will be sent to people
who own property in Clarington but do not live within the Municipal boundaries.
In addition, this report provides Council with more information and context on several
resolutions that deal specifically with the re-evaluation of proposed Environmental Protection
Zoning as well as clarification on the Environmental Protection designation. Staff continue to
work with residents, Central Lake Ontario Conservation authority and Ganaraska Region
Conservation Authority on site-specific reviews to verify any Environmental Protection
Features. This report outlines that process. It also explains the natural heritage system
setbacks found within EP zones such as the 30 -metre Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone
and the 90-metre Environmental Review Area. The report also provides an update on the
three-month deferral of rural area zoning as mandated by Council and what that means to
the overall project. The report also answers questions brought up by residents regarding
Municipal zoning and whether it needs to conform with Provincial policy as well as the
ramifications if it doesn’t.
Page 9
Municipality of Clarington Page 3
Report PSD-040-19
1.3. Since its release, Council has heard concerns from Clarington landowners who feel they
were not properly notified of the review and the release of the first draft. Some
landowners have also expressed opposition to the implementation of Official Plan
policies that protect Clarington’s natural heritage system. Requests have been made to
revisit the Clarington Official Plan and repeal the natural heritage system policies that
implement the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS), Greenbelt Plan and Oak Ridges
Moraine Conservation Plan. In addition, in light of the initiation of Provincial reviews of
the PPS and the Conservation Authorities Act, some landowners have requested that
Clarington’s zoning by-law review be put on hold. Council passed Resolution #117-19
placing the review on “pause” for 3 months.
1.4. On July 2 and September 16, 2019, a series of resolutions regarding ZONE Clarington
were passed by Council. They relate to the following:
Public notice;
Re-evaluation of proposed environmental protection zoning and refinement of
Official Plan designation;
Natural heritage system setbacks (buffers);
Deferral of rural area zoning review;
Conformity with Provincial policy; and
Legal ramifications of not conforming to the Official Plan.
1.5. Full copies of these resolutions are set out in Attachment 1. Council’s directions from
these resolutions, tabulated by the topics, are provide d in Attachment 2.
2. Public Notice
2.1. Resolution #PD-104-19 directed staff to provide notice in writing to landowners who,
based on the first draft zoning by-law, are proposed to have more of their property
zoned Environmental Protection (EP) than is currently zoned, and to invite input on the
proposed zoning change. With the approval of Resolution #JC-117-19, the scope of the
notice changed to also include landowners that had a change in Environmental
Protection Area designation on their property resulting from the approval of Official Plan
Amendment 107.
Official Plan Review Notice
2.2. On June 19, 2017, the Region of Durham approved Official Plan Amendment No. 107,
which updates the Clarington Official Plan to make sure it is relevant and complies with
provincial and regional planning documents, and overarching community goals for
growth and development. As part of the conformity requirements, the natural heritage
system in the 1996 Clarington Official Plan (mapping and policies in the text) was
updated. While many features that comprise Clarington’s natural heritage system were
already protected through the policies in the 1996 Clarington Official Plan, these were
not fully reflected in the Environmental Protection Area land use designation (i.e. they
were not mapped).
Page 10
Municipality of Clarington Page 4
Report PSD-040-19
2.3. The concern regarding lack of notice about the zoning by-law review has extended to
include the opinion that there was insufficient notice provided during the Official Plan
Review. The Municipality invested significantly in undertaking a comprehensive review
of the Official Plan, including an extensive public participation process. The public
participation process carried out for the Clarington Official Plan Review is fully described
in Report PSD-060-16. In brief, the review included:
20 Council reports;
9 discussion papers;
Numerous workshops, public engagement sessions and meetings with
landowners, interest groups and Committees of Council; and
Website, social media, newspaper and newsletter advertising and information
sharing.
2.4. Landowners have recently questioned why notice of the Official Plan Review was not
mailed to every property owner in the Municipality. Notice of the release of proposed
changes to the Official Plan and advertising a series of public information sessions, was
included in the Municipal tax mail out in May 2015 (Figure 1).
Figure 1: Official Plan Review Municipal Tax Bill Notice – May 2015
2.5. Report PSD-060-16, followed the series of public open houses advertised in Figure 1. It
outlined concerns heard during the Official Plan Review regarding Environmental
Protection Area designation limits and provided additional information on how the
natural heritage system was defined. The report outlined how the actual development
limits are determined, and the purpose and determination of the minimum vegetation
protection zone from an environmental feature . In addition, the report included final
refinements to policies relating to the minimum vegetation protection zone for inclusion
in the recommendation of Official Plan Amendment No. 107.
Page 11
Municipality of Clarington Page 5
Report PSD-040-19
ZONE Clarington Notice of Project Commencement and Release of First Draft
Zoning By-law
2.6. An overview of the communication and engagement strategy pl anned for ZONE
Clarington was provided in PSD-060-17, which announced the commencement of the
comprehensive zoning by-law review project. Communication and engagement is
planned to occur throughout the review process.
2.7. Announcement of the launch of ZONE Clarington was provided through advertising in
Clarington This Week and Orono Times, the Municipality’s website, notice in the
Clarington Planning eUpdate newsletter. Letters were sent to development review
agencies and the following advisory committees and rural stakeholders:
Association of Ontario Land Surveyors;
Durham Region Federation of Agriculture;
Durham Region Association of Realtors;
Greenbelt Foundation;
Oak Ridges Moraine Foundation;
Ontario Stone, Sand and Gravel Association;
Durham Farm Fresh;
Niblett Environmental Associates;
Oakridge Environmental Ltd.;
Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs;
Building Industry and Land Development Association;
Durham Region Home Builders Association;
Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington; and
Committee of Adjustment.
A copy of the notice letter is provided as Attachment 3.
2.8. Notification of the release of the first draft zoning by-law in November 2018 was
provided via a memo to Council, notice letters to interested parties, notice letters to the
above listed groups and other interested parties. Advertising in Clarington This Week
and Orono Times, and in the Clarington Planning eUpdate newsletter, corporate news
release, and through the project website and the Municipality’s social media pages. A
copy of the key Rural Phase stakeholders mail out is provided as Attachment 4.
2.9. Notification of the first round of public open houses, held in January and February of this
year, was provided via Report PSD-082-18, notice to interested parties, advertising in
Clarington This Week and Orono Times, advertising in the Clarington Planning eUpdate
newsletter and on information screens in Municipal recreation facilities, through the
project website and the Municipality’s social media pages. Copies of the newspaper
advertising for the first draft zoning by-law open houses is provided as Attachment 5.
Page 12
Municipality of Clarington Page 6
Report PSD-040-19
2.10. In addition to the notification described above, staff have formally met directly with
numerous stakeholders and landowners to answer questions and discuss the project,
as follows:
Agricultural Advisory Committee of Clarington (x5)
Committee of Adjustment (x1)
Region of Durham Planning Staff (x5)
Conservation Authority Staff (x5)
Building Industry and Land Development Association – Durham Chapter (x1)
Local residents group respecting Special Event Venues (x1)
Durham Landowners Association (x1)
Rezoning Clarington Citizens Group (x1)
2.11. Staff have a previously scheduled presentation to Durham Region Association of
Realtors Board on September 26, 2019 which will address the overall ZONE Clarington
Project.
2.12. Staff routinely receive and respond to inquiries made in person, via email and over the
phone to Planning Services or through the direct methods of contact for ZONE
Clarington. Some residents maybe confused as to where to obtain accurate
information. The official ZONE Clarington website is
www.Clarington.net/ZoneClarington. The site can be accessed directly or from the
municipal website.
2.13. At the September 16, 2019 Council meeting, a delegate indicated that rural area
residents are not being responded to by Staff. Staff aim to respond to all inquiries
received within 24 – 48 hours, currently because of volume, it is taking longer. Staff
have no record of any inquiry that has not been responded to. Detailed responses to
submissions will be addressed in the second draft, anticipated for Fall 2020. Staff
acknowledge receipt of all submissions.
2.14. Written comments submitted on the first draft zoning by-law are catalogued in a
summary table. Written comments inform the preparation of the next d raft of the
proposed zoning by-law. Individual responses to each written submission received
during zoning by-law review are typically not provided, rather they form part of the public
comment record. The comment summary table will include details as to how comments
were addressed.
Direct Notice to Landowners with Proposed Environmental Protection Zoning
2.15. In response to Council’s direction respecting the provision of written notice to
landowners, staff have assessed and determined cost estimates for a range of
notification options. These options are detailed in Attachment 6 and show a cost range
of $2,864 to $31,233, depending on the printing option and scope of distribution. Staff
are recommending the option that notifies landowners in a cost efficient manner.
Page 13
Municipality of Clarington Page 7
Report PSD-040-19
2.16. The direction from Council was to focus distribution to landowners who, based on the
first draft zoning by-law, are proposed to have more of their property zoned
Environmental Protection (EP) than is currently zoned. Staff recommend that the notice
be broadened. EP zoning proposed in the first draft zoning by-law is an important issue
for a number of rural landowners. Proposed changes related to the other topics in the
zoning by-law may be of particular interest to other landowners. There is a risk that a
notice specific to a single topic and distributed to a limited number of landowners may
create further misunderstanding. As shown in Attachment 6, a limited circulation that
includes only the landowners who may be affected by the proposed changes to the EP
zone would capture only 9.48% of the total number of landowners in Clarington.
2.17. Staff recommend that the direct notice requested by Council consist of a letter sent via
Canada Posts non-addressed direct mail service (by postal code) to all property owners
or taxpayers within Clarington, and as an addressed mail out to owners outside of
Clarington. This approach provides a cost effective option for reaching all property
owners and tenants in Clarington, and those who may own property in Clarington but
are not located here. With respect to the expansion of Council’s direction to notify
landowners of the environmental protection changes that took place in Official Plan
Amendment No. 107, this represents 2,936 rural area landowners, all of whom would be
captured by the recommendation of staff.
2.18. The letter will provide general notice that a comprehensive zoning by-law review is
underway, including the relationship to the Clarington Official Plan and Provincial policy.
In addition, the letter will inform landowners about the site-specific environmental
protection zoning review process, as addressed in Section 3.5 to 3.9.
2.19. The estimated cost to complete the provision of notice as described in Section 2.16 is
$13,327. Staff recommend that the surplus in the Planning Services Department
budget for 2019 (because of gapping in staff positions) be used to fund the mail out.
This expenditure is required as the approved budget for the project does not include
communications and public engagement funds for ZONE Clarington.
2.20. The option to include the letter in the May 2020 Final Tax Bill mail-out, would eliminate
the costs associated with direct mail and postage. This approach is not recommended
due to the delayed timing of notification.
3. Re-Evaluation of Proposed Environmental Protection Zoning
and Refinement of Environmental Protection Designation
3.1. There are numerous provincially, regionally and locally mandated environmental
protection policies that need to be implemented in a new zoning by-law for Clarington.
The first draft zoning by-law proposes to protect significant environmental features and
natural hazards (e.g. floodplain) with an Environmental Protection (EP) zone. A listing
of significant environmental features that comprise Clarington’s natural heritage system
and are protected from development by the policies of the Provincial Greenbelt Plan
Page 14
Municipality of Clarington Page 8
Report PSD-040-19
and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, the Region of Durham Official Plan and
Clarington’s Official Plan is provided as Attachment 7.
3.2. Since the release of the first draft zoning by-law, staff have documented requests from
landowners for site-specific EP zoning reviews. On July 2, Council directed staff to
provide owners of a property with proposed EP zoning the opportunity to have their
properties inspected “to verify any Environmental Protection features”. This is
addressed in Sections 3.5 to 3.9 of this report.
3.3. At the time of the writing of this report, 36 landowners are included on ZONE
Clarington’s listing of property inspection requests. In some cases, landowners own
multiple properties. Some landowners who have contacted Planning Services to
request a site visit have subsequently determined a visit is not necessary after
discussing their property and its proposed zoning with staff and gaining a better
understanding of the zoning by-law review project. In some cases, these landowners
believed that the zoning of their property was proposed to be either entirely
Environmental Protection or close to it, which was inaccurate. Misleading and incorrect
information circulating throughout the rural community, on social media, and repeated
by some media outlets, is contributing to misunderstanding and confusion amongst
Clarington landowners.
3.4. Prior to initiating any site visits, the development of a clear, standard process is
underway in order to ensure transparency and consistency in approach and obtain
concurrence of the Conservation Authority staff necessary to conduct the site visit, and
Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry (MNRF) staff if required.
Site Specific Review Process
3.5. Staff have been working in collaboration with the Central Lake Ontario Conservation
Authority (CLOCA) and Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority (GRCA) to identify a
process for site-specific reviews, including site visits. The Environmental Protection
Area designation in the Clarington Official Plan was created using the Conservation
Authorities’ base map data for the ecological land classification system, watercourses,
valleylands and natural hazards. In addition, information from the MNRF for Provincially
Significant Wetlands and Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest was used. The
Municipality relies on Conservation Authority staff to provide advice and expertise on
environmental features.
3.6. Municipal and Conservation Authority staff agree that all site inspection re quests should
begin with a site-specific review of any available data and documentation to determine if
adjustments can be made to proposed EP zone boundaries. This approach may
provide the ability to address concerns without the need for a site visit. Where
concerns cannot be addressed based on an initial desktop review, the opportunity for an
inspection will be available as warranted.
Page 15
Municipality of Clarington Page 9
Report PSD-040-19
3.7. Table 1 outlines the site-specific EP zoning review process developed by staff, and in
consultation with the Conservation Authority staff. Prior to initiating this process for the
requests received to date, staff will seek final concurrence and confirmation of capacity
to assist from CLOCA and GRCA. The timeline for completion of any site-specific
review requests will be dependent upon the number of requests that are received and
the capacity of both Municipal and Conservation Authority staff. Further discussion of
the Conservation Authorities capacity is addressed in Section 5.5 through 5.9.
3.8. Site-specific reviews may identify locations where adjustments to the proposed EP zone
boundary on a property will be made. Where identified, these changes will be reflected
in the schedules (i.e. mapping) of the second draft zoning by-law, once released. An
update to the ZONE Clarington interactive eMap tool will also be issued concurrently
with the release of the second draft zoning by-law. In the interim, no changes will be
made to the first draft zoning by-law schedules or the current version of the ZONE
Clarington interactive eMap tool.
3.9. Where a landowner disagrees with the results of a site-specific review, they will
continue to have the opportunity to submit comments outlining their concerns with the
draft zoning by-law, and can participate in the formal zoning by-law amendment and
public consultation process, once initiated. Staff will not be able to make changes to
address concerns that would conflict with provincial policies or policies within the
Region of Durham Official Plan or Clarington Official Plan. Once a new zoning by-law
has been approved by Council, all persons or public bodies will have appeal rights to
the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal.
Page 16
Municipality of Clarington Page 10
Report PSD-040-19
Table 1: ZONE Clarington Site-Specific Environmental Protection Zone Review Process
Step Agencies
Involved
Description
1. Data Review Municipality
CLOCA /
GRCA
MNRF
Review all data sets that identify environmental features to determine if
refinements to the feature boundary information could be m ade at a desktop level
and if there is an ability to update the data sets based on new or updated
information.
2. Issue
Confirmation
Municipality Requests for evaluations will be reviewed to identify specific concerns with the
proposed Environmental Protection zone. In some cases residents may be
contacted to obtain further details.
3. Issue
Mapping
Municipality The Municipality will create an issues map to identify properties where residents
have requested an evaluation. The map will be linked to a data set that includes
relevant details provided by the resident to aid in the review. In some cases
residents have provided detailed descriptions of environmental features and areas
where they feel adjustments should be made. Some residents have also provided
additional information such as environmental impact studies and letters from staff
at the Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry.
4. Document
Review
Municipality
CLOCA /
GRCA
Planning staff and staff at the Conservation Authorities will conduct a file review
related to properties on the issues map to determine if there is any relevant
documentation or previous approvals that may assist us in our review.
Documentation provided in step 3 will also be reviewed.
5. Identify
Edits
Municipality
CLOCA /
GRCA
Based on the review of information gathered from steps 1 through 4, Planning
staff will meet with Conservation Authority staff to review the findings and identify
whether there is adequate rationale to propose changes to the draft zoning maps.
6. Confirmation
of Issues
and
Scheduling
of Site Visits
Municipality
CLOCA /
GRCA
a) Letters will be sent to residents to identify whether there is adequate rationale
to make changes to the proposed zoning maps for their properties based on the
outcome of step 5. Residents will then be asked if the proposal addresses their
previous concern and if not confirmation that they still wish to pursue a site visit.
b) Responses to the letters identified in a) will be recorded. Conservation
Authority staff will be contacted to identify potential scheduling of site visits. It is
anticipated that some visits may need to occur during a specific season of the
Page 17
Municipality of Clarington Page 11
Report PSD-040-19
year dependant on the identified feature. For example, a watercourse that runs
intermittently may need to be visited during the spring thaw.
7. Site Visits Municipality
CLOCA /
GRCA
Site visits will be conducted and staff will discuss whether the findings of those
visits can result in potential revisions to the proposed zoning maps.
8. Confirmation
of Site Visit
Edits
Municipality Letters will be sent to residents to identify what was found as a result of the site
evaluation and whether changes can be made to the proposed zoning maps.
Where changes cannot be made, an explanation will be provided.
Page 18
Municipality of Clarington Page 12
Report PSD-040-19
Official Plan Amendments
3.10. In the suite of land use planning tools, Official Plans and Zoning By-laws have different
roles and functions. Official Plans are policy documents that must conform/be
consistent with, and not be in conflict with applicable provincial policies. Accordingly,
the Region of Durham’s Official Plan and the Municipality of Clarington’s Official Plan
must be consistent/not conflict with the natural heritage policies of the Provincial Policy
Statement, Greenbelt Plan, and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. As such,
according to Durham’s Official Plan, development or site alteration is not permitted
within key natural heritage features and/or functions, including any vegetative protection
zone, with few exceptions. The Municipality of Clarington Official Plan reflects these
policies with more individual features and specific policies that are described in more
detail. Zoning By-laws implement and support Official Plans by determining in more
detail the types of uses permitted by location, as well as performance standards such as
setbacks, height and parking.
3.11. If it could be demonstrated there were mistakes with Clarington Official Plan’s
environmental mapping, then in theory an Official Plan Amendment could be initiate d to
correct any such mistakes. However, there are two issues to bear in mind. First the
Region was the approval authority for Clarington’s comprehensive Official Plan
Amendment No. 107 in 2017. The purpose of Clarington’s ongoing zoning by-law
update exercise is to bring the Zoning By-law into conformity with the new Official
Plan. Regional planning staff, in cooperation with Conservation Authority staff reviewed
Amendment No. 107 carefully to ensure it was in conformity with the Region’s Official
Plan and provincial policies prior to issuing approval in 2017. Second, if there are
mistakes in Clarington’s maps, then we need to determine if there are mistakes in the
Region’s Official Plan maps, as Clarington’s Official Plan must be in conformity with the
Region’s Official Plan. In turn, the Region’s environmental mapping must be in
conformity with Provincial documents. The Region’s Official Plan was approved by
MMAH.
3.12. Section 14.4.7 of the Clarington Official Plan states that the extent of the Environmenta l
Protection Areas designation is approximate. The precise limits must be detailed
through the appropriate studies as part of the review of development applications and/or
in consultation with the Conservation Authority. Based on this policy, were limits are
refined based on evaluations in consultation with the Conservation Authority an
amendment would not be required. The limits can be refined in the mapping of the
proposed zoning by-law.
3.13. In instances where it is determined a feature does not exist, staf f will initiate an
amendment to the Official Plan that will be brought forward at the same time as the final
draft zoning by-law for Council’s decision. Since the Official Plan Amendment will be
staff initiated, residents will not be required to submit an application fee. It will be at no
cost to the landowner.
Page 19
Municipality of Clarington Page 13
Report PSD-040-19
4. Natural Heritage System Setbacks
4.1. Resolution #JC-104-19 directed staff to report back to Council to explain and provide
justification for development setbacks (e.g. buffers) from significant environmental
features that are included in the first draft zoning by-law.
Draft Zoning By-law Environmental Protection Setback and Review Area
4.2. In rural areas (outside of rural settlement areas, e.g. hamlets), the EP zone proposed in
the first draft zoning by-law includes a “Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone (MVPZ)”
overlay that extends 30 metres from a significant environmental feature. This is
illustrated in Figure 2. The MVPZ is intended to buffer the environmental feature,
providing a transition area between the environmental feature and development. In
rural settlement areas, the extent of the proposed MVPZ varies depending on the type
of feature.
Figure 2: Illustration of EP Zone, MVPZ and ERA Boundary Limits
Relative to a Significant Environmental Feature
4.3. As illustrated in Figure 2, the first draft zoning by-law included an Environmental Review
Area (ERA) overlay that extends 90 metres from the MVPZ. The uses permitted in the
ERA are based on the underlying zone (for example Agriculture in Figure 2). Any new
development proposed within the ERA overlay would have required an evaluation to
demonstrate that there will be no adverse effects on the feature. Staff are
recommending that new agricultural, agricultural-related and secondary on-farm uses
proposed within the ERA be exempt from this requirement.
Page 20
Municipality of Clarington Page 14
Report PSD-040-19
Deletion of the Environmental Protection Setback and Review Area
4.4. On September 16, 2019, Council directed staff to “delete the Environmental Review
Area (90 metres) and Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone (30 metres) from the draft
zoning by-law amendment.” The intent of showing the environmental protection se tback
(i.e. MVPZ) and environmental review area limits (i.e. ERA) for new development in the
schedules of the first draft zoning by-law was to ensure transparency. This approach
has raised questions and concern from landowners over the amount of land zoned EP.
It is apparent that many perceive the ERA to be an extension of the EP zone rather than
an overlay to an underlying zone that sets out the permitted uses and regulations (e .g.
“Agricultural (A)”).
4.5. The deletion of the MVPZ and ERA will be reflected in the second draft zoning by-law
mapping, once released. During preparation of the second draft zoning by-law, staff will
recommend what regulations are required in the text of the zoning by-law to ensure
conformity with provincial policy, the Region of Durham Official Plan and the Clarington
Official Plan as it relates to setback and environmental review requirements for new
development. In addition, staff will consider the use of other planning tools t o add clarity
to when an evaluation would be required if development is within a MVPZ and/or ERA.
Provincial Policy for MVPZ and ERA
4.6. Environmental protection policy direction comes from the Provincial Policy Statement
(PPS), the Greenbelt Plan, and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. Official
Plans at both the Regional and Municipal level must be consistent with those policies.
A consolidation of all related Provincial, Regional and local policies was provided to
Council in a memo from the Acting Director of Planning Services, dated August 9, 2019
(Attachment 8). Notably, 92% of Clarington’s rural land area is within the area covered
by the Greenbelt Plan and Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan.
4.7. The PPS does not permit development within significant environmental features. For
development to occur adjacent to an environmental feature, the PPS requires the
proponent demonstrate there will be no negative impacts on the environmental feature.
4.8. The Greenbelt Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan do not permit
development within environmental features, including any associated vegetation
protection zone, with some exceptions including for conservation management,
infrastructure and aggregate. Both Plans require that the vegetation protection zone be
a minimum of 30 metres measured from the outside boundary of the key natural
heritage feature or key hydrologic feature. Both Plans continue to allow existing uses
and buildings within an environmental feature and any associated min imum vegetation
protection zone. There is also consideration for expansions of existing buildings and
uses providing the expansion is evaluated. Single detached dwellings are permitted to
be constructed on existing lots, provided the lot was zoned for such use prior t o the
Page 21
Municipality of Clarington Page 15
Report PSD-040-19
respective date the Greenbelt Plan or Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan came
into effect.
4.9. The Greenbelt Plan and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan provide direction
for requiring an environmental study for development that is proposed withi n proximity
to a significant environmental feature. Both Plans require a proposal for new
development within 120 metres of a significant environmental feature undertake an
evaluation prior to development to demonstrate there will be no adverse effects on the
feature or its related function and to confirm the appropriate setback distance from the
environmental feature.
5. Deferral of Rural Area Zoning Review
5.1. Council directed that work on the rural phase of the zoning by-law review be paused for
a period of three months (as part of Resolutions #JC-115-19 and JC-117-19). The
factors influencing this direction include the following:
The review of the 2014 Provincial Policy Statement (PPS);
The announcement of provincial direction for Conservation Authorities to focus
on their “core mandate” and the potential effect on CLOCA / GRCA capacity; and
The recent passing of a new comprehensive zoning by-law in East Gwillimbury
and subsequent appeal by the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority.
2014 Provincial Policy Statement Review
5.2. The PPS provides policy direction on matters of provincial interest related to land use
planning and development. Under Section 3 of the Planning Act, where a municipality
is exercising its authority affecting a planning matter, such decisions “shall be consistent
with” all policy statements issued under the Act.
5.3. On May 2, 2019 the Province announced a review of the PPS through Bill 108 “More
Homes, More Choice Act, 2019”. Proposed changes to the PPS were released on July
22, 2019 and the Conservation Authorities Act. Key principles of the proposed changes
include protecting the environment and public safety. Based on the proposed draft, this
is achieved through enhanced direction relating to climate change matters and soil
reuse. Policies to protect the local natural heritage system and the Greenbelt have
been maintained.
5.4. The deadline for submitting comments on the PPS Review is October 21, 2019. Under
the proposed changes to the PPS, the Province reaffirms that Official Plans are the
most important vehicle for implementation and achieving comprehensive long range
planning. The PPS directs planning authorities to keep their zoning by-law up-to-date
with their Official Plans. Furthermore, the PPS directs that all planning decision s “shall
Page 22
Municipality of Clarington Page 16
Report PSD-040-19
be consistent” with the Provincial Policy Statement. The Draft Provincial Policy
Statement leaves untouched the natural heritage protection policies of the current
PPS. The PPS policies require the long term protection of the ecological and
biodiversity function of natural heritage systems, recognizing the linkages among
natural heritage features and surface and ground water.
Conservation Authority Capacity to Support ZONE Clarington
5.5. Conservation authorities in Durham Region have an integrated role in the land use
planning system as “public bodies” under the Planning Act and its implementing
regulations. Conservation authorities provide commentary and advice within their
regulatory and policy mandate on land use planning matters, including ZONE
Clarington.
5.6. The role of conservation authorities in the land use planning system is further defined
through two Memoranda of Understanding (MOUs). The first MOU is between
conservation authorities and the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing and the
Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. It outlines the delegated roles and
responsibilities of conservation authorities to represent the provincial interests in
planning matters that relate to natural hazards (flooding and erosion hazards) under the
Provincial Policy Statement. The second MOU is between the Region of Durham and
the conservation authorities within the Region. It outlines the roles and responsibilities
with respect to land use planning services related to natural hazards and natural
heritage, watershed management and other related matters.
5.7. Amendments to the Conservation Authorities Act were enacted earlier this year through
the passage of Bill 108. The amendments included new requirements for conservation
authorities to deliver ‘mandatory programs and services,’ which include ‘programs and
services related to the risk of natural hazards.’ The details of such programs are
forthcoming in provincial regulations, however, it is clear that the existing conservation
authority roles in the planning system relate directly to programs and services related to
the risk of natural hazards (i.e. providing technical information and planning
commentary and advise for flooding and erosion hazards).
5.8. On August 1, 2019, Planning Services Department staff met with staff from CLOCA and
GRCA as part of setting out a protocol for site-specific EP zoning reviews and site visits,
including confirming the involvement of the Conservation Authorities. The Conservation
Authorities confirmed their willingness to support the process with their technical
knowledge, advice and site-specific knowledge to collaborate with Municipal staff to
address the site-specific review requests in a timely manner.
5.9. Municipal staff are able to utilize the technical advisory role of the conservation
authorities to further refine the draft zoning by-law and mapping to address landowner
concerns wherever possible and to further understand issues that may exist if
Page 23
Municipality of Clarington Page 17
Report PSD-040-19
refinements are not warranted. While decisions are required to be consistent with, or
conform to, provincial legislation and policy, the Municipality is the decision maker with
respect to the Zone Clarington project, .which the Conservation Authorities play an
advisory role. Municipal staff have an ongoing and productive working relationship with
conservation authority staff in their integrated role in the planning system. As part of
seeking final concurrence on the review process outlined in Table 1, Page 10, staff will
formally confirm the capacity of CLOCA and GRCA to assist.
East Gwillimbury Zoning By-law Appeal
5.10. On May 1, 2018, the Town of East Gwillimbury approved an updated zoning by-law for
the municipality. In response to similar concerns raised by area landowners respecting
zoning for environmental protection, the updated zoning by-law passed by the East
Gwillimbury council maintained the private property environmental protection
boundaries from their 1997 zoning by-law. This ensured that any permissions allowed
under the existing East Gwillimbury by-law were maintained and no restrictions were
added to private property.
5.11. On June 12, 2018, the Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority (LSRCA) filed an
appeal to the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT) (LPAT Case No. PL180594) and
provided the following three grounds of appeal:
The ZBL Schedule A maps are inconsistent with the Provincial Policy Statement;
The ZBL Schedule A maps fail to conform to and conflict with provincial plans;
The ZBL Schedule A maps fail to conform to the Region and Town Official Plans.
5.12. Subsequently, the Town of East Gwillimbury and LSRCA have agreed to the use of
mediation toward a possible settlement. While agreements in principle have been
reached between the Town of East Gwillimbury and LSRCA, which include maintaining
the mapping as approved by the Town of East Gwillimbury Council in June 2018 and
the addition of regulatory text in the zoning by-law stating the need for a planning
approval process including environmental evaluation of features for new development
with or adjacent to a significant environmental feature, a formal LPAT settlement
hearing has not yet occurred.
Deferral of Rural Area Zoning By-law Review
5.13. In accordance with #JC-117-19, staff will pause work on the rural portion of ZONE
Clarington for a period of three months and within this period will report back to Council
to provide updates on the status of the three matters outlined in Section 5.1. An
exception to this is that staff will continue to address site inspection requests for the
purposes of verifying environmental features, as directed in Resolution #JC-117-19.
The process that staff will undertake for receiving, tracking, evaluating and respon ding
to site inspection requests is outlined in Table 1, Page 10.
Page 24
Municipality of Clarington Page 18
Report PSD-040-19
5.14. For clarity, effective September 16, 2019, work on the zoning by-law review will include
the following:
Continuing to receive requests for, and will be undertaking, the site-specific
environmental protection zoning review process (see Table 1) (subject to final
concurrence by the of Conservation Authority staff);
Receiving and logging written comments submitted in response to the first draft
zoning by-law;
Preparation and distribution of written public notice of the zoning by-law review
(subject to Council’s decision on this report); and
Research and the preparation of proposed zoning regulations and mapping for
Clarington’s urban areas.
5.15. During the ‘pause’ period, staff will continue to answer questions and direct landowners
to ZONE Clarington information and resources that are currently available. The
preparation and publication of any new information and resources will be limited to
urban-specific zoning topics. In addition, staff will not coordinate or participate in any
public information sessions or presentations relating to the proposed first draft zoning
by-law (the rural portion).
5.16. Project related communications will continue as outlined in Report PSD-060-17 which
indicated that communication and engagement will occur throughout the review process
and will be customized for each of the phases. Strategies will seek to share information
about the process and subject matters being reviewed and will engage Council, the
public and stakeholders to obtain feedback and comments. Communication and
engagement to make the community aware of the overall ZONE Clarington project and
work on the Urban phase will continue.
6. Conformity with Provincial Policy
6.1. Resolution #PD-104-19 requested staff report back on “whether the proposed zoning
by-law is ultra vires to the Oak Ridges Moraine Act and the Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan, as it pertains to “agricultural uses” within the Natural Core and
Natural Linkage Areas of the Oak Ridges Moraine.”
Page 25
Municipality of Clarington Page 19
Report PSD-040-19
Policy Conformity
6.2. The statement ‘ultra vires’ suggest that one has acted beyond one’s legal power or
authority. The final draft zoning by-law that will be presented to Council for a decision
must conform to Provincial policy, including the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation P lan
and Act. Staff has, and will continue to review the draft zoning by-law in accordance
with Provincial policy documents, the Region of Durham Official Plan and Clarington
Official Plan.
6.3. Although Council has approval authority over zoning by-laws, the Region of Durham
has review responsibility for conformity with provincial policy documents and legislation.
Regional staff were circulated on the first draft zoning by-law and will continue to be
circulated on subsequent drafts for comments. No indication has been provided by
Regional Staff to suggest the first draft zoning by-law is “ultra vires”.
6.4. If the Region of Durham identifies conformity issues, staff will provide corrections in the
subsequent draft zoning by-law. Planning staff at both the Municipality and the Region
of Durham will work to ensure the proposal is not “ultra vires” with any Provincial
policies or legislation. It should be noted that Clarington’s Zoning By-law 2005-109
(Oak Ridges Moraine) was approved by the Minister of Municipal Affairs and Housing
on March 24, 2010.
6.5. The Municipal Solicitor will be providing a report regarding whether the proposed zoning
by-law is “ultra vires” when the Zoning By-law comes forward for approval.
Implementation of Provincial Policies
6.6. Since review of proposed zoning by-laws in relation to Provincial policy has been
downloaded to the Region of Durham, planners at the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing (MMAH) would not have direct involvement in this process to see how the
policies they formulate are being implemented. It is apparent from Resolution #JC-117-
19 that there are significant concerns within the Clarington commu nity with provincial
policy implementation relating to the MVPZ and ERA. It would be appropriate for staff
at the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing to follow the progress of the ZONE
Clarington project to be informed on the policy implementation issues. Clarington staff
have been in conversation with staff at MMAH and requested that they pass on
information and resources that could assist with our review.
6.7. Historically, many farm houses and buildings were located in proximity to watercourses
for ease of access to water. Due to this pattern of development, many rural houses and
agricultural buildings are within the EP zone and MVPZ and would be subject to
additional approvals in order to expand. Staff at the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and
Housing could provide advice on how best to implement policies related to agriculture
and the environment that strike a balance to protect both policy priorities without being
overly bureaucratic or requiring undue additional processes.
Page 26
Municipality of Clarington Page 20
Report PSD-040-19
7. Concurrence
Not Applicable.
8. Conclusion
8.1. The first draft Zoning By-law released in November 2018 was the first of three draft
versions planned for release for public and agency comment prior to the
recommendation of a new, consolidated zoning by-law to Council for approval. There
will be ample opportunity for the public to engage with Staff throughout the next phases
of the ZONE Clarington project. Staff receive inquiries on the project daily, and
continue to discuss the project with residents to help them understand the project and
ensure they have accurate information in order to provide meaningful feedback.
8.2. No changes to the first draft zoning by-law, including mapping will be made in the
interim. Changes to address submissions and comments from agencies will occur
during the creation of the second draft which is not expected to be released for at least
a year. This includes changes to the current version of the ZONE Clarington interactive
eMap tool.
8.3. Staff will continue to log submissions and site visit requests. Site visits will be
determined based on the recommended process outlined in Sections 3.5 to 3.9 and
more specifically in Table 1, Page 10. Those who have requested site visits will be
contacted as part of that process.
8.4. It would be appropriate for staff at the Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing to be
advised of this report. MMAH staff should follow the progress of ZONE Clarington to
understand how implementing provincial policies at the municipal level is challenging.
Page 27
Municipality of Clarington Page 21
Report PSD-040-19
Staff Contact: Tracey Webster, Senior Planner, 905-523-3379 ext 2415 or
twebster@clarington.net; Amy Burke, Acting Manager of Special Projects, 905 -623-3379 ext
2423 or aburke@clarington.net.
Glossary of Terms
Attachments:
Attachment 1 – Council Resolution #PD-103-19, #PD-104-19, #JC-115-19 and #JC-117-19
Attachment 2 – Resolution Consolidation, by Topic
Attachment 3 – Notice Letter – Announcement of Zone Clarington, dated September 25, 2017
Attachment 4 – Notice Letter – New Draft Zoning By-Law Notice of Release for Public
Comment, dated November 14, 2018
Attachment 5 – First Draft Zoning By-Law Public Open House Newspaper Advertisement
Attachment 6 – Notification Cost Estimate Details
Attachment 7 – Listing of Significant Environmental Features
Attachment 8 – Memo, August 9, 2019: ZONE Clarington – Policies requiring buffers to
environmental features
Interested Parties:
List of Interested Parties available from Department.
Page 28
Municipality of Clarington
Report PSD-040-19
Glossary of Terms
CA Act Conservation Authorities Act
CLOCA Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority
EP Environmental Protection
ERA Environmental Review Area
GRCA Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority
LPAT Local Planning Appeal Tribunal
LSRCA Lake Simcoe Region Conservation Authority
MMAH Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing
MNRF Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry
MVPZ Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone
ORMCP Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan
PPS Provincial Policy Statement (2014)
Page 29
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 905-623-3379 www.clarington.net
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the
Accessibility Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
July 11, 2019
Dear Interested Parties:
Re: Agricultural Land Uses and Environmental Protection
Clerk’s File Number: PG.25.06
At a meeting held on July 2, 2019, the Council of the Municipality of Clarington
approved the following Resolution #PD-103-19:
That, as part of the Zone Clarington exercise, Staff be directed to report back on
a process whereby Official Plan amendments made to correct errors in
Environmental Protection designations in Clarington’s Official Plan be made at no
cost to the property owner.
Later in the meeting, the Council of the Municipality of Clarington approved the following
Resolution #PD-104-19:
That the Staff Presentation on Agricultural Land Uses and Environmental
Protection be received;
That Clarington Staff report back on whether the proposed zoning by-law is ultra
vires the Oak Ridges Moraine Act and the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation
Plan, as it pertains to "agricultural uses" within Natural Core and Natural Link
Areas of the Oak Ridges Moraine;
That Clarington Staff report back, in general, on whether setbacks were added to
properties proposed to be re-zoned to Environmental Protection and if so, what
justification Staff have for such expansion of the setbacks;
That Clarington Staff afford any owners of a property affected by the proposed
zoning changes the opportunity to have their properties inspected to verify any
Environmental Protection features;
Page 30
2 July 11, 2019
That every landowner materially affected by the Zoning By-Law Amendment be
notified of the proposed change in zoning in writing where there is an expansion
of EP lands, and be invited to provide input, either through a representative or
personally, regarding the proposed re-designation;
That the Municipal Solicitor report to Council with a report outlining legal
ramifications of not conforming to the Official Plan; and
All interested parties and any delegations be advised of Council’s decision.
Yours truly,
C. Anne Greentree, B.A., CMO
Municipal Clerk
AG/sg
c. Bell Canada
Clarington Board of Trade
Canadian Pacific Railway
Canadian National Railway
Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority
Conseil Scolaire Viamonde
Conseil Scolaire Catholique Mon Avenir
Elexicon Energy Inc.
Enbridge Gas
Ganaraska Region Conservation Authority
Hydro One
Kawartha Pine Ridge District School Board
Ministry of Transportation
Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry
Peterborough Victoria Northumberland and Clarington Catholic School Board
Regional Municipality of Durham – Planning Division
Rogers Cable
Page 31
Memo
The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington
40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville ON L1C 3A6 | 905-623-3379
If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility
Co-ordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131
At a meeting held on September 16, 2019 the Council of the Municipality of Clarington
approved the following Resolutions:
#JC-115-19:
That staff be directed to delete the Environmental Review Area (90 metres) and
Minimum Vegetation Protections Zone (30 metres) from the draft zoning by-law
amendment.
#JC-117-19:
Whereas a draft zoning by-law for the rural portions of the Municipality of
Clarington was released in November 2018 for comment; and
Whereas there has been much concern with respect to the zoning of
Environmental Protection (EP) Areas in the draft zoning by-law; and
Whereas the Provincial Policy Statement (PPS) has been issued for review and
comment; and
Whereas the proposed East Gwillimbury Zoning By-law has been appealed to
the Local Planning Appeal Tribunal (LPAT); and
Whereas Bill 108 proposes to amend the Conservation Authorities Act and
regulations, and the Conservation Authorities (CAs) have been advised to restrict
their services to core functions; and
Whereas MPP Piccini, at a recent public meeting regarding Zone Clarington,
advised members of the public and municipal Councillors present, that as a
Provincial Policy Statement is being reviewed by the Minister of Municipal Affairs,
and movement to move forward on EP zoning would be irresponsible;
To: Faye Langmaid, Director of Planning Services
From: June Gallagher, Deputy Clerk
Date: September 17, 2019
Subject: Zone Clarington – Environmental Review Area & Minimum Vegetation
Protections Zone and Environmental Protection Areas
File: PG.25.06
Page 32
Faye Langmaid - 2 - September 17, 2019
Now therefore be it resolved that:
1. Planning Services Staff be instructed to pause their work on the rural portion
of Zone Clarington for a period of three months, until (a) a decision has been
rendered for the East Gwillimbury LPAT case; (b) there is greater clarity on
the PPS revisions; and (c) it is confirmed that the CAs will have capacity to
assist with review of natural heritage features;
2. Staff report back within 3 months on any changes that have taken place with
respect to paragraph (1);
3. Staff report back on September 30, 2019 on the process for municipal led
Official Plan amendments to the Clarington Official Plan, for correcting errors
in EP designations at no cost to the landowners;
4. Staff report back to the September 30, 2019 on notifying landowners of the
EP changes which took place in the recent Official Plan amendments, as well
as EP changes for Zone Clarington; and
5. The inspection of properties by municipal staff continue where requested by
landowners.
________________________
June Gallagher
Deputy Clerk
JG/lp
Page 33
Attachment 2 to
Report PSD-040-19
Resolution Consolidation – By Topic
Resolution
Number:
Date Resolution Direction
Public Notice
PD-104-19 Jul. 2,
2019
That every landowner materially affected by the Zoning By-
law Amendment be notified of the proposed change in
zoning in writing where there is an expansion of EP lands,
and be invited to provide input, either through a
representative or personally, regarding the proposed re-
designation.
JC-117-19 Sep. 16,
2019
That Staff report back to the September 30, 2019 on
notifying landowners of the EP changes which took place in
the recent Official Plan amendments, as well as EP changes
for ZONE Clarington.
Re-Evaluation of Proposed Environmental Protection Zoning & Correction of Official
Plan Designation Errors
PD-104-19 Jul. 2,
2019
That Clarington Staff afford any owners of a property
affected by the proposed zoning changes the opportunity to
have their properties inspected to verify any Environmental
Protection features.
JC-117-19 Sep. 16,
2019
That the inspection of properties by municipal staff continue
where requested by landowners.
PD-103-19 Jul. 2,
2019
That, as part of the Zone Clarington exercise, Staff be
directed to report back on a process whereby Official Plan
amendments made to correct errors in Environmental
Protection designations in Clarington’s Official Plan be made
at no cost to the property owner.
JC-117-19 Sep. 16,
2019
That Staff report back on September 30, 2019 on the
process for municipal led Official Plan amendments to the
Clarington Official Plan, for correcting errors in EP
designations at no cost to the landowners.
Natural Heritage System Setbacks
PD-104-19 Jul. 2,
2019
That Clarington Staff report back, in general, on whether
setbacks were added to properties proposed to be re-zoned
to Environmental Protection and if so, what justification Staff
have for such expansion of the setbacks.
JC-115-19 Sep. 16,
2019
That staff be directed to delete the Environmental Review
Area (90 metres) and Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone
(30 metres) from the draft zoning by-law amendment.
Deferral of Rural Area Zoning Review
JC-117-19 Sep. 16,
2019
That Planning Services Staff be instructed to pause their
work on the rural portion of Zone Clarington for a period of
three months, until
Page 34
Attachment 2 to
Report PSD-040-19
Resolution Consolidation – By Topic
Resolution
Number:
Date Resolution Direction
(a) A decision has been rendered for the East
Gwillimbury LPAT case;
(b) There is greater clarity on the PPS revisions; and
(c) It is confirmed that the CAs will have capacity to
assist with review of natural heritage features.
JC-117-19 Sep. 16,
2019
That Staff report back within 3 months on any changes that
have taken place with respect to [East Gwillimbury / PPS
review / CA capacity for NHS review requests].
Conformity with Provincial Policy
PD-104-19 Jul. 2,
2019
That Clarington Staff report back on whether the proposed
zoning by-law is ultra vires the Oak Ridges Moraine Act and
the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, as it pertains to
“agricultural uses” within Natural Core and Natural Link
Areas of the Oak Ridges Moraine.
Other – Addressed by Confidential Report LGL-010-19
PD-104-19 Jul. 2,
2019
That the Municipal Solicitor report to Council with a report
outlining legal ramifications of not conforming to the Official
Plan; and
Page 35
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 905-623-3379 www.clarington.net
September 25, 2017
Dear Sir / Madam,
Re: ZONE Clarington – Comprehensive Zoning By-law Review Project
(Rural Area Phase)
The Planning Services Department has initiated a comprehensive review of Clarington’s zoning
by-laws. ZONE Clarington will update our current zoning regulations to implement the policies
and goals of the revised Clarington Official Plan, address emerging trends, reflect current
planning standards and best practices, and make the document easier to use and understand.
With the Project Initiation Phase nearly complete, ZONE Clarington is now examining zoning in
Clarington’s rural areas, including lands within the Oak Ridges Moraine. Your organization has
been identified as a potential key stakeholder for the Rural Area Phase of ZONE Clarington. As
such, we want to ensure that you are aware of how to stay informed and up-to-date on project
progress, and encourage you to subscribe to receive future project updates and information.
On September 18, 2017, Council of the Municipality of Clarington received Staff Report PSD-
060-17 outlining the need for the zoning by-law review and providing an overview of the review
approach, including public consultation and engagement. The report is available at
www.clarington.net/ZoneClarington.
To assist the Municipality with its review of the zoning by-laws, we will be engaging Council, the
community, and key stakeholders to obtain feedback and comments on zoning matters of
interest. Project information and consultation event notices will be posted on the ZONE
Clarington webpage (www.clarington.net/ZoneClarington).
To receive project updates and be notified of upcoming open houses, public meetings, or other
events, subscribe on the ZONE Clarington website, or contact us by email
(zoneclarington@clarington.net) or phone (905-623-3379 ext. 2415).
Yours truly,
Tracey Webster, Senior Planner Amy Burke, Senior Planner
ZONE Clarington Project Co-Lead ZONE Clarington Project Co-Lead
Development Review Branch Special Projects Branch
ACB/av
I:\^Department\LDO NEW FILING SYSTEM\PLN Planning Files\PLN 40 2016-2018 Zoning By-Law Review\Communication and Engagement\Notices\2017'09'25 LTR_Zone
Clarington_Rural Ph Notice.docx
Page 36
CORPORATION OF THE MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
40 TEMPERANCE STREET, BOWMANVILLE, ONTARIO L1C 3A6 905-623-3379 www.clarington.net
November 14, 2018
Dear Sir / Madam,
Re: New Draft Zoning By-law
Notice of Release for Public Comment
We are excited to announce the release of a new Draft Zoning By-law for public review
and comment. The proposed draft zoning by-law includes updated general provisions
that apply to all of Clarington and rural zoning regulations. An online mapping tool is
also available that shows the current zoning and proposed future zoning for land parcels
within the municipality. These can be viewed on the ZONE Clarington webpage
(www.clarington.net/ZoneClarington), where you can submit feedback on the draft
zoning by-law and comments on zoning matters of interest. Copies of the draft zoning
by-law are also available at the Planning Services Department and at the Clarington
Public Libraries.
We encourage you to subscribe on the ZONE Clarington website to receive project
updates and be notified directly of the upcoming open houses, public meetings, or other
events. The first Open House Session to share information and gather input on the Draft
Zoning By-law (November 2018) will be announced soon, in local newspapers and on
the webpage.
Alternatively, you can contact us by email (zoneclarington@clarington.net) or phone
(905-623-3379 ext. 2415).
Yours truly,
Tracey Webster, Senior Planner Amy Burke, Senior Planner
ZONE Clarington Project Co-Lead ZONE Clarington Project Co-Lead
Development Review Branch Special Projects Branch
ACB/av
Page 37
List of First Draft Zoning By-law
Newspaper Advertising
Notice of Release of First Draft Zoning By-law
The following ad was published in the Orono Weekly Times and Clarington This Week
on Wednesday, November 14, 21, 28, and December 5, 2018:
Notice of First Draft Zoning By-law Open House Sessions:
The following ad was published in the Orono Weekly Times and Clarington This Week
on January 9, 16 and 23 and 30, 2019:
Page 38
List of First Draft Zoning By-law
Newspaper Advertising
Due to inclement weather, the open house session scheduled for February 6, 2019 was
cancelled. The following ad was published in the Orono Weekly Times and Clarington
This Week on February 20 and 27, 2019 to advertise the rescheduled meeting date:
Page 39
Attachment 6 to
Report PSD-040-19
Notification Cost Estimate Details
Number of Landowners in Clarington
Area Number of
Landowners
All rural landowners 5,540
Rural lands affected by proposed reduction to EP zoning 1,012
Rural lands affected by proposed expansion to EP zoning 3,039
Urban landowners 26,704
Total number of Clarington landowners 32,035
Addressed
Mail to all
Clarington
Property
Owners
Direct Mail
Letter (by
postal code)
to all
Clarington
Addresses &
Addressed
Mail to
Property
Owners
outside
Clarington
Addressed
Mail Letter to
Property
Owners with
a change in
EP Land Use
(Rural only)
Addressed
Mail Letter to
Property
Owners with
an increase
in proposed
EP Zoning
(Rural only)
Letter
included
in Final
Tax Bill
Printing
Cost
$3,362 $4,205 $309 $319 $3,362
Postage
Cost
$27,871 $9,122 $2,555 $2,644 N/A
Total
Cost
$31,233 $13,327 $2,864 $2,963 $3,362
Page 40
Attachment 7 to
Report PSD-040-19
Significant Environmental Features that Comprise
Clarington’s Natural Heritage System
In accordance with the Clarington Official Plan (policy 3.4.2), the following natural
heritage features and hydrologically sensitive features comprise the natural heritage
system:
Natural Heritage Features
Wetlands;
Areas of Natural and Scientific Interest;
Significant Woodlands;
All significant Valleylands;
Fish habitat and riparian corridors;
Habitat of endangered species and threatened species;
Rare vegetation communities, including sand barrens, savannahs and tallgrass
prairie; and
Wildlife habitat.
Hydrologically Sensitive Features
Wetlands;
Watercourses;
Seepage areas and springs;
Groundwater features; and
Lake Ontario and its littoral zones.
Page 41
Memo
Planning Services Department
The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington
40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville ON L1C 3A6 | 905-623-3379
If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility
Co-ordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131
At a meeting on July 24, 2019 Councillor Neal and Councillor Jones requested a memo
outlining the policies that require buffers for environmental features. In the context of
the draft Zoning By-law, buffers would be the Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone
Overlay and the Environmental Review Area Overlay. The draft Zoning By-law can be
found on our website at www.clarington.net/zoneclarington.
The chart attached outlines all Provincial, Regional and local polices that relate to the
buffers. Links to the documents are provided. The policy term for the Environmental
Review Area is minimum area of influence. Staff will provide discussion on these
policies in the report responding to #PD-104-19 scheduled for the September 30, 2019
Planning and Development Committee meeting.
Should you have any questions, Amy Burke, Tracey Webster, Carlo Pellarin or I would
be happy to respond.
_____________________________
Faye Langmaid
Acting Director of Planning Services
cc: Andrew Allison, CAO
Department Heads
Carlo Pellarin, Manager, Development Review Branch
Amy Burke, Acting Manager, Special Projects Branch
Tracey Webster, Senior Planner, Development Review Branch
I:\^Department\PLN Files\PLN 40 2016-2018 Zoning By-Law Review\Council Reports\MEM_Mayor and Council_re buffers_9'08'19.docx
To: Mayor and Members of Council
From: Faye Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning Services
Date: August 9, 2019
Subject: ZONE Clarington – Policies requiring buffers to environmental features
File: PLN 40
Page 42
Page | 2
Attachment 1
Section Policy
Provincial Policy Statement http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/AssetFactory.aspx?did=10463
2.1.8 Development and site alteration shall not be permitted on
adjacent lands to the natural heritage features and areas
identified in policies 2.1.4, 2.1.5 and 2.1.6 unless the
ecological function of the adjacent land has been evaluated
and it has been demonstrated that there will be no negative
impacts on the natural features or on their ecological
functions.
Greenbelt Plan http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page13783.aspx
3.2.5.1. Development or site alteration is not permitted in key
hydrologic features and key natural heritage features within
the Natural Heritage System, including any
associated vegetation protection zone, with the exception of:
a) Forest, fish and wildlife management;
b) Conservation and flood or erosion control projects, but
only if they have been demonstrated to be necessary in
the public interest and after all alternatives have been
considered; or
c) Infrastructure, aggregate, recreational, shoreline
and existing uses, as described by and subject to the
policies of section 4.
3.2.5.4. In the case of wetlands, seepage areas and springs, fish
habitat, permanent and intermittent
streams, lakes and significant woodlands, the
minimum vegetation protection zone shall be a minimum of
30 metres measured from the outside boundary of the key
natural heritage feature or key hydrologic feature.
3.2.5.5. A proposal for new development or site alteration within 120
metres of a key natural heritage feature within the Natural
Heritage System or a key hydrologic feature anywhere
within the Protected Countryside requires a natural heritage
evaluation or a hydrological evaluation which identifies
a vegetation protection zone which:
Page 43
Page | 3
a) Is of sufficient width to protect the key natural heritage
feature or key hydrologic feature and its functions from
the impacts of the proposed change and associated
activities that may occur before, during and after
construction and, where possible, restore or enhance the
feature and/or its function; and
b) Is established to achieve and be maintained as natural
self-sustaining vegetation.
3.2.5.7. Notwithstanding section 3.2.5.5, new buildings and
structures for agricultural, agriculture-related or on-farm
diversified uses are not required to undertake a natural
heritage or hydrologic evaluation if a minimum 30
metre vegetation protection zone is provided from a key
natural heritage feature or key hydrologic feature. In
addition, these uses are exempt from the requirement of
establishing a condition of natural self-sustaining
vegetation if the land is and will continue to be used for
agricultural purposes. However, agricultural, agriculture-
related and on-farm diversified uses shall pursue best
management practices to protect and/or restore key natural
heritage features and key hydrologic features and functions.
Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page13788.aspx
21 (1) For the purposes of this Part,
(a) the minimum area of influence that relates to a key
natural heritage feature or a key hydrologic feature
described in Column 2 of the Table to this Part is the
area referred to in the corresponding item in Column
3 of the Table; and
(b) the minimum vegetation protection zone that relates
to a key natural heritage feature or a key hydrologic
feature described in Column 2 of the Table is the
area determined in accordance with the
corresponding item in Column 4 of the Table.
(2) If land falls within more than one key natural heritage
feature or key hydrologic feature described in Column 2
of the Table, the minimum area of influence described in
Column 3 that is the largest and the vegetation protection
zone described in Column 4 that is the largest shall apply
with respect to each feature for the purposes of this Plan.
(3) With respect to land that is in a Settlement Area on April
22, 2002, any provision referred to in subsection (4)
Page 44
Page | 4
prevails, to the extent of any conflict, over clause (1) (b)
and subsection (2).
(4) Subsection (3) applies with respect to a provision of the
applicable official plan or zoning by-laws, as the case
may be, that is adopted on the basis of,
(a) environmental studies; or
(b) infrastructure planning including, without limitation,
environmental assessments, infrastructure servicing
studies and master environmental servicing studies.
(See Attachment 2 for the Table)
22 (2) All development and site alteration with respect to land
within a key natural heritage feature or the related minimum
vegetation protection zone is prohibited, except the
following:
1. Forest, fish, and wildlife management.
2. 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.
3. Development of infrastructure in accordance with the
requirements set out in section 41.
4. Low-intensity recreational uses as described in section
37.
5. Any development and site alteration in Countryside Areas
or Settlement Areas that is within the habitat of an
endangered or threatened species, but only if,
i. it is not prohibited under the Endangered Species Act,
2007 and it complies with any requirements or
restrictions under that Act, and
ii. it is not within any other key natural heritage feature or
the related minimum vegetation protection zone.
6. Agricultural uses other than uses associated with on-farm
buildings and structures, but only with respect to land in
the minimum vegetation protection zone related to a key
natural heritage feature and not in the key natural
heritage feature itself.
Page 45
Page | 5
22 (3) An application for development or site alteration with respect
to land within the minimum area of influence that relates to 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.
22 (4) Despite subsection (3), a natural heritage evaluation is not
required in the case of an application relating to the
construction of a new building or structure in the minimum
area of influence of a key natural heritage feature if the
proposed building or structure is for agricultural uses,
agriculture-related uses or on-farm diversified uses and is
located a minimum of 30 metres from the key natural
heritage feature.
22 (5) Any agricultural uses, agriculture-related uses or on-farm
diversified uses that are carried out in the minimum area of
influence that relates to a key natural heritage feature shall
be carried out in accordance with best management
practices to protect or restore key natural heritage features
and related ecological functions.
26 (2) All development and site alteration with respect to land
within a key hydrologic feature or the related minimum
vegetation protection zone is prohibited, except the
following:
1. Forest, fish, and wildlife management.
2. Conservation and flood or erosion control projects, but
only if they are determined to be necessary in the public
interest after all alternatives have been considered.
3. Development of infrastructure in accordance with the
requirements set out in section 41.
4. Low-intensity recreational uses as described in section
37.
5. Agricultural uses other than uses associated with on-farm
buildings and structures, but only with respect to land in
the minimum vegetation protection zone related to a key
hydrologic feature and not in the key hydrologic feature
itself.
26 (3) An application for development or site alteration with respect
to land within the minimum area of influence that relates to a
key hydrologic feature, but outside the key hydrologic
Page 46
Page | 6
feature itself and the related minimum vegetation protection
zone, shall be accompanied by a hydrological evaluation
under subsection (4).
Region of Durham Official Plan https://www.durham.ca/en/doing-
business/resources/Documents/PlanningandDevelopment/Official-Plan/2017-Durham-
Regional-Official-Plan-Consolidation.pdf
2.3.14 The general location of key natural heritage and/or
hydrologic features are shown on Schedule 'B' – Map 'B1'.
The individual features and their associated vegetation
protection zones are to be identified and shown in more
detail in area municipal official plans and zoning by-laws.
The location and extent of key natural heritage and/or
hydrologic features may be further confirmed through
appropriate studies such as a watershed plan or an
environmental impact study in accordance with Policy
2.3.43.
2.3.15 Development or site alteration is not permitted in key natural
heritage and/or hydrologic features, including any
associated vegetation protection zone, with the exception of:
a) forest, fish and wildlife management;
b) conservation and flood or erosion control projects
demonstrated to be necessary in the public interest and
after all alternatives have been considered;
c) infrastructure, subject to the policies of the Greenbelt Plan
and this Plan;
d) minor recreational uses such as trails, footbridges and
picnic facilities, and existing uses;
e) agriculture, in accordance with Policies 2.3.18 and 14.5.4;
or
f) aggregate extraction, in accordance with Policies 9D.2.9
and 9D.2.10.
2.3.16 Within Urban Areas and Rural Settlements, the vegetative
protection zone shall be determined through an
environmental impact study, in accordance with Policy
2.3.43. The scope of the environmental impact study for any
development or site alteration shall be determined in
accordance with the Council approved EIS Guideline.
Page 47
Page | 7
2.3.17 Outside of Urban Areas and Rural Settlements, an
environmental impact study, in accordance with Policy
2.3.43, shall be required for any development or site
alteration within 120 metres of a key natural heritage or
hydrologic feature to identify a vegetation protection zone
which:
a) is of sufficient width to protect the feature and its
functions from the impacts of the proposed change and
associated activities that may occur before, during, and
after, construction;
b) where possible, will restore or enhance the feature and/or
its function; and
c) will maintain natural self-sustaining vegetation.
The vegetation protection zone for wetlands, seepage areas
and springs, fish habitat, permanent and intermittent
streams, lakes, and significant woodlands, shall be a
minimum of 30 metres wide, measured from the outside
boundary of the feature.
2.3.18 Notwithstanding any other policies of this Plan to the
contrary, new buildings and structures used for agriculture
within the Greenbelt Natural Heritage System must provide
a 30 metre vegetation protection zone from a key natural
heritage or hydrologic feature. This vegetation protection
zone may consist of natural self-sustaining vegetation or
agricultural crops if the land is, and will continue to be, used
for agricultural purposes. However, best management
practices should be pursued to protect and/or restore key
hydrologic features and functions.
10B.2.6 Development and site alteration shall be prohibited within
key natural heritage features and hydrologically sensitive
features and their related minimum vegetation protection
zone as identified by the Table in Part III of the Oak Ridges
Moraine Conservation Plan. In accordance with the policies
of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan, conservation
and resource management, transportation, infrastructure
and utilities and low-intensity recreational uses may be
permitted. Within the portion of the Uxbridge Urban Area
that falls within the Oak Ridges Moraine, the required
minimum vegetation protection zone identified in an
environmental impact study shall prevail.
Page 48
Page | 8
10B.2.7 An environmental impact study, in accordance with Policy
2.3.43, shall include a natural heritage evaluation and/or a
hydrological evaluation, as detailed in the Oak Ridges
Moraine Conservation Plan where new development or site
alteration is proposed within the minimum area of influence
surrounding a key natural heritage feature and/or a
hydrologically sensitive feature as identified by the Table in
Part III of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation Plan. This
evaluation shall:
a) demonstrate that the development and site alteration
applied for will have no adverse effects on the features
and functions of the key natural heritage feature and/or
the hydrologically sensitive feature;
b) identify planning, design and construction practices that
will maintain and, where possible, improve or restore the
health, diversity and size of the key natural heritage
feature and/or hydrologically sensitive feature;
c) in the case of an application relating to land in a Natural
Core Area, Natural Linkage Area or Countryside Area,
demonstrate how connectivity within and between key
natural heritage features and, hydrologically sensitive
features will be maintained and improved during and after
construction;
d) determine whether the minimum vegetation protection
zone is sufficient to protect the features and its functions
and if not, specify whether a greater protection zone is
necessary; and
e) ensure compliance with the requirements of the
Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada where fish
habitat is of concern.
An environmental impact statement may result in a minimum
vegetation protection zone greater than that specified in the
Table in Part III of the Oak Ridges Moraine Conservation
Plan.
10B.2.9 No new agricultural uses and/or agriculture-related uses
shall be permitted within a key natural heritage feature
and/or a hydrologically sensitive feature and their associated
minimum vegetation protection zone.
10B.2.11 The general location of Areas of Natural and Scientific
Interest (earth science) are shown on Schedule 'B' – Map
'B1', Greenbelt Natural Heritage System & Key Natural
Page 49
Page | 9
Heritage and Hydrologic Features. These features may be
identified and shown in more detail in area municipal official
plans and zoning by-laws. An application for development or
site alteration with respect to land in 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 as outlined in the Oak Ridges Moraine
Conservation Plan.
Clarington Official Plan https://www.clarington.net/en/do-business/resources/Official-
Plan/Clarington-Official-Plan.pdf
3.4.8 Development and site alteration with respect to land within a
natural heritage feature and/or a hydrologically sensitive
feature or within its vegetation protection zone is prohibited,
except the following:
a) Forest, fish and wildlife management;
b) 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;
c) Transportation, infrastructure and utilities, but only if the
need for the project has been demonstrated by an
Environmental Assessment, there is no reasonable
alternative, and it is supported by a project specific
Environmental Impact Study; and
d) Low intensity recreation.
3.4.14 Table 3-1 identifies the minimum vegetation protection zone
and the minimum area of influence of identified natural
heritage system features.
(See Attachment 3 for the Table)
3.4.15 An Environmental Impact Study, a Natural Heritage
Evaluation and/or Hydrological Evaluation shall be
undertaken for any development or site alteration proposed
within the minimum area of influence of any natural heritage
feature and/or hydrological sensitive feature identified in
Section 3.4.2, 3.4.3 or 3.4.11 but outside the feature itself
and the related minimum vegetation protection zone
identified in Table 3-1 of this Plan.
3.4.16 The Environmental Impact Study, Natural Heritage
Evaluation and/or Hydrological Evaluation required in
Section 3.4.15 shall determine the vegetation protection
zone based on the sensitivity of the features and ecological
Page 50
Page | 10
functions of the natural heritage system but in no case will
the vegetation protection zone be less than the minimum
vegetation protection zone identified in Table 3-1 of this
Plan.
3.4.17 Notwithstanding Section 3.4.15, and the Minimum
Vegetation Protection Zone identified in the Urban or Rural
Settlement Areas on Table 3-1, the following may apply:
e) Where a significant woodlands is not associated with
and/or adjacent to a hydrologically sensitive feature the
minimum vegetation protection zone may be reduced to
10 metres;
f) Where an in-fill lot is proposed, surrounding development
setbacks shall be considered and a reduced minimum
vegetation protection zone may be considered;
g) In Greenfield Areas, the Minimum Vegetation Protection
Zone may be modified only as a result of physical
constraints of the site; and
h) Any modification to the minimum vegetation protection
zone provided for in this Section must be supported by
the Environmental Impact Study, and provided there is
no net loss on the total area of the Vegetation Protection
Zone.
3.4.18 Notwithstanding Section 3.4.15, the preparation of an
Environmental Impact Study, Natural Heritage Evaluation
and/or Hydrological Evaluation is not required for an
agricultural use, agriculture related use, or on-farm
diversified use building or structure located within 120
metres of a natural heritage feature or hydrologically
sensitive feature, provided the features and their functions
are protected from the impacts of the proposed building or
structure and provided the building or structure is located
outside of the natural heritage system and the minimum
vegetation protection zone.
14.4.3 The extent of the Environmental Protection Area designation
includes a 30 metre vegetation protection zone from the
natural heritage system and hydrologically sensitive features
outside of Urban and Rural Settlement Areas.
(Note: This chart does not include policies from the Growth Plan for the Greater Golden
Horseshoe)
Page 51
Page | 11
Attachment 2 - Oak Ridges Moraine Table
TABLE
Key Natural Heritage Features, Key Hydrologic Features and Areas of Natural and
Scientific Interest (Earth Science): Minimum Areas of Influence and Minimum
Vegetation Protection Zones
Column
1
Column 2 Column 3 Column 4
Item Feature Minimum Area of
Influence (21)
Minimum Vegetation Protection Zone (21,
23, 26(4), 30 (12))
1. Wetlands All land within 120
metres of any part of
feature
All land within 30 metres of any part of feature,
subject to clause 23 (1) (d) if a natural heritage
evaluation is required
2. Habitat of
endangered and
threatened species
None None
3. Fish habitat All land within 120
metres of any part of
feature
All land within 30 metres of any part of feature,
subject to clause 23 (1) (d) if a natural heritage
evaluation is required
4. Areas of natural and
scientific interest (life
science)
All land within 120
metres of any part of
feature
As determined by a natural heritage evaluation
carried out under section 23
5. Areas of natural and
scientific interest
(earth science)
All land within 50
metres of any part of
feature
As determined by an earth science heritage
evaluation carried out under subsection 30 (12)
6. Significant
valleylands
All land within 120
metres of stable top
of bank
All land within 30 metres of stable top of bank,
subject to clause 23 (1) (d) if a natural heritage
evaluation is required
7. Significant
woodlands
All land within 120
metres of any part of
feature
All land within 30 metres of the tree canopy drip
line of the outermost trees within the woodland,
subject to clause 23(1)(d) if a natural heritage
evaluation is required
8. Significant wildlife
habitat
All land within 120
metres of any part of
feature
As determined by a natural heritage evaluation
carried out under section 23
9. Sand barrens,
savannahs and
tallgrass prairies
All land within 120
metres of any part of
feature
All land within 30 metres of any part of feature,
subject to clause 23 (1) (d) if a natural heritage
evaluation is required
10. Kettle lakes All land within 120
metres of the
surface catchment
area
All land within the surface catchment area or
within 30 metres of any part of feature,
whichever is greater, subject to clause 26 (4) (c)
if a hydrological evaluation is required
11. Permanent and
intermittent streams
All land within 120
metres of meander
belt
All land within 30 metres of meander belt,
subject to clause 26 (4) (c) and subsection 26
(5) if a hydrological evaluation is required
12. Seepage areas and
springs
All land within 120
metres of any part of
feature
All land within 30 metres of any part of feature,
subject to clause 26 (4) (c) and subsection 26
(5) if a hydrological evaluation is required
Page 52
Page | 12
Attachment 3 - Clarington Official Plan
Table 3-1
Minimum Areas Of Influence and Minimum Vegetation Protection Zones
Natural Heritage
System Features
Within Urban and
Rural Settlement
Areas
Minimum
Vegetation
Protection Zone
Outside of Urban and
Rural Settlement
Areas
Minimum Vegetation
Protection Zone
Minimum Area
of Influence
Wetlands 30 metres All land within 30
metres of:
the outermost
extent of the
natural heritage
feature
the stable top of
bank for
Valleylands
the dripline of the
outermost tree
within the
woodland
meander belt
All land within
120 metres of:
any part of
the natural
heritage
feature
stable top
of bank for
Valleylands
meander
belt
Fish habitat and
riparian corridors
15 metres
Valleylands
Significant woodlands
Watercourses
Seepage areas and
springs
Habitat of endangered
species and threatened
species
As determined by an Environmental Impact
Study or a Natural Heritage Evaluation in
accordance with Provincial and Federal
requirements.
Areas of natural and
scientific interest (life
science)
Wildlife habitat
Rare Vegetation
Communities including;
Sand barrens,
Savannahs and
tallgrass prairies
Areas of Natural and
Scientific Interest (earth
science)
As determined by an Earth Science Heritage
Evaluation
Page 53
Page | 13
Table 3-1
Minimum Areas Of Influence and Minimum Vegetation Protection Zones
Natural Heritage
System Features
Within Urban and
Rural Settlement
Areas
Minimum
Vegetation
Protection Zone
Outside of Urban and
Rural Settlement
Areas
Minimum Vegetation
Protection Zone
Minimum Area
of Influence
Beach/Bluff As determined by a Geotechnical Evaluation
and/or a Slope Stability Assessment
Page 54
Staff Report
If this information is required in an alternate accessible format, please contact the Accessibility
Coordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131.
Report To: Planning and Development Committee
Date of Meeting: September 30, 2019 Report Number: PSD-041-19
Submitted By: Faye Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning Services
Reviewed By: Andrew C. Allison, CAO Resolution#:
File Number: COPA2018-0003, PLN34.5.2.64 By-law Number:
Report Subject: Community Vision for Jury Lands, Urban Design Master Plan + Design
Guidelines for former Ontario Boys Training School and WWII Prison of
War Camp 30 – Amendment No 121 to the Clarington Official Plan
Recommendation:
1. That Report PSD-041-19 be received;
2. That the Official Plan Amendment No. 121 (Attachment 1) be approved;
3. That the Region of Durham Planning and Economic Development Department and
the Municipal Property Assessment Corporation be forwarded a copy of Report
PSD-041-19; and
4. That all interested parties listed in Report PSD-041-19 and any delegations be
advised of Council’s decision.
Page 55
Municipality of Clarington Page 2
Report PSD-041-19
1. Proposal Details of Special Policy Area F
Proposed Official Plan Amendment
1.1. The Municipality proposes to:
Amend Section 16.7 of the Official Plan regarding Special Policy Area F Camp
30 to make reference to and implement The Jury Lands, Bowmanville/Special
Policy Area F Urban Design Master Plan + Design Guidelines;
Identify a Municipal Wide Park on the former campus lands (see Attachment 2)
and designate Urban Residential lands for approximately 700 residential units;
Provide for mid-rise residential uses concentrated along Lambs Road and near
the Concession Street East intersection; and
Recognize the cultural heritage, national and local designations of the six
buildings and ring road of the former campus.
1.2. Special Policy Area F is bounded by Soper Creek on the west, the CP railway tracks on
the north; Lambs Road on the east and Concession Street East on the south.
Report Overview
The Jury Lands, Bowmanville / Special Policy Area F: Urban Design Master Plan + Design
Guidelines and Official Plan Amendment No 121 (Attachment 1) is presented herein for
approval. The lands are bounded by Lambs Road, the CPR tracks, Soper Creek and
Concession Street East. The central portion of the property has significant cultural and
historic value to the residents of Clarington, the Province of Ontario and the Country of
Canada.
A Municipally initiated Official Plan Amendment statutory public meeting was held in
September of 2018. Most people in attendance were supportive. The Municipality has been
working with the owners, Lambs Road School Property Ltd. (Kaitlin Group and Fandor
Homes) and Far Sight Investments Ltd. (Schickendanz) to outline the development
principles. The Jury Lands Foundation are poised to assist with the re-use of the buildings
and interpretation of the site.
The Municipality retained DTAH to prepare a community vision as outlined in the Official
Plan, Special Policy 16.7 to set out how the central portion of the campus is to become a
municipal wide park. The Master Plan also sets out urban design and architectural
guidelines for the development. A presentation by the consultant of the Urban Design Master
Plan + Design Guidelines for Special Policy Area F was provided at the June 3, 2019
Planning and Development Committee meeting.
Page 56
Municipality of Clarington Page 3
Report PSD-041-19
1.3. The total land area with Special Policy Area F is 48.05 hectares.
1.4. Special Policy Area F is mostly located within Built Boundary.
2. Background
2.1. For a brief history of the Boys Training School, Camp 30, alternate uses and milestones
since the site was vacated in 2008 see Attachment 3. The land area is made up of two
parcels 42.62 ha (105 acre) parcel owned by Lambs Road School Property Ltd. and the
northern 5.42 (13.4 acre) owned by Far Sight Investments Ltd. The ownership is
outlined on Attachment 2.
2.2. In 2009 Lambs Road School Property Ltd. applied for an Official Plan amendment to
move the Community Park from the northwest intersection of Lambs Road and
Concession Street East northerly to the location of the historic buildings; they sought to
redesignate the community park area as Urban Residential with a Medium Density
Residential Symbol. In addition subdivision and zoning applications were submitted for
the former community park location (Area 1 of Attachment 2).
2.3. In 2016, as part of Official Plan Amendment No.107, the entire area was designated as
Special Policy Area F and the community park shifted from the northwest corner of
Lambs Road and Concession Street East to the northeast corner. In addition the
policies of Special Policy Area F called for the development of a community vision.
The land use designation for the central campus was reserved until this work was
completed.
2.4. Early in 2017, the Municipality retained DTAH to develop an overall community vision
for the urban design and architectural guidelines of development sites and concept plan
for the former campus as municipal wide parkland including the integration and re-use
of the heritage resources. Based on the work of DTAH and Goldsmith Borgal &
Company Ltd. Architects the six buildings and their setting within the ring road were
designated under the Ontario Heritage Act Part IV in January of 2018.
2.5. The Jury Lands, Bowmanville/Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Master Plan +
Design Guidelines were prepared to:
a. Provide a Master Block Plan, detail land use, recommend urban design guidelines
and related policies;
b. Implement the provisions of Special Policy Area F, the Local Corridor and other
policies contained in the Clarington Official Plan; and
c. Determine the future uses of the heritage buildings and municipal -wide park.
Page 57
Municipality of Clarington Page 4
Report PSD-041-19
2.6. In December 2018, the owners applied for demolition permits for the six historical
buildings. The demolition applications have not been withdrawn but the demolition
permits have not been issued.
3. Land Characteristics and Surrounding Uses
3.1. The property at 2020 Lambs Road is culturally and historically significant at a local,
provincial and national level. The past uses of the site, as a Boys Training School and
Prisoner of War Camp, and the Prairie style architecture of the buildings in a campus
setting, are historically significant and unique. The Historic Sites and Monuments Board
of Canada has recognized the significance of the uses and the architecture by
designating the property a National Historic Site, essentially the central campus lands
as shown on Attachment 2.
3.2. The surrounding uses are as follows:
North CPR tracks and farmland which is outside the urban boundary.
South Draft approved 541 unit residential plan of subdivision, currently subject to
an application to increase to 610 units (by Far Sight Investments Ltd of
309 singles and 301 townhomes).
East Future urban residential lands subject to the Soper Hills Secondary Plan.
West The Soper Creek valley and residential subdivisions dating from the late
1990’s.
4. Provincial Policy
Provincial Policy Statement
4.1. The Provincial Policy Statement identifies settlement areas as the focus of growth.
Land Use patterns shall be based on densities and a mix of land uses that efficiently
use land, resources and infrastructure.
4.2. Significant built heritage resources and cultural heritage landscapes shall be conserved.
Planning authorities can permit development and site alternation on adjacent lands to
designated heritage properties where the proposed development demonstrates that the
heritage attributes and designated property will be conserved.
4.3. Healthy and active communities should be promoted by planning public streets to be
safe, meet the needs of pedestrians, foster social interaction and facilitate active
transportation and community connectivity. Compact and diverse developments
promote active modes of transportation such as walking and cycling.
4.4. The proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 121 (Attachment 1) is consistent with the
Provincial Policy Statement.
Page 58
Municipality of Clarington Page 5
Report PSD-041-19
Provincial Growth Plan 2019
4.5. The majority of the subject lands are within the defined Built Boundary. Population and
employment growth will be accommodated by directing a significant portion of new
growth to the built up areas through intensification and efficient use of existing services
and infrastructure. The development of complete communities is encouraged by
promoting a diverse mix of land uses, a mix of employment and housing types, high
quality public open spaces and easy access to local stores and services. The Growth
Plan establishes minimum residential targets. The future subdivision applications will
have to demonstrate their consistency with the Growth Plan.
4.6. The Provincial Growth Plan, 2019 requires decisions made by Council conform to the
Plan. The Growth Plan continues to reinforce and provide stronger policies to guide
growth in consideration of:
Making use of existing infrastructure;
Addressing traffic congestion in the GTA;
Avoiding the environmental impacts of continued urban sprawl, and impact to
natural resources;
Avoiding low density and automobile dependent development;
Accommodating an aging population and providing more varied housing uni t
types and affordability; and
Supporting the Province’s commitment to its Climate Change Action Plan.
4.7. The proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 121 conforms to the Growth Plan, as
confirmed by the Region of Durham.
5. Official Plans
Durham Region Official Plan
5.1. The Durham Region Official Plan designates the lands as Living Area. Lands
designated Living Area permit the development of communities incorporating the widest
possible variety of housing types, sizes and tenure to provide living accommodations
and address various socio-economic factors.
5.2. Development applications in Living Areas must consider having a compact built form,
including providing intensive residential and mixed uses along arterial road and transit
routes. Consideration must also be given to urban design, pedestrian connections, grid
pattern of roads, and the availability of services and infrastructure.
Page 59
Municipality of Clarington Page 6
Report PSD-041-19
5.3. The Region’s Official Plan establishes a framework for Regional and Local Corridors.
The Region’s Official Plan identifies and maps Regional Corridors, and provides policy
direction to local municipalities for designating Local Corridors in local Official Plans.
5.4. Local Corridors are mixed use areas, planned to support frequent transit service. Local
Corridors make connections to Regional Centres (i.e. Downtown Newcastle, Downtown
Bowmanville, Bowmanville West Town Centre). Local Corridors support a long term
density target of a minimum of 30 units per gross hectare, and a Floor Space Index of
2.0.
5.5. The Region encourages the conservation, protection and enhancement of built cultural
heritage resources.
5.6. The proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 121 conforms with the Regional Official
Plan.
Clarington Official Plan
5.7. The Clarington Official Plan seeks to create walkable neighbourhoods and to provide a
variety of uses within each neighbourhood that is specific to its context. New
neighbourhoods are to provide for a variety of housing densities, tenure and types for all
incomes, ages and lifestyles. The Jury Lands are part of the JuryVale Neighbourhood
which has yet to be planned as part of the Soper Hills Secondary Plan (Figure A).
5.8. The Clarington Official Plan designates the lands as Urban Residential, Local Corridor
and Environmental Protection except for the former campus area which has no
designation.
5.9. The Urban Residential designation shall predominantly be used for housing purposes,
providing for a variety of densities, tenure and types. Neighbourhoods are to be
walkable, compact, connected and create a high quality public realm.
5.10. The lands associated with the Soper Creek valleylands and tributaries are designated
Environmental Protection. The limits of the Environmental Protection will be determined
through the preparation of studies that will be submitted as part of a development
application.
5.11. The Clarington Official Plan identifies Lambs Road as a “Local Corridor”. Mixed -use
buildings, apartments and townhouse units are permitted (height between two and six
storeys) with a minimum net density of 40 units per net hectare along the local corridor.
The mix between low-rise (between 2 and 4 storeys) and mid-rise (5 and 6 storeys)
shall generally be split 80% and 20%, respectively. Corridors are approximately 100
metres deep on both sides of the road.
Page 60
Municipality of Clarington Page 7
Report PSD-041-19
Figure A: Showing Special Policy Area F, Juryvale and Soper Hills Secondary Pan
Boundary
5.12. As provided in Official Plan Policy (10.6.3) density and built form within Corridors shall:
a. Incorporate and be sensitive to existing local character and scale to create a
compatible and attractive built form within a distinctive community image;
b. Incorporate measures to protect and enhance the natural heritage system and
sensitively integrate them with new development, streetscaping and architectural
detail; and
c. Create a public realm that accommodates a range of higher density residential uses,
complemented by compatible retail, service and institutional uses.
Page 61
Municipality of Clarington Page 8
Report PSD-041-19
5.13. The subject lands are within the western portion of the Juryvale Neighbourhood
(Figure A). The remainder of the Juryvale Neighbourhood is the Soper Hills Secondary
Plan area has yet to be completed. Approximately 700 units are recommended for the
subject lands on the west side of Lambs Road, bringing the total number of units for the
Juryvale Neighbourhood to approximately 2,100 units. The number of units withi n the
Soper Hills Secondary Plan area will further refine the total units for this neighbourhood
once the plan is complete.
5.14. Neighbourhoods are to be served with neighbourhood parks or parkettes. In the case of
Special Policy Area F, the municipal-wide park, valleylands, and pedestrian walkways
are meant to be the green infrastructure (in place of traditional parks) that will provide
the recreational amenities for the area.
5.15. Structures of cultural heritage value or interest are to be conserved, protected,
enhanced and incorporated into community design. Development in previously non-
built up areas adjacent to cultural heritage resources are required to conserve and
enhance the cultural heritage attributes by providing an appropriate transition with scale,
massing and character. Urban Design Guidelines are to be prepared for the
development of new neighbourhoods containing heritage resources.
5.16. The proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 121 will continue to implement the
Clarington Official Plan as amended and fulfills the objectives of the Official Plan.
Special Policy Area F – Camp 30
5.17. Special Policy Areas are identified in the Official Plan as areas where additional work
and policy direction is needed to clarify the intent of the future use of the land within the
identified area. The policies in the Official Plan are to be read and used in conjunction
with the specific policy direction provide for each Special Policy Area.
5.18. The policies in the Official Plan for Special Policy Area F called for the development of a
community vision and urban design plan for the long term use of the lands while
respecting the nationally designated cultural heritage resource. The study was to set out
design principles, architectural control guidelines and a Master Block Plan. In a ddition,
it was to determine the adaptive reuse of the heritage structures and their integration
with future land use while ensuring public access to the heritage resources from the
surrounding residential neighbourhoods and the Soper Creek trail system. Phase 2 of
the Soper Creek Trail was recently completed on the west side of Soper Creek.
5.19. The majority (88%) of the Special Policy Area is within the Built Boundary. Development
units within the built-up area contribute to the Municipality’s intensification targets. The
Official Plan policy states that development proposals within the built-up area will be
given priority provided that the proposal meets the urban design and sustainability
polices of the Plan.
Page 62
Municipality of Clarington Page 9
Report PSD-041-19
5.20. Table 4-3 of the Official Plan describes the predominant building typologies, minimum
densities, and heights for lands within the Urban Area. For lands that are “internal to a
neighbourhood” the minimum density is 13 units/net hectare and the height of the
buildings is to be between 1-3 storeys. This would produce a mix of townhouses, semi-
detached and detached dwellings and all are intended to be ground related units. The
northern most parcel (under separate ownership) is “greenfield” and therefore subject to
higher density at 50 residents and jobs per gross hectare (approximately 17 units/net
hectare, however the other provisions are the same. Although this parcel is subject to
slightly higher densities, the ground related built form described, can achieve this
density.
5.21. Lambs Road is a Local Corridor as outlined in Section 5.11 of this report. Local
Corridors are intended to be at higher densities (minimum of 40 units/net hectare)
building heights are to be between 2-6 storeys and the distribution of built form is to be
80% low rise (2-4 storeys) and 20% mid-rise (5-6 storeys). Mid-rise residential would
include mixed use buildings, apartments and townhomes.
6. Public Notice and Submissions
6.1. A public information session was held at John M. James School on June 13, 2018
where the consultant, DTAH had display panels explaining the overall Urban Design
Master Plan + Design Guidelines. The consultant provided a presentation on the
proposed land uses, development framework and building typologies. The consultant
and staff fielded questions prior to the presentation in a one-on-one setting and as a
general question/answer session following the presentation.
6.2. Over 40 people attended the public information session which had been advertised i n
the local newspapers, on the Municipal website and through social media. The meeting
was held concurrently with the Soper Creek Trail, Phase 2 meeting. Notification
included all adjacent property owners on Sprucewood Crescent and Guildwood Drive.
In addition, the owners of the property parcels affected by Special Policy Area F were
notified.
Public Comments
6.3. The display panels and presentation have been posted to the municipal website since
June 14, 2018 with a request for comments by July 31, 2018. To date comments from
the public received have been:
Retain natural beauty and as many of the historic buildings as practical.
Consider wildlife, ecology, natural spaces, protect species at risk .
Include community gardens on the site to serve nearby proposed residences.
Support for the demonstration garden with produce supplying local eatery.
Page 63
Municipality of Clarington Page 10
Report PSD-041-19
The development and building forms appear to be higher in density than adjacent
lands and should be less dense and lower in height.
Provide special event venue space for 100+ people.
Property has been subject to severe vandalism.
6.4. A draft of the Official Plan amendment for Special Policy Area F – Camp 30 was made
available to the interested parties and posted to the website on August 17, 2018 for
comment. Based on the comments received a revised Official Plan Amendment has
been drafted and circulated to all commenting agencies, property owners and inte rested
parties in August 2019.
Land Owners Comments
6.5. The initial comments from the land owners (November 2018) included:
The limited range of land uses, density and built form types included in the vision
for the Jury Lands, which amongst other matters could have a direct impact on
affordability and accessibility;
There is a lack of clarity on how the integration of the vison for the Jury Lands will
work with the vison for the Secondary Plan area to the east, including the
creation of a hub at the Lambs Road and east-west street;
Concern about incomplete information on future process, and associated timing,
to implement the vision including opportunities to participate prior to the
preparation of statutory documents.
6.6. Staff, the land owners and their consultants have been meeting to work towards a
consensus, adjustments have been made both to the proposed Block Master Plan and
the proposed policies of the Official Plan Amendment. However, the land owners are
not satisfied with the proposed Official Plan Amendment No. 121. Their key concerns
(September 2019) are outlined below and addressed in Sections 9.7 to 9.10 and 11.5 to
11.7.
The OPA directs that development around the heritage buildings is not intended
to be seen, however, there are many examples of how new development can be
appropriately integrated with heritage resources (e.g. Brickworks). The request
is for 6 storey buildings adjacent to Lambs Road in proximity to the Cafeteria, on
south and north of the tributary (Areas 2 and 3 of Attachment 2).
The Clarington Official Plan provides that Priority Intensification Areas have been
identified as the primary locations to accommodate growth and the greatest mix
of uses, heights and densities. Priority Intensification Areas include Local
Corridors. Lambs Road is identified as a Local Corridor.
Page 64
Municipality of Clarington Page 11
Report PSD-041-19
Local Corridor policies indicate that the highest densities should be located along
the Lambs Road frontage. Given that the width is approximate and that 100
metres along the road is part of the Natural Heritage System, there should be an
opportunity to capture density in the northern area of the site. The Municipality is
recommending limiting built form to a maximum of 4-storeys north of the 250
metre radius of the intersection of Lambs Road and Concession Street.
Concentration of density should be distributed along the entire corridor and 6-
storey building heights permitted.
Northern development area (Area 4 of Attachment 2) the heights proposed by
Clarington (1-3 storeys) are not consistent with Provincial or Regional policies.
There are examples in other municipalities of higher density development being
permitted in isolated pockets. This area should have specific policies that
override the general policies of the Official Plan and include mid -rise residential
(4-6 storeys).
The request of the developers is to increase the unit target in Appendix B to
1,100 units from 700 (see below).
The uniqueness of the site should be recognized.
Urban Area
Neigbourhoods
Low Medium High Total
Juryvale* 400 650 300 450 - 700 1100
6.7. In summary, the most significant aspects of the owners submission include:
Increasing the number of housing units by 400, from 700 to 1100 units;
Changing the majority of the ground related residential land use designation
(Area 4) the block south of CPR to mid-rise residential; increasing the permitted
height of the ground related residential in this area to 4 storeys; increasing the
permitted height of the mid-rise residential to 6 storeys for Areas 2 and 3.
Deleting the requirement to ensure an alternate emergency access and instead
leave the decision of when an alternate access is required to the results of an
engineering study.
Jury Lands Foundation Comments
6.8. The Jury Lands Foundation is supportive of the Jury Lands Urban Design Master Plan +
Design Guidelines report. The Jury Lands Foundation purpose is to ensure the
residential development complements the heritage of the site:
Page 65
Municipality of Clarington Page 12
Report PSD-041-19
this will create a destination park that citizens of not just Bowmanville but beyond
could travel to and learn about the history of the site along with the unique
example of the Carolinian forest;
the site will be linked into the trail system; and
the access as proposed means people can walk, ride bicycles or use public
transit along with a car to access the park from Concession St reet, Lambs Road
or the trail system.
6.9. The Jury Lands Foundation believe it would be beneficial to approve the DTAH plan,
Block Master Plan and design guidelines and begin development of the park area;
thereby giving the Jury Lands Foundation the opportunity to begin the process of
repurposing the heritage buildings.
6.10. The comments received from the public, the Jury Lands Foundation and the landowners
have been considered in the preparation of the proposed Official Plan Amendment No.
121 contained in Attachment 1 of this report. A few minor changes to wording and
clarifications to the Block Master Plan have been included in the final Official Plan
Amendment No. 121 (as outlined in sections 11.8 and 11.10).
7. Agency Comments
Regional Municipality of Durham
7.1. The Region of Durham comments are:
The recommended Official Plan Amendment No.121 conforms with the Region’s
Official Plan and Growth Plan and is now exempt from Regional approval.
The location and distribution of the revised densities in Official Plan Amendment
No. 121 conform with the policies of the Growth Plan and Regional Official Plan.
Decisions on massing are local decisions.
Regarding conformity, the Region’s Official Plan requires a long-term density
target of 75 residential units per gross hectare for Regional Centres and 60 units
for Corridors. The subject lands are not within a Centre or Corridor and do not
require these densities. Lands within Local Cen tres and Corridors only require 30
residential units per hectare. The Growth Plan requires not less than 50 persons
and jobs per hectare. The proposed cap on the maximum number of units in the
proposed amendment will meet these policies.
A Functional Servicing Report will not be required for the Official Plan
Amendment at this time, however; one will be required as the se lands progress
to the next steps of development.
Page 66
Municipality of Clarington Page 13
Report PSD-041-19
Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority
7.2. Central Lake Ontario Conservation Authority (CLOCA) has no objections to the
proposed amendments and offers strong support for the proposed community vision,
Urban Design Master Plan and Design Guidelines. In particular they support the
designation of a Municipal Wide Park and associated Natural Heritage System. They
offered the following comments: “The proposed land use designations on Map A3
should provide for an enhanced level of environmental protection including future
restoration and enhancement opportunities for a robust permanent natural heritage
system.” They support the inclusion of the policy which requires the implementation of
low impact development practices for stormwater management through the
development process. CLOCA staff appreciate the progressive nature of the proposed
policies and believe they will protect the natural heritage and water resource systems
while allowing for development with green infrastructure measures.
7.3. CLOCA agrees with removing the outline of SWM facilities from the Block Master Plan
and replacing them with symbols. If it is possible to address stormwater management
completely via low impact development measures, that would be preferable. However
what is actually possible will be determined through functional and detailed design of
the storm water management measures.
Other Agencies
7.4. Veridian and Bell had no objections and asked that when development is to proceed
that the appropriate application be submitted. No other utilities have submitted
comments.
8. Departmental Comments
Engineering
8.1. The Engineering Services Department has no objection to the report as presented. At
the detail design stage, stormwater management facility options will need to be
evaluated based on in-situ conditions, design parameters and feasibility. Any proposed
stormwater management facilities will not be considered as part of the parkland
dedication requirements. The overall road network layout for the development is
acceptable. Standard Municipal Right of Way sections will be utilized for public roads
and the Engineering Department is agreeable to a modified Right of Way width
(reduced to 15 metres) and cross-section for the Park Drive running adjacent to the
valley lands. Parking for the development should meet standard requirements at a
minimum.
8.2. If the Park Drive specified right of way width is removed as requested by the land
owners it would then be subject to the general provisions of the Official Plan which is 20
metres. The storm water management facilities shown on the Block Master Plan are
Page 67
Municipality of Clarington Page 14
Report PSD-041-19
conceptual and will be refined as part of the Storm Water Management Report when the
subdivision applications are submitted. Policy 16.7.4 g) allows the developer to also
use low impact development practices to manage storm water.
Emergency and Fire Services
8.3. Emergency and Fire Services provided support for the need for two access points to
isolated development parcels and large development blocks. Given the experience in
servicing other neighbourhoods that have no or deficient alternate access, including the
requirement to have an additional access at the 200 unit threshold is reasonable.
9. Community Vision Discussion
Urban Design Master Plan
9.1. The Urban Design Master Plan prepared by DTAH and dated April 12, 2019 contains a
development framework that can accommodate a range of housing types and
landscapes while preserving the central campus area of the site for parkland and public
uses. The development framework outlines the Street and Pedestrian Network, Built
Form, Housing Types and Stormwater Management. The residential d evelopment
parcels are defined by the environmental protection lands of the Soper creek valley and
tributaries.
9.2. The various conceptual layouts for the different residential areas has been translated
into the Master Block Plan. The specifics of the building types and mix of units are to
conform to the urban design guidelines and will respect the heights set out in the Official
Plan, Table 4.3.
9.3. The street network is composed of primary streets with major intersections and
secondary streets with minor intersections. Key to the development of the area will be
the east/west connections spaced out along Lambs Road at:
the northern boundary of the future community park on the east side of Lambs
Road;
centred to the campus/municipal-wide park;
off-set from the rail line to accommodate the future overpass (rail crossing); and
The ring road (Park Drive) and former campus road entrance from Concession
Street are to be retained as a park lane with its rural cross-section to access the
park.
9.4. The built form and distribution of development combined with open space encourages
active transportation and pedestrian access to the Soper Creek’s trail system and limits
privatization of the valleyland frontage. The approach to stormwater management is to
Page 68
Municipality of Clarington Page 15
Report PSD-041-19
integrate runoff by allowing for infiltration within the soft surface areas through low
impact design solutions.
9.5. The focal point of the neighbourhood is the central campus/municipal-wide park and its
historic buildings. The Urban Design Master Plan outlines adaptive re-use suggestions
for each of the buildings with complimentary exterior garden spaces to reinforce the re -
use of the buildings. It is anticipated that the buildings will be mothballed for a period of
time awaiting funding for redevelopment.
9.6. The Urban Design chapter of the Official Plan (Section 5.6.1) provides for the
implementation of Urban Design policies through a number of mechanisms including
urban design guidelines prepared for specific topics or sites. The Urban Design Master
Plan should be approved by Council as part of Official Plan Amendment 121. Council
received a presentation by the consultant at the June 3, 2019 Planning and
Development Committee meeting, Report PSD-029-19.
Official Plan Amendment
9.7. The purpose of the Local Corridors polices in the Official Plan is to support the Growth
Plan and Regional Official Plan population and housing targets. Encouraging higher
densities in key areas further support transit initiatives and build a critical mass to
support the expansion of transit services. Higher densities also alleviate consumption of
agricultural land, support climate change initiatives, and provide a range of housing
choices.
9.8. The major issues considered are as follows:
Conformity to the Growth Plan, the Regional Official Plan, and the new
Clarington Official Plan.
Built form, density and site layout.
Traffic, access, signalization, parking and active transportation.
Transitions between environmental protection lands (e.g. valleylands) and the
adjacent residential neighbourhood.
Urban Design elements, including private amenity spaces.
Reinforcement of the heritage resources and elements as outlined in the National
Historic Sites and Monuments of Canada designation.
9.9. The proposed Official Plan Amendment assigns 700 housing units to this area which
would allow for a variety of housing types and built form.
Page 69
Municipality of Clarington Page 16
Report PSD-041-19
9.10. The proposed residential development limits along the Soper Creek valley and
tributaries have yet to be established. The issues that will have to be addressed at the
time of subdivision, zoning and site plan applications include the following:
Establish the development limits through an Environmental Impact Study (EIS)
considering slope stability, natural heritage and mitigating impacts;
The stormwater management system features and on-site low impact
development measures that maintain the appropriate water balance;
Active transportation connections for residents along Lambs Road and
Concession Street and to the Soper Creek valley trail;
The signalization of Lambs Road and Concession Street intersection; and
Parkland dedication requirements in light of the anticipated development on both
the east and west sides of Lambs Road involving lands owned by the
development partners.
10. Concurrence
Not applicable.
11. Comments
11.1. At the June 3, 2019 Planning and Development Committee meeting, Committee when
accepting PSD-029-19 and directing staff to prepare a recommendation report for
September 30, 2019 also passed the following resolution:
That the Municipality continue to work with the Jury Lands Foundation on the
terms set out in the existing MOU to preserve the historical significance of the
Camp 30 lands and buildings.
11.2. An application by Lamb’s Road School Property Ltd. was submitted in 2009 to amend
Map A3 of the Official Plan to shif t the Community Park from the southwest corner of
Lamb`s Road and Concession Street. This application pre-dated Amendment 107
which has moved the community park to the northeast corner of Lambs Road and
Concession Street. This application is now redundant and at the request of the land
owner could be closed.
11.3. Subdivision and zoning applications were submitted in 2009 for the most southern
residential development block (6.82ha) (Area 1 on Attachment 2). Those applications
were the subject of a Public Meeting in June 2010. When a revised subdivision plan is
submitted another public meeting will be required given the amount of time that has
elapsed.
Page 70
Municipality of Clarington Page 17
Report PSD-041-19
11.4. The purpose of this report is to provide background information on the recommended
Official Plan amendment to Special Policy Area F – Camp 30. It is proposed that the
central campus within the ring road south of the tributary (5.96 ha) be designated green
space with a municipal wide park symbol. For the area north of the tributary, the Jury
Lodge location, the designation is proposed to change from urban residential to green
space with a municipal wide park symbol. The undesignated lands just south of the
north tributary at Lambs Road and just north of the south tributary at Lambs Road are
proposed to be designated urban residential. These designations would allow for the
lands surrounding the designated heritage buildings to be developed to compliment the
adaptive re-uses suggested for the heritage buildings. The remaining 16.55 hectares of
developable land, was designated urban residential by Amendment 107. The
recommended housing units for Special Policy Area are in keeping with Official Plan
policies and the background studies prepared for this area.
11.5. This request by the landowners to increase the unit count from 700 to 1100 would affect
the overall number of units in the Neighbourhood planning area, as well as the Urban
area of Bowmanville. The landowner is proposing a significant increase to what staff
have determined would be best suited for this area in keeping with DTAH’s
recommendations. Such a significant increase would have great implications when
planning for service levels such as emergency services, parks and recreation and
planning framework than has been established for development along local corridors
and internal neighbourhoods. The urban structure is implemented through the density
targets of Table 4-3 and the Appendix B and have been used to plan infrastructure and
transportation (Clarington and Region's MTP). Densities are to be sensitive to local
character and scale, this is why the 80/20 balance is desirable.
11.6. A local corridor is to be 80/20 (low rise/mid-rise) along its length. While there is natural
heritage area adjacent to Lambs Road this does not mean that the local corridor
provisions shift into the internal portion of the neighbourhood. In the development areas
(Areas 2 and 3) directly influenced by the central campus and heritage buildings, while
the request for additional height would conform with the local corridor policies it would
not be in keeping with the principles outlined in the National Heritage Designation about
view planes and set out in the Urban Design Master Plan. Nor how does it conform with
the general policy for cultural heritage resources in the Regional and Municipal Official
Plan. It would be out of character.
11.7. Based on the comments we received from the land owners some minor changes have
been made to the Block Master Plan. Prior to issuing Official Plan Amendment 121, staff
revised the open space along the railway such that an alternate lotting pattern or road
network could be implemented, Policy 16.7.4 i) specifically allows this flexibility. In
addition, the Block Master Plan has been amended to show the storm water
management facility general locations, the size and layout will be subject to the Storm
Water Management Report and detailed at the time of subdivision. The Block Master
Plan also has been updated with two additional pedestrian and bicycle routes. These
Page 71
Municipality of Clarington Page 18
Report PSD-041-19
have been discussed with the owners and could provide alternate access for
emergency services.
11.8. The Municipality has received a number of comments regarding the Official Plan
Amendment since it was made available in August 2019 and as a result staff have
made a few minor changes to the wording as follows:
Recommended Policy 16.7.3. The phrase ‘historically themed residential
neighbourhood’ has been changed to ‘historically respectful residential
neighbourhood’;
Recommended policy 16.7.4 a) has been amended to soften the position that no
lots would be permitted to back onto Park Drive to one that generally does not
permit lots to back onto Park Drive; and
Recommended policy 16.7.4 c) has been amended to remove the maximum
density permitted for the areas designated for ground related residential units.
11.9. These changes are considered minor in nature and given these policies are not
responding to a specific development concept, these changes will allow for some
leeway for the owners as the detailed concepts are developed.
11.10. To provide clarity as to where the land use minor changes were made to Figure 1, the
Block Master Plan was revised as follows.
The mid-rise residential designation has been subdivided to differentiate where
up to 6 storeys may be permitted and where up to 4 storeys are permitted;
The Stormwater Ponds designation has been replace by a symbol; and
The addition of cycling and pedestrian linkages.
Showing the environment protection designation within the municipal wide park.
11.11. The requirement for alternate access to be provided for development parcels where
more than 200 housing units are planned (policy 16.7.4 j) is necessary to ensure
emergency services have access. There are a number of ways this can be achieved,
such as through a boulevard access or multi-use trail. The road network within
development parcels must meet Policy 9.4.5 which provides for a limitation on the
linking of different condominium corporations on a private road network and ensures
multiple vehicle accesses from a public street.
11.12. Making a decision on Camp 30 is one of the legacy projects listed in the Strategic Plan
for this term of Council.
12. Conclusion
12.1. It is recommended that Official Plan Amendment No. 121 be approved.
Page 72
Municipality of Clarington Page 19
Report PSD-041-19
Staff Contact: Faye Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning Services, 905-623-3379 x 2407 or
flangmaid@clarington.net.
Attachments:
Attachment 1 –Official Plan Amendment No. 121
Attachment 2 – Areas of Development
Attachment 3 - Brief History of Boys Training School and Camp 30
Interested Parties:
List of Interested Parties available from Department.
Page 73
Attachment 1 to
Report PSD-041-19
Amendment Number 121
to the Clarington Official Plan
Purpose The purpose of this amendment is to update Section
16.7 Special Policy Area F – Camp 30 with the
completion of the Urban Design Master Plan
Location: Special Policy Area F – Camp 30 includes the land
area bounded on the west by Soper Creek, north by
the CPR rail line, east by Lambs Road and south by
Concession Street East.
Basis: The Amendment is based upon the development of
the Jury Lands, Bowmanville, Special Policy Area F:
Urban Design Master Plan + Design Guidelines dated
2019-04-12 by DTAH. This amendment conforms to
the Durham Regional Official Plan and the Growth
Plan for the Greater Golder Horseshoe and is
consistent with the Provincial Policy Statement.
Actual Amendment:
The Clarington Official Plan is hereby amended as follows:
(1) Existing Sections 16.7.2. through 16.7.5. are deleted and replaced with
the following:
16.7 Special Policy Area F - Camp 30
“16.7.2 The Municipality has consulted and will continue to work with the land
owners of Special Policy Area F, the Jury Lands Foundation, other
levels of government and interested parties to:
a) Implement “The Jury Lands, Bowmanville, Special Policy Area F:
Urban Design Master Plan + Design Guidelines”, dated 2019-04-
12 by DTAH (Master Plan), which sets out the principles of the
community vision, for the long term use of the subject lands while
respecting the nationally designated cultural heritage landscape;
b) Implement this community vision, and build upon the designation
of the National Historic site under Part IV (individual) of the Ontario
Heritage Act by establishing different mechanisms; and
c) Implement the architectural control guidelines contained within the
Master Plan.
Page 74
Attachment 1 to
Report PSD-041-19
16.7.3 The residential portions of Special Policy Area F shall be developed
as a historically respectful residential neighbourhood focused around a
public park in accordance with the community vision.
16.7.4 A detailed Block Master Plan has been prepared for the Special Policy
Area F lands to establish a framework for future development. In
accordance with the Block Master Plan, as displayed on Figure 1,
development shall:
a) Implement Park Drive along the valley and campus ring road.
Park Drive will have a right of way of 15 metres and be
predominately located on the existing driveway. Residential
development shall not be dependent upon Park Drive for
vehicular access and generally lots shall not back onto Park
Drive.
b) Implement the Local Corridor policies of the Official Plan, with
the greatest density and building height being located at the
intersection of Lambs Road and Concession Street East.
Notwithstanding any other policy in the Official Plan to the
contrary, development beyond 250 metres from the
intersection of Lambs Road and Concession Street, and
identified as Mid-Rise Residential on the Block Master Plan,
shall be a maximum of 4 storeys in order to distribute built
forms along the Local Corridor. The Mid-Rise Residential
density shall be a minimum of 40 units per net residential
hectare;
c) In accordance with the Block Master Plan lands identified as
ground-related residential shall adhere to building height and
density appropriate for lands “Internal to the Neighbourhood”
as per Table 4-3 of the Official Plan. The density of ground-
related development shall be a minimum of 13 units per
hectare.
d) Be contemporary interpretations of Prairie-style architecture
with a prevalence of horizontal lines, flat or hipped roofs,
overhanging eaves, windows grouped in horizontal bands with
simplicity of style and integration into the landscape. This
policy shall apply to all development within Special Policy Area
F.
e) Implement low impact development practices for stormwater
management such as bio-swales, permeable pavers, rain
barrels and green roofs;
Page 75
Attachment 1 to
Report PSD-041-19
f) Ensure and enhance views, public access and connections to
the heritage resources from surrounding neighbourhoods and
the Soper Creek trail system;
g) Be designed to create view corridors to the valleylands and
heritage resources from Lambs Road and the internal
neighbourhood roads, in keeping with the original viewplanes
of the National Historic Site;
h) Minimize the visual impact of vehicular access through
building and site design;
i) With the exception of the alignment of Park Drive, the roads
provided in the Master Block plan are conceptual. The design
and layout of public and/or private roads shall consider the
objectives of Official Plan and conform with policy 9.4.5 and
shall be detailed in future applications for draft plan of
subdivision and site plan approval;
j) Ensure alternate emergency access is provided to
development parcels where more than 200 housing units are
planned.
16.7.5 To facilitate the adaptive reuse of the National Historic Site
designated area, the portion of the subject lands designated Green
Space is identified as a Municipal Wide Park on Map A3. The
Municipality will work with the land owners, the Jury Lands
Foundation, other levels of government and interested parties to:
a) Facilitate the transfer of the Municipal Wide parkland and
heritage buildings to the Jury Lands Foundation and/or the
Municipality;
b) Develop and construct the Municipal Wide Park at the earliest
opportunity;
c) Promote the adaptive reuse of the heritage buildings with a
range of public and private uses appropriate to the park
setting, further detailed in the Master Plan;
d) Encourage other levels of government to support the
conservation of the heritage resources; and
e) Promote public awareness and appreciation of the heritage
resources.
Page 76
Attachment 1 to
Report PSD-041-19
16.7.6 As part of the first development application, the applicants must
provide a phasing plan together with a transportation and servicing
plan for the whole Block Master Plan that implements the
Clarington Official Plan;
16.7.7 Development applications within the Block Master Plan area must
address the criteria established through Clarington’s Green
Development Program, and are encouraged to plan for more
resilient infrastructure and to move towards a net zero community.
16.7.8 In order to support the implementation of this Special Policy, the
Municipality of Clarington will consider the development of a
Community Improvement Plan.”
Page 77
Attachment 1 to
Report PSD-041-19
Page 78
The Jury Lands, Bowmanville / Special Policy Area F
Urban Design Master Plan + Design Guidelines
Draft 2019-04-12
Page 79
ii Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
1.1 Purpose of this Document
1.2 The Project Site
1.3 Urban Design Principles
1.4 Existing Reference Documents
2. Site Planning Strategies
2.1 Site Planning Context
2.2 Development Framework
2.3 Transportation Connectivity
2.4 Public Open Space
2.5 Stormwater Management Strategy
2.6 Land Use
2.7 Built Form
2.8 Pedestrian Network
2.9 Parking and Servicing
3. Architectural Guidelines
3.1 Neighbourhood Character
3.2 Street Character and Interface
3.3 Architectural Style
3.4 Building Component Design
3.5 Materiality and Cladding
3.6 Municipal Address Signage
Page 80
5. Jury Lands Park
5.1 Preliminary Park Concept
6. Phasing
6.1 Suggested Phase 1 Improvements
4. Heritage
4.1 Building Adaptive Re-use
4.2 Heritage Interpretation
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines iiiPage 81
The particular character of this historic collection of buildings,
their siting, position, scale and materiality, influence the
recommendations within this report. However design intent
of the new development surrounding the existing buildings of
Camp 30 is not that new buildings replicate the old, but rather
that complementary design principles are employed to give
the neighbourhood a distinct character that is reflective of its
historical importance, as well as its unique natural heritage
setting on the edge of Soper Creek.
This document is to be read in conjunction with the over-
arching General Architectural Design Guidelines (2011 Update),
and in concert with other documents already governing the
development of the site (listed in Reference Documents). When
appropriate, portions of these reference documents have been
excerpted into this report and noted / italicized accordingly.
Right: Aerial view of the site (Clarington)
Page 82
Introduction
1.1 Purpose of this Document
The purpose of this Urban Design Master Plan + Design
Guidelines is to set out a framework for future development on
the property surrounding the proposed Jury Lands Park, and to
supplement the existing General Architectural Design Guidelines
(2011 Update) published by the Municipality of Clarington. The
scope of this report are the subject lands bounded by Soper
Creek to the west, Lambs Road to the East, Concession Street to
the south and the CN Railway corridor to the north. These lands
are identified as Special Policy Area F in the 2017 Clarington
Official Plan. At the heart of this property is the National Historic
Site of Camp 30, the former Boys Training School that was
converted to a prisoner-of-war camp during the Second World
War (referred to locally as the Jury Lands).
The Urban Design Master Plan considers the subject lands in
their unique urban and landscape context, at the eastern edge
of the expanding community of Bowmanville. The concept
plans outlined in this report take into consideration the current
and future expansion of urban and ex-urban development to
the east, south and north of the site, and seeks to establish a
hierarchy of streets, blocks, development sites and open spaces
that are consistent with the scale and nature of development
within Clarington as well as anticipate future developments. The
principles of walkable neighbourhoods, integrated stormwater
management systems, and transit-oriented development have
been embedded in the master plan thinking and is reflected in
the proposed distribution of use and density on the site.
The particular character of this historic collection of buildings,
their siting, position, scale and materiality, influence the
recommendations within this report. However design intent
of the new development surrounding the existing buildings of
Camp 30 is not that new buildings replicate the old, but rather
that complementary design principles are employed to give
the neighbourhood a distinct character that is reflective of its
historical importance, as well as its unique natural heritage
setting on the edge of Soper Creek.
This document is to be read in conjunction with the over-
arching General Architectural Design Guidelines (2011 Update),
and in concert with other documents already governing the
development of the site (listed in Reference Documents). When
appropriate, portions of these reference documents have been
excerpted into this report and noted / italicized accordingly.
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 1Page 83
History of the Site
The following history of the site was prepared by the Municipality
of Clarington: The 40 hectare (100 acre) parcel farm at 2020
Lamb’s Road adjacent to Soper Creek, was formerly the Darch
Farm prior to its donation to the Ontario government in the early
1920s by J.H.H. Jury for the purpose of establishing a boys
training school.
The Boys Training School officially opened in August of 1925.
Various buildings were constructed over the next several years by
the Government of Ontario. Archival records indicate that the first
dormitory was built in 1925, a gymnasium and swimming pool
C AMP 30, 2020 L AMBS R OAD, B OWMANVILLE, M UNICIPALITY OF C LARINGTONSITE V ISIT R EPORT
Historical Photographs
Darch Farm – Land donated for the construction of the Boys’ Welfare Home
Building 6 – seen from the rear looking west Lambs RdSoper CreekConcession St. E
The Darch Farm
Above: Sketch of Camp 30 by a resident POW
(from the Clarington Museum and Archives)
Left: Aerial view of the site as Camp 30, 1941
Page 84
1.2 The Project Site
History of the Site
The following history of the site was prepared by the Municipality
of Clarington: The 40 hectare (100 acre) parcel farm at 2020
Lamb’s Road adjacent to Soper Creek, was formerly the Darch
Farm prior to its donation to the Ontario government in the early
1920s by J.H.H. Jury for the purpose of establishing a boys
training school.
The Boys Training School officially opened in August of 1925.
Various buildings were constructed over the next several years by
the Government of Ontario. Archival records indicate that the first
dormitory was built in 1925, a gymnasium and swimming pool
CAMP 30, 2020LAMBS ROAD, BOWMANVILLE, MUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTONSITE VISIT REPORT
Historical Photographs
Darch Farm – Land donated for the construction of the Boys’ Welfare Home
Building 6 – seen from the rear looking west Lambs RdSoper CreekConcession St. E
Gym and Swimming Pool as seen from south entry drive, 1927 Diagram of Boys Training School site configuration, c. 1939
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 3Page 85
4 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
building was built in 1927, a large triple dorm in 1928 and a
hospital in 1937. In 1939 the facility was renamed to the Ontario
Training School for Boys.
During World War II the property was taken over as a German
Prisoner of War camp, known as Camp 30, by the Department of
National Defence. New temporary dormitories were added and
the site housed up to 800 detainees who were mainly officers of
the Third Reich. There was an uprising at the Camp following the
Dieppe raid in 1942 when an order was issued to manacle
German POWs housed in camps across Canada. Historically
recorded as the “Battle of Bowmanville”, the uprising lasted for
three days until it ended with the assistance of the Royal
Canadian Ordinance Corps from Kingston. This uprising is the
BOWMANVILLE BOYS TRAINING SCHOOL/CAMP 30
Figure 42 Triple Dormitory (called North, Centre, and South Lodges in the period), James
Govan, architect, 1928. (Programme, Boys’ Training School 4th Annual Fall Fair,
September 1930)
1369
BOWMANVILLE BOYS TRAINING SCHOOL/CAMP 30
Figure 38. Cafeteria, James Govan, architect, 1924. (Programme, Boys’ Training School
4th Annual Fall Fair, September 1930)
Figure 39. Jury House (called Jury Lodge), James Govan, architect, 1924. (Programme,
Boys’ Training School 4th Annual Fall Fair, September 1930)
1367
BOWMANVILLE BOYS TRAINING SCHOOL/CAMP 30
Figure 38. Cafeteria, James Govan, architect, 1924. (Programme, Boys’ Training School
4th Annual Fall Fair, September 1930)
Figure 39. Jury House (called Jury Lodge), James Govan, architect, 1924. (Programme,
Boys’ Training School 4th Annual Fall Fair, September 1930)
1367
BOWMANVILLE BOYS TRAINING SCHOOL/CAMP 30
Figure 44. View of grounds and buildings at Camp 30, circa 1941-1942. Purpose-built
wooden buildings are located to the right of the Gymnasium. (Department of National
Defence/Library and Archives Canada/PA-168126)
1371 Lambs RdSoper CreekConcession St. E
Jury Lodge, looking north through the tributary landscape, 1930
Triple Dorm, taken from the west looking east, 1930
Cafeteria, taken from the central green, 1930
Taken from south looking north east, 1927
Page 86
building was built in 1927, a large triple dorm in 1928 and a
hospital in 1937. In 1939 the facility was renamed to the Ontario
Training School for Boys.
During World War II the property was taken over as a German
Prisoner of War camp, known as Camp 30, by the Department of
National Defence. New temporary dormitories were added and
the site housed up to 800 detainees who were mainly officers of
the Third Reich. There was an uprising at the Camp following the
Dieppe raid in 1942 when an order was issued to manacle
German POWs housed in camps across Canada. Historically
recorded as the “Battle of Bowmanville”, the uprising lasted for
three days until it ended with the assistance of the Royal
Canadian Ordinance Corps from Kingston. This uprising is the
BOWMANVILLEBOYSTRAININGSCHOOL/CAMP30
Figure 42 Triple Dormitory (called North, Centre, and South Lodges in the period), James
Govan, architect, 1928. (Programme, Boys’ Training School 4thAnnual Fall Fair,
September 1930)
1369
BOWMANVILLEBOYSTRAININGSCHOOL/CAMP30
Figure 38. Cafeteria, James Govan, architect, 1924. (Programme, Boys’ Training School
4thAnnual Fall Fair, September 1930)
Figure 39. Jury House (called Jury Lodge), James Govan, architect, 1924. (Programme,
Boys’ Training School 4thAnnual Fall Fair, September 1930)
1367
BOWMANVILLEBOYSTRAININGSCHOOL/CAMP30
Figure 38. Cafeteria, James Govan, architect, 1924. (Programme, Boys’ Training School
4thAnnual Fall Fair, September 1930)
Figure 39. Jury House (called Jury Lodge), James Govan, architect, 1924. (Programme,
Boys’ Training School 4thAnnual Fall Fair, September 1930)
1367
BOWMANVILLE BOYS TRAINING SCHOOL/CAMP 30
Figure 44. View of grounds and buildings at Camp 30, circa 1941-1942. Purpose-built
wooden buildings are located to the right of the Gymnasium. (Department of National
Defence/Library and Archives Canada/PA-168126)
1371 Lambs RdSoper CreekConcession St. E
View of Camp 30, 1941-42 Diagram of Camp 30 site configuration, c. 1945
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 5Page 87
6 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Sketch of Camp 30, 1941-42 (source: Clarington Archives)
Page 88
Sketch of site as Camp 30, identifies existing Boys Training School,
main entrance, new gate for Camp 30 off Lamb’s Road, and
connection to Warden’s House (source: Clarington Archives)
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 7Page 89
8 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
only known battle of its kind and has national significance.
Occupation of the Training School as Camp 30 ended in April
1945.
After the war, use as a Training School resumed, name changes
happened and other changes related to the philosophy of dealing
with young offenders eventually saw the elimination of Training
Schools in Ontario. In 1979, the Pine Ridge School, as the site
was known at the time, was permanently closed. The Province
offered the property to the Municipality at fair market value in
1983. The Council of the day declined, citing acquisition cost, the Lambs RdSoper CreekConcession St. E
Aerial photograph, 1988 Diagram of site configuration, c. 1988
Page 90
cost of maintenance, building renovation costs, other operational
matters and the distance of the facility from the urbanized area of
Bowmanville. Council offered a nominal amount, an offer which
was declined. On October 7, 1983 the Ministry of Government
Services accepted an offer from How Kheng Ang, in Trust, to
purchase the school, and the facility reopened as a preparation
school for Malaysian students entering Canadian universities,
which functioned until April of 1986. The Members in Christ
Assemblies of Ontario purchased the site in 1987 and leased a
portion of the property for the St. Stephen’s Catholic Secondary
School which opened in September of 1988. While the property
was privately owned between 1987-2008, the sports fields were
used by many of the recreational leagues in Clarington.
In 1999 the property was sold to the Sea Land Holdings
Corporation and became known as the Great Lakes College
which was home to students from Hong Kong. During the time
Sea Land Holding Corporation owned the property from 1999
to 2005, they filed an application (in 2002) for an Official Plan
amendment which proposed to delete the Community Park in
favour of an Urban Residential designation and to change the
Future Urban Residential designation to Urban Residential. A
number of modifications and studies were required prior to staff
accepting the Official Plan amendment application as complete.
The requirements for a complete application were not submitted
and the file was later closed.
In May of 2005 the property was sold to Madressa Ashraful
Uloom. The school functioned as an Islamic University called
Darul Uloom under the ownership of Madressa Ashraful Uloom.
In January of 2006 the Region of Durham received applications
for consent to sever the areas north and south of the buildings
thereby proposing to split the property into three relatively equal
parcels. The Kaitlin Group proposed to acquire the northerly
and southerly parcels for future development purposes. The
northernmost portion of the site was under separate ownership
by Schickedanz Developments Ltd. Planning Services Staff
supported the severance application as the northerly and
southerly parcels are within the boundary of the Bowmanville
Urban Area and the valley lands were to be dedicated to the
Municipality as part of the severances. The applications were
approved on March 13th, 2006 but the conditions of approval
were not fulfilled, and the approval lapsed.
In February, 2007 the property was purchased by Lambs Road
School Property Ltd. (Kaitlin and Fandor). Darul Uloom, the
Islamic University, continued to operate until they relocated
in October of 2008 due to the failure of the sewage treatment
system for the site and the prohibitive cost of its replacement.
Since the school closed in October 2008 there have been
no resident uses of Camp 30. The buildings have fallen into
disrepair, mostly due to vandalism. In December 2008, the owner
Lambs Road School Property Ltd. approached the Municipality
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 9Page 91
10 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
to discuss demolition. A Municipal Report (PSD-016-09) placed
all of the buildings on the site on the Municipal Heritage Register.
On March 28, 2009 the former administration building and
gymnasium/ natatorium building sustained substantial fire
damage, leading to the ultimate demolition of the administration
building. Many of the buildings have been vandalized which has
prompted liability concerns and other safety and security issues.
A further Municipal Report (PSD-099-09) removes 12 of the 18
buildings on the site from the Municipal Register, leaving the six
most historically relevant buildings on the register.
In July 2009 Council was provided with a petition that contained
over 800 signatures and also informed them that a Clarington
branch of the Architectural Conservancy of Ontario (ACO) had
been formed to preserve our history and to educate the public on
the heritage of the area. One of the first stated priorities of this
ACO branch is the preservation of Camp 30 the last remaining
intact German POW camp in Canada.
Applications for an Official Plan Amendment, Rezoning and
Subdivision on the southern third of the property were filed with
the Municipality in December 2009 and the initial public meeting
was held on June 7, 2010. Approvals for development continue
to be withheld pending the successful outcome of negotiations
between the landowner and the Municipality of Clarington. Lambs RdSoper CreekConcession St. E
Diagram of site configuration, c. 2017
Page 92
View of Cafeteria and Infirmary (foreground), 2017
View of Infirmary (foreground) and Gym/Pool, 2017
View of Infirmary, 2017
Current Conditions
In October 2014 a Condition Survey and Mothballing Plan was
prepared by Goldsmith Borgal & Company Ltd Architects that
suggested that the existing buildings could be left unoccupied for
up to ten years if properly protected from weather and vandalism,
but strongly recommended that the site be occupied as soon as
possible. The mothballing scope of work outlined in this report
has been only partially implemented by the ownership group and
therefore the decay of the buildings has advanced significantly
since 2014.
The current condition of the site is unoccupied and only partially
mothballed pending future redevelopment and reuse. Many of
the existing buildings continue to weather, sustain vandalism and
the intrusion of water. The site grounds are being maintained
intermittently by the land owners with some on-site security
measures including cameras having assisted in discouraging the
heaviest levels of vandalism from continuing.
Site tours continue to be conducted by the Jury Lands
Foundation and the Municipality of Clarington using primarily the
western driveway and walking path along the Soper Creek ravine.
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 11Page 93
12 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
National Historic Site Designation
The Jury Lands were federally designated under the Historic
Sites and Monuments Act on April 19, 2013. Within the
designation report the following character-defining elements and
statement of heritage value are specified:
Character-Defining Elements
Elements contributing to the heritage value of the site include:
• the intactness of the landscape including surface imprints and
subsurface components associated with the Bowmanville Boys
Training School and with Camp 30;
• the complex of six buildings laid out in a campus-style plan
beside an oval-shaped ring road, the sixth and largest building
being just outside the perimeter road;
• the manner in which the buildings are visually and functionally
interconnected by a network of paved pathways;
• the Prairie-Style of the building, with masonry construction,
volumes, the natural materials, their horizontality, their
geometric ornamentation and their flat roofs;
• the integrity of any surviving archaeological remains and
features that relate to the site’s use as a prisoner of war camp
during the period of 1941-1945; and
• the viewplanes between the buildings.
Heritage Value
The former Bowmanville Boys Training School / Camp 30 is
of historical significance because: when it opened in the mid-
1920’s, the Bowmanville Boys School was widely considered
the most progressive institution of its kind in Canada. A rare
example of Prairie School architecture in Canada, Bowmanville’s
modern architecture, campus style plan, professional staff,
open, semi-domestic environment, and broad educational
programme for boys aged 8-14, place it at the head of the youth
reform movement; during the Second World War, the school was
adapted to serve as an internment camp, known as Camp 30,
for German prisoners of war captured by the Allies. Its principal
buildings, used from 1941 to 1945 for internment, remain at the
site, although the guard towers, fencing and temporary barracks
were dismantled after the war when the camp was turned back
into a school. Camp 30 was the site of a small but infamous riot
popularly known as the Battle of Bowmanville.
Preservation Methodologies
The preservation and rehabilitation of the Jury Lands property
should be in conformance with Standards and Guidelines for the
Conservation of Historic Places in Canada.
Page 94
...“complex of six buildings laid
out in a campus-style”...
...“beside an oval-shaped ring
road”...
...“visually and functionally
connected by a network of paved
pathways”...
...“viewplanes between the
buildings”...
Understanding the Heritage Designation
The following diagrams attempt to capture the nature and scale of the features discussed within the federal heritage
designation, in order to understand the territory explicitly referenced and therefore deserving of conservation: Lambs RdSoper CreekConcession St. E Lambs RdSoper CreekConcession St. E Lambs RdSoper CreekConcession St. E Lambs RdSoper CreekConcession St. E
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 13Page 95
14 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Building Specific Heritage Attributes
The National Heritage Designation makes note of the brick and
stucco exteriors and geometric ornamentation within the interior
and exterior design of the six remaining buildings on the Jury
Lands property. Some of these attributes continue to be visible
on the exterior of the buildings, although significantly degraded
by water damage and vandalism.
As part of the conservation of the Jury Lands property, the
preservation and rehabilitation of the existing heritage buildings
is anticipated, and as such the following principles should be
followed with respect to the exterior facades:
• Ornamentation on exterior is to be preserved and/or restored
• Exposed masonry as an important component to the design
and aesthetic of the building and is to remain exposed where
and whenever possible
• Graffiti removal procedures to conform to heritage restoration
best practices - removal of graffiti not to degrade or conceal
original material finishes.
In addition to the attributes above, the following heritage
attributes were defined by Goldsmith Borgal in preparation for
the site’s Heritage Designation Report submission:
• The steel framing with masonry construction, finished on the
exterior in brick and/or stucco, with shingle roofs
• With the exception of the Infirmary building, the long,
Detail of Gym/Pool building ornamentation, 2017
View of geometric ornamentation within Jury Lodge interior,
date unknown
Additional Character-defining elements for the Gymnasium/
Natatorium:
• Large window openings with metal windows for natural lighting
• The glass block windows
• The configuration and materials of the pool
Additional Character-defining elements for the Infirmary:
• The two-storey form under a hipped roof with one-storey
addition under a flat roof
• The rectangular window openings (for double-hung windows)
Additional Character-defining elements for the Triple Dormitory:
• The hipped roof over the clerestory windows
Page 96
View of the Jury Lodge, 2017
low massing that visually connects the buildings with the
landscape site by means of flat roofs with pronounced
overhangs over one-storey structures
• With the exception of the Infirmary and the Gymnasium, the
clerestory windows (steel framed, hopper type) set back from
the outer walls of the one-storey structures with slightly hipped
roof and overhanging eaves
• The variety of window openings and types being primarily
double-hung, paired openings on the ground floor or
single openings (with the exception of the Infirmary and the
Gymnasium)
• With the exception of the Infirmary building, the simple,
geometric terracotta ornamentation under the eaves and the
geometric patterning incorporated through the use of stucco
outlining cubic forms of the structures
• The overall massing of the buildings with clear, simple forms
and ample fenestration for natural lighting
• The ambiguity of the primary/front facade
Additional Character-defining elements for the Cafeteria:
• The large open concept interior flooded with natural light from
the windows and the clerestory
• The large window openings with metal windows for natural
lighting
• The tall brick chimney
Additional Character-defining elements for the Gymnasium/
Natatorium:
• Large window openings with metal windows for natural lighting
• The glass block windows
• The configuration and materials of the pool
Additional Character-defining elements for the Infirmary:
• The two-storey form under a hipped roof with one-storey
addition under a flat roof
• The rectangular window openings (for double-hung windows)
Additional Character-defining elements for the Triple Dormitory:
• The hipped roof over the clerestory windows
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 15Page 97
16 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Ecological Context
The ecological context of Special Policy Area F in the Official
Plan is characterized primarily by its position immediately east
of Soper Creek and the environmentally sensitive area. The
development lands sit on a series of plateaus defined by the
valley lands topography running north-south along the site’s
western edge, as well as tributary creeks that run toward the
Soper Creek from the east, subdividing the development lands
into four parts. These tributaries are characterized by their
shallow slopes and the dense riparian vegetation.
An Environmental Impact Assessment has been prepared
for the southern portion of the site by Niblett Environmental
Associates Inc. and identifies the sensitive ecologies bordering
the development lands and provides recommendations for the
protection of these lands during and post development.
Aerial of Current Conditions (Source: Google 2017)
Page 98
Development Context
Special Policy Area F exists within the urban boundary
of Bowmanville, and are therefore within the area where
urbanization is anticipated. The growth of Bowmanville has
been steady over the last number of decades due to its
relative proximity to the Greater Toronto Area and the relative
affordability of housing as compared to the GTA average.
Transit connectivity, including the planned extension of the
commuter GO-Train service east from Oshawa is anticipated
to strengthen the housing market for commuters within
Bowmanville.
The lands immediately to the east of Lambs Road are
owned by the same ownership group, and are subject to a
future Secondary Plan process prior to development being
undertaken upon those lands.
The lands immediately south are owned by a separate
ownership group and residential development of those lands
is now underway.
3 Jury Lands Community Development Plan
Figure 2: Local Context
Note:
This map is for illustrative purpos-
es only. Scale is approximate and
some information may no longer
be accurate.
Sources:
Durham Region Transit, 2009
Friends of the Greenbelt
Foundation, 2009
Google, 2009
Micro Environmental Resources Overview
The Soper Creek flows south towards Lake Ontario, through the western portion
of the Jury Lands. The Soper Creek is a natural habitat for many species of fish
including native brown and speckled trout. Stephen’s Gulch Conservation Area,
which is north of the site, provides great potential for cold-water fishing as well
as other wilderness and outdoors tourism-related activities. This conservation
area consists of 130 hectares of deciduous forest and coniferous forest/swamp,
which contribute to the maintenance of the Soper Creek’s water quantity and
temperature. This portion of the valley system has been designated the Soper
Valley Area of Natural and Scientific Interest (ANSI) because of its dynamic natural
heritage systems (Central Lake Ontario Conservation, 2007). The 2005 Greenbelt
Plan designated the Bowmanville and Soper Creeks as ‘river valley connections
outside the greenbelt’. This indicates the importance of these watercourses as
natural corridors that facilitate movement of native plants and animals between
landscapes (Ministry of Municipal Affairs and Housing, 2005). In consideration of
these ecological features, the Municipality of Clarington’s Official Plan designates
the areas surrounding the Soper Creek as environmentally sensitive lands. This
classification prohibits any development that is detrimental to the natural heritage
landscapes. Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 17Page 99
18 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Clarington Official Plan, Office Consolidation 2017
The 2017 Official Plan outlines the area between Soper Creek and
Lamb’s Road from Concession Street to the CP Railway Tracks; an
area of 47 ha (116 acres) as Special Policy Area F. Special Policy
Areas are subject to comprehensive planning studies to determine
future land uses which will be incorporated into the Official Plan by
amendments and/or by the addition of Secondary Plans. Until such
time as appropriate land use designations and planning policies are
determined, the use of land within the Special Policy Areas shall be
limited to existing uses. Integral to any future plan is the promotion
of the adaptive reuse of the heritage structures and the integration of
future land uses; and the provision and promotion of public access to
the heritage resources from the surrounding neighbourhoods and the
Soper Creek trail system.
Open Space: Any significant open space within this Special Policy
Area will be classified as a Municipal Wide Park, defined as specialized
parks designed to serve the entire Municipality. They may be developed
to support recreation or cultural facilities that are one of a kind and
have specialized location requirements, or take advantage of specific
attributes such as natural or cultural heritage features. The size and
shape of Municipal Wide Parks shall depend on the attributes of the
property and the specific program for the park.
k
k!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!!!!!!!
!
!
!
!
!
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
å
å
å
å
å
å
å
å
å
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(SCUGOG STREET
RUNDLE ROADCONCESSION STREET
BASELINE ROAD
HIGHWAY 401GREEN ROADLAMBS ROADREGIONAL ROAD 57LIBERTY STREETMEARNS AVENUESPECIAL
STUDY
AREA 3
SPECIAL
POLICY
AREA E
TRA
N
S
-
N
O
R
T
H
E
R
N
P
I
P
E
L
I
N
E
HYDRO
C
O
R
R
I
D
O
R
SPECIALPOLICYAREA C BENNETT ROADSPECIAL
POLICY
AREA F
GREEN ROADLONGW
O
R
T
H
A
V
E
N
U
E
NORTHGLEN BOULEVARD
KING STREET
BOULEVARD
CONCESSION ROAD 3
SIMPSON AVENUEBROO
K
H
I
L
L
C.N.R.C.P.R.ASPEN
S
P
RI
N
G
S
D
RI
V
ECLARINGTON BOULEVARDWAVERLEY ROADGREEN ROADOLD SCUGOG ROADA107-21
A107-11
GO
CP
CP
CP
MP
MPMP
³
Lake Ontario
SECONDARY SCHOOL
REGIONAL CORRIDOR
URBAN CENTRE
å
URBAN BOUNDARY
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
SPECIAL POLICY AREA
SPECIAL STUDY AREA
UTILITY
URBAN RESIDENTIAL
LIGHT
INDUSTRIAL AREA
BUSINESS PARK
GENERALINDUSTRIAL AREA
PRESTIGEEMPLOYMENT AREA
GATEWAY COMMERCIAL
AGGREGATE EXTRACTION AREA
NEIGHBOURHOOD CENTRE
k TOURISM NODE
!
WATERFRONT PLACE
MP MUNICIPAL WIDE PARK
WATERFRONTGREENWAY
COMUNITY PARK!CP
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AREA
GREEN SPACE
TRANSPORTATION HUB
! ! ! ! ! ! !
! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! !! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
GO
APPEALED TO THE OMBA107
BOWMANVILLE URBAN AREA
OFFICIAL PLANMUNICIPALITY OF CLARINGTON
JUNE, 2018
OFFICE CONSOLIDATION
LAND USE
MAP A3
study area
Map A3, Clarington Official Plan
Page 100
1.3 Urban Design Principles
The following guiding principles for the redevelopment and
revitalization of the Jury Lands:
1. Design to acknowledge the historical value of the Jury Lands
as defined by the National Heritage Designation, including
landscape elements identified therein;
2. Design new developments within and surrounding the
Jury Lands to reflect public value and amenity opportunity
represented by the valley lands;
3. Design new developments surrounding the Jury Lands in the
context of the future condition and character of the adjacent
roads - Concession and Lambs Road - as well as the future
development of lands to the east and south;
4. Design new developments surrounding the Jury Lands to
utilize landscape as a transition between built development
and its natural and heritage surroundings, including integrated
stormwater management strategies; and
5. Design new developments within the Jury Lands to allow
for the adaptive re-use of heritage buildings over time as
partnerships and funding sources become available.
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 19Page 101
20 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
1.4 Existing Reference Documents
Municipality of Clarington Official Plan (Adopted by Council of
the Municipality of Clarington on November 1, 2016)
Municipality of Clarington Zoning By-law 84-63
Municipality of Clarington Amenity Guidelines For Medium and
High Density Residences
Municipality of Clarington Landscape Design Guidelines For Site
Planning
Municipality of Clarington Lighting Guidelines
Municipality of Clarington Guidelines for The Preparation of
Neighbourhood Design Plans in Accordance with Section 9.5 of
The Clarington Official Plan
Municipality of Clarington General Architectural Design
Guidelines (prepared for Municipality of Clarington by John G.
Williams Limited Architects) updated 2011
Municipality of Clarington Design Guidelines and Standard
Drawings (prepared by Engineering Services Department)
Stage 1 Archaeological Assessment (AA) of Proposed Camp 30
Subdivision Development (Prepared by Archeoworks Inc)
Camp 30/ Bowmanville Boy School Condition Survey and
Mothballing Plan (prepared by Goldsmith Borgal & Company Ltd
Architects, October 2014)
Statement of Significance and List of Character-Defining
Features (prepared by Goldsmith Borgal & Company Ltd
Architects, 2015)
Camp 30 / Bowmanville Boy School Structural Assessment of
Four Buildings (prepared by Ojdrovic Engineering Inc., January
2015)
Lamb’s Road School Property Ltd., Part Lot 7, Concession
2, Former Town of Bowmanville, Municipality Of Clarington,
Environmental Impact Study (prepared by Niblett Environmental
Associates Inc., November 2012)
Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places
in Canada (Second Edition, 2010)
Page 102
Site Planning Strategies
The developable area within the Special Policy Area is shaped by
Soper Creek, its tributaries and the associated environmentally
sensitive areas. East of Lambs Road, the lands slated for future
development are not as confined by topography and sensitive
natural heritage features but should connect to the overland
drainage patterns of the lands to the west.
The study area contains four areas of interest for the purposes of
future residential and mixed-use development. The parcels are
confined by the natural heritage boundary of Soper Creek and
the Lambs Road right-of-way to the west and east respectively,
and are separated by protected natural heritage features to
create the developable parcels. The centre two parcels also
contain the existing Jury Lands buildings and ring road which are
intended to be protected and adapted for future use.
As part of the Master Plan Study, work was undertaken to
investigate how the development framework for the Jury Lands
could influence the future development framework for the lands
to the east in order that the design of both parcels might be
coordinated and synergies achieved. Therefore a diagrammatic
layout of that parcel was undertaken in parallel to the
Development Framework, as illustrated within the diagrams on
the following pages. The lands east of Lambs Road are subject to
a future Secondary Plan.
Area of Interest
2.1 Site Planning Context
Subject to future
Secondary Plan
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 21Page 103
22 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
2.2 Streets and Blocks Pattern
Within the area of interest, public streets and development
blocks subdivide the developable land as well as define areas for
the open spaces.
The southern area of interest is subdivided by an L-shaped public
road splitting the land into two smaller development parcels.
This road connects to Lambs Road approximately 1/4 of the
distance between Concession Street and the railway corridor.
The development lands on either side of this roadway have public
street frontage as well as frontage onto the Soper Creek ravine
and tributary. This road is intended to extend east of Lambs
Road to access future development.
The central two areas of interest are the most constrained
within the property, defined by multiple tributaries as well as
the heritage attributes outlined elsewhere in this report. Access
to these two areas is provided from Lambs Road as well as the
existing ring road proposed to be maintained as part of the plan
and connected to Concession Street.
The northern area of interest is separated from Lambs Road by a
tributary of the Creek, and is accessed by a roadway positioned
south of the railway corridor in anticipation of the construction of
a future grade-separated crossing. The roadway network within
this parcel provides residential frontages as well as open space
at the southern tip of the parcel overlooking Soper Creek.
Area of Interest
Open Space
Jury Lands Park
Development Block
Subject to future
Secondary Plan
Page 104
2.3 Transportation Connectivity
The hierarchy of the public street network is defined by three
types: Primary and Secondary Streets and a Park Driveway.
Where Primary streets intersect with other street types, the
intersections are defined as either Major or Minor.
Primary streets are town-wide and regional connectors,
represented within the study area by Concession Street East
and Lambs Road. These provide the principal access route
to neighbourhoods, include bus transit routes and cycling
infrastructure, and carry through-traffic to destinations within
and beyond the municipality. Secondary streets are local or
neighbourhood roads that serve as primary access points for
developments and may include opportunities for on-street
parking and access to driveways or private roadways governed
by private condominium corporations. The Park Drive is the
upgraded heritage ring road and its connection from Concession
St. East. The Park Drive is intended for mixed cycle / vehicular
traffic to be characterized by limited width and informal paving
strategy to encourage slow, pedestrian-paced speeds. Limited
opportunities for on-street parking are available around the ring.
Major intersections are located at the junction of the Park
Driveway and Concession Street East as well as intersections
along Lambs Road that provide roadway connections between
the east and west parcels. Major intersections will be signal
controlled. Minor intersections are located where no through
access exists, potentially with right-in, right-out limitations.
Primary Street
Secondary Street
Park Drive
Major Intersection
Minor Intersection
Subject to future
Secondary Plan
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 23Page 105
24 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
2.4 Public Open Space
The Public Open Space within the site is divided into six types:
Park, Jury Lands Park, Green Infrastructure, Railway Buffer,
Flood Zone, and Natural Heritage.
Park lands and the Jury Lands Park are structured as larger
or amalgamated blocks of open space. Park lands provide
community amenities primarily for the use of residents within the
new development. The Jury Lands Park provides complementary
landscapes and amenities supporting the adaptive reuse of the
existing six buildings. The Jury Lands Park is also intended to
serve a broader range of users and provide amenities to create a
regional draw.
Within the study area, there are two types of linear public
open space. Green Infrastructure areas provide opportunities
to convey stormwater passively towards the natural heritage
system through connected linear planted areas. The Railway
Buffer provides a continuous planted barrier between the new
development areas and the existing rail corridor and will also
have a stormwater drainage function.
The Flood Zone exists as a sub-area to the Natural Heritage area.
The Natural Heritage area is the lands within the limits of the
Soper Creek watershed that should not be developed. Within that
area, the Flood Zone delineates the limits of a projected 100-year
flood event.
Park
Jury Lands Park
Green Infrastructure
Railway Buffer
Flood Zone
Natural Heritage
Subject to future
Secondary Plan
Page 106
2.5 Stormwater Management Strategy
The stormwater management strategy for the site is designed
to passively convey stormwater runoff towards Soper Creek,
taking advantage of the existing natural heritage features of
the site. Development will be designed to reduce reliance on
sewer infrastructure and large stormwater retention structures.
Green infrastructure will also be used to demonstrate low impact
development practices and will be designed to be aesthetically
pleasing as well as highly functional.
The development areas will take advantage of existing
topography to mitigate stormwater runoff and use parks and
other open spaces to infiltrate run-off to reduce peak runoff
flows.
Park
Jury Lands Park
Green Infrastructure
Railway Buffer
Flood Zone
Natural Heritage
Overland Flow
High Point / Low Point
Subject to future
Secondary Plan
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 25Page 107
26 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
2.6 Land Use
The site will be developed to support multiple uses and densities
creating a vibrant community surrounding a valuable heritage
resource.
Development parcels west of Lambs Road will accommodate
primarily residential land uses with supporting Open Space. The
majority of development blocks will be designated for Multi-Unit
Residential with some Townhouse and Single-Family blocks.
Open Space will be composed of small neighbourhood-scaled
spaces, linked by linear networks and mid-block connections.
The Jury Lands Park will support the heritage structures. Natural
Heritage area constitute the remainder of the west parcels.
Development parcels east of Lambs Road are subject to a
future Secondary Plan process. For the purposes of this Master
Plan these lands are proposed to include a Mixed Use central
corridor aligned to the main entrance gateway of the Jury Lands
Park. Multi-Unit residential uses will line the Primary Streets
with the remaining portion of the parcel being composed of
Townhouse development. The north development blocks will
provide a majority of Single-Family Residential development. The
southwest Open Space (designated as a Community Park) will
provide community amenities for both the east and west parcels
while the smaller north block and adjacent spaces will provide
amenities for the immediate neighbourhood.
Single Family
Townhouse
Multi-Unit
Mixed Use
Open Space
Jury Lands Park
Natural Heritage
Subject to future
Secondary Plan
Page 108
2.7 Built Form
Within the site’s development blocks, built form typologies will
include Single Family, Townhouse, Back-to-Back Townhouse and
Stacked Townhouse residential structures, as well as several
heritage structures intended for adaptive re-use. The majority
of the residential structures could be Stacked Townhouses,
especially adjacent to Primary Streets. The orientation of the
housing specifically addresses the ambition to maintain public
access to the Soper Creek natural heritage system, with only
a limited number of private single-family house lots having
rear yards with direct creek or tributary frontage. Pedestrian
and visual porosity in the east-west direction is prioritized
within every development block in order for meaningful visual
and pedestrian connections to the Soper Creek system to
be maintained. Private condominium roads will stem from
the Secondary Roadways within the site but purposefully not
connected to the Park Drive within the southern development
parcel, in order to control vehicular access to the Park Drive.
Taller building types (over three storeys), if identified as being
desirable, would be located along the Concession Street East
and Lambs Road frontages, so as to take best advantage of the
vehicular, transit and pedestrian connectivity those locations
provide, and to reinforce the importance of those primary street
frontages for higher-order development.
Single Family
Townhouse
Back-to-Back
Stacked Townhouse
Heritage Structure
Subject to future
Secondary Plan
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 27Page 109
28 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
2.8 Pedestrian Network
Development within the site will capitalise on east-west
connections at major intersections on Lambs Road and improve
opportunities to access the Soper Creek natural heritage
system. Within the subject lands west of Lambs Road, mid-
block pedestrian connections will create opportunities for green
infrastructure and improved connectivity and walkability within
the development. Heritage pathways within the Jury Lands Park
will be maintained and enhanced with connections to landscape
spaces beyond the immediate park environs.
Pedestrian Path
Future Trail
Subject to future
Secondary Plan
Page 110
2.9 Public Parking
Public parking will be situated to support the adaptive re-use
of the six Jury Lands heritage structures and other public park
uses. Enhanced existing parking lots, new parking areas on the
east side of the park and selective on-street parking will provide
adequate facilities for the proposed uses as streets within the
Jury Lands Park.
Private residential developments within the subject site will
provide their own parking to meet current Municipality of
Clarington standards.
Parking Lot
Subject to future
Secondary Plan
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 29Page 111
30 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Architectural Guidelines
3.1 Overall Neighbourhood Character
The overall neighbourhood character of the Special Policy
Area is envisioned as a unique addition to the existing urban
fabric of Bowmanville. Characterized by rich built heritage and
natural heritage resources, the site offers a unique opportunity
to develop a lively and dynamic residential district that
acknowledges the surrounding rich cultural and landscape
resources and extends and supports those resources in the
layout, built form, and provision for open space within each
development parcel. As discussed elsewhere in this document,
the framework for the development sets the stage for private
residential developments that respect nature, support adaptive
reuse, and connect residents meaningfully to one another and
to the larger natural heritage system of Soper Creek that defines
this part of Bowmanville.
One fundamental characteristic of new development on the site
is the comprehensive integration of low-impact development
methodologies including day lit stormwater management devices
into the landscape character of the neighbourhood.
Another fundamental characteristic of the new development is its
relationship to the Soper Creek frontage - making this frontage
as public and accessible as possible, and not fencing it off or
otherwise privatizing access, unlike the existing development on
the west side of Soper Creek.
Page 112
The overall neighbourhood character of the new residential
area is intended to be distinct from the surrounding ex-urban
development. Specifically the design of the neighbourhood is
to be informed by the Urban Design Principles set out in this
document, including specific deference to the following points:
• New development in and around the Designated Heritage
Structures to be designed in such a way as to acknowledge
the historical value of the Jury Lands as defined by National
Heritage Designation, including landscape elements identified
therein;
• New development should not turn its back on or privatize the
valley lands;
• New development to be designed to reflect the future
condition and character of the adjacent roads - Concession
and Lambs Road - including address and frontages onto these
streets that reflect their important role within the urban fabric;
• New development to utilize landscape as a transition between
built development and its natural and heritage surroundings,
including integrated stormwater management strategies; and
• New development should not preclude or limit the reuse of
heritage buildings over time as partnerships and funding
sources become available.
View of integrated stormwater management with new development
View of Soper Creek landscape looking east
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 31Page 113
32 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
3.2 Street Character and Interface
General Guiding Principles
The quality of a resident’s and visitor’s experience to the Special
Policy Area is dependent upon the successful design of the
individual building frontages and their interface with the streets
of the neighbourhood. Careful consideration needs to be given
to the public realm design and the character of the immediate
context, both existing and proposed.
Each type of street in the development has a unique character
that defines the scale, pace of movement and qualities of the
street.
Pavement widths of local streets are to be minimized in order
to encourage a slow pace of movement and maximize available
width for landscaped boulevards, pedestrian sidewalks and
walkways and stormwater management features.
Landscape materials (hard & soft) and exterior lighting (free
standing and building mounted) shall be selected for their quality,
durability and visual compatibility with the public realm.
Vehicular access should be appropriately integrated into the
design of the individual building massings and public realm, in
such a way that it supports the design concept and does not
overwhelm or detract from the design of the building elevation
and the overall character of the street.
Vehicular entrances for parking, servicing and loading access
shall be minimized.
Primary Street: Concession Street East
Concession Street East is an important east-west corridor
connecting downtown Bowmanville to municipalities to the east,
and provides the site with transit and bicycle connections into
the downtown.
For the purposes of this report, upgrades to the Concession
Street right-of-way adjacent to the subject site are assumed to
include sidewalks on either side of the traffic lanes separated
by a treed boulevard, and on-street bike lanes in either direction
that will ultimately connect to the Soper Creek trail system and
future improvements to Lambs Road / expansion of the bicycle
network eastward. The dimension of the bicycle lanes assumed
is consistent with the existing Concession Street East cross-
section west of the subject site, allowing for the expansion of
peak period traffic lanes assuming a sharrow condition.
New housing development fronting onto Concession Street
East is provided with a significant stormwater management /
landscape buffer that also includes pedestrian walkway access.
It is assumed that the ground level of the development along
this frontage will be elevated relative to the existing grading of
Concession Street and therefore visual privacy from the roadway
is achieved without significant fences or opaque constructed
retaining elements.
3.5m
Travel
3.5m
Travel + Sharrow
3.5m
Travel
3.5m
Travel + Sharrow
5.3m
Boulevard
5.3m
Boulevard
2.0m
Sidewalk
5.0m
SWM
Stacked
Townhouses
2.0m
Sidewalk
G
28.0m
ROW
7.5m
Setback
Page 114
Primary Street: Concession Street East
Concession Street East is an important east-west corridor
connecting downtown Bowmanville to municipalities to the east,
and provides the site with transit and bicycle connections into
the downtown.
For the purposes of this report, upgrades to the Concession
Street right-of-way adjacent to the subject site are assumed to
include sidewalks on either side of the traffic lanes separated
by a treed boulevard, and on-street bike lanes in either direction
that will ultimately connect to the Soper Creek trail system and
future improvements to Lambs Road / expansion of the bicycle
network eastward. The dimension of the bicycle lanes assumed
is consistent with the existing Concession Street East cross-
section west of the subject site, allowing for the expansion of
peak period traffic lanes assuming a sharrow condition.
New housing development fronting onto Concession Street
East is provided with a significant stormwater management /
landscape buffer that also includes pedestrian walkway access.
It is assumed that the ground level of the development along
this frontage will be elevated relative to the existing grading of
Concession Street and therefore visual privacy from the roadway
is achieved without significant fences or opaque constructed
retaining elements.
3.5m
Travel
3.5m
Travel + Sharrow
3.5m
Travel
3.5m
Travel + Sharrow
5.3m
Boulevard
5.3m
Boulevard
2.0m
Sidewalk
5.0m
SWM
Stacked
Townhouses
2.0m
Sidewalk
G
28.0m
ROW
7.5m
Setback
Primary Street: Concession Street East
Precedent: walkway separated by treed boulevardConcession Street (existing condition looking west)
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 33Page 115
34 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Primary Street: Lambs Road
Lambs Road is an important north-south corridor connecting
Lake Ontario and Hwy 401 with Bownmanville and lands to the
north, and is slated for upgrades coincident with the build-out of
the site and properties to the east. Its current cross-section will
transform from a rural two-lane roadway into a 36.0 metres right-
of-way incorporating two lanes of traffic in either direction plus
cycling and pedestrian infrastructure appropriate for the volume
of residents anticipated to live within the precinct.
For the purposes of this report, the upgraded cross-section has
been illustrated to include a central planted median that can
accommodate turning lanes as appropriate, as well as linear
landscape strips on either side separating the roadway and
raised cycle track from the pedestrian sidewalk. The sidewalks
are located at the property lines to encourage their installation
early in the roadway reconstruction process, and the landscapes
flanking the sidewalk will be graded to accommodate stormwater
collection and infiltration.
Development fronting onto Lambs Road is anticipated to include
new residential townhouse developments provided with a
sideyard setback from the right-of-way, that includes stormwater
management and landscape screening in the form of hedgerows
or dense tree plantings. Visual screening in the form of opaque
fences is not desirable along the Lambs Road frontage.
Where Lambs Road opens onto the Jury Lands Park and the
heritage buildings, increased visual access is desirable. The
design of plantings beyond the right-of-way should prioritize
views to the existing buildings and beyond to Soper Creek.
Any new parking lots situated fronting onto Lambs Road are to
be provided with appropriate landscape screening integrated
with the stormwater management setback of the roadway. 1.8m
Cycle
1.8m
Cycle
3.5m
Travel
4.0m
Median / Turn Lane
3.5m
Travel
3.5m
Travel
3.5m
Travel
2.0m
Sidewalk
2.0m
Sidewalk
H
36.0m
ROW
5.0m
SWM
Page 116
Primary Street: Lambs Road
Precedent: raised cycle track Lambs Road (existing condition looking north)
Where Lambs Road opens onto the Jury Lands Park and the
heritage buildings, increased visual access is desirable. The
design of plantings beyond the right-of-way should prioritize
views to the existing buildings and beyond to Soper Creek.
Any new parking lots situated fronting onto Lambs Road are to
be provided with appropriate landscape screening integrated
with the stormwater management setback of the roadway. 1.8m
Cycle
1.8m
Cycle
3.5m
Travel
4.0m
Median / Turn Lane
3.5m
Travel
3.5m
Travel
3.5m
Travel
2.0m
Sidewalk
2.0m
Sidewalk
H
36.0m
ROW
5.0m
SWM
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 35Page 117
36 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Secondary Street: Public
The secondary street network within the development
accommodates access by residents as well as the general public
into the development from Concession Street and Lambs Road.
These roadways have flanking residential developments including
single-family houses as well as townhouses, and terminate at the
primary streets in the form of major, signalized intersections.
The proposed cross-section of this roadway typology
acknowledges the difference between a townhouse frontage
and a single-family frontage, principally through the position of
the public sidewalk. When flanking single-family house lots, the
sidewalk is positioned against the property line to encourage
neighbourly interaction. When flanking townhouse development
the sidewalk is located to back of curb in order to provide for
landscape screening between the roadway and the more dense
form of multi-family housing.
The roadway itself is proposed to be two lanes with parking
available along one side of the street, with a total right-of-way
dimension of 20 metres, consistent with other public streets
within residential neigbhourhoods in Bowmanville.
In order to reduce the presence of parked cars within the
development, setbacks from the property line have been
articulated to include a portion of the built form 3.0 metres from
I
P
3.0m
Lane
3.0m
Lane
1.5m
Sidewalk
1.5m
Sidewalk
2.5m
Parking
4.25m4.25m Single Family
Housing
3 Storey
Townhouses
20.0m
ROW
3.0m + 6.0m
Setbacks
3.0m + 6.0m
Setbacks
the property line (proposed to include the primary entrances to
the dwellings) and other portions (proposed to be the garage)
setback 6.0 metres from the property line. This variegated
setback allows for cars parked within the private driveways to be
partially screened, and garage doors to be recessed within the
volume of the buildings.
Page 118
Secondary Street Public
Precedent: The Village, Niagara on the Lake, where garages are setback
relative to residential entries and front porches
Guildwood Drive - typical cross section west of the Jury Lands
Secondary Street: Public
The secondary street network within the development
accommodates access by residents as well as the general public
into the development from Concession Street and Lambs Road.
These roadways have flanking residential developments including
single-family houses as well as townhouses, and terminate at the
primary streets in the form of major, signalized intersections.
The proposed cross-section of this roadway typology
acknowledges the difference between a townhouse frontage
and a single-family frontage, principally through the position of
the public sidewalk. When flanking single-family house lots, the
sidewalk is positioned against the property line to encourage
neighbourly interaction. When flanking townhouse development
the sidewalk is located to back of curb in order to provide for
landscape screening between the roadway and the more dense
form of multi-family housing.
The roadway itself is proposed to be two lanes with parking
available along one side of the street, with a total right-of-way
dimension of 20 metres, consistent with other public streets
within residential neigbhourhoods in Bowmanville.
In order to reduce the presence of parked cars within the
development, setbacks from the property line have been
articulated to include a portion of the built form 3.0 metres from
I
P
3.0m
Lane
3.0m
Lane
1.5m
Sidewalk
1.5m
Sidewalk
2.5m
Parking
4.25m4.25m Single Family
Housing
3 Storey
Townhouses
20.0m
ROW
3.0m + 6.0m
Setbacks
3.0m + 6.0m
Setbacks
the property line (proposed to include the primary entrances to
the dwellings) and other portions (proposed to be the garage)
setback 6.0 metres from the property line. This variegated
setback allows for cars parked within the private driveways to be
partially screened, and garage doors to be recessed within the
volume of the buildings.
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 37Page 119
38 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Private Street: Condo Road
The private residential streets within the development are
intended to provide access to the condominium developments
while providing a pedestrian-scaled public realm. A combination
of front yard and side yard townhouse frontages flank these
streets, and as such their ownership and maintenance is
assumed to be within the control of the applicable condominium
corporation.
Furthermore a series of different frontage conditions require
distinct cross-sections as outlined below.
Example 1: The first variant of the private street typology applies
where the roadway is flanked by a townhouse front yard on
one side and a side yard on the other. The design of the street
accommodates two-way traffic lanes with vehicular parking
on the side facing the townhouse side yard and a pedestrian
walkway on the side facing the townhouse front yards. The
location of the parking and sidewalks will be determined by the
adjacent frontage configuration. The provision for tree planting
between the parking pads breaks up the vehicular presence
within the street and provides for shading and integrated
stormwater management opportunities. A further vegetated side
yard setback is illustrated to increase the screening of the side
yard condition from the street.
E
P
3.0m
Lane
3.0m
Lane
1.5m
Sidewalk
2.5m
Parking
6.5m
Parking
3 Storey
Townhouses
3.5 Storey
Stacked Townhouses
The built form flanking these streets is to be configured to
provide a strong street wall presence, with residential entrances
prominent and vehicular storage set back and screened.
Example 2: The second variant applies to the condition where
stacked townhouse blocks face one another across an elevated,
landscaped greenway. In this condition vehicular access is
provided at the rear of each townhouse block, allowing the
greenway to be exclusively pedestrian. The intention of this
central walkway is to allow residential entrances to face one
another across from a landscaped swale, collecting and filtering
stormwater and providing open space amenity shared by both
rows of townhouses. Residential entrances are presumed to be
raised (based on the stacked townhouse example provided by
Kaitlin), providing visual privacy from the shared open space.
Example 3: The third variant of the private street typology
addresses the condition of facing stacked townhouse rows
where vehicular access is provided. As per example one above,
two lanes of vehicular traffic are provided in order to access the
residential garages of the development. Driveways are provided
to each garage with planting beds installed in between in order to
provide visual screening and stormwater management capacity.
Pedestrian access to the residential units is presumed to take
place through the garages.
Page 120
Private Street: Condo Road Example 1
Precedent: building side yard planting
Precedent: townhouse entrances with garages screened and setback
from entries
Private Street: Condo Road
The private residential streets within the development are
intended to provide access to the condominium developments
while providing a pedestrian-scaled public realm. A combination
of front yard and side yard townhouse frontages flank these
streets, and as such their ownership and maintenance is
assumed to be within the control of the applicable condominium
corporation.
Furthermore a series of different frontage conditions require
distinct cross-sections as outlined below.
Example 1: The first variant of the private street typology applies
where the roadway is flanked by a townhouse front yard on
one side and a side yard on the other. The design of the street
accommodates two-way traffic lanes with vehicular parking
on the side facing the townhouse side yard and a pedestrian
walkway on the side facing the townhouse front yards. The
location of the parking and sidewalks will be determined by the
adjacent frontage configuration. The provision for tree planting
between the parking pads breaks up the vehicular presence
within the street and provides for shading and integrated
stormwater management opportunities. A further vegetated side
yard setback is illustrated to increase the screening of the side
yard condition from the street.
E
P
3.0m
Lane
3.0m
Lane
1.5m
Sidewalk
2.5m
Parking
6.5m
Parking
3 Storey
Townhouses
3.5 Storey
Stacked Townhouses
The built form flanking these streets is to be configured to
provide a strong street wall presence, with residential entrances
prominent and vehicular storage set back and screened.
Example 2: The second variant applies to the condition where
stacked townhouse blocks face one another across an elevated,
landscaped greenway. In this condition vehicular access is
provided at the rear of each townhouse block, allowing the
greenway to be exclusively pedestrian. The intention of this
central walkway is to allow residential entrances to face one
another across from a landscaped swale, collecting and filtering
stormwater and providing open space amenity shared by both
rows of townhouses. Residential entrances are presumed to be
raised (based on the stacked townhouse example provided by
Kaitlin), providing visual privacy from the shared open space.
Example 3: The third variant of the private street typology
addresses the condition of facing stacked townhouse rows
where vehicular access is provided. As per example one above,
two lanes of vehicular traffic are provided in order to access the
residential garages of the development. Driveways are provided
to each garage with planting beds installed in between in order to
provide visual screening and stormwater management capacity.
Pedestrian access to the residential units is presumed to take
place through the garages.
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 39Page 121
40 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Precedent: townhouse units facing a vegetated greenway,
Dockside Green, Victoria
Precedent: typical stacked townhouse unit section, Kaitlin
Example 2 - Private Outdoor Space
3.15m
Lane
3.15m
Lane
6.1m
Parking
6.1m
ParkingSWMPathwayPathway
3.5 Storey
Stacked Townhouses
3.5 Storey
Stacked Townhouses
F
Page 122
Precedent: townhouse garages integrated with facade design Precedent: townhouse garages interspersed with planting, Guelph
Example 3: Private Lane
3.15m
Lane
3.15m
Lane
6.1m
Parking
6.1m
ParkingSWMPathwayPathway
3.5 Storey
Stacked Townhouses
3.5 Storey
Stacked Townhouses
F
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 41Page 123
42 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Park Drive
The Park Drive right-of-way typology is a unique street within
the development, and its design intent stems from the original
experience of entering the site as illustrated photographically in
archival images shown opposite.
The Park Drive begins at Concession Road and runs north
along the path of the original entry drive of the Boys Training
School. The southern-most portion of this drive hugs the edge
of the existing plateau and provides views across the Soper
Valley. The proposed cross-section of this portion of right-of-
way is a 6.0m curbless pavement accommodating two-way
mixed cycle and vehicular traffic, flanked on either side by a
row of bollards. On the valley side is proposed an additional
permeable shoulder designed for pedestrian use. On the
development side is provided a significant landscape buffer
accommodating stormwater management infrastructure. The
form of development flanking this portion of the Park Drive are
townhouses set perpendicular to the path of the right-of-way,
allowing for significant view and circulation porosity between
the development and the Soper Valley. At the southern end
of the Park Drive is assumed to be a gated access point onto
Concession Road, so that it can be closed to vehicular traffic
when required. No residential traffic is dependent on the Park
Drive for access, allowing it to operate similar to a typical
provincial park access driveway.
Additional general principles applying to rights-of-way with
residential frontages include the following:
• Facades shall be animated with variety of architectural
elements such as bay windows, balconies, porches, and
articulated to respond to human scale at street level.
• The setback zone shall provide a transition between the
public realm and the private residential units to encourage
resident outdoor activity, while providing a sufficient level of
privacy.
• Multiple entrances shall be provided along the residential
frontages to ensure a level of resident and public presence
encouraging street animation.
• Building facades shall feature prominent windows and be
sufficiently open at street level to encourage “eyes on the
street”.
Page 124
As it moves north and emerges into the centre of the site, the
Park Drive cross-section changes to accommodate a modest
volume of on-street parking defined by curbs adjacent to the
adaptively reused heritage buildings within the Jury Lands Park.
Two lanes of traffic continue to be provided in addition to one-
sided parking, with the language of bollards distinguishing the
drive aisles from the park space continuing throughout the length
of this roadway typology.
Where the Park Drive crosses over an existing creek tributary the
surface treatment of the roadway itself is proposed to change to
reflect the passage of water below - precast planks or patterned
concrete being an appropriate expression of bridging over a
watercourse.
Where the Park Drive passes beside new surface parking
facilities a significant landscape buffer is proposed to screen the
new parking from the roadway itself.
Original entry drive to Jury Lands site seen from the south
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 43Page 125
44 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Park Drive - southern portion from Concession Road
3.0m
Travel
2.0m
Gravel Shoulder
3.0m
Travel
6.0m
SWM Stacked Townhouses
A
Public Park + Valley Lands
4.0m
Setback
Precedent: wood bollards adjacent to a curbless roadwayExisting condition of entrance roadway looking south toward Concession
Page 126
Park Drive - ring portion with on-street parking
C
P
3.75m
Travel
2.5m
Parking
3.75m
Travel
Park Drive - ring portion at heritage building and new parking lots
3.75m
Travel
3.0m
Planted Divider
2.0m
PathMeadow Lawn
3.75m
Travel Parking Lot
4.7m
Swale
4.7m
Swale
2.0m
Sidewalk
B
Precedent: park drive through Central Park, New York City, with
significant tree planting either side
Precedent: park drive in Boston showing minimal curb and planting
details and pedestrian crossings demarcated with painted lines
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 45Page 127
46 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
3.3 Architectural Style
Our design approach for new development follows best practices
in heritage conservation and adaptive re-use that encourage a
harmonious and progressive cultural narrative. Parks Canada’s
Standards and Guidelines for the Conservation of Historic Places
in Canada states that “the addition [of new development] should
be physically and visually compatible with, subordinate to and
distinguishable from the historic place, so that a false historical
appearance is not created”. This indicates that the architectural
style should be contemporary in design and not attempt to
replicate existing buildings, but must also be respectful to the
site’s heritage. In recognizing the key features of the existing
buildings, these same qualities can be incorporated into new
development so that the character of the place is conserved and
extended throughout the entire site.
Within the Designation of National Heritage Significance, the
existing buildings are noted for “their Prairie-Style architecture
with masonry construction, brick and stucco exteriors and
asbestos-shingle roofs, the modern sensibility of the buildings
expressed through open plans, the fragmented volumes,
the natural materials, their horizontality, their geometric
ornamentation and their flat roofs...”.
Prairie-Style architecture is defined by the prevalence of
horizontal lines, flat or hipped roofs with broad overhanging
eaves, windows grouped in horizontal bands, the architecture’s
integration with the surrounding landscape, its solid construction,
demonstration of craftsmanship, and discipline in the use of
ornamentation. With respect to the architectural style for new
development within the subject site, the same qualities as
outlined above are appropriate and desirable, specifically the
following:
• The architectural expression of the buildings be contemporary.
• Building massing to give preference to the horizontal.
• Building roof lines to be generally flat or hipped in shape with
broad overhanging eaves.
• Natural, robust and durable materials are to be utilized for
exterior cladding and landscape elements.
• The scale, articulation, rhythm, proportion, pattern, colour,
texture and materials of buildings shall be complimentary to
adjoining buildings, existing and new.
• Ornamentation is to be kept to a minimum and, when
utilized, should be geometric in nature and/or based on the
demonstration of the qualities of the materials utilized.
• The integration of the site’s surrounding landscape with the
architecture including the provision of pathways, patios, and
other entry features and outdoor amenities appropriate for the
building’s siting and frontage.
• A cohesive overall effect shall be provided, but no two
buildings shall appear identical. Repeated buildings are not
permitted unless they are part of a row whose design relies on
repetition to create a cohesive streetscape.
Page 128
Precedent: flat roof with horizontal window banding and recessed garagePrecedent: low-slung hipped roof and horizontal banding of windows
Precedent: expressed roof structure and robust materialityPrecedent: masonry bay townhouse row with horizontal brick banding
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 47Page 129
48 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
3.4 Building Component Design
Entrances, Porches and Patios
A key characteristic of new development is the architecture’s
integration with landscape.
• Within the residential development blocks, the individual and
grouped entrances are to be expressed through gracious and
generous entrance pathways and entry features, including
terraced patios where the ground floor elevation is either
above or below the surrounding grade.
• Landscaping is to be considered both for its ornamental
and screening capacity, and characteristics of the front yard
landscape should wrap around the side and rear yards of
buildings where possible to allow for a cohesive reading on
all four sides of a building.
• The placement of plantings against the facade of buildings
is to be purposeful, and designed to feature ornamental
plantings through the use of planters, urns, and discrete
lighting where appropriate.
• Entrance features are to be designed to assist in screening
private vehicle parking on the property, so that views onto
parked cars are minimized from the public realm.
Precedent: entry walkway with terraces and layered plantings
Page 130
Precedent: integrated site lighting with landscape features
Precedent: use of natural materials in landscape constructionPrecedent: extension of building cladding into landscape treatments
that wrap the perimeter of the building
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 49Page 131
50 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Roof Line, Shape and Pitch
The roof lines of new development are to correspond to the
predominant roof line typologies found in the existing buildings
on the property.
• The roof lines within new development are to be flat or low-
slung hipped profiles.
• Deep overhangs are encouraged to create sheltered exterior
“rooms” or porches in order to better connect indoors with
out and expand living areas into the landscape.
• The expression of the building’s roof structure within the
soffit is desirable when appropriate, as is the continuation of
the soffit material from inside the building to outside.
• Soffit materiality in sizeable overhang conditions must adhere
to the material restrictions noted elsewhere in this document.
• Gutters and downspouts are to be integrated into the facade
and designed to drain into the surrounding landscape.
Precedent: low-slope hipped roofs with deep overhangs
Precedent: flat roofs with slim profiles and integrated downspouts
Page 132
Precedent: low-sloped and flat roofs and horizontal projectionsPrecedent: low-sloped hipped roofs and “outdoor room”
Precedent: flat roofs and horizontal projections Precedent: flat roofs with deep overhangs and clerestory windows
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 51Page 133
52 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Windows and Doors
The window patterning within new developments is to favour
the horizontal, and take cues from mid-century and west-coast
architectural styles as demonstrated in the precedent images
contained within this report. Where vertical window forms
are required their mullion pattern should allow the reading of
horizontal banding.
Windows are to be constructed of durable materials and include
operable sections to encourage natural ventilation throughout
each residence. The use of clerestory windows at or below the
building roof line is encouraged in combination with lower
operable windows.
Entrance doors are to be considered as important features within
the front facade and their materiality and transparency are to be
consistent with the design of openings on the rest of the facade.
Precedent: large window and door areas broken into horizontal bands
Precedent: integration of horizontal mullion banding in larger openings
Page 134
Windows and Doors
The window patterning within new developments is to favour
the horizontal, and take cues from mid-century and west-coast
architectural styles as demonstrated in the precedent images
contained within this report. Where vertical window forms
are required their mullion pattern should allow the reading of
horizontal banding.
Windows are to be constructed of durable materials and include
operable sections to encourage natural ventilation throughout
each residence. The use of clerestory windows at or below the
building roof line is encouraged in combination with lower
operable windows.
Entrance doors are to be considered as important features within
the front facade and their materiality and transparency are to be
consistent with the design of openings on the rest of the facade.
Precedent: horizontal window banding Precedent: clerestory window band below roof line
Precedent: horizontal mullion details within larger windowsPrecedent: horizontal window band within larger glazed wall
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 53Page 135
54 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Architectural Detailing
The architectural detailing of new development is to be defined
by a simplicity of line and material and a demonstration of solid
construction and craftsmanship.
• Masonry elements are to be used so as to read as a material
of weight and thickness - expressing just a veneer of
masonry is not desirable.
• Structural connections, if exposed, are to be designed as
finished hardware components relating to other hardware
elements within the building facade.
• The expression of the structural frame of the building and/
or the roof structure, if exposed, should be continuous from
inside to outside whenever possible.
• Roof line eave thicknesses to be consistent in proportion with
the architectural style precedents noted within this report.
• Trim details around openings to be consistent in style with
the architectural style precedents noted within this report.
• Window and doors design and specifications to be consistent
in material and quality within a building.
Precedent: expressed roof structure extending to eaves
Precedent: integrated window and door designs
Page 136
Architectural Detailing
The architectural detailing of new development is to be defined
by a simplicity of line and material and a demonstration of solid
construction and craftsmanship.
• Masonry elements are to be used so as to read as a material
of weight and thickness - expressing just a veneer of
masonry is not desirable.
• Structural connections, if exposed, are to be designed as
finished hardware components relating to other hardware
elements within the building facade.
• The expression of the structural frame of the building and/
or the roof structure, if exposed, should be continuous from
inside to outside whenever possible.
• Roof line eave thicknesses to be consistent in proportion with
the architectural style precedents noted within this report.
• Trim details around openings to be consistent in style with
the architectural style precedents noted within this report.
• Window and doors design and specifications to be consistent
in material and quality within a building.
Precedent: expressed roof structure Precedent: roof profile and expressed structure of overhang
Precedent: expression of building structurePrecedent: masonry detailing to emphasize weight and
thickness of material
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 55Page 137
56 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Garage, Utility and Service Elements
The design and appropriate screening of supporting elements
within a building is an important factor in the overall architectural
design of new development.
• Vehicular garages to be setback from the main building face
and detailed in a manner compatible with the balance of the
architecture.
• Garage doors to be of high quality and any patterning
within the door be compatible with the characteristics of the
adjacent building openings.
• Building utilities, vents, service meters and connections shall
be minimized on primary street facades, concealed (within
the building or by landscape elements) and integrated within
the overall design of the building.
• Residential garbage enclosures are to be screened in
compatible material to the building, designed to be robust
and durable, and situated on side yards where possible to
limit their visual impact on the public realm.
Precedent: garage door material compatible with building cladding
Precedent: garage door relating to window patterning of building
Page 138
Garage, Utility and Service Elements
The design and appropriate screening of supporting elements
within a building is an important factor in the overall architectural
design of new development.
• Vehicular garages to be setback from the main building face
and detailed in a manner compatible with the balance of the
architecture.
• Garage doors to be of high quality and any patterning
within the door be compatible with the characteristics of the
adjacent building openings.
• Building utilities, vents, service meters and connections shall
be minimized on primary street facades, concealed (within
the building or by landscape elements) and integrated within
the overall design of the building.
• Residential garbage enclosures are to be screened in
compatible material to the building, designed to be robust
and durable, and situated on side yards where possible to
limit their visual impact on the public realm.
Precedent: metal perforated screening element Precedent: wood screening integrated with landscape design
Precedent: integrated screening with building facadePrecedent: wood screening integrated with landscape design
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 57Page 139
58 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
3.5 Materiality and Cladding
The selection of materials shall be sympathetic to the heritage
context, yet allow for a clear and distinct reading of the heritage
and contemporary buildings.
Materials shall be selected for their quality, durability and visual
compatibility with adjoining buildings (new and existing) and the
public realm.
Conservation strategies shall be holistic and complementary to
adjoining contemporary materials.
The following materials and building envelope systems shall not
be permitted within new development:
• Stucco and/or EIFS as a primary solid cladding material and as
accent or molding elements;
• Coloured or patterned finish effects that simulate another
material;
• Concrete block;
• Residential-type metal siding;
• Highly reflective (except as incidental decorative element) and
mirror finishes for glazing;
• Vinyl (siding, windows, railings, awnings);
• Pressure-treated softwood (excluding naturally rot-resistant,
durable softwoods used in a protected location).
Stone masonry with wood cladding and windows
Material Colour Palette
The colour palette of exterior materials is to be consistent with
the natural material colour where appropriate, and in cases
where materials are utilized that are painted or pre-finished
colours should relate to those found in the landscapes
surrounding the site.
Page 140
Brick masonry and cement board cladding Brick masonry and wood soffit
Wood siding and soffits Patterning within wood siding
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 59Page 141
60 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
3.6 Signage
The design of site signage and building signage within the
development is to be considered as a coordinated suite of
elements that share a common typography, materiality, and
character, so as to connect all built and open space resources on
the site into a cohesive whole.
• Feature site signage should be considered at all entrance
points from the flanking Primary Streets.
• The character of Jury Lands Park and the heritage
components therein should drive the design of signage
across the site.
• The addition of interpretive signage elements throughout the
Jury Lands Park is encouraged and the design is to be in
keeping with the balance of the site signage and wayfinding.
• Building signage is to be minimal and elegant in its design
and placement on the building facade. Oversized numbering
or lettering will not be permitted.
• All signage is to be produced using durable materials that do
not degrade, fade, or delaminate with time and exposure to
elements.
Precedent: house signage with distinct colouration
Precedent: house signage with distinct colouration
Page 142
Precedent: house signage in durable materialsPrecedent: house signage in compatible typography
Precedent: site signage integrated with landscape Precedent: site signage integrated with landscape
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 61Page 143
62 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
4.1 Building Adaptive Re-use
At the heart of the Jury Lands is the original campus of the
Boys Training School, six buildings from which still stand in
their original locations surrounded by remnants of the road and
pathway network set out in the original campus plan.
The development framework anticipates these existing buildings
be adaptively re-used to accommodate a range of uses that
would contribute positively to the surrounding residential
community and to Bowmanville more broadly. The existing
building attributes are well documented in the Background
Documents identified within this report. Based on this
documentation, and relating to the vision for Jury Lands Park
that surrounds these buildings, the following pages explore
potential programming that could be accommodated within each
building that would be compatible with the existing structure and
its position on the site.
The existing buildings considered for their adaptive re-use
potential as part of this study include the following:
1. Natatorium / Gymnasium
2. Triple Dormitory
3. Kiwanis House
4. Jury Lodge
5. Infirmary
6. Cafeteria
Heritage
Page 144
The existing buildings considered for their adaptive re-use
potential as part of this study include the following:
1. Natatorium / Gymnasium
2. Triple Dormitory
3. Kiwanis House
4. Jury Lodge
5. Infirmary
6. Cafeteria
1.
2.
3.
4.
6.
5.
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 63Page 145
64 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Natatorium / Gymnasium (1929)
6,681 SF | 1-storey with partial basement
The Natatorium / Gymnasium building is situated on a prominent
location relative to the Park Drive and Soper Valley, and is
therefore a good candidate for re-use with programming that
relates to the surrounding park and larger trail and parks system.
The building’s configuration includes two double-height spaces
originally used as a pool and gym, with a smaller central
supporting spine in between these volumes. Access to natural
light and views of the surrounding landscape are good, and the
building benefits from direct access to one of the proposed
public parking lots on the site.
DESCRIPTIONDATE
SCALE:
REVIEWED BY:DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO.:
DRAWING NO.
NO.
PROJECT:
FOR:
TITLE:
Contractor must verify all dimensions and be responsible forsame. Report any discrepancies to the Architect and awaitfurther instruction before commencing work.
Do not scale drawings.
All drawings are the property of Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd.Architects and must be returned upon request.
Drawings Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd Architects, Toronto,Ontario, Canada. Reproduction in whole or in part isforbidden without written permission.
This drawing is not to be used for construction purposesunless counter signed.
by:
date :
20141014 1 ISSUED FOR MOTHBALLING PLAN
14024 SEE DRAWING
JM / DF CB
CAMP 30
BOWMANVILLE
KAITLIN CORPORATION
28 SANDIFORD DR. SUITE 201
STOUFVILLE ON. L4A 1L8
N
0'8'16'24'4'12'
BUILDING 1
GROUND FLOOR
PLAN
A1.2
DESCRIPTIONDATE
SCALE:
REVIEWED BY:DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO.:
DRAWING NO.
NO.
PROJECT:
FOR:
TITLE:
Contractor must verify all dimensions and be responsible forsame. Report any discrepancies to the Architect and awaitfurther instruction before commencing work.
Do not scale drawings.
All drawings are the property of Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd.Architects and must be returned upon request.
Drawings Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd Architects, Toronto,Ontario, Canada. Reproduction in whole or in part isforbidden without written permission.
This drawing is not to be used for construction purposesunless counter signed.
by:
date :
20141014 1 ISSUED FOR MOTHBALLING PLAN
14024 SEE DRAWING
JM / DF CB
CAMP 30
BOWMANVILLE
KAITLIN CORPORATION
28 SANDIFORD DR. SUITE 201
STOUFVILLE ON. L4A 1L8
N
0'8'16'24'4'12'
BUILDING 1
GROUND FLOOR
PLAN
A1.2area of basement
Photo of existing gymnasium Photo of building from the west
Page 146
Possible Adaptive Re-use: Active Recreation
There are numerous precedents for old buildings being reused
for fitness gyms supporting active recreation, health and
wellness within a community. Aligned with its original purpose
and use, the Natatorium/Gymnasium building would be well
suited to accommodate active recreation uses as part of the
larger Soper Creek recreation system.
The two-storey volume of gym could be reused as a gym, or as
a fitness centre space for cardio machines, weights, or some
combination therein.
The pool volume could be renovated with a flat floor for
additional gym area, or designed more as a multi-purpose space
for yoga and accommodating a range of assembly activities.
The spaces in between could be used for entry, support, storage
and change rooms appropriate for the flanking uses.
Private Fitness Club, Old Montreal
Totum Fitness, Toronto
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 65Page 147
66 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Triple Dormitory (1928)
14,470 SF | 1-storey with partial basement
The Triple Dormitory is located on a prominent raised plateau
just outside of the existing ring road, and is designed to take
advantage of the expansive west-facing views its siting allows.
Configured as a series of small dormitories surrounding a larger,
double-height, naturally lit volume, the building is the largest on
the property and, due to its construction, highly adaptable to a
range of new uses.
0'8' 16' 24'4'12'
DESCRIPTIONDATE
SCALE:
REVIEWED BY:DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO.:
DRAWING NO.
NO.
PROJECT:
FOR:
TITLE:
Contractor must verify all dimensions and be responsible forsame. Report any discrepancies to the Architect and awaitfurther instruction before commencing work.Do not scale drawings.All drawings are the property of Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd.Architects and must be returned upon request.Drawings Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd Architects, Toronto,Ontario, Canada. Reproduction in whole or in part isforbidden without written permission.This drawing is not to be used for construction purposesunless counter signed.by:date :
20141014 1 ISSUED FOR MOTHBALLING PLAN
14024 SEE DRAWING
JM / DF CB
CAMP 30
BOWMANVILLE
KAITLIN CORPORATION
28 SANDIFORD DR. SUITE 201
STOUFVILLE ON. L4A 1L8
N
BUILDING 2
GROUND FLOOR
PLAN
A2.2
0' 8' 16' 24'4'12'
DESCRIPTIONDATE
SCALE:
REVIEWED BY:DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO.:
DRAWING NO.
NO.
PROJECT:
FOR:
TITLE:
Contractor must verify all dimensions and be responsible forsame. Report any discrepancies to the Architect and awaitfurther instruction before commencing work.Do not scale drawings.All drawings are the property of Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd.Architects and must be returned upon request.Drawings Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd Architects, Toronto,Ontario, Canada. Reproduction in whole or in part isforbidden without written permission.This drawing is not to be used for construction purposesunless counter signed.by:date :20141014 1 ISSUED FOR MOTHBALLING PLAN
14024 SEE DRAWING
JM / DF CB
CAMP 30
BOWMANVILLE
KAITLIN CORPORATION
28 SANDIFORD DR. SUITE 201
STOUFVILLE ON. L4A 1L8
N
BUILDING 2
GROUND FLOOR
PLAN
A2.2
area of basement
area of double-height
Historical photograph of Triple Dorm as seen from the southwest
BOWMANVILLE BOYS TRAINING SCHOOL/CAMP 30
Figure 42 Triple Dormitory (called North, Centre, and South Lodges in the period), James
Govan, architect, 1928. (Programme, Boys’ Training School 4th Annual Fall Fair,
September 1930)
1369
Page 148
Possible Adaptive Re-use: Office / Incubator
The concept of re-use as an office or incubator space
acknowledges the trend toward on-demand hotelling or hot-
desking within the office market, and the desire for large, open
plan areas for collaborative work as demonstrated by other
facilities opened in the surrounding region.
The central double-height daylit volume could be used for
workshops or communal work spaces supported by the cellular
rooms around the perimeter of the building that could be
renovated as more private office areas.
The existing basement could be used for storage to support uses
within the building.
Precedent: The Tannery Incubator, Waterloo
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 67Page 149
68 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Kiwanis House (1927)
6,148 SF | 1-storey with partial basement
The Kiwanis House and Jury Lodge are both configured in a
similar way, with single-storey cellular spaces surrounding a
taller, double-height volume accommodating larger gathering
spaces within the plan. Both of these buildings are highly
adaptable to uses that require both small-scale private rooms as
well as larger, more grand rooms in both scale and volume. Each
of these buildings also benefit from good access to the outdoors,
with their footprint configurations creating small courtyards that
could be programmed in ways compatible and supportive of the
interior uses. area of basement
20141014 1 ISSUED FOR MOTHBALLING PLAN
14024 SEE DRAWING
JM / DF CB
CAMP 30
BOWMANVILLE
KAITLIN CORPORATION
28 SANDIFORD DR. SUITE 201
STOUFVILLE ON. L4A 1L8
DESCRIPTIONDATE
SCALE:
REVIEWED BY:DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO.:
DRAWING NO.
NO.
PROJECT:
FOR:
TITLE:
Contractor must verify all dimensions and be responsible forsame. Report any discrepancies to the Architect and awaitfurther instruction before commencing work.
Do not scale drawings.
All drawings are the property of Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd.Architects and must be returned upon request.
Drawings Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd Architects, Toronto,Ontario, Canada. Reproduction in whole or in part isforbidden without written permission.
This drawing is not to be used for construction purposesunless counter signed.
by:
date :
0'8'16'24'4'12'
N
BUILDING 3
GROUND FLOOR
PLAN
A3.2
20141014 1 ISSUED FOR MOTHBALLING PLAN
14024 SEE DRAWING
JM / DF CB
CAMP 30
BOWMANVILLE
KAITLIN CORPORATION
28 SANDIFORD DR. SUITE 201
STOUFVILLE ON. L4A 1L8
DESCRIPTIONDATE
SCALE:
REVIEWED BY:DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO.:
DRAWING NO.
NO.
PROJECT:
FOR:
TITLE:
Contractor must verify all dimensions and be responsible forsame. Report any discrepancies to the Architect and awaitfurther instruction before commencing work.
Do not scale drawings.
All drawings are the property of Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd.Architects and must be returned upon request.
Drawings Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd Architects, Toronto,Ontario, Canada. Reproduction in whole or in part isforbidden without written permission.
This drawing is not to be used for construction purposesunless counter signed.
by:
date :
0'8'16'24'4'12'
N
BUILDING 3
GROUND FLOOR
PLAN
A3.2area of double-height
Page 150
Possible Adaptive Re-use: Child Care Centre
The square footage of the Kiwanis House is appropriate for a
child care centre use, which is a program that has been identified
as needed within the surrounding community.
The smaller spaces around the perimeter of the building could
be converted into children’s playrooms, classrooms or reading
rooms surrounding the larger central gathering space which
could be used as a communal area or for gross motor play in
inclement weather.
The basement could be used for storage to support uses within
the building.
Age-appropriate outdoor play areas could be established around
the perimeter of the building and accessed directly from each
playroom.
Precedent: Dane Avenue Child Care, City of Toronto
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 69Page 151
70 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Jury Lodge (1927)
5,251 SF | 1-storey with partial basement
The Jury Lodge, as noted previously, shares many qualities with
the Kiwanis House in terms of its relative size and configuration,
however the Jury Lodge is located in a slightly more remote
location relative to the Jury Lands Park and the public open
spaces therein, and therefore might be considered for re-use
by tenants requiring slightly more privacy and/or have less of a
demand for highly visible street frontage.
BOWMANVILLE BOYS TRAINING SCHOOL/CAMP 30
Figure 38. Cafeteria, James Govan, architect, 1924. (Programme, Boys’ Training School
4th Annual Fall Fair, September 1930)
Figure 39. Jury House (called Jury Lodge), James Govan, architect, 1924. (Programme,
Boys’ Training School 4th Annual Fall Fair, September 1930)
1367
area of basement
20141014 1 ISSUED FOR MOTHBALLING PLAN
14024 SEE DRAWING
JM / DF CB
CAMP 30
BOWMANVILLE
KAITLIN CORPORATION
28 SANDIFORD DR. SUITE 201
STOUFVILLE ON. L4A 1L8
DESCRIPTIONDATE
SCALE:
REVIEWED BY:DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO.:
DRAWING NO.
NO.
PROJECT:
FOR:
TITLE:
Contractor must verify all dimensions and be responsible forsame. Report any discrepancies to the Architect and awaitfurther instruction before commencing work.
Do not scale drawings.
All drawings are the property of Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd.Architects and must be returned upon request.
Drawings Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd Architects, Toronto,Ontario, Canada. Reproduction in whole or in part isforbidden without written permission.
This drawing is not to be used for construction purposesunless counter signed.
by:
date :
0'8'16'24'4'12'
N
BUILDING 6
GROUND FLOOR
PLAN
A6.2
20141014 1 ISSUED FOR MOTHBALLING PLAN
14024 SEE DRAWING
JM / DF CB
CAMP 30
BOWMANVILLE
KAITLIN CORPORATION
28 SANDIFORD DR. SUITE 201
STOUFVILLE ON. L4A 1L8
DESCRIPTIONDATE
SCALE:
REVIEWED BY:DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO.:
DRAWING NO.
NO.
PROJECT:
FOR:
TITLE:
Contractor must verify all dimensions and be responsible forsame. Report any discrepancies to the Architect and awaitfurther instruction before commencing work.
Do not scale drawings.
All drawings are the property of Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd.Architects and must be returned upon request.
Drawings Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd Architects, Toronto,Ontario, Canada. Reproduction in whole or in part isforbidden without written permission.
This drawing is not to be used for construction purposesunless counter signed.
by:
date :
0'8'16'24'4'12'
N
BUILDING 6
GROUND FLOOR
PLAN
A6.2area of double-height
Page 152
Possible Adaptive Re-use: Single Tenancy
Given the location and scale of the Jury Lodge, it could be an
ideal office use building for an organization, or a more residential
use similar to a supportive living centre, hospice etc. as it
combines small-scale rooms that could be converted to offices
or bedrooms with a larger gathering space in the centre, and
benefits from a siting more removed from the public and views
more directly onto the Soper Creek.
The central double-height daylit volume could be used for
gatherings supported by the cellular rooms around the perimeter
of the building.
The basement could be used for storage to support uses within
the building.
Precedent: L’Arche Daybreak, The Big House, Richmond Hill
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 71Page 153
72 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Infirmary (1927)
3,825 SF | 2-storey with full basement
The Infirmary is a building situated prominently near the Lambs
Road entrance to the site, and is the only hipped roof structure
within the collection of heritage buildings. Its ground floor
overlooks the centre of the site, and connects meaningfully to the
terraced landscape beyond. Originally used as a medical facility,
its room configuration is more traditional in nature than the other
buildings on site, and is therefore well suited to a variety of uses
that might require multiple floors and smaller, more intimate
rooms and spaces.
20141014 1 ISSUED FOR MOTHBALLING PLAN
14024 SEE DRAWING
JM / DF CB
CAMP 30
BOWMANVILLE
KAITLIN CORPORATION
28 SANDIFORD DR. SUITE 201
STOUFVILLE ON. L4A 1L8
NORTH
DESCRIPTIONDATE
SCALE:
REVIEWED BY:DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO.:
DRAWING NO.
NO.
PROJECT:
FOR:
TITLE:
Contractor must verify all dimensions and be responsible forsame. Report any discrepancies to the Architect and awaitfurther instruction before commencing work.
Do not scale drawings.
All drawings are the property of Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd.Architects and must be returned upon request.
Drawings Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd Architects, Toronto,Ontario, Canada. Reproduction in whole or in part isforbidden without written permission.
This drawing is not to be used for construction purposesunless counter signed.
by:
date :
0'8'16'24'4'12'
BUILDING 4
SECOND FLOOR
PLAN
A4.3
20141014 1 ISSUED FOR MOTHBALLING PLAN
14024 SEE DRAWING
JM / DF CB
CAMP 30
BOWMANVILLE
KAITLIN CORPORATION
28 SANDIFORD DR. SUITE 201
STOUFVILLE ON. L4A 1L8
NORTH
DESCRIPTIONDATE
SCALE:
REVIEWED BY:DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO.:
DRAWING NO.
NO.
PROJECT:
FOR:
TITLE:
Contractor must verify all dimensions and be responsible forsame. Report any discrepancies to the Architect and awaitfurther instruction before commencing work.
Do not scale drawings.
All drawings are the property of Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd.Architects and must be returned upon request.
Drawings Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd Architects, Toronto,Ontario, Canada. Reproduction in whole or in part isforbidden without written permission.
This drawing is not to be used for construction purposesunless counter signed.
by:
date :
0'8'16'24'4'12'
BUILDING 4
GROUND FLOOR
PLAN
A4.2
20141014 1 ISSUED FOR MOTHBALLING PLAN
14024 SEE DRAWING
JM / DF CB
CAMP 30BOWMANVILLE
KAITLIN CORPORATION
28 SANDIFORD DR. SUITE 201
STOUFVILLE ON. L4A 1L8
NORTHDESCRIPTIONDATE
SCALE:
REVIEWED BY:DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO.:
DRAWING NO.
NO.
PROJECT:
FOR:
TITLE:
Contractor must verify all dimensions and be responsible forsame. Report any discrepancies to the Architect and awaitfurther instruction before commencing work.Do not scale drawings.All drawings are the property of Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd.Architects and must be returned upon request.Drawings Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd Architects, Toronto,Ontario, Canada. Reproduction in whole or in part isforbidden without written permission.This drawing is not to be used for construction purposesunless counter signed.by:date :
0'8'16'24'4'12'
BUILDING 4
GROUND FLOOR
PLAN
A4.2
2nd Floor
Ground Floor
Page 154
Possible Adaptive Re-use: Boutique Hotel / B+B
The scale and nature of the Infirmary’s interior configuration
would suggest it could be converted into a boutique hotel with
a restaurant on the ground floor that could also support food
services needs of the other buildings on the Jury Lands site.
The existing floor plans are cellular in nature and lend themselves
to smaller hospitality rooms or could be combined to up to 4
larger suites per floor (400-500 SF each) if desirable.
The ground floor could be converted into a reception and
restaurant space with high public visibility, given its location
adjacent to main entrance from Lambs Road.
The adjacent gardens could be themed to support the restaurant
kitchen and/or events hosted within the building.
Precedent: Drake Devonshire Lobby
Precedent: Drake Devonshire - Re-Use of Old Farmhouse + Addition
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 73Page 155
74 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Cafeteria (1924-25)
8,095 SF | 1-storey with partial basement
The Cafeteria is situated in a prominent location along the ring
road near the centre of the site, and is highly visible from Lambs
Road. It is one of the most compelling buildings on site due to its
size, multiple roof lines and generous window openings onto the
surrounding landscape. Its interior architecture is also unique,
and inspiring to visit and imagine restored. It is a naturally
compelling building, drawing great interest from all those who
visit the site.
DN
R
20141014 1 ISSUED FOR MOTHBALLING PLAN
14024 SEE DRAWING
JM / DF CB
CAMP 30
BOWMANVILLE
KAITLIN CORPORATION
28 SANDIFORD DR. SUITE 201
STOUFVILLE ON. L4A 1L8
DESCRIPTIONDATE
SCALE:
REVIEWED BY:DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO.:
DRAWING NO.
NO.
PROJECT:
FOR:
TITLE:
Contractor must verify all dimensions and be responsible forsame. Report any discrepancies to the Architect and awaitfurther instruction before commencing work.
Do not scale drawings.
All drawings are the property of Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd.Architects and must be returned upon request.
Drawings Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd Architects, Toronto,Ontario, Canada. Reproduction in whole or in part isforbidden without written permission.
This drawing is not to be used for construction purposesunless counter signed.
by:
date :
0'8'16'24'4'12'
N
BUILDING 5
GROUND FLOOR
PLAN
A5.2
DN R
20141014 1 ISSUED FOR MOTHBALLING PLAN
14024 SEE DRAWING
JM / DF CB
CAMP 30
BOWMANVILLE
KAITLIN CORPORATION
28 SANDIFORD DR. SUITE 201STOUFVILLE ON. L4A 1L8
DESCRIPTIONDATE
SCALE:
REVIEWED BY:DRAWN BY:
PROJECT NO.:
DRAWING NO.
NO.
PROJECT:
FOR:
TITLE:
Contractor must verify all dimensions and be responsible forsame. Report any discrepancies to the Architect and awaitfurther instruction before commencing work.
Do not scale drawings.
All drawings are the property of Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd.Architects and must be returned upon request.
Drawings Goldsmith Borgal & Co. Ltd Architects, Toronto,Ontario, Canada. Reproduction in whole or in part isforbidden without written permission.
This drawing is not to be used for construction purposesunless counter signed.
by:
date :
0'8'16'24'4'12'
N
BUILDING 5
GROUND FLOOR
PLAN
A5.2area of basement area of double-height
BOWMANVILLE BOYS TRAINING SCHOOL/CAMP 30
Figure 38. Cafeteria, James Govan, architect, 1924. (Programme, Boys’ Training School
4th Annual Fall Fair, September 1930)
Figure 39. Jury House (called Jury Lodge), James Govan, architect, 1924. (Programme,
Boys’ Training School 4th Annual Fall Fair, September 1930)
1367
Page 156
Possible Adaptive Re-use: Event Venue
The scale and nature of the Cafeteria’s interior configuration
would suggest it could be converted into an event venue
accommodating between 200-300 persons for events. The
two-storey volume at centre would be great for public or private
gatherings, recreational activities, gallery space, large lectures or
workshops, performances, etc.
The smaller, more cellular spaces surrounding used for entry,
support, and perhaps a catering kitchen supported by a
more robust kitchen within the restaurant proposed to be
accommodated within the renovated Infirmary next door. The
basement could be used for storage.
The building’s proximity to Lambs Road as well as the new
surface parking facilities further support the idea of the building
as accommodating large gatherings.
Existing central daylit volume within the Cafeteria
Precedent: Artscape Wychwood Barns in Event Mode
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 75Page 157
76 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Jury Lands Park
5.1 Preliminary Park Concept
The intention behind the Jury Lands Park design concept is to
provide a framework for community gathering and recreation
that reflects the location of the park within the Soper Creek trail
system, the rich history of outdoor activities programmed on the
site, and ties meaningfully to the future uses proposed for the
heritage buildings. Furthermore, as the primary outdoor amenity
for residents and visitors, the Park stands as the heart and public
“common” of the surrounding neighbourhood, and reinforces the
community’s unique identity.
Fundamental to the Park’s overall structure is the retention of the
original oval drive, pathway and view plane structure of the site.
Uses within the Park are organized within the spoked array of
paths, with larger gathering and recreational spaces in the centre
and smaller, more intimate outdoor activities accommodated
between buildings. Views to and from Soper Creek are
reinforced whenever possible, as are trail connections. Existing
watercourses across the site, marked by more distinct areas of
plantings and tree canopy, are maintained in order to allow for
ecological systems to thrive and stormwater to be managed in an
effective manner.
Page 158
C.
D.
E.
F.
The proposed components of the Jury Lands Park
include the following:
A. Active Landscape
B. The Lawn
C. Children’s Garden
D. Water Garden
E. Food Garden
F. Event Terrace
G. Look Out
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 77Page 159
78 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Active Landscape
The landscape surrounding the existing Natatorium/Gymnasium
are proposed to support sporting and health and wellness
activities year round, including skating, active play, formal and
informal games, and even outdoor exercise equipment as an
extension of the proposed recreational activities accommodated
within the building. Each of these activities would be integrated
into the surrounding landscape and designed as features within
an intact and coherent landscape. Flexibility and adaptability are
important characteristics of each component within the Active
Landscape, so that seasonal use and all-ages use are supported.
The Active Landscape south of the Natatorium/Gymnasium may
also be a good location for the planting of maple saplings, as a
way of reinforcing the Park Drive as it moves from Concession
Street East and emerges into the Jury Lands Park.
Precedent: outdoor fitness equipment adapted for a park context
Precedent: skating loop at Colonel Samuel Smith Park, Toronto
Page 160
The Lawn
At the heart of the Jury Lands Park is proposed a central lawn
that provides for flexible use including additional active and
passive recreation activities. This lawn reinstates the sports
fields and active green evident in photographs from the Boys
Training School, and would accommodate a range of sports and
cultural activities throughout the year.
The natural terracing of landscape around the perimeter of the
lawn, evidenced by the steps still in existence adjacent to the
Cafeteria, Infirmary and Kiwanis House, could be restored and/or
expanded upon to create a line of tiered and planted seating.
Precedent: The Green in New York’s Central Park
Precedent: tiered amphitheater seating integrated into the landscape
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 79Page 161
80 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Children’s Garden
As the Kiwanis House is proposed to be adaptively re-used as a
children’s facility / child care, nature-based outdoor play areas
could be established around the perimeter of the building and
accessed directly from each playroom. Some areas would be
fenced and used exclusively by the child care, and others would
be open to the public. Designed as a continuous play landscape,
the Children’s Garden would offer residents and visitors an
unique opportunity to engage with the site, learn about its
history and its ecological richness. Furthermore the location
of the Children’s Garden is adjacent to the Active Landscape,
allowing for all age groups to engage with the landscape in close
proximity to one another.
Precedent: nature-based play elements including furniture
Precedent: nature-based play, Los Angeles
Page 162
Water Garden
Located in line with the natural drainage topography of the site,
and directly visible from the Park’s entrance from Lambs Road,
the Water Garden would demonstrate stormwater management
best practices, integrating water into a meditative garden
landscape. Situated between the Kiwanis House and Infirmary,
the Water Garden would also support the flanking uses within
these two buildings, and provide an interpretive opportunity with
respect to the larger Soper Creek drainage system that crosses
the site.
Precedent: native plantings within swale, Rain Gardens United
Precedent: stormwater pond and plantings, Toronto
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 81Page 163
82 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Food Garden
Food brings communities together. The proposed Food Garden
within the Jury Lands Park is conceived as both a teaching and
commercially-relevant opportunity to reintegrate small-scale
agriculture to the former Darch Farm. Positioned adjacent to the
proposed Infirmary Hotel/Restaurant use, the Food Garden could
provide agricultural demonstrations tied to a seasonal menu at
the restaurant. Further agricultural opportunities on the site exist
including allotment gardens, which could be integrated with the
Food Garden or positioned adjacent.
Precedent: kitchen garden used by chefs to enrich their menu
Precedent: food garden laid out in a traditional English style
Page 164
Event Terrace
The Event Terrace is conceived of as an extension of the event
venue use within the Cafeteria, and is positioned so as to take
advantage of the southern and westward views the tiered
landscape of the Jury Lands provides. The Terrace would include
a hardscaped zone for outdoor events including adequate
power, AV and lighting to support event use throughout the year.
Consideration of shade provisions for summer months is also
important, achieved through canopies or deciduous tree planting.
Precedent: outdoor dinner gathering under the stars
Precedent: wedding venue with a natural backdrop
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 83Page 165
84 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Lookout
The Look Out proposed on the western edge of the Park provides
an outlook over the Soper Creek ravine and valley lands, and
punctuates / reinforces a new connection to the trail head into
creek system.
Precedent: lookout over valley landscape
Precedent: informal seating opportunities integrated with lookout
Page 166
Phasing
6.1 Suggested Phase 1 Improvements
The reality of the Jury Lands buildings revitalization will unfold
over time as development interest and partnership opportunities
arise. Understanding this, there is value in considering how the
portion of the site identified in the 2016 legal agreement (the
central portion) could be revitalized in a modest way in order to
catalyze interest and investment in the site. Investment in the
public realm along with modest interior renovation can translate
into significant interest and energy. The following are suggested
priorities for Phase 1 of the site’s revitalization:
Landscape Amenities
• Walking Paths through Heritage Landscape
• Access to Soper Creek Trail System
• Public Parking close to Trail Head
• Informational and Interpretive Signage throughout Site
• Special Landscape Feature / Use
Supporting Indoor Amenities
• Use to Animate the site 7-days/week to improve site security
• Space for Gatherings / Events - steady source of income
• Public Washrooms to support surrounding active recreation
• Example: Powerhouse Rec. Centre includes washrooms,
change rooms, gallery, a community kitchen and multi-
purpose room for 50 people. Outdoor skating ribbon
1st in Toronto - immediate draw to the site and flexible
accommodation of people when they arrive.
Farmers’ Market at Don Valley Brick Works pre: renovation
Skating at Wychwood Barns pre: renovation
Colonel Sam Smith Park / Powerhouse Recreation Centre
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 85Page 167
86 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Option 1a - Soper Recreation
• Renovate Natatorium into Indoor Rec. Centre including
provision of washrooms
• Repave existing western parking lot
• Establish improved trail head into valley
• Establish new roadway access from Lambs Road leading to
southern loop
• All other buildings
mothballed for future
• Improve landscape
Options for Phase 1 Renewal
The following four options illustrate ways in which lands at the
centre of the site can be renewed in a phased manner so as to
establish a destination on site to attract public attention and
visitation/engagement. Each option relies upon a central theme
to connect all of the suggested improvements, and considers
the likelihood of a modest budget for Phase 1 investment. The
territory in the dashed outline in each diagram indicates the
territory to be improved in Phase 1, whereas the red outline
indicates lands identified in the 2016 legal agreement.
Page 168
Option 1b - Soper Recreation
w/ Concession Access
• Renovate Natatorium into
Indoor Rec. Centre including
provision of washrooms
• Repave existing western
parking lot
• Establish improved trail head
into valley
• Establish new park drive
access from Concession
Road
• All other buildings
mothballed for future
• Improve landscape
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 87Page 169
88 Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines
Option 2 - Jury Lands Works
• Renovate Triple Dorm into Office Incubator
• Partner with Child Care provider to renovate Kiwanis House
• Establish new roadway access from Lambs Road + parking
• All other buildings mothballed for future
• Improve landscape
Page 170
Option 3 - Jury Lands Plays
• Renovate Cafeteria into Event Venue
• Renovate Infirmary into Hotel
• Establish new roadway access from Lambs Road including
parking (or reuse existing roadway access)
• All other buildings
mothballed for future
• Improve landscape
Special Policy Area F - Urban Design Guidelines 89Page 171
50 Park Road
Toronto, Ontario
Canada M4W 2N5
www.dtah.com
Page 172
Attachment 1 to
Report PSD-041-19
(2) Map A3 – Land Use Bowmanville Urban Area is amended as shown on
Exhibit “A” to this Amendment.
(3) Appendix B – Unit Targets by Neighbourhood as follows:
Urban Area
Neigbourhoods
Low Medium High Total
Juryvale* 400 300 - 700
*Units for these Neighbourhood Areas do not include Future Secondary
Plan Units as they will be added through the development of a Secondary
Plan
Page 173
Attachment 1 to
Report PSD-041-19
121
Page 174
Attachment 2 to
Report PSD-041-19
Page 175
Attachment 3 to
Report PSD-041-19
Page 176
Attachment 3 to
Report PSD-041-19
Page 177
Memo
Page | 1
The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington
40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville ON L1C 3A6 | 905-623-3379
If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility
Co-ordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131
As requested at the September 9 General Government Committee meeting, staff have
followed up with the Region of Durham regarding the concerns raised over the impact of
the 112-unit development proposal outlined in Planning Report PSD-036-19. Please
find attached a memorandum from the Region of Durham’s traffic department regarding
this matter and reiterating their previous comments that this development, on its own,
will not have a significant impact on the operation of the Hwy. 2 and Prestonvale Road
intersection. The memo also states that the Region recognizes the existing operational
concerns during certain, short windows of time and have provided interim
recommendations that will address the existing and short-term future impacts.
Furthermore, staff will request that the Region of Durham consider further studies of the
intersection to address the longer-term impacts that are expected as a result of the
planned development, as well as an estimate of when or how many additional new
housing units would trigger the need for construction of a longer-term solution. Staff will
also ask that this improvement be included in the Region’s future budget such that the
works are complete prior to the occupation of the identified number of housing units.
Regards,
Anthony S. Cannella
Director of Engineering Services
Attachment: Durham Region Memo re: HWY 2 at Prestonvale Road Traffic Signal
Operations
cc: Department Heads
To: Mayor and Members of Council
From: Anthony S. Cannella
Date: September 16, 2019
Subject: Highway 2 and Prestonvale Road Traffic Signal Operations
File: D.02.33.028
Page 178
If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact
the Accessibility Co-ordinator at 1-800-372-1102 extension 2009.
September 16, 2019
Mr. Tony Cannella
Director – Engineering and Building Services
Municipality of Clarington
tcannella@clarington.net
Dear Mr. Canella:
RE: Highway 2 at Prestonvale Road – Traffic Signal Operations
Further to our recent discussions, Durham Region’s Traffic
Engineering and Operations Division has further reviewed the
proposed developments at Bloor Street and Prestonvale Road and
anticipated impacts on the northbound traffic queue at Highway 2 and
Prestonvale Road in the morning peak period.
Analysis of current intersection operations do not indicate a poor level
of service for the intersection, including the northbound left movement.
Our observations on site and through CCTV video indicate that queued
vehicles, wanting to make a northbound left turn, typically cleared the
intersection during the green signal indications. Any northbound left
turning vehicles that approach the intersection during the green
indication may or may not be serviced and can appropriately expect to
wait until the next cycle of the signals.
There are, however, indications that the queuing of the northbound left
movement is undesirable at times. The Region’s Traffic Division is
considering several actions to address these concerns, each of which
with its own challenges and opportunities. The two most notable
options include the installation of a second northbound left turn lane
and modifications to existing signal timings. Details are as follows:
1. Installing a second northbound left turn lane would, in theory,
reduce the vehicle queue length depending on how drivers
The Regional
Municipality
of Durham
Works Department
Traffic Operations Centre
101 CONSUMERS DRIVE
PO BOX 623
WHITBY, ON L1N 6A3
CANADA
905-666-8116
1-866-786-8116
Fax: 905-666-8826
Email: traffic@durham.ca
www.durham.ca
Steven Kemp, P.Eng.
Manager, Traffic
Engineering & Operations
Page 179
If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact
the Accessibility Co-ordinator at 1-800-372-1102 extension 2009.
would choose to utilize both lanes. This option would introduce
an additional signal phase to the signal timing configuration,
increasing vehicle delay for all movements at the intersection
(for safety reasons it would be necessary to run the northbound
and southbound traffic movements independently of one
another). Traffic staff are conducting further modelling to assess
the benefits and potential impacts of changing the lane
configuration.
2. Increasing the northbound left turn green time would increase
the frequency of the northbound left turn queue clearing while
generating additional delay for opposing directions. It would also
likely have a negative impact on the synchronization of this
traffic signal with adjacent intersections.
The Region is aware of two planned developments that may impact
operations at the subject intersection. The consultants, working on
behalf of the developer, did not recommend any actions to improve the
northbound left turn queuing issue in either study as it was out of their
project scope.
The Region worked with the Municipality of Clarington and the
developers to provide the most safe and effective operations available
within the limits of the review process. We do not anticipate that the
planned developments will have an immediate negative impact on
Highway 2 and Prestonvale Road operations. However, should there
be a need intersection modifications will be undertaken by the Region.
Given the changing dynamics of the land use and subsequent road
network, Traffic will conduct a new study to determine the appropriate
measures required for safe and effective traffic operations at this
location.
In addition to our planned study, we will continue to monitor the
intersection, adjusting signal timings and apply appropriate initiatives
accordingly to manage any increase congestion. Results of the study
will be forwarded to your office once they become available and are
finalized.
Page 180
If this information is required in an accessible format, please contact
the Accessibility Co-ordinator at 1-800-372-1102 extension 2009.
I trust the information provided addresses your enquiry. Should you
have any further questions or require additional information , please do
not hesitate to contact me.
Yours truly,
Steven Kemp, P. Eng.
Manager of Traffic Engineering & Operations
c: Ron Albright, Municipality of Clarington
Ramesh Jagannathan, Director – Transportation and Field Services
Amanda Spencer, Manager – Road Safety
Dave Dankmeyer, Program Manager – Traffic Systems
Page 181
Memo
Planning Services Department
The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington
40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville ON L1C 3A6 | 905-623-3379
If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility
Co-ordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131
Report PSD-039-19 was referred to staff for a report to the September 30, 2019
Planning and Development Committee Meeting. The request for a report was to give
staff and Mr. Hoy the opportunity come to a consensus concerning his proposal.
The purpose of Report PSD-039-19 was to address a requested exemption to Interim
Control By-law 2018-083 by Mr. Hoy. Staff did not support the request because the
proposal does not meet the regulations contained in section 2.f. of Interim Control By-
law 2018-083 and Mr. Hoy was not willing to conduct a character analysis of the area to
inform his design.
Staff reached out to Mr. Hoy on September 13, 2019 to inquire if he had plans to
conduct a character analysis to identify how the proposal could better fit with the
provisions of the interim control by-law. Mr. Hoy responded that he will submit a
character analysis which he believed would support his design. The analysis was
expected the week of September 16, 2019, has to date, not been received.
Staff recommend that a report be forwarded to Planning and Development Committee
once the character analysis and modified design are submitted and staff have the
opportunity to review and discuss the proposal with Mr. Hoy.
I:\^Department\PLN Files\PLN 8 Other By-laws\PLN 8.6 Interim Control By-law\PLN 8.6.1 - 10 Victoria Street\MEMO_MMC_K.Hoy_Sept'25'19.docx
To: Mayor and Members of Council
From: Faye Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning Services
Date: September 25, 2019
Subject: PSD-039-19 Exemption Request for 10 Victoria Street from Interim Control
By-law
File: PLN 8.6.1
Page 182
Memo
Planning Services Department
The Corporation of the Municipality of Clarington
40 Temperance Street, Bowmanville ON L1C 3A6 | 905-623-3379
If this information is required in an alternate format, please contact the Accessibility
Co-ordinator at 905-623-3379 ext. 2131
At its meeting on September 16, 2019 Council considered the recommendation in
Planning Services Report PSD-030-19 regarding the addition of 816 Regional Road 17
to the Municipal Heritage Register as part of unfinished business. The recommendation
was further tabled for reconsideration at the September 30, 2019 Planning and
Development Committee meeting.
On September 25, Planning Services staff, Councillor Zwart, and a representative of the
Heritage Committee met with Mr. Holliday and his real estate representative, Wendy
Fuller, regarding addition of Mr. Holliday’s property, known as 816 Regional Road 17
(DocVille), to the Municipal Heritage Register. Discussions at the meeting were
productive and were focused on (i) the subject property in the context of the North
Village Secondary Plan process that is currently underway, (ii) the process the Heritage
Committee undertakes when evaluating and recommending properties for addition to
the Heritage Register, and (iii) the implications of adding 816 Regional Road 17 to the
Register for the future development of the property.
Mr. Holliday was appreciative of the information provided at the meeting, and has
requested the recommendation to add 816 Regional Road 17 be further deferred until
the November 12, 2019 Planning and Development Committee. This will afford him time
to consider the matter further.
Faye Langmaid, RPP, FCSLA
SA/tg
\\netapp5\group\Planning\^Department\PLN Files\PLN 34 Heritage\PLN 34.5 Heritage Property Files\PLN 34.5.5.58 816 Regional Road 17\MEMO_ Re PSD-030-2019_816
Reg Rd 17 Sept 30 2019.docx
To: Mayor and Members of Council
From: Faye Langmaid, Acting Director of Planning Services
Date: September 30, 2019
Subject: PSD-030-19 Recommendation to Add 816 Regional Road 17 to the
Municipal Heritage Register
File: PLN 34.16, 34.5.1
Page 183
Presentations and Handouts
THE ZONE CLARINGTON
& REVIEW OF RURAL EP ZONED LANDS
EP was identified for many reasons, I can just mention some of them:
-they may be recharge or discharge areas for creeks
-they may serve as a Source Water Protection like Courtice north
-they may be wetlands, marshes, meadows, forest or agricultural
lands
-they may contain habitat for creatures that are helping us to
maintain healthy environment
These are just a few functions of EP lands; all of them
protect people
Geology of Courtice
Common aquifer underlain by clay Aquifer stratigraphy
Empty
well in basement used for filling
ponds
Not all lands can be developed into subdivisions
EP lands have to be protected in order to assure safety, well-
being and health of us ALL and for future generations
The whole world is and will be affected weather-wise by not
understanding what these EP lands are here for -to protect us
We can see now all over the world the results of removal of
the EP lands (Brazil rainforest)
Unwise local actions influence not only the neighbours around
the removed EP lands, but the negative effects are seen far
beyond our borders
So, let’s imagine two different futures –one with trees (or EP
ZONED LANDS) and one without
WHAT FUTURE DO YOU WANT TO LIVE?
Climatecost.ca:
Climate change will cost us more than 91 billion annually by 2050
Extreme floods, fires and storms will get worse, harming our children and
grandchildren. We have to make good decisions NOW!
18 ha of PSW –100’s year old treed swamps, meadows and marshes were
removed along Black and Tooley Creek in Courtice alone for Hwy 418 that
was not suitable for this sensitive area
How many more EPs or trees do you think can be removed in Courtice???
There will be plans for more housing in Courtice
Courtice north needs Council’s attention
Conclusion:
For the fairness to all taxpayers, not just to rural residents, EP zoned
urban lands document on which our Planning is working now should
be dealt with first, not after new development applications, if not for
us –at least for our future generations safety and well-being